ΕΝΕ'ΡΓΕΙΑ ΠΛΑ'ΝΗΣ.  
Or a brief DISCOURSE Concerning Man's natural proneness to, and tenaciousness of Error.  
Whereunto is added Some Arguments to prove, that that Covenant entered with Abraham, Gen. 17.7. is the Covenant of Grace.  
By J. Whiston, Minister of the Gospel.  
I have laid the Foundation, and another buildeth thereon; but let every Man take heed how he buildeth thereupon:  1 Cor. 3.10. 
Nemo sibi tantum errat, sed alieni Erroris Causa, & Author est.  Sen. de vit. beat. 
Nimis perversè seipsum amat qui alios vult errare, ut Error suus lateat.  Aug. 
LONDON; Printed by J.D. for Jonathan Robinson, at the Golden-Lyon in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1682.   

THE PREFACE TO THE READER.  
THat there is a Time coming, viz. When the Fullness of the Gentiles shall be come in, and the Deliverer come out of Zion, and hath turned Ungodliness from Jacob; when all the Diversities of Doctrines shall cease, and the Doctrine of the Gospel be taught in its Perfection, Purity and Simplicity; thereupon through the more plentiful pourings forth of the Spirit, a perfect Untie of Mind, Judgement and Practice, in especial in the Worship of God among Saints, and that no small part of the Glory and Happiness of the Church shall consist therein, these Scriptures (with divers others of a like import) do fully declare, 
Hic Fluvius est uberrima Doctrina Christi; Bright. in loco.  Rev. 22.1. Zeph. 3.9. Zech. 14.9. Unto which State, when the Church is arrived, she shall receive that Approbatory and Commendatory Eulogium from Christ's own Mouth, Cant. 6.8. My Dove, my Undefiled is but One, she is the only One of her Mother, she is the chief of her that bear her; Then the Daughters shall see her, and bless her; the Queens and Concubines shall behold her, and praise her: Then shall she be Ephziba, the King shall greatly delight in her Beauty: Then shall she be called Beulah, as visibly appearing in her Marriage-union with Christ. But alas! how far doth the Church at present fall short of this Glory and Happiness? What Diversity of Doctrines? what Variety of Opinions and Practices arising therefrom are there? Surely for the Divisions of Rouben [of Zion], there are, and cannot but be great Thoughts (and those sorrowful ones too) of Heart, in all that are true and legitimate Children.  
Neither in these present Diversities of Doctrine, Judgements and Practices found in the Church, (some of which must necessarily be erroneous, if not heretical) less matter of Sorrow and Grief then her future Unity is matter of Joy and Rejoicing. And therefore let all that wish well unto Zion say, For Zion 's sake will I not hold my Peace; for Jerusalem 's sake will I not rest, till the Righteousness thereof go forth a Brightness, and the Salvation thereof as a burning Lamp; that there may be one Lord, and his Name one throughout all the Earth. 'Tis indeed no wonder that Errors and Heresies do abound among those who only have the Form, but want the Power of Godliness; especially those whom God (as an effect of his Wrath and Displeasure) hath sent strong Delusions; and consequently while there are such in the Churches of Christ, and mingled with his Saints, that there are Errors and Heresies in and among them. There must be Heresies (saith the Apostle, speaking to the Church at Corinth) among you, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Those that are allowed and approved, viz. by Christ, may be manifest, 1 Cor. 11.19. But that there should be such an abounding of Errors, and these some of them bordering upon and coming very nigh unto Heresies, not only among, but in, and tenaciously held by those who have the same Faith in, and Love to our Lord Christ, and for whom he hath made such Provision for their Knowledge of, and Guidance into Truth as he hath done, is a like matter of Admiration as of Lamentation, whence this should come to pass is worthy of our most serious Inquiry. Some Satisfaction whereunto may be received from the former of the ensuing Discourses; but yet a further Inquiry may arise, with an especial respect unto those we now speak of (at least some of them) viz. such, who not only have the old Man crucified, and thereby the Body of Sin destroyed, in common with all other Saints, but do walk in a peculiar exactness of Obedience to the whole Will of Christ, so far as known by them: and consequently who cannot be supposed to be left of God, nor given up to the Power of Satan, to be seduced and influenced by him to the embracement, or tenacious holding of Error, especially such who have competent Parts and Abilities, rendering them capable of discerning between Truth and Error.  
Now the Enquiry is, Whence it should come to pass that such as these should yet take up and embrace Errors, (yea, and that some that are very plain and palpably so) and having once taken up and embraced them, should be so tenacious of them, as sometimes they are found to be. Can it be supposed, that that corrupt Principle or Inclination unto Error connatural unto Men, as fallen, should retain and keep up its vigour and strength, so as to have any considerable Influence upon such Men's Embracement of Error? or can they be supposed to be so far under the power of Self-Love, as by that to be rendered so tenacious of it, when embraced by them? Can these particular Lusts retain their Force and Vigour, when all other Lusts are in a good measure mortified and subdued?  
For Satisfaction hereunto, I shall not at present insist on the low degree of Mortification, that the Generality of sincere Christians do attain unto, and consequently the Strength that inherent Lust (though greatly enervated and weakened by renewing Grace) yet retains in them; nor the variety of Biasses that good Men may lie under to particular Errors; nor yet the Sovereign Pleasure of God in concealing particular Truths from some of his choicest Serevants. There are three things that have no little Interest in such Men's embracing and tenacious holding of Error. We may call them the deficient Causes of those Evils.  
1. Either some Error or Mistake about God, as dwelling in Jesus Christ, or the want of preserving in their Hearts a continual due sense of what is known of him. The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the first Error, making way for all others, oftentimes respects God himself: even those who do truly know, and are known of God, yet may and do greatly err and mistake about him, and in especial as to our present purpose about his Holiness and Jealousy proceeding therefrom, respective to his own People; or, suppose they are right in their Notions, yet they do not preserve an abiding due sense of what they know of him upon their Hearts. Had but Christians those awakening words of Joshua, Josh. 24.19. Ye cannot serve the Lord; for he is an holy God: he is a jealous God, he will not forgive your Transgressions, nor your Sins. Not only he will not forgive your Transgressions, your Rebellions and more gross Evils, but he will not forgive your Sins; your Errors or Mistakes, and Miscarriages arising from them, though of an inferior Nature. I say, had but Christians these Words always sounding in their Ears, with a due sense of their Importance upon their Hearts, as Jerome had his, Surge & veni in Judicium; which added to the former, would make them more efficacious, they would be more wary of embracing any Error, and more ready to relinquish it when detected, than too commonly they are. Christians do not study and labour to acquaint themselves with the infinite Holiness and Jealousy of God, get and keep a due sense thereof upon their Hearts, as they ought to do. To study and weigh Doctrines and Practices, whether only proposed, or actually embraced, with a right Apprehension of the infinite Holiness and Jealousy of God in the Mind, and a due sense of the one and the other upon the Heart, would prevent the Embracement of many Errors when proposed, and produce the Relinquishment of others, when actually taken up and embraced.  
And here let me warn all to take heed of judging of the Holiness and Jealousy of God, respective to his own People, in especial respective to themselves, by sense. 'Tis not safe judging of any of the Attributes and Perfections of God by sense, which yet Christians are too apt to do: and hence not sensibly feeling or discerning of any of the Effects of them, in and upon, or with reference to themselves, they either entertain Mistakes about, or else have not a due Sense of what they have the right Notion of, upon their Hearts. Our Hearts are too commonly affected with what we know of God, according as it is verified in suitable Effects upon, or with reference to ourselves; when as God may and often doth manifest and verify his Attributes in Effects that are very secret and hidden, at least that fall not in, nor correspond with our Expectations or Suppositions; and when they are so, they are sometimes of most dreadful Consequence unto Men. Thus God may exert and verify his holy Jealousy in suffering Men to fall into, and tenaciously hold an Error, the Embracement and holding of which is of very dangerous Consequence to them, when yet they perceive it not: and therefore let us judge of the Holiness and Jealousy of God not by Sense, but by Faith, according to the Revelations he hath made thereof in his Word: and answerably search the Scriptures, weigh all Doctrines and Practices, whether only proposed, or actually embraced, with a due Sense, holy Awe and Dread of the Holiness and Jealousy of God upon our Hearts.  
2. The low Enjoyment that Christians generally have of the Communion of the Spirit. 'Tis one of the glorious Privileges that our Lord Christ hath purchased, and still intercedes for, on the behalf of his People; and 'tis prayed for by the Apostle primarily on the behalf of the Corinthians, and secundarily of all Saints; 2 Cor. 13.14. yet it is not attained unto and enjoyed, but in a lower degree, by most of those in whose Hearts he habitually dwells, whereby the Life of Grace is maintained in them. Christians through their Carnality and Sensuality, want of acting their Faith on Jesus Christ for the Spirit, and holy Dependence on him for this Communion, or through one Miscarriage or another, greatly deprive themselves of this Privilege. And pardon me, though I say (not to exempt any) it is well if those who unadvisedly decry the Jewish Church as a Carnal Church, are not themselves found not much exceeding them in Spirituality, at least so many of them in most Ages, as might justly give to the whole the Denomination of a Spiritual Church. Alas! we are all too carnal. This is certain, the more Spiritual any are, the more of this Communion of the Spirit they have; and the more of this Communion they have, the greater is their Security from Error, and answerably ordinarily the more free they are from it. One of the great Ends of our Lord Christ in purchasing and leaving the Spirit with his Church, was its Guidance into, and Establishment in all Truth. Had we but the Communion of the Spirit in that Fullness attainable even in this Life, no sooner should we turn to the Right hand or to the Left, but we should (as the Prophet speaks) hear a Word (and that made effectual) behind us, saying, This is the Way, walk in it. He would not only effectually restrain those corrupt Principles within, inclining us to Error, and causing our tenacious holding thereof, and actuate that Principle of Love to Truth, and Self-Denial wrought in Regeneration, but would enlighten our Minds in, and subdue our Heats unto an Embracement of Truth, and consequently to a ready Relinquishment of Error, how contrary unto self soever the one and the other may be.  
