A39697:46
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis
Vindiciæ legis & fœderis: or, A reply to Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn call Wherein he pretends to answer all the arguments of Mr. Allen, Mr. Baxter, Mr. Sydenham, Mr. Sedgwick, Mr. Roberts, and Dr. Burthogge, for the right of believers infants to baptism, by proving the law at Sinai, and the covenant of circumcision with Abraham, were the very same with Adam's covenant of works, and that because the gospel-covenant is absolute. By John Flavel minister of the gospel in Dartmouth
London: printed for M. Wolton, 1690
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
That Abraham's Covenant, Gen. 17. is the very same Covenant of Grace we are now under; and (2ly.) that Circumcision in the nature of the act, did not oblige all men to keep the whole Law for Righteousness. And (3ly.)
That the New Covenant is not absolute and wholly unconditional; though notwithstanding a most free and gracious Covenant: the Pillars on which Mr. Cary sets his new Structure sink under it, and the building falls into ruins.
I have not here taken Mr. Cary's two Syllogisms, proving Abraham's Covenant to be a Covenant of Works; because I find my self therein prevented by that ingenuous and learned man Mr. Whiston, in his late Answer to Mr. Grantham. Neither have I particularly spoken to his 23 Arguments to prove the Sinai Law to be a pure Adam's Covenant, because frustra sit per plura, quod sieri potest per pauciora, I have overthrown them all together at ⟨image 16⟩one blow; by evincing every Argument to have four terms in it, and so proves nothing. But I have spoken to all those Scriptures which concern our four Positions, and fully vindicated them from the injurious senses to which Mr. Cary (following Mr. Tombs) had wrested them.
I have not here taken Mr. Cary's two Syllogisms, proving Abraham's Covenant to be a Covenant of Works; because I find my self therein prevented by that ingenuous and learned man Mr. Whiston, in his late Answer to Mr. Grantham. Neither have I particularly spoken to his 23 Arguments to prove the Sinai Law to be a pure Adam's Covenant, because frustra sit per plura, quod sieri potest per pauciora, I have overthrown them all together at ⟨image 16⟩