3. Here, in this one general family, the seed, not on. ly according to the literal, but the figurative meaning of that term, was to be found, as one generation succeeded another. Proselytes were indeed to come orig inally from the idolatrous world. But the blessing which rested upon those proselytes, was the blessing of Abraham, which passed over to his offspring. He

was blessed, in having a seed given to him, to whom Jehovah was a God. And sincere proselytes were heirs acccording to the promise. They were blessed with faithful Abraham. They partook of the root and fatness of the tree. They were the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them.— The blessing had a lineal or seminal descent, as well with respect to them, as the home born. I do not mean that the infant offspring of proselytes were the seed primarily intended in that particular clause of the covenant, "I will establish my covenant with thy seed." This would be to contradict all that has been said. But, as the promise, "and in thee shall all fami*lies of the earth be blessed," did not respect one generation only, but every generation, the blessing involved in it was to be transmitted in a family way, or by family descent; and by means of those instructions, and that discipline, which the covenant furnished and required. So that the infant offspring of the stranger, just like the other, though upon a different principle, were to be accounted holy, the Lord's, and joint heirs with the offspring of the natural seed, of the heavenly inheritance. The profit of circumcision extended to the one sort of offspring as really as to the other.Hence the manner in which benedictions thoughout the scriptures embrace the children of all pious parents, connectively with parents themselves. Deuteronomy, xxx. 19. "Therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live." Ibid xxviii. 4. "Bles

sed shall be the fruit of thy body." Ib. vii. 13, "And he will love thee, and bless thee, and multiply thee, he will also bless the fruit of thy womb." Ib. xxx. 6. "And the Lord thy God shall circum

L

cise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed." Psalm xxv. 13. "His soul shall dwell at ease, and his seed shall inherit the earth." These several promises had an application to proselytes, as much as to the home born. For they were equally of the body. Psalm cxii. 1, 2. "Blessed is the man that feareth the Lord, that delighteth greatly in his commandments: His seed shall be mighty upon the earth; the generation of the upright shall be blessed." Psalm xxxvii. 26. "He is ever merciful and lendeth, and his seed is blessed." Proverbs xi. 21. "Though hand join in hand, the wicked shall not be unpunished; but the seed of the righteous shall be delivered." Isaiah xliv, 3."For I will pour water upon him that is thirsty, and floods upon the dry ground. I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring." Ib. Ixi. 9. "And their seed shall be known among the Gentiles, and their offspring among the people; all that see them shall acknowledge them, that they are the seed which the Lord hath blessed."

These declarations, as has been shewn with respect to the term seed, are to be understood, not as securing the salvation of all, individually, of the offspring of the adoption; but as announcing the descent of the blessing, and the descent of it in this way, that is, seminally.

These promises certainly involve a connexion between the piety of the parent and the piety and salvation of his child; or that the blessing descends seminally throughout the whole Church. If there be no such connexion, then these promises are without meaning. They secure nothing. They convey no blessing like that, which, in terms, they express. There is an essential disparity between the covenant state of the natural, and the adoptive seed. The grand reason for the application of circumcision with respect to the one, has no application to the other.

This theory will have a full confirmation, when we come to see how Jews and Gentiles are consolidated, with out any distinction, into one body, at the period, when the Messiah orders and establishes his kingdom forever.

1

The view of the covenant of circumcision which has now been taken, presents a number of important conclusions, which, because they will farther illustrate the general subject in hand, will here be noticed.

1. It is plainly a gross pervertion of the leading promise of the covenant of circumcision, when it is treated, as it often is, as meaning no more than that God would unite himself to the posterity of Abraham as a temporal sovereign; to govern them as to their worldly state, and to bestow on them temporal rewards, upon mere external obedience.* This idea will be more largely considered and refuted, when we come to examine the Sinai covenant. Here let it be only observed, that not a word of this nature is suggested in all God's covenant transactions with Abraham; but every thing, as we have seen, has a contrary appear