3. Christian's ignorance of, and unacquaintedness with themselves, in especial as to their Proclivity unto Error, and excess of Self-Love, with the various Influences it hath upon their Minds, may be assigned as another Cause concurring to the Evils before mentioned, Error ex eo est homini quod sibi est incognitus. They see not, nor are sensible of these Evils in themselves, and hence neither apply themselves to that vigorous Mortification of them, nor so diligently watch against their Production of the evil Effects under consideration as they ought to do. And this may be added, that many, if not most Christians, seem less apprehensive of their danger, in respect of these Evils, than of most others that original Concupiscence manifests itself in. The former of them is not so usually taken notice of, and insisted upon by those who have laboured in the Discovery of the dreadful Corruption and Depravation of human Nature through the Fall of Man, as most other Evils flowing therefrom are. Hence Christians generally are not so apprehensive of the Infection of their Natures with this Evil, nor of the Evil and Sinfulness of it, as they are of others; neither do the inward workings of these Evils, make such sensible Impressions upon the Mind, as the Workings of many others do; yea, as the former carries an Appearance of the Fruit of the Spirit, whence many take a strong Inclination after new Notions and strange Doctrines to be the Efforts of Love unto Truth; so the latter shrouds itself under the Notion of an inseparable Adjunct, or essential Property of humane Nature. Did but Christians know and consider their own Propensity unto Error, and were more apprehensive of the Influence Self-Love may have upon them, they would be more cautious of what Doctrines they embrace, and more jealous over themselves, lest it should be Error that they have embraced instead of Truth, and consequently more willing to attend to Light offered unto them. Hence it would be of singular Use unto Christians to hearken to that Advice, though given by an Heathen, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. This I shall say, would but all that love our Lord Christ in Sincerity, throughly acquaint themselves with the infinite Hoiness of God, and his holy Jealousy; yea, and that with reference to his own People proceeding therefrom, and endeavour to recover their lost Communion with the Holy-Ghost, and as apprehensive and sensible of their own Propensity unto Error, with the Advantage it receives as to its holding the Mind in Captivity to it, from the evil Influences of the Remainders of Self-Love in them; and apply themselves in an holy Awe and Dread of God, and Reliance upon our Lord Christ for the Teachings of his Spirit, to the study and search of the Scriptures, taking in the benefit of those Helps and Advantages afforded to them for the distinguishing Truth from Error, and all with an holy Resolution to comply with Truth, and relinquish Error, as the one and the other is discovered to them; withal, communicating the Light received each unto other with a Spirit of Meekness; they would arrive to a greater Unity of Mind, 
Deus non singulis seorsum largiter Spiritum sed pro gratiae mensura cuique distribuit, ut Ecclesiae membra vicissim inter se communicando unitatem foveant. Calv.  Judgement and Practice, and thereby retreive the Glory of the Church with that holy Doctrine 'tis built upon, now greatly obscured from the Eyes of Men through the sad Diversity of Doctrines, Opinions, and Practices too visible among Christians. In subservency to this blessed End, I have in the ensuing Discourse endeavoured to represent Christians to themselves, and show them the danger they are in of taking up and embracing Error; and having once embraced it, of their tenaciously holding of it under a Notion of Truth; not having had a sole respect to Christians of any one Persuasion, the things therein offered (I hope) may be of some Use unto all. For besides the Use they may be of in those Respects pointed at in the Application, espeically considering the Times we are fallen into, and the Circumstances we are under, to be awakened to an holy Jealousy of themselves, and thereupon review their own Principles and Practices with the Scriptures they are bottomed upon, will be prejudicial unto none. Yet shall I not deny but that I have a peculiar respect to our Opponents in that Controversy relating to the Covenant-Interest and Baptism of the Infant-Seed of Believers, that (if the Lord will) their Minds may be prepared for a serious Attention to, and through weighing of what is offered in those few Sheets added in the close, to evince that the Covenant of Circumcision is indeed the Covenant of Grace; which would they but proceed in the Method before declared (so full and demonstrative is the Evidence given thereunto throughout the whole Scriptures) sure they could not but comply with, and consequently that long Controversy depending between them and us would hasten to a Period, it being at least by many, and those among the chief on either side, agreed, that the main Hinge of that Controversy doth turn upon that Covenant. Can they prove that that Covenant was the old Covenant, it must be granted, that the ground we lay to Infant's Covenant-Interest and Baptism therein must needs fall, and consequently the Claim we bottom thereupon must be acknowledged to be vain: So, on the other hand, were they fully convinced that that Covenant is indeed the Covenant of Grace, they must acknowledge our Claim to be just: so much some of them have acknowledged. See Dr. Winter of Infant Baptism.  
It is possible indeed that some may grant this Covenant to be the Covenant of Grace, and yet deny the Covenant-Interest and Baptism of the Infant-Seed of Believers, and that upon this Supposition, viz. That Infants are not Abraham's Seed: But that Plea will soon appear exceeding insignificant, seeing that by the Promise its being extended to them, they are constituted his Seed. Abraham's Seed in their Generations, constitutes but one Seed; the Text is plain Gen. 17.7. Seed in their Generations, in the former part of the Verese, is expressed by that single Term [Seed] in the latter. And besides, could it be proved (which it can never be) that they could not according to Scripture-warrant, be accounted Abraham's Seed; yet so long as the Promise runs to Abraham's Seed in their Generations, their Covenant-Interest and Baptism will stand firm. Hence to deny them to be Abraham's Seed, and on that ground to deny their Covenant-Interest and Baptism, will come to all one, as to deny their Covenant-Interest and Baptism absolutely without any respect to that Supposition; seeing the same Arguments that prove their Covenant-Interest, proves them to be Abraham's Seed, at least we are no way prejudiced by a denial that they are so. And this I add, to show what will be expected from any that shall attempt to invalidate our Claim to their Covenant-Interest and Baptism, by that Supposition they must answer all our Arguments, and prove them unconcerned in the Covenant from other Topics; otherwise whatsoever they shall say will signifiy nothing unto us.  
But not to detain the Reader any longer, any Apology for the Publication of the ensuing Discourses, whether in regard of the matters and things treated of in them, the season of their coming abroad, or their meanness and plainness, I conceive is either unnecessary, or will be but of little use, at least with reference to the end designed.  
Only this may be said, The things treated of are weighty; the general Design of the former is to convince Christiansof a Possibility, that they may take hold of, and hold fast Deceit and Error under a Notion of Truth, yea, that they are prone so to do, and this not only in matters of Faith and Religious Observance, but in matters of Practice in the ordinary course of their Lives and Conversations, and that to the subjecting themselves to Divine Displeasure, and those Judgements that seem impendent, thereby to awaken them to an holy Jealousy, lest they should have so done. The design of the latter, is to establish and secure one of those great Truths included in the Faith once delivered to the Saints, wherein their Comfort is not a little concerned. And surely the nature and import of these Designs, secures their Pursuance from a charge of Unseasonableness, be the Times or State of Affairs what they will; yea, the Evil of the Days, with the Circumstances we are under, makes it more especially necessary; yet did I know of any thing extant of the same Import with the former of these Discourses, it had probably been as an untimely Birth that sees not the Sun. As for their meanness and plainness, I shall only say, that as to the former, it is but an Abstract of some few Sermons preached to a plain Congregation, who rather desire that their Souls should be fed with the sincere Milk of the Word, than their Fancies gratified with the words of Man's Wisdom: and possibly the Sense may sometimes seem somewhat obscure, and the Sentence less coherent, through the Abbreviations made, than otherwise they would have been. And besides, I have had all along considerable respect to the present Times: they seem to direct that Injunction, Exod. 33.5. given to the People of Israel, to ourselves; and 'tis applicable to Parents with reference to their Children, 
Libri quasi liberi.  the Fruit of their Bodies, as well as to themselves; and it may not unfitly be applied to Authors, with reference to their Books, the Fruit of their Minds. Hence I have been so far from searching after what might (at least to some) seem ornamental, that I have again and again laid aside what was in my hand. And as for the latter, it designed the Establishment of a particular Truth, required Scripture-Evidence with solid Solutions of the Objections and Argumentations it was attached by (wherein the Reader (I hope) will find it not wanting) rather than Rhetorical Flourishes or humane Authorities, which might have been multiplied in great abundance, it having had from first to last the Suffrage of almost the whole Universal Church. Neither am I out of hope, but that for the future our Opponents themselves will be of the same Mind and Judgement, at least that the Author, whose Discourse occasioned these few Sheets, will be so; having this hope concerning him, thta however, through one means or another, his Understanding hath been blassed and bribed to a taking hold of Deceit, yet the tenderness of his Conscience will not admit of a Defilement through the tenacious holding of it. And the Truth is, the Mistake on his part is so palpable, and the opposite Truth so evident and plain throughout the whole Scriptures, that it is pity it should be espoused, at least tenaciously held by any but those among whom it had its Rise, viz. those whom God hath sent strong Delusions.  
I shall only add, That to me there is so great a Probability, to say no more, that the Vials of the Wrath of God are pouring, yea, are far poured out upon the Antichristian Kingdom, and consequently that the Witnesses are on the rising hand, that I cannot but hope the day is now hastening when the Sp●●it shall be more plentifully poured forth from on high, as the issue whereof, all Contests of this nature shall cease; all sincere Saints being by him led into all Truth, and all that love and make a Lie, having their Place without. In the mean time, let Brotherly Love continue, with mutual Endeavours to subserve each other in the Knowledge of, and Establishment in the Truth, and so edify one another in Faith and Holiness, that we may be all found of our Lord Christ (who is one's as well as another's,) in Peace, without Spot and blameless.  
Reader, Thine in the Service of the Gospel; J. Whiston.   

ERRATA.  
PAge 4. in the Margin, read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, lin. 22, add before Gen. 48. P. 18. l. 23. r. that. P. 21. l. 24. but the period after Christ. P. 22. l. 12. r. of. P. 30. l. 5. r. commends. P. 33. l. 30. r. and. P. 52. f. 48. r. 10. P. 55. l. 34. r. that. P. 56. l. 24. blot out from, P. 57 l. 23 r. word in the Verb. P. 58. l. 18. r. Causet. P. 57 l 24. r. unaccountable. P. 63. l. 27. put the? after Gild. P. 66. l. 21. r. end. P. 70. l. 31. r. possession. P. 86. l. 28. r. prize. P. 100 l. 3. r. came. P. 131. l. 13. r. were. P. 111. l. 6. put the Period after Covenant. l. 18. r. convey. P. 115. l. 8. r. Jew. P. 120. l. 14. deal as. l. 21. deal that. P. 126. l. 29. deal thus. P. 131. l. 27. add of the condition. P. 134. l. 30. r. is. P. 137. l. 35. r. Charran. P. 143. l. 12. r. were. P. 146. l. 15. deal the.   

JER. 8.5.  
They hold fast Deceit; they refuse to return.  
THat God hath con-created with, or implanted in the natures of the very Brutes, certain Qualities or Powers, whence they both can and do act, in a subserviency to their own Welfare and Well-beings, and that both negatively and positively; and that he hath not dealt worse with Man, yea that he hath dealt better with him, hath taught him more than the Beasts of the Field, and made him wiser than the Fowls of Heaven, is obvious both to Reason, Sense and Experience, and is often taken notice of, and improved by the Penmen of the Scriptures; and among the rest by our Propheet, and that for this end and purpose, viz. that he might the more effectually convince the Jews of their Folly and Stupidity, as well as Impiety, in refusing, notwithstanding all the means used to bring them thereunto, to return unto God, from whom they had at that time sorely backslidden: the Qualities and Powers of the brute Creatures, with their way of acting therefrom, with reference to their own Good, he takes notice of in the ensuing Context, thus ver. 7, The Stork in the Heavens knoweth his appointed pointed times, and the Turtle, and the Crane, and the Swallow, observe the time of their coming. As these Creatures have a natural Sagacity or Instinct, whereby they know what Countries or Places at this or that time are most commodious for them; so they act answerably in continuing in, or removing from them; but saith the Prophet, My People know not the Judgement of the Lord. The endowments of Men, and how they improve them, in matters relating to the Welfare of the Body or outward Man, the Prophet, or rather the Lord by the Prophet, takes notice of in the Verse immediately preceding our Text; Shall they fall, and not arise? shall he turn away, and not return? that is, will a Man being fallen to the Ground, or in the Mire, not arise again? Surely no. Men may fall, but they will not lie and perish, they will immediately arise again; Shall he (a change of the Person, but not of the Sense) turn away, and not return? that is, will a Man, being gone out of his right Path, not return? Men, though they may, through one means or another, turn, or be turned out of their right Path, yet will upon the discovery thereof, return again. Now the Consideration hereof the Prophet improves for the End before mentioned; viz. to convince the Jews of their Folly and Stupidity, as well as Impiety, in persisting in their Backslidings, notwithstanidng the discoveries made, and dreadful Judgements denounced against them, upon the Account thereof. Hence he puts this admiring, as well as upbraiding Question, in the foregoing part of the Verse, wherein our Text lies; Why then is this Poople of Jerusalem slidden back by a perpetual Back-sliding? Implying that they fell short in that common Wisdom and Prudence, that Nature itself hath furnished all Men with. Men when fallen, will arise again; when turned out of the way, will return; but it was otherwise with this People: they were fallen, yet would not arise; they were turned out of the way, yet would not return; they were backslidden from God and his Ways, and yet would not Repent and Return unto him. No, notwithstanding all the Menas used by him to bring them thereunto; yea they fell short, in that Knowledge and Wisdom that is in, and expressed by, the very Bruties; as the following Context implies. Hence the Prophet might well admire at, and upbraid them, as here he doth, Why then is this People of Jerusalem slidden back, by a perpetual Back-sliding? or, as some read it, with an obstinate Rebellion? Now the Prophet having thus endeavoured their Conviction, that he might be instrumental in their recovery from this their asonishing Obstinacy, in their Backsliding or Rebellion; and consequently for the prevention of those Judgements which were impendent, immediately points at the Cause thereof, and that was their holding fast Deceit: so in the Words designed as the Foundation to the ensuing Discourse, They hold fast Deceit, they refuse to return; that is, therefore they refuse to return, Or, they refuse to return, because they hold fast Deceit.  
In the Words than we have these two things considerable.  
1. The intrinsic Root, Spring of Original Cause of the Jews Apostasy and Backsliding from God and his Ways, and that was Deceit. There were some Deceit embraced by them, which was the Root or Spring of their Apstacy; that's employed.  
2. We have the Cause of their obstinate persistance in this their Apostasy or Backsliding, and that was their Tenaciousness of this Deceit. In a word, we have the Root and Spring of their Apostasy and Backsliding supposed, and the Cause or Reason of their persistance proposed. Briefly, to explain the Terms, and therewith show the Genuine Sense and Meaning of the Holy Ghost in them; and I shall take them as they lie in order before us. They hold fast] 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Multas habet significationes sed omnes inter se aliquam cognationem habent. Boot.  'tis but one Word in the Hebrew, but a very emphatical one: the Seventy translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they have strengthened themselves; so we translate it, Gen. 2. and frequently elsewhere. Hence from this Hebrew word comes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Greek, possum, or potens sum: Thus these Jews, they had so strengthened and confirmed themselves in Deceit, that they were now become strong. They hold it with strength. And hence it is that we fitly translate, They hold fast Deceit. The Word isu sed to Pharaoh, Exod. 8.19. Then the Magicians said unto Pharaoh, This is the Finger of God. And Pharaoh 's Heart was beardned, and he harkened not unto them, as the Lord had said. Where the Seventy translate it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. The Word we have Heb. 3.8. Harden not your Hearts, as in the Provocation, etc. So we may translate in this place, They were hardened, or they have hardened themselves in Deceit. They became obstinate therein. Durum quod non cedit tactui. Thus their Hearts would not yield to the Word of God, by the Prophet; the Word had no influence upon their Hearts, to work a Conviction upon them. Elsewhere the Seventy translate it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, viriliter ago: So Deut. 31.6, 7. & 23. We read, Be strong; the Seventy, Play the Man: Thus here, these Jews, they play the Men in holding fast their Deceit. The Lord complains, Jer. 9.3. that they are not Valiant for the Truth, etc. but they were valiant for Deceit, they could play the Men in holding that fast. Yet once more, the Word signifies to Prevail; 2 Sam. 24.4. Notwithstanding the King's words prevailed, etc. The Word which we here translate Hold fast, we there translate Prevailed. Joab, though loath to obey the King's Command, yet his Command prevailed over him. We have the Word again used in Job 2.3. And still he holdeth fast his Integrity, that is, he prevailed in holding his Integrity. Job had his Discouragements in holding, yea he had many Temptations to let go his Integrity; Satan endeavoured with all his Might, to wring it out of his hands; his Wife solicits him to let it go; the Dispensations of God were no small Temptation to him to part with it. The Psalmist was well nigh brought to part with his Integrity, through the like Dispensation of God towards him: as may be seen by comparing Psalms 73. beginning, with 13. Yet Job prevails over, and conquers all, still holding fast his Integrity.  
Thus was it with the Jews, in an evil Sense; they wanted not a sufficiency of Means for their Conviction, they wanted not fore-warnings of the Miseries which they would bring upon themselves; but they prevailed over, and conquered all, and still held fast their Deceit, and thereupon refused to Return. Yet further, the Word signifies, not only, to hold, or, to hold fast; but also to receive, take up, or take hold of; 2 Sam. 15.5. It's said there of Absalon, When any Man came nigh to him to do him obeisance, he put forth his hand, and took him and kissed him. The Seventy turn it both by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Pagnine reads it Apprehenderunt, in our Text: and so it notes the freeness and readiness of the Jews to receive this Deceit; they readily received and took it up, and thereupon held it fast. Yea, they strengthened and confirmed, yea hardened themselves in it; they play the Men, improve all their Parts and Abilities to maintain it, and do actually prevail over, and conquer all Means used, to convince them of, and reclaim them from it.  
They hold fast Deceit; the Word used is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Seventy read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they strengthened themselves in their Choice, implying the closure of their Wills with their Deceit; and thence in part it was that they held it so fast. The Word seems to include a Notion of Subtlety, Cunning or Craft in it: hence we read it, Subtlety, Gen. 27.35. And he said, thy Brother came with Subtlety, etc. And indeed all Deceit must have somewhat of Cunning or Subtilty in it, otherwise it would bewray itself, and consequently become its own Antidote: seeing no Man will ordinarily embrace Deceit as known to be so. The Hook must be well covered, otherwise the Fish will not meedle with it. Deceit must have somewhat of Craft to conceal it. Hence Seducers are said to have their Slights and cunning Craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive, Eph. 4.14. The silliest of Women (as the Apostle speaks) would hardly otherwise be led away by them. Thus here the Jews hold fast subtle or cunning Deceit; Deceit cunningly contrived and obtruded upon them. But what was this Deceit? I Answer, Some take Deceit for those Evils, whether Religious, as Idolatry; or Moral, as Impieties in their Conversations, that the Jews were seduced into: but I rather conceive (with others) we are to understand Frauds Pseudoprophetarum; the false Doctrines preached by the false Prophets. So the Word is used by this our Prophet, Jer. 14.14. Then the Lord said unto me, The Prophet's prophecy lies in my Name, I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spoke unto them: they prophecy unto you a false Vision, and Divination, and a thing of nought, and the Deceit of their Heart. Where we have the same Word; Deceit in the latter part of the Verse, is the same with Lies, and a false Vision, in the former part. These false Prophets under a pretence of revealing the Will of God to them, had preached Lies or Deceits. As for instance, that they having the Temple of the Lord among them, they must necessarily have his Presence with, and his Providence watching over them. Hence is that Boasting, Jer. 7.4. The Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord, the Temple of the Lord are these. The false Prophets having cunningly pretended themselves true Prophets, teach such false Doctrine. This takes with their corrupt Inclinations, and they greedily ebrace it, and having embraced it, hold it fast, and will by n means be brought to relinquish it; whereupon they refused to Return. The Word we translate to Refuse, hath again its Emphasis; it signifieth not barely to Refuse, but to Refuse with a certain Loathing or Abhorrency. It is proper (saith Mr. Caryl) to the nauseating of the Stomach, at the sight of some filthy thing. We have it used of Naboths refusing to sell Ahab his Vineyard, 1 Kings 21.15. And with what vehemency he refused it, the third Verse declares. The Seventy translate it, in Prov. 1.24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, They would not hear. So these Jews here, they refused to Return, nay they would not so much as hear of Returning. The very calling them to Return, as it were, turned their Stomaches against the true Prophets. It notes the strange Efficacy of Error; their Minds were so bewitched with it that they could hardly give the true Prophets the Hearing; they loathed to hear to think of Returning. They refused to Return, to be Converted, saith Junius.  
The Sense lies plain, they would neither change their Minds, in respect of the Deceit they had taken up and entertained, nor return from their Sins, or sinful Practices, unto God and his Ways.  
The Words being opened, there are three Doctrines lie obvious in them.  

I. That Sin in Practice is ordinarily the fruit of some Error or Deceit in the Understanding.  
This I shall but touch upon in transitu. Only let it be observed, That Error or Deceit I take here, and so shall do in the ensuing Discourse, in the largest Sense, viz. For any Notion, Apprehension or Reasoning, that the Mind of Man is incident unto, (and they are innumerable;) that disagrees with, or is contrary unto that System of Divine Truth, contained in the Scriptures.  
Now I say, that all Sin is ordinarily the Fruit of some Error, some false Notion, Mistake or Misapprehension in the Understandin. A deceived Heart hath turned him aside, saith God of an Idolater, Isa. 44.20. The same may be said of Sinners in general, A deceived Heart hath turned them aside. Hence Sins in the general are called Errors, Psal. 19.12. Who can understand his Errors? that is, his Sins. So the Highpriest is said to offer that Blood, which he carried into the Holiest of all, for himself, and for the Errors of the People, Heb. 9.7. that is, the Sins of the People. Hence, whereas we read, Job 5.24. Thou shalt visit thy Habitation, and shalt ot sin: the Hebrew is, and some Margins read it, And shalt not Err. As sinning is the erring or deviating from the right Rule; so all Sin ordinarily is the Fruit of some Error, or Deceit in the Understanding. This holds true of Sins of Omission, as well as of Commission, and is eminently true, of the Sins that are found with the People of God; I mean it of such Sins, as they live and allow themselves in: and that there are found such Sins with them, and that both of Omission and Commission, cannot be denied, but they do not, they indeed cannot live, or allow themselves in any known Sin. 1 John 3.6. Whosoever abideth in him (viz. Jesus Christ) sinneth not. i e. He lives not in any way of, nor allows himself in the least known Sin. What Sins he lives or allows himself in, they are the Fruit of some Error or Deceit, that the Understanding hath taken up and etertained. It may be said, A deceived Heart hath turned him aside. All Sins, whether found with the Men of the World, or with the Saints, are ordinarily the Fruit of some Error or Deceit in their Understandings: I say, they are ordinarily so, because I shall not determine that Question, An necesse sit errare eum qui peccat in eo quod peccat. But this will be found true odinarily, where Men are turned aside into any way of Sin, yea or into any particular Sin, that it's a deoeived Heart hath turned them aside. And this may be further added, That as all Sin is ordinarily the Fruit of some Error, so all Error is ordinarily productive of some Sin, either by way of Omission or of Commission. As Error itself is a Sin, so it and Sin are Correlates; the former as the Root, the latter as the Fruit. Where there is Error as the Root, there will be some Sin as the Fruit; and where there is Sin as the Fruit, it may be concluded that there is Error as the Root within. But this is not that which I intent to insist upon.  
