A39697:90
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
A REPLY TO Mr. Philip Cary's Solemn Call. › Section 1: I Position.
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.
Besides, It is to me an unaccountable thing, that a Promise which hath a double comfortable Aspect, 430 years back, and some thousands of years forward; should not cast one comfortable glance upon the Penitents of the present Age when it was made, nor upon any ⟨p. 21⟩till near the end of the World. What think you Sir, of the 3000 Jews pricked at the Heart? Acts 2. had they no Relief from it, because their Lot fell not late enough in time? Were the Penitent Jews in Moses and Peter's days, all born out of due time, for this Promise to relieve? O what Shifting and Shuffling is here! Who can think a Man that twists and winds every way, to avoid the dint of an Argument, can possibly have a Moral Assurance of the truth of his own Opinion?
Besides, It is to me an unaccountable thing, that a Promise which hath a double comfortable Aspect, 430 years back, and some thousands of years forward; should not cast one comfortable glance upon the Penitents of the present Age when it was made, nor upon any ⟨p. 21⟩till near the end of the World. What think you Sir, of the 3000 Jews prick'd at the Heart? Acts 2. had they no Relief from it, because their Lot fell not late enough in time? Were the Penitent Jews in Moses and Peter's days, all born out of due time, for this Promise to relieve? O what Shifting and Shuffling is here! Who can think a Man that twists and winds every way, to avoid the dint of an Argument, can possibly have a Moral Assurance of the truth of his own Opinion?
(3.) You say, Page 134. That through Christ's satisfaction there is no repugnancy or hostile contrariety betwixt the Law and Promise, but an Agreement betwixt them, and that they differ only in respect of Strength and Weakness, the Gospel is able to go through stitch with it, which the Law cannot do.