The preceding analysis has shewn, that God was the God of Abraham in the most gracious and spiritual sense. He was his exceeding great reward; not upon the low ground of a civil compact, which involves no moral rectitude; nor upon the scale of mere temporal prosperity, which involves no blessing; but upon the principle of distinguishing and everlasting mercy. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is Jehovah's memorial throughout all generations. And he is not the God of the dead, but of the living. If Jehovah be the God of Isaac and Jacob, not as dead and reprobate men, but as eternally living in his favor; without all doubt he is a God in the same sense to the residue of Abraham's seed. The covenant relation is exactly the same with respect to all. Nothing then can be more derogatory to God than such a construction of the Abrahamic covenant. It sinks him down to a level with the miserable kings of the earth. It sup

"It is exceedingly evident that the Abrahamic covenant respected and promised blessings to Abraham's posterity, or natural descendants as such. Those blessings however, were of a mere temporal kind." Andrews's Vindication of the Baptists, page 24. "It is an undoubted truth, that God was the God of the posterity of Abraham in the very sense in which he promised to be. It will not be denied that God was the God of the Jewish Nation, in the most literal sense. He was their political lawgiver and king," pages 43 and 44:

poses him to be the friend and patron of a race of be ings, held in external allegiance, by interested motives only; who are wholly adverse to him in their real character. It makes him unite himself favorably to moral filth and deformity. For what are a class of beings, merely subject to civil regulations, without religion? What, but enemies to God by wicked works? No wonder, that the more modest advocates of this theory, advance it with a trembling hand. That the promises of the Abrahamic covenant, principally respected an eternal inheritance, and were exclusively of a gra cious nature, is just as evident as that there is a Bible. We might multiply quotations without end in proof of it. But enough evidence has been presented. We are assured that God would be ashamed to be called the God of a man upon a lower principle.

2. It is plain, from what has been said, that the covenant of circumcision has more than two parties. A covenant is often exslusively defined as a stipulation by one, and a restipulation by another; and of course as comprehending no more than two parties. This is a just description of some covenants; but by no means of all covenants. It may be a just description of such covenants as respect things only. But when a covenant respects moral agents, there may be several parties. This is often the case in the settlement of the terms of peace between nations who have been engaged in war. There may be two transacting parties only; and yet there may be others; either societies or individuals, whom their engagement may respect, and in whom certain rights shall be as really vested, as in either of the contracting parties. A king, in settling a peace with another king, with whom he has been at war, makes the investiture of his eldest son, with a certain principality, a primary article in the treaty, entirely unknown, at the time of establishing this trea ty, to this son. By the agreement of the contracting parties the son becomes entitled to this principality. He is therefore, properly a party in the covenant. As soon as the treaty shall be published, he will advance his claims accordingly.

In the covenant of circumcision, God covenanted, Abraham was the immediate covenantee. This covenant respected another portion of intelligent agents, the seed. These were covenantees only as the cove. nant respected them. But the promise respecting them, did as really invest them with the blessing, as it did Abraham himself.

3. It is evident from the view which has been taken of the covenant of circumcision, that the application of particular promises to individuals, which are not made to others, is not at all inconsistent with their being in the same covenant, and interested in the same common blessing. The promise addressed to Abraham, "I will make of thee a great nation, kings shall come out of thee," did not apply to Moses, though one of his seed. The promise to Moses, Exodus iv. 12. "Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say," did not apply to Abraham. Yet Abraham and Moses were in the same covenant, and had equally God for their God. Hence, though the promise of the land of Canaan, does not apply to Gentile believers, it will not follow that they are not in the same covenant, with the seed of Abraham.

4. From the view we have taken of the seed, and their covenant standing, it is an obvious conclusion, that the salvation of children was not so suspended up. on the faith of parents, and their diligence in instructing them, as that, however perfect, their salvation would always infallibly follow. The covenant comprehended no promise, securing such à connexion universally. In millions of instances it might fail, and yet the covenant stand good. Fidelity on the part of the parent was an indispensable duty. It was an important mean, in the hand of God, of accomplishing his gracious purpose, relative to the seed; and was so commonly prospered, or made effectual, as that it had the strongest encouragement, and presented a foundation for raised hope. Yet it was not always effectual; for it was not a condition of the promise. The promise was absolute. But an absolute promise,