Use. Let this Exhort Believers, (yea all in General) to be jealous of their Understandings. Believers they may, and too often do allow themselves in such Sins, as are greatly displeasing to our Lord Christ, and yet perceive it not; and the reason is, because, a deceived Heart hath turned them aside. Their Practice, 'tis true, corresponds with the Light of their Understandings, but there is too much Darkness mingled with that Light, and that they discern not: For we shall find that sincere Christians, too often are not so jealous of their Understandings, as they should be. They are careful that their Practice comes up to, and is commensurate with their Knowledge, but suspect not that Deceit (which in the State of Imperfection) they are incident unto.  
From hence are these various Evils, which are found amongst Professors: one is really Covetous, another Proud, another Voluptuous, and another lives in the open neglect of the commands of Jesus Christ; and yet probably their Consciences check them not: and the Reason is, There is some Deceit, some Error in the Understanding, by means whereof Conscience discerns not those Evils; and the great Reason of this is, that they are not sufficiently jealous of their own Understandings, nor suspect themselves to lie under any Deceit.  
And therefore, as we ought to hold our Integrity, with the like steadfastness that Job did, and according to his Resolution, Job 27.6. nor give any occasion to our own Hearts to reproach us; so we ought to exercise an holy jealousy over our Hearts, left any Deceit lodging in them, they should turn us aside into Ways or Actions, for which our Lord Christ may, and probably will, if not condemn, yet sharply reprove and correct us. But of this more hereafter.   

II. That not only the Men of the World, but even the People of God themselves may, yea are, prone to take up and embrace Error, instead of Truth; and having taken it up, they too commonly are exceeding tenacious of it.  
In the Prosecution of this Doctrine, (though I shall have a peculiar respect to Men's Tenaciousness of Error, when embraced by them, yet) I shall speak somewhat to their Propensity, to take it up and embrace it instead of Truth: And answerably I shall do these three things.  
First, Offer somewhat for the Illustration and Confirmation of it.  
Secondly, Show whence it is, that so it is. And,  
Thirdly, Make some Application. For the  
First, And thus the Doctrine may be abundantly proved from various Considerations. But to mention some few of them, As  
1. From the Consideration of the Nature and Quality of Errors, that are taken up and tenaciously held by some Men.  
2. The slight Ground Men will take up Errors upon, with the strange shifts they will use for their own Defence and Justification, in their holding of them.  
3. Their apparent Dissonancy from, yea (as to some) direct Contrariety to, plain and express Scripture.  
4. The utter inconsistency of the Embracement, and holding such Errors with Men's own Interests, and that both internal and external; and consequently their want of any rational Inducements to do the one or the other.  
5. Men's obstinate refusal of the Means offered for their Information and Conviction.  
These things, with others of a like Nature, plainly show how strangely prone Men are to take up, and embrace Error, instead of Truth; and tenaciously to hold it, when once taken up and embraced by them. But (designing Brevity) I shall not insist upon these things; but only Illustrate and Confirm, what is affirmed, by way of Instance; and I shall confine myself to these two or three: only premissing this, That what the Scripture records, either of the proneness of any particular Person, to embrace Error instead of Truth, or of their Tenaciousness of it when embraced, that is not to be understood as though those Evils were peculiar and proper to those particular Persons; but they declare the Case of Men in general, as in this depraved and corrupted State respective unto Error. These Instances show the Nature and Property of Men in general, how prone and propense they are unto Error, both to take it up and embrace it instead of Truth, and how tenacious usually they are of it, when taken up and embraced by them.  
This being premised, I shall first instance in the Galatians; and they are a strange Instance in special, of the proneness of Men, yea of such as are truly Regenerate (for so undoubtedly many of them were) to take up and embrace Error instead of Truth. The Apostle speaks to them on this Account, as though they had been bewitched: Gal. 3.1. O Foolish Galatians, who bath bewtiched you, that you should not obey the Truth? etc. he had a respect to their strange Infatuation, in relinquishing the Truth, and their embracing Error in the stead of it: they seemed rather to be bewitched, than by ordinary Means, and in an ordinary Way, to be drawn thereunto. It is of no great Concern to know what kind of Witchcraft, the Apostle hath reference unto; whether that performed by the Eye, that performed by uttering hard, uncouth and unintelligible Words; or that (however performed) whereby things are represented to the Eye in Forms, Shapes or Appearances, quite differing from what properly are their own. He mighthave reference to any of these kinds of Witchcrafts, according to the different derivation of the Word used by him. But be the Witchcraft of what kind it will, such was their Infatuation, that he speaks to them, as though bewtiched. And the strangeness of their Infatuation will appear, if we consider these three things;  
1. The Difference between the Truth relinquished on the one hand, and the Error or Errors (take it as a single or complicated Error) on the other hand, taken up and embraced by them.  
2. By the Consideration of sundry things, peculiarly remarkable in their Case, which even according to Principles of Reason, should have been engaging unto them to a steadfast Adherence unto the Truth.  
3. The Consideration of the suddenness and easiness of the false Teachers, bringing them over to relinquish the Truth, and to embrace the contrary Error.  
To touch upon these three things a little distinctly, yet with what brevity I may.  
1. Let us consider the Difference, between the Truth they had relinquished, and the Error they had embraced.  
The Truth relinquished, is contained in the Doctrine of the Gospel, preached by the true Apostles; the Error they embraced, was contained in the Doctrine of the false Teachers.  
Now let us a little compare these different Doctrines the one with the other. As for the Doctrine of the Gospel, It is (as the Apostle tell us) a Doctrine worthy of all Acceptation, 1 Tim. 1.15. It is a Doctrine of such Excellency, Worth and Benefit unto Men, that it puts a Beauty upon the very Feet of the Publishers of it, Isa. 52.7. In brief, we may take this summary Account of it, That it is a Doctrine revealing and offering unto all in general, and assuring to all those in particular, that sincerely Believe, Embrace and Practise according to it, full and complete Justification, Peace with God, and Adoption, with suitable Affections and Actings from God, the indwelling Presence of the Spirit, with perfect Sanctification, gradually to be wrought by him, and at last an Eternal Weight of Glory. And all this from the mere Grace, Mercy and Love of God, through the alone Mediation of Jesus Christ. This was the Doctrine which the Galatians had formerly embraced, but now relinquished. And we may rationally conclude, that upon their embracement of it, they had tasted of the blessed Effects thereof, in the Peace of their Consciences, with unspeakable Joy, and the Comforts flowing therefrom. Hence in part was that Blessedness they gloried in, Gal. 4.15. How welcome must such a Doctrine needs be to poor Sinners, awakened to a Sense of their Sin and Misery, by reason of it! According to the Principles of Reason, such a Doctrine, with the Blessedness enjoyed upon their embracement of it, should have so commended itself to their Understandings, Wills and Affections, as that any Doctrine inconsistent with, or contrary unto it, should have been rejected with the greatest Abhorrency.  
2. Let us consider, what the Doctrine of the false Teachers was. And here it may be observed, that their Doctrine did not lie in an absolute and total Contrariety to the Doctrine of the Gospel; the Doctrine of the Gospel was only perverted by it. Gal. 1.6, 7.  
These false Aposiles, did not deny the necessary of Faith in Christ, nor did they deny it to be the Duty of his Disciples, to obey all his Commands, nor did they (so far as we read) deny the necessity of taking up of his Cross, when called thereunto; though thy their preaching of that Doctrine, they designed their own security from it, as laid upon Christians by the Jews: So much the Apostle tells them, Gal. 6.12. But they did not absolutely deny it to be the Duty of Christians, to bear Afflections for the sake of Christ, when justly called thereunto. So that their Doctrine did not release from either the Yoke or Burden of Jesus Christ; which had it done, it might have been some Inducement to them to embrace it; but that it did not do. But than it may be said;  
Quest. Wherein did their Doctrine differ from the Doctrine of the Gospel, preached by the true Apostles? And consequently, What was the Truth these Galatians had relinquished, and the Error they had embraced, and taken up in the stead of it?  
In brief thus.  
Answ. The false Teachers preached up a necessity of observing and keeping the Law, and that both Moral and Ceremonial, in a Conjunction with Faith in Christ, and Obedience to his Precepts; and that as a joint Cause with Christ, of their enjoyments of the enefits and Blessings of the Gospel. They did not Preach up the necessity of observing and keeping the Law, merely as a Medium, or Means of their enjoying the Blessings and Benefits of the Gospel through Christ, or as Causa sine qua non, as that without which they could not enjoy Christ, or any Benefits by him; which had they done, it had not been so bad, though very bad. But this was not all, for they join the observation of the Law with Christ, as having a like Influence on, or the same kind of causality in their Justification or Salvation, that Jesus Christ himself has. So that the Truth that these Galatians had relinquished was this, viz. That all the Benefits and Blessings of the Gospel, are granted to, and bestowed upon Men, merely by, or from the free Grace of God through Jesus Christ; and that it is Faith alone that Unites Men unto, and Interests them in Christ; and consequently, gives them a Right to all those Benefits and Blessings. The Error that they had embraced, consisted in these two Branches.  
1. That there was a necessary of observing and keeping the Law of Moses.  
2. That their observing and keeping that Law, had a joint Concurrence with Christ, in purchasing and procuring Gospel-Benefits and Blessings for them.  
Now let it be observed, That as by Preaching up the necessity of keeping the Law, they brought the Persons embracing their Doctrine, under the Yoke of the Law: which as Peter tells the Jews, in Acts 15.10. was a Yoke, that neither they nor their forefathers could bear. So by preaching up the observation of the Law for such an end, they brought them under an internal Bondage; a Bondage worse than the Yoke of the Law, as to the matter of it was, viz. The Bondage of Gild, even the Gild of all their Sins, with variety of Fears, Terrors and Disquietments of Conscience, arising from a Consciousness thereof. And let it be supposed, that those Galatians were not apprehensive of their total Deprivation of the Grace of God, or any Benefit by Christ, that the embracement of the Doctrine (at least should they finally adhere thereunto) would subject them to, and consequently, were not sensible of their being under the Bondage of Gild, in an Absolute Sense, but might have some hope of Pardon, through their observation of the Law, conjoined with Christ in whom they yet believed; yet this Doctrine must needs bring them under a Bondage of variety of Fears, Terrors and Perplexities of Conscience. Hence the Apostle tells them, that the law gendered unto Bondage, Gal. 4.9. with the 24. So that by the embracement of that Doctrine, they did bring themselves under an internal Bondage: And that these two ways:  
1. The very Preaching of this Doctrine, did imply an Insufficiency in Christ, to be a Means of, or by himself alone, of their enjoyment of all the Benefits and Blessings of the Gospel: for otherwise, to what purpose should the Observation of the Law be adjoined unto Christ, as a joint Cause with him, of their enjoying of them?  
2. They would (being unable to keep the Law in perfection) be at an uncertainty when they had so observed and kept it, as that they might be sure of their enjoying those Benefits and Blessings. Hence varieties of Fears, Terrors and Perplexities of Conscience, must necessarily arise; for this will be found in Experience, if Men once call in Question, either the Sufficiency of the Grace of God to bestow, or of Christ to purchase, and procure for them, all the Good promised in the Gospel; and thereupon, conceit a necessity of adjoining any thing of their own unto Christ, as a joint Cause with him of their enjoyment of that Good; they will be utterly at a loss, to determine when they have added enough of their own, so as assuredly to promise to themselves, the enjoyment of that Good, and consequently, must needs be in Bondage, under variety of Fears and Perplexities. And from hence those Fears, Doubts and Perplexities of Conscience, found in, and in part allowed by the Church of Rome, have their Rise. I remember an Anonymous Author of the Church of Rome, upbraids Luther with his Confessing himself, before his full understanding of the Doctrine of free Justifiation by Christ alone, to be of a troubled Conscienee, and full of Doubts and Perplexities: as though that had been an Argument of the Wickedness of his Heart, when as it was the necessary Effect of their own Doctrine, and only argued Luther's Conscience to be more throughly awakened and enlightened, than his own was. 'Tis certain, that when a Sinner comes to be throughly awakened, and to have his Conscience throughly convinced, and thereupon comes to see his own lost and undone Condition, 'tis nothing but a pure Faith, a closing in with, a reliance upon, or a trusting in a naked Christ, that can relieve him. So long as he supposes a necessity of adjoining any thing of his own unto Christ, his Disquietments and Perplexities will remain. So that this Doctrine taught by the false Teachers, did not only bring the Galatians, under the external and unsupportable Yoke of the Law, but did subject them unto an unsupportable intenral Bondage of Fears, Doubts and Perplexities of Conscience; and this they might have easily foreseen, would be (as they did after Experience, that it was) the Issue of their relinquishing the Truth, and their embracing of that Error. Yet for them to do the one and the other, argued their strange Infatuation. But  
Secondly, Let us Consider, Some of those things peculiarly remarkable in their Case; which (even according to Principles of Reason) should have been engaging unto them, to a steadfast Adherence to the true Doctrine of the Gospel, and consequently, to a Rejection of the Error embraced by them.  
To Instance in these six.  
1. There was the Priority of their Instruction in, and Embracement of the Truth of the Gospel. Now there is scarce any thing (if any thing at all) conduces more to men's establishment in any Doctrine, Opinion or Practice, than to be instructed in, and have the ind prepossessed with it. 'Tis one main Cause of many Men's obstinate Adherence to Popish Doctrines, and Practices, viz. That they have been primarily instructed and brought up in them. And the like may be said of many men's firm Adherence to the Doctrine and Practice of Protestantism. Hence the Preachers of any Doctrine (be it true or false) lie under no small disadvantage as to Success, when they are (so to speak) to play an aftergame, when the Minds of Men are prepossessed with a contrary Belief, Opinion or Persuasion. The Consideration of this was one Reason of the Apostle's Admiration, Gal. 1.6. I marvel (saith he) that you are so soon removed from him, that called you into the Grace of Christ, unto another Gospel. Not only, that they should be so soon removed (of which hereafter) but that they should ever be removed from him, who had called them into the Grace of Christ by him. It is true, some understand God, but I shall rather (with Beza and Piscator) understand it of Paul himself, and take 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Into the Grace, that is, the Doctrine of Grace expressed to Men through Christ: and this Sense the Antithesis (as Piscator observes) seems necessarily to require. This made their embracement of that false Doctrine so strange, in that they thereby were removed from another Doctrine, viz. The true Doctrine of the Gospel, that they had before been instructed in, and had embraced.  
2. There was the clearness and plainness of those Reelations made unto them, of the Truth of the Gospel. They had not the Mysteries of the Gospel, held forth in obscure Types and Shadows, as the Jews before had; but the Veil was now taken off, and they had the Mystery of God in Christ plainly revealed; they had Christ set forth as crucified before their Eyes, with the full End and Design of God in his Mission, Humiliation and Sufferings, with the Fullness and Redemption in, and obtained by him thereby, full manifested: they had the exceeding Riches of the Grace of God in him plainly declared; this the Apostle takes notice of once and again, and that as an Aggravation of their Folly: So in Chap. 3. 1. and again in Chap. 4. 9 While they were in their Heathenism, and knew not the true God, it was no wonder, though they did Service to Idols, that by Nature were not God; yea though they were carried away, Prout rapi contigisset, as some translate that, 1 Cor. 12.2. sometimes to Worship and Serve one Idol, sometimes another, sometimes to Worship and Serve them one way, sometimes another, as the Apostle there intimates that they were: Yea had they been proselited to the Jewish Church, when Christ, and the Mystery of Salvation by him was more darkly revealed; it had not been so much though they had been removed from the Doctrine of the Gospel, as then held forth, into another Doctrine; But that now, after Christ had been evidently set forth, as Crucified before their Eyes, and God had been clearly revealed to them, and that in the Riches of his Grace and Mercy, as the Apostle, Gal. 2. 21. and Gal. 5.4. not obscurely intimates that he had been; that they should relinquish the Truth, and embrace another Doctrine, this did greatly aggravate their Folly. Quam indignum est in medio Lucis tam turpiter errare! saith Calvin.  
3. There was the Confirmation, that the Doctrine of the Gospel, had received by the Apostle Paul's working of Miracles amongst them. Thus Gal. 3.5. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh Miracles among you, doth he it by the Works of the Law, or by the Hearing of Faith? That is, doth he it as a Minister, or Preacher of the Law, or as a Minister, or Preacher of the Doctrine of the Gospel? The Interrogation vehemently denies the former, and asserts the latter. So that the Apostle, had not only preached the Gospel to them, but had confirmed it with miraculous Works. Now the miraculous Works wrought by Jesus Christ himself, and by the Apostles, were the great Means ordained of God, for the evidencing to the World, that both their Mission, and Doctrine were from himself; and they were sufficient for that end and purpose: and hence, left all Men without Excuse, who did reject either Jesus Christ himself, his Apostles, or the Doctrine preached by them. Hence is that of our Lord Christ, John 15.22. compared with 24.  
4. There was yet this further in their Case, That many of them through the Preaching of the Gospel, had themselves received the Spirit, and that to renew and sanctify their Natures, and to dwell in them. Whereby not only that Doctrine was further confirmed unto them, but they had tasted and experienced the Benefit thereof. Gal. 4.2, 5.  
(1.) They had the Doctrine preached by the Apostle, further confirmed, and that in the surest and most infallible way possible. And therefore, the Apostle puts a peculiar Emphasis upon this, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Gal. 3.2. as if this Consideration alone were sufficient (as indeed it was) to evince the Truth of that Doctrine, he had preached unto them. 'Tis true, both the Teachers and Embracers of a false Doctrine may do wonderful things, such as seem to be miraculous, though really they are not so. Satan may by his Agents and Instruments, produce wonderful Effects; so it is said of the Man of Sin, 2 Thess. 2.9. that his coming should be after the working of Satan, with all Power, and Signs, and lying Wonders. This was one special Means, whereby the Kingdom of Antichrist, was erected and raised up to that Grandeur it did at last arrive to. Hence for any Doctrine to be the Ministration of the Spirit, for the regenerating, renewing, and sanctifying the Natures of Men, is a more infallible Evidence of its being from God, than the bare working of Wonders by the Preachers or Embracers of it, is. Now such was the Doctrine of the Gospel, preached by the Apostle to the Galatians.  
(2.) They had hereby a taste, and experience of the Good and Benefit of that Doctrine. Next to the Gift of Christ, the Spirit is the greatest Gift communicable from God himself unto Men. The Gift of the Spirit includes all Good; Matth. 7.11. compared with Luke 11.13. Now, for them to reject the Gospel, and embrace another Doctrine, by which they could not expect the like Benefit, argued their strange and dreadful Infatuation.  
5. There were the Sufferings, they had undergone for the true Doctrine of the Gospel, which they might easily have foreseen would be in vain, and useless to them, by their relinquishing that Doctrine, and embracing another. Men according to the natural Notions they have of God, may and do expect much Benefit by any Sufferings they undergo for Conscience sake, or for and on the account, of any Doctrine they have received as from him.  
We can hardly suppose that Socrates, acting only according to the mere Light of Nature, would have laid down his Life in defence of that great Truth, That there is but one God, had he not expected a plenary Reward from God. Now as Men from the very natural Notions they have of God, may and do expect a satisfactory Reward for such Sufferings, as these we now speak of; so the Gospel assures the Embracers of it, that this Reward shall be exceeding Great; and also declares wherein it shall consist, and when to be enjoyed. Mat. 19 at the latter end. Luke 6.22, 23. 2 Cor. 4. the latter end, etc.  
Now these Galatians, had not only these natural Notions of God, that are common to all Men, but they had these Assurances of the Gospel: Hence it may be rationally concluded, that they sometime had very great hopes of a glorious Reward, for those Sufferings which they had undergone. To these Hopes, the Apostle may also have reference, in that Gal. 4.13. where he puts them in mind of their boasting of Blessedness, viz. in which they were, at present; but more especially hoped to be made partakers of, through their embracement of, practising according to, and their Sufferings for, that Doctrine which he had delivered unto them. Hence suppose, that the Doctrine preached by the Apostle Paul, had been a false Doctrine; yet in reason the hopes they had already conceived of so great a Reward, might even have blinded their Minds and perverted their Judgements, so as to have firmly adhered thereunto and rejected any other Doctrine, contrary unto or inconsistent with it. We see what a strange Influence the Pleasure's Men have in, and the hopes of Profit and Advantage, which they have from the Ways of Sin, have upon their Hearts, both to blind their Minds, and bribe their Judgements, against their embracing of the Gospel. But now, suppose the Doctrine preached by the Apostle, to be true, and that Doctrine preached by the false Apostles, to be false, (as it can hardly be imagined, that they were above all suppositions, that they might be so;) how great Loser's might they have easily foreseen that they should be? and yet for them, by relinquishing of that Doctrine they had received from the Apostle Paul, and their embracing that Doctrine from the false Apostles, to give up all their Hopes, of any Blessings and Benefits by all their past Sufferings; this argued, the strange Influence that Error had upon their Minds.  
Lastly, To instance only in one thing more, and that is, the strength and fervency of their Affections to the Apostle Paul, as Preaching the true Doctrine of the Gospel unto them. What a high value for, and what fervent Affections towards him, had they? See Chap. 4. 14, 15. They received him as an Angel of God; and as he there tells them, could have plucked out their own Eyes, and given them to him. Now it's usually found, that ordinary Professors, are very much led to the embracement of, and steadfastness in any Doctrine or Practice, by the value they have for, and the love they have to the Preachers of it. Hence it was, that the false Teachers endeavoured by all means imaginable, to lower the Churches esteem of, and to alienate their Affections from the Apostle Paul; and on the other hand, to commend themselves to them, and to insinuate themselves into their Affections; So the Apostle Paul, was so careful to keep up his Reputation among them, and retain their Affections towards him: for this cause it is, that he was so frequent, and large, in the vindicating of himself, from the unjust Censures and Calumnies he was loaded with, and in (seemingly) boasting of his own Endowments, Actions, Sufferings, and Vouchsafements, and that to such a Degree, as had he not (as himself speaks) been compelled thereunto, had been inexpedient, yea, had savoured of Folly for him to have done it. Both the one, and the other knew, that the value Christians have for, and the fervency of Affections, they bear towards their Teachers, have no small Interest, in their ready embracement of, and firm adherence to the Doctrines taught by them. But that's the second Consideration, to show the strange Infatuation of these Galatians; and consequently, in them we may see the marvellous Proneness, and Propensity of Men; yea of those that are truly regenerate (while in this imperfect State) unto Error, and answerably, to take up and embrace that instead of Truth. But  
3. Let us consider, how soon they were brought to relinquish Truth, and embrace Error. This the Apostle admires, see Gal. 1.6. I marvel (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that you are so soon, so quickly, or so easily removed from him, that called you into another Gospel: That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, may refer, either to the Apostles preaching the Gospel unto them, and their embracement of it; or to their embracement of that Doctrine, they had now embraced from the false Teachers, whereby the Gospel was perverted. According to the former Reference, the Apostle upbraids their Inconstancy; according to the latter, their Levity; and he may, as justly he might, upbraid them with both, more especially the latter. The false Apostles, it seemeth, found little Difficulty, in turning them from the Truth of the Gospel, to the embracement of those Errors or Deceits preached by themselves; they drew them into their Nets: Nullo negotio, as Paraeus speaks, they were soon in a short space of time, and with little difficulty, on the part of the false Teachers, brought to relinquish Truth, and embrace Error.  
But to pass from this Instance, let but these three things, in the case of these Galatians, be laid together and well weighed, and we may see in them, the strange Propensity of Man, in this his fallen and corrupted State, unto Error: otherwise it would be unaccountable, whence it should be, that they should relinquish such a glorious Truth, and in the room, and stead thereof, embrace such a pernicious Error, and that notwithstanding so many things, which (even according to Principles of Reason) should have obliged them to a constant adherence to the Truth, and a resolute rejection of that Error; yea, and that this should be so soon, so quickly, and with so little difficulty effected by the false Teachers; had not their corrupt Doctrine, met with an inward Propensity unto Error, it cannot be well supposed, they would, and that notwithstanding so many Obligations to the contrary, so soon have embraced it.  
2. I shall instance in the Jews. And they are as strange an Instance of Man's tenaciousness of Error, when once taken up and embraced, as the Galatians are of their proneness unto it; and readiness to embrace it instead of Truth. Neither can it be supposed, but that Men being so prone unto Error, they will at least, ordinarily be exceeding tenacious of it, when taken up and embraced by them; seeing there are more causes of their tenaciousness of Error, than there are of their proneness to it, and readiness to embrace it, Hence men's proneness to Error so fully appearing in that Instance of the Galatians, I may, and answerably shall, with more brevity pass over the other Instances, designed more especially to illustrate, and set forth the strangeness of men's tenaciousness of Error, when taken up and embraced by them. It is not unworthy our Observation, that the Holy Ghost speaks of Men, as holding Error or Deceit in their right Hand, Isa. 44.20. Truth is too often held as in the left Hand, but a Lie in the Right; which implies men's tenaciousness of it. What we would do most surely and effectually, we do it with our right Hand: therefore Deborah commands Jael, that She put her Hand to the Nails, her right Hand to the Workmen's Hammer, Judg. 5.26. implying, her purpose to make sure work of it. So it is one of the Royal Titles of God, that He saves with his right Hand, them that trust in him, Psal. 17.7. He is the Saviour of all Men, yea he saves Man and Beast, (as the Psalmist speaks,) but he saves others (so to speak) with his left Hand, but he saves those that Trust in him, with his right Hand, i. e. he saves them effectually. So when the Holy Ghost, speaks of Men as having Error, Deceit, or a Lie, in their right Hand, it strongly implies their tenaciousness of it.  
But to come to our Instance, and to pass by the various Errors held by the Jews, as concerning the Person, Office, and Works of the Messiaeh, etc. which how tenaciously they have hitherto held, and yet do hold, is obvious unto all that know any thing of them. I shall only single out this Error, viz. That they being the seed of Abraham, could not be cast off from being the People of God, nor disinherited of the Promises made to Abraham, with reference to his Seed, without a failure on God's part, in keeping Covenant, and making good his Promises. This was the Error they had taken up; and how strangely tenacious they hitherto have, and still do hold it!  
When this Error was first taken up, and entertained by them, is hard to determine; but it seems plainly to have prevailed in Ezekiel's time, hence say they Ezek. 33.24. Abraham was one, and he inherited the Land: but we are many, the Land is given us for Inheritance. Whether they say this, as reflecting upon the Faithfulness of God, in suffering so many of them, to be carried away Captive into Babylon, as then there were, or as promising to themselves, who yet were in the Land, a Continuance therein, with the speedy return of those that were carried away, I shall not determine: however they seem to have reference to that Promise, Gen. 17.8. made unto Abraham and his Seed: The Gift made by that Promise, with others of the same Import, they seem plainly to have an Eye unto; and having the Land given them, by that Promise, they suppose they could not be disinherited of it, without a failure on God's part. But whenever this Error was taken up by them, it sufficiently appears, by the variety of Endeavours, successfully used for their Conviction, they were ever after most strangely tenacious of it. Which that we may the more plainly see, let us consider, both the Persons endeavouring their Conviction, as also, the Way and Manner how they did endeavour it.  
1. For the Persons endeavouring their Conviction, and these were more especially these four. 1. The Prophet Ezekiel. 2. John Baptist. 3. Our Lord Christ. 4. The Apostle Paul. Now both Ezekiel, and John Baptist, the former by all of them universally, the latter by the major part of them, were acknowledged to be Prophets sent from God. Hence Ezekiel's Prophecy was put, and always hath been, and still is, by the Jews as well as Christians, in the Reckoning among those Books, or Writings, that are of Divine Inspiration. And as for John Baptist, when our Lord Christ demands of the Chief Priests and Elders, Whether his Baptism was from Heaven or of Men? they durst not deny it to be from Heaven; and that for this very Reason (as themselves declare) Because all Men held John as a Prophet, Mat. 21.25, 26. and probably themselves were convinced that he was so.  
And as for both our Lord Christ, and the Apostle Paul, though they denied the former to be the Messiah, and the latter to have received his Doctrine from Heaven; yet what Evidence they had of the Truth of both, the History of the New Testament fully declares. Indeed it may seem, that one main reason of their denying Jesus Christ to be the Messiah, and the Apostle to have received his Doctrine from Heaven, was their opposing, and endeavouring to convince them of that Error, as appears from that John 8. from ver. 33. to 46. compared with Acts 13.38, 39, 40, and ver. 50. Rather than they would let go this Error, they would reject both our Lord Christ, and his Apostles, how plain and convincing soever, the Evidence given of the one's being the true Messiah, and the others being inspired of God himself, was. But  
2. For the Way and Manner of their respective endeavouring the Jews Conviction of this Error. They did not indeed all proceed in the same Way, and after the same Manner; but take what was said by them all in pursuance of this Design, and it was sufficient for their Conviction, had they been only Teachers among them, and not either extraordinary Prophets, or immediately sent from God, and inspired by him, as they were.  
1. For Ezekiel. As he only endeavoured to convince them, of the Vanity and Unreasonableness, of expecting the good of Promises; in particular, that of Canaan, upon the mere account of their Relation to Abraham, as his Seed, while themselves were Apostatised from God, so far as then they were; so he onlyappeals to their own Reason and Consciences: thus Ezek. 33.25, 26. If you (saith he) do thus and thus, sin thus and thus against God, shall ye possess the Land? as if he should say, be you yourselves your own Judges; can you imagine, that while you are Apostatised from God, and live in Ways of Sin, against him, that you should have the Promises made good unto you? your own Reason and Consciences (may they be but attended unto) will convince you, of the vanity and unreasonableness of such expectations: and by thus appealing to their own Reasons, and Consciences, as to the vanity and unreasonableness of this their expectation, he doth implicitly assert the like vanity and unreasonableness, of their expecting, that God should continue to be their God, and owning them to be his People, in case of their total and absolute Apostasy from him. Seeing tho it's possible, that the Condition of some particular Promise may not be performed, as consequently, the good promised; forfeited, when yet the Covenant in the general is not broken; yet if Men, by failing in the Condition of a particular Promise, do forfeit the Good promised, then by failing in the Condition of the Covenant, in an absolute Sense, they would forfeit their Covenant-Interest. So that the Prophet evincing the unreasonableness of their expecting their continued Possession of the Land of Canaan, while they were Apostatised from God; notwithstanding their Relation unto Abraham, doth implicitly evince, the unreasonableness of their expecting, that God should continue to be a God unto them, and own them for his People, and by consequence, the justness and reasonableness of their total rejection by God, notwithstanding their natural descent from Abraham, in case of an absolute and total Apostasy from him. So that, would but the Jews have acted according to the principles of Reason, which Nature hath furnished them withal, and would they but have attended to the Light of their own Consciences, this Error would have been nipped in the very first budding of it forth: but notwithstanding all the Prophet can say, yet they hold it fast. Hence,  
2. No sooner doth John Baptist enter upon his Ministry, but he finds it necessary, again, to endeavour their conviction of the same Error: and both John Baptist, our Lord Christ, and the Apostle Paul, arise higher, and endeavour to convince them of the unreasonableness of their expecting that God should continue to be their God, and to own them as his People; and consequently, the justness of their rejection by God, in case of their total Apostasy from, and rejection of him, as they would do, and did, by their rejecting of Jesus Christ. And as for John Baptist, as he only implicitly asserts, that in case of their rejection of Jesus Christ the true Messiah, then ready to be revealed; and continuing in their Impenitency, God would cast them off from being his People, yea would consume them with the Fire of his Judgements, and at last cast them into everlasting Burn; and answers an Objection, he foresaw they would make against God's so dealing with them: thus, Mat. 3.9, 10. Think not to say (says John Baptist) within yourselves, we have Abraham to be our Father, etc. As if he should say, your natural Relation unto Abraham, as his Seed, will not avail in case of your Unbelief and Impenitency: notwithstanding, that Relation, you may, yea, continuing in your Impenitency, you will be rejected of God, and consumed by his Wrath. Now the Objection that John foresaw they would make, was this, viz. That in case any were Rejected, than the Promise made to Abraham would fail. God had promised to be a God to him and his Seed in their Generations, and the Covenant wherein this Promise is contained, is an everlasting Covenant, which supposes that Abraham should have a Seed throughout all Generations: now, they say within themselves, in case we are cast off and thus dealt withal, where shall Abraham have a Seed? And if his Seed fail, the Promise must also necessarily-fail. Now to this John answers, That God was able of those very Stones, to raise up a Seed unto Abraham: Abraham should have a Seed, to whom the Promises should be made good, though themselves were rejected and destroyed; but notwithstanding what John can say, yet they still hold fast their Deceit. Hence,  
3. Our Lord Christ himself further pursues this Design of their Conviction. Now our Lord Christ speaks more home and full to their Conviction, and he not only implies their Rejection by God, so as no longer to be accounted either his Servants or Children, but proves the Dueness and justness of that their Rejection, and that by a double Argument: The  
1. Is taken from the State they had put themselves into, viz. a State of Servitude. They were but Servants to another Master, viz. Sin: So he tells them John 8.34. that Whosoever committeth Sin, is a Servant of Sin: and then tells them, in v. 35. The Servant abideth not in the House for ever, but the Son abideth for ever: that is only proper to the Son; plainly implying, that they, however naturally descended from Abraham, yet being now become the Servants of Sin, should (as justly they might) be rejected or cast out of the House, that is, the Church of God: and consequently, be rejected of him, from being his People. They having cast off God from being their Master, and subjected themselves unto another Master, it was but just and equal that God should, as now he would, cast them out of his House, and consequently, from being his Servants or People.  
2. He argues it, from the Relation they put themselves into, to the Devil, by doing his Works: and hereby, had cut off their Spiritual Relation unto Abraham as his Seed; according to the true import and intendment of that term Seed in the Covenant. Hence he tells them, ver. 39 That if they were Abraham's Seed, that is, his Spiritual Seed, they would do the Works of Abraham, but that they not doing, they ceased to be his Seed or Children. Thus our Lord Christ tells them, ver. 44. Ye are the Children of the Devil. And how just and equal was it, that they having cut off their Relation to Abraham as his Seed, and become the Children of the Devil, they should be cast off by God, from being any longer his People. So that our Lord Christ evinces, according to the Principles of Reason, the justness of their Rejection from being the People, Servants or Children of God; notwithstanding the continuance of their natural Relation to Abraham: but yet they hold fast their former Deceit. Hence  
Lastly, The Apostle Paul further endeavours their Conviction, and he doth it, by implicitly asserting not only a possibility that they might be, but that de facto, some, yea many of them, were actually rejected of God from being his People, and by vindicating the Faithfulness of God, in his Covenant and Promises, notwithstanding that their Rejection. He vindicates the Faithfulness of God, by distinguishing of Abraham's Seed, and showing they were either Natural or Spiritual: now he shows that all, (though some of Abraham's Natural Seed, viz. those that descended, immediately, from his Loins, and that in their pure infant State) were under the Covenant, and Promises of it as his Seed; yet neither they, when grown up, nor any others in after-Ages, could either for themselves or theirs, lay any just claim thereunto, merely on the account of their natural descent from Abraham, without a personal Acceptation of the Covenant, and performing the Conditions of it; and thereby becoming his Spiritual Seed. And hence he infers, That God might be, and was faithful to his Covenant and Promises, though they were rejected by him.  
And yet there is one thing more, in respect of those that have survived their dispersion by the Romans, and that is, God's actual Rejection of them: his actual Rejection of them, is an undeniable Evidence, of the falsity of that Notion, which they had entertained and embraced; but yet notwithstanding all, they still hold fast that their Deceit, and will needs suppose themselves the only People of God, to this very day.  
Now from the whole of what hath been said, we may see how strangely tenacious the Jews have been, and still are, of this their Error, having once taken up and embraced it. They had (besides others) these four successively one after the other: the two former of whom, were either universally, or by the major part of them, owned and acknowledged to be true Prophets sent from God; the two latter did abundantly, yea superabundantly, evidence themselves, the one to be the true Messiah, the other to be an Apostle of his, having received his Doctrine by Divine Revelation, endeavouring their Conviction, and that by appealing to their own Reason and Conscience, by dealing with them in a way of Argument and rational Demonstration, and by answering what Objections they could (with any show of Reason) make. And last of all, God himself confutes this their Error, by his actual Rejection of them: and yet they hitherto have, and still do hold it fast, and thereupon refuse to return: so tenacious is Man of Enour when once taken up and embraced by him. But,  
3. We may instance in the Church of Rome, or those we call Papists; and they are a marvellous Instance, both of Man's proneness to Error, and of his tenaciousness of it when once taken up and embraced by him. It is needless to instance in particulars, their strange proneness to, and tenaciousness of Error is sufficiently known, unto all that have but any acquaintance with the Tenets held by them; what some amongst them have undergone rather than they would relinquish them, and what Means have been used for their Conviction! Indeed the Tenets embraced and held by them, (especially some of them) are not only so directly contrary to the Scriptures, but to all Principles of Philosophy, yea to the common Reason and Sense of Mankind, that their embracement, especially their tenaciousness of them, would be utterly unaccountable, had not the Scriptures before declared that it should be so, and resolved it into the severity of the Divine Wrath, and just Judgement of God upon them, giving them up unto Strong Delusions, to believe a Lie, 2 Thess. 2.11. 
* Nullis verbis exprimi potest quam portentosa (speaking of the Papists) illuc sic eorum collubes, quam crassa & pudenda sit superstitionum absurditas, quam aliena a sensu communi deltria, etc. Vide Calv. in loc.  But let that suffice for the first thing to be spoken unto; namely, That there is a marvellous Proneness unto Error in Man, as now fallen and corrupted, and that having once taken up and embraced it, he is too commonly too tenacious of it.  
Secondly, To make some enquiry, Whence it should come to pass that it is so: Or what the Causes are that the one or the other of these Evils must be ascribed unto. Now for this they must be ascribed to a threefold Cause, and a fourth may be added, in especial of the latter of them.  
I. It must be ascribed to that Pravity and Corruption contracted and come upon human Nature, through the Fall of our First Parents. That there is a most dreadful Pravity and Corruption come upon Human Nature, through the Fall of the first Parents of Man kind, and that it is propagated successively from Parents to Children throughout all Generations, I shall at present take for granted. Now (I say) that this proneness in Men, to take up and entertain Error instead of Truth, and also their tenaciousness of it, when taken up and embraced by them, may, and must be eminently ascribed to this Pravity and Corruption of their Natures. And there are three things considerable, with respect unto Man as thus depraved and corrupted, from whence these Evils now mentioned, proceed, and have their Rise. And the, 

1. Is, The Blindness and Injudiciousness of the Mind.  
2. The Suirableness and Agreeableness of Error to the Mind, as thus depraved and corrupted.  
3. That some particular Lust is thereby gratified.    
1. This twofold Evil (we have been discoursing of) proceeds from the Blindness and Injudiciousness of the Mind. The Mind being blinded and become injudicious, it is neither able to discern Truth, nor to distinguish betwixt Truth and Error: and hence, Men often greedily catch at and take up Error, under an apprehension that it is Truth. There are two things yet remaining in all Men, at least, that have not in a more than ordinary way debauched Nature, inclining them to the Truth, as absolutely considered, and so far as it is known to be Truth.  
1. There is somewhat of that Love unto Truth, wherein the Image of God, enstamped upon Nature at the first Creation, did confist.  
2. There is a Conscientiousness of Duty towards God.  
Hence, even in respect of those in whom Conscience hath no Interest in, or Influence upon their Acts and Actions, they may yet earnestly catch at, and tenaciously hold what they apprehend to be Truth: but through the Darkness and Injudiciousness of their Minds, mistaking Error for Truth, they may, and usually do take up, and tenaciously hold Error under an apprehension that it is Truth. This seems to be the Case of the Sadduces, Mat. 22.21. But now when Conscience comes in, and joins with that natural Love unto Truth, a Man is carried out with more earnestness to embrace and hold fast Truth: but now, mistaking Error for Truth, they embrace and hold fast that, under an apprehension that it is Truth: This seems to be the Apostle's Case, Acts 23.1. And Paul earnestly beholding the Council, etc. And the more active and effectual Conscience is, in the exciting and stirring up Men to their Duty, the more earnestly and greedily do they embrace Error, and the more tenacious the they of it, when once embraced by them. They now embrace and hold it fast out of Conscience, as though it were really Truth; and hence oftentimes, none are more tenacious of Error, than weak Believers: And the Reason is, Because they hold it both from a renewed Principle of Love to Truth, and also out of a Conscience of their Duty towards God, as supposing it to be Truth indeed: and when Men, through the Darkness of their Understandings, mistake Error for Truth, it is no wonder though they greedily embrace it; and having embraced it do hold it fast.  
2. These Evils proceed from the Suitableness and Agreeableness of Error to the Mind of Man, as corrupted and depraved.  
Error is as natural unto Man fallen, as any other Sin is. Now there is a certain Connaturality and Congeniality, (so to speak) between Sin, and the Nature of Man as corrupted. Hence it is, that he is said to Drink in Iniquity like Water, Job 15.16. Eating and Drinking are natural Actions; 
Occulta quadam innataque proclivitate ad Haereses, Schismata, mendacia, ac veritatis odium vel desertionem & neglectionem propendet; (scil. Caro nostra) Sibyl in Judas.  thus it is as natural for Men as now corrupted, considered in their moral Capacities to Sin, as it is to them considered in their natural Capacities to Eat and Drink. Hence Man sins with a like Pleasure and Delight, as be Eats and Drinks; and this holds true of Error as well as any other Sin. The Understanding of Man stands averse from God, and whatever is from him, Rom. 8.7. and is strongly inclined to whatever bears a contrariety to him. And hence it is, that through the Connaturalness of Error unto Men, that it is after a sort sweet unto them, even as Truth is to a renewed Mind. Hence Henesy is reckoned up amongst the Works of the Flesh, Gal. 5.20. And hence, as the Apostle James speaks of Envy, the Flesh lusteth to it: the like may be said of Error, the Flesh lusteth to it. Whence that Combat or Conflict between the Flesh and the Spirit in regenerate persons, is between Truth and Error, as well as between any other Vice, and Virtue or Grace, that lie in a direct Opposition one unto the other: And from this Connaturalness of Error unto the Minds of Men, we may observe these two things.  
1. That Man naturally inclines to Error from the very Womb.  
Hence it is expressed as one Effect of Original Sin, that all Men are gone aside, Psal. 14. compared with Rom. 3. and that from the very Womb, as the Psalmist tells us, Psal. 58.3.  
Now Men are said to be gone aside, not only in respect of their outward Ways and Actions, but in respect of the internal Acts of their Souls; their Understandings are gone aside, or deviated from Truth to Error, as well as their Wills and Affections are gone aside, or turned from God unto the World. Hence Error always anticipates Truth, unless prevented by supernatural Illuminations, or some Instructions from without.  
2. That the Mind of Man as corrupted naturally, or if left to its own natural Inclination, embraces Error and rejects Truth qua talis. My meaning is not that the Mind doth embrace Error, 
Quemadmodum Terra, quae propter peccatum maledictaepst, multo feracius fert spinas & Tribulos, etiam, sine Culturâ, quam Triticum, etc. Sic Terra Carnis nostrae multo capacior aest impiae Doctrinae, quam piae, quia natura sumus impti & mali, etc.  or reject Truth as known to be so, but it embraceth Error and rejects Truth, merely from that Suitableness and Agreeableness that is between it, as corrupted, and Error, and the Unsuitableness and Disagreement that is between it and Truth. Hence Men embrace Errors and reject Truth, though there be no rational inducement so to do. That is a remarkable Passage of our Lord Christ, John 8.45. Because I tell you the Truth, ye believe me not. The very Design of our Lord Christ, is to show the Reason of the Jews rejecting his Doctrine, and that was the unsuitableness and unagreeableness of it to their corrupted Natures. Hence he tells them in ver. 47. that they heard not the World, because they were not of God; that is, they were not born of God; they were not Partakers of the Divine Nature, as Peter speaks. There is an unsuitableness, yea a contrariety between divine Truth and an unregenerated Nature. Hence, as the Will and Affections reject practical Truth, so the Understanding rejects speculative Truth, and that merely because it is Truth; as he said, Non amo te, etc. So Men reject Truth, when they can give no reason for their so doing, only they find their Minds averse unto it. And from hence it is sometimes, that the clearer Discoveries there are of Truth, the more the Minds of Men are averse unto, and hardened against it.  
3. There is some Lust gratified by Error. There is hardly any, if any, Error at all, but the embracement of it is a gratification of some Lust, either of the Flesh, or of the Mind; as the Apostle distinguishes, Eph. 2.3. Truth lies in a direct Opposition to all the Lusts, corrupt Affections, and Passions of Men; insomuch, that in case a Man had an exact and perfect System of Truth in his Understanding, there could no Lust or corrupt Affection stir within him, but it would immediately meet with a check from that Light of Truth in the Understanding; and were the Understanding but throughly sanctified, and by sanctifying Grace, with the concurring Efficacy of the Spirit, enabled to guide and rule the whole Man as it ought, and at the first Creation was appointed to do, they would thereby be effectually kerbed and restrained. Hence is that of the Apostle, Eph. 4.20, 21. where having in the foregoing Verse spoken of the corrupt Manners of the Gentiles, he immediately subjoins, But ye have not so learned Christ; that is, you have not either been instructed by the Doctrine, or guided by the Practice of Christ to lead such Lives as they do; neither the Doctrine nor Example of Christ teacheth you to live as they do, fulfilling the Desires of the Flesh and of the Mind: no (as if he should say) both the Doctrine and Example of Christ, instruct and guide you to a quite different Life, even a Life of Holiness and Righteousness. Now mark how he proceeds, If so be ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the Truth is in Jesus, etc. that is, if you have savingly learned the Truths contained in his Doctrine, and exemplified in his Practice, you will not live as do the Gentiles, that Light of Truth held forth in the Doctrine, and illustrated in the Life and Practice of Jesus Christ, will curb, restrain, and effectually keep you from such a Life as they live. Whence it appears, that as the Truth lies in a direct Opposition to all the Lusts, Affections and Passions, that are found either in the Flesh or in the Minds of Men; so when it is learned and understood in a saving manner, all those Lusts and corrupt Affections are kerbed and restrained, that is, they are so according to the measure and degree in which that Light of Truth is received and sanctified unto Men.  
Hence again is that Petition of our Lord Christ, on the behalf of his Disciples. Sanctify them through thy Truth: John 17.17. Now as the Truth lies in such a direct Opposition to the Lusts and Corruptions of Men, so there is no Error but it hath a compliance with some Lust, either in the Flesh, or in the Mind, and by the embracement of it, that a curb or restraint laid upon such a Lust by the opposite Truth, is taken off; and consequently, that Lust is gratified: for than is Lust gratified when the Restraints it before lay under, from the Light of Truth in the Understanding, are taken off, and it acts freely without any control from Conscience.  
To clear up this only in two Instances.  
1. Let us see it in that Error entertained and taken up by the Galatians. What it was, we have already seen: Now, that Error had an apt compliance with that Lust of Pride, connatural unto all Men, as corrupted and depraved through the Fall. Man naturally, through the Pride of his Heart, would fain be his own Saviour; at least would have a joint Interest with Christ, in purchasing and procuring his own Justification and Salvation. He would have somewhat to glory in, and boast of; now, that Error did comply with that Lust connatural unto all Men: and from hence it was, that the Galatians did so readily fall in with it and embrace it.  
2. Let us see it in that Error taken up and so tenaciously held by the Jews. Theirs was an Error that had a compliance with all Lust, or with Lust in the general. They supposing themselves as the Seed of Ahraham, secure as to their Covenant-State, and the enjoyment of the good of Promises, can now indulge themselves in the fulfilling of their Lusts without control. And thus, should we go over all manner of Errors, we might easily discover a compliance they have, in one respect or another, with one Lust or another; and from this Compliance that Error hath with Lust, and the Gratification that it receives therefrom, it is that Men are so prone to entertain, and having entertained, are so tenacious of Error. And from the whole we may infer, that as unregenerate Persons are more prone to Error, and having embraced it, are more tenacious of it than the Regenerate; so the less the Natures of any that are Regenerate or Sanctified, the more Corruption prevails, the more prone they are to embrace Error, and the more tenacious are they of it, when once embraced by them. Hence we shall find in Scriptures that as to especially the more gross and dangerous Errors or Heresies, they usually have been taken up and embraced, either by Men of corrupt Minds (as the Apostle speaks) or else by very weak Christians, such as have little Grace, but much Corruption abounding in them. Hence, as those Seducers mentioned, in 2 Tim. 2.16, 17, 18. and again, in Chap. 3.6. are implied to be such as have a Form of Godliness, but deny the Power of it; so the Persons by them seduced, are peculiarly said to be silly Women laden with Lusts; 2 Tim. 3.5, 6, 7. And hence, our Lord Christ gives it as a Character of false Teachers, that they bring forth evil Fruit, they are Men of corrupt Hearts, and their Actions are answerable, Mat. 7.15. or else, they are very weak, though sincere Christians; so it was with the Galatians. Hence, the Apostle writes to them as little Children; Tenuitatem fidei denotat. Tho they seemed to be grown Christians, yet they were but little Children, weak in Grace, but having their Corruptions strong in them. But let that suffice for the first Cause of this twofold Evil, we have hitherto discoursed of, that is found amongst Men.  
II. Man's proneness to, and tenaciousness of Error, must be in part ascribed unto Satan. Satan hath no little Interest in all the Errors, Deceits, and Falsehoods found among Men. The Deception of the World by the Antichristian Errors and Deceits, is eminently ascribed unto him, Rev. 12.9. He is said there to deceive the Nations: he invents Errors (so to speak) and then insuses them into the Minds of Men.  
Men sometimes applaud themselves, when they have, as they may possibly suppose, found out any new Doctrine or Tenet, any Notion that differs from the common Sentiments of Professors, and they think they have discovered a Truth that was before hid from others: hereupon they hug it, as though it were the Fruit of their own Sagacity, piercing Understandings, or peculiar Diligence and Industry, when alas it's only a Brat of Satan's begetting in their Fancies, and subtly conveyed to their Understandings.  
Satan is the great Promoter of Error among Men, and he is not only the Promoter of it amongst Men of corrupt Minds, (who are the proper subjects of his own Kingdom) but he is the great Promoter of it even amongst Saints themselves. Hence the Apostle Paul was so jealous of the Corinthians, 2 Cor. 11.3. I fear (saith he) lest as the Serpent, that is Satan, beguiled Eve, so your Minds, viz. through the same subtlety of this Serpent, should be corrupted from the Simplicity that is in Christ. And hence, our Watch against Satan ought to be exercised with respect unto Errors, as well as to any other Evils whatsoever, he still endeavouring to corrupt the Minds of the Saints themselves from the Simplicity that is in Christ. And not to insist upon the Power that Satan hath to deceive the Minds of Men, I shall only intimate some few Reasons, why Satan is so industrious to promote Errors among Men, especially among Saints. And,  
1. It is because of that Love he bears to, and that Pleasure he takes in Error, as it is agreeable to his own degenerated and corrupted Nature. Satan is the most degenerated and depraved of all Creatures, there is nothing of Moral Good in him; no Truth in his Understanding, no Moral Virtue in his Will; so our Lord Christ tells the Jews, be hath no Truth in him, John 8.44. And hence, he bears the greatest Enmity unto, and hath an irreconcilable Antipathy against Truth, as well as against Moral Good: and on the other hand, hath a love unto, and taketh pleasure in Error, Deceit and Falsehood. As some Men are said to Love and to make a Lie, Rev. 22.15. it seems to be meant principally of Error. Now if Men may degenerate so far as to love a Lie, the like is true, and that in a higher Degree, of Satan, he loves a Lie: hence he is said to be the Father of a Lie, in the place before mentioned: whence he is still suggesting Error and Deceit to the Minds of Men, and that merely from that Love he bears to, and Pleasure he takes therein. As it is said of God, he is the Father of Mercy, 2 Cor. 1.3. He showeth Mercy from his own native Inclination and Propensity thereunto, though there be no other Motive but the Misery of the Creature; so Satan is the Father of a Lie, he promotes it among Men from his mere love to and pleasure in it.  
2. It is because he takes Pleasure and Delight in deceiving and deluding Men. And this Pleasure and Delight eminently ariseth from the Gratification of his own Lutes thereby; for Satan hath his Lusts as well as Men, John 8.44. and these Lusts are gratified by his deceiving and deluding of Men: As for Instance;  
1. In that Lust of Pride. Satan is the proudest of all Creatures, and he is eminently proud of his intellectual Endowments. Hence he accounts it his Glory, and prides himself in overreaching and deluding Men, and the wiser any be, the more doth Satan endeavour to deceive them, the more he prides himself in deceiving them. And hence in some Sense, it is a greater Pleasure and Delight to Satan, to delude and deceive Saints, then to deceive and delude others, because they have a higher Degree of Wisdom than others have, and consequently, he accounts it a greater Glory to deceive them than others.  
2. There is his love of Sovereignty and Dominion. He would be a God, would have an universal Dominion over all Men, and by deluding and deceiving them, he conquers and subdues them to himself, at least so far as they are deceived by him, and it is more Pleasure to him to conquer Men by Deceit, than by mere Force: as Men proud of their Wit or Policy, take more Pleasure in conquering their Enemies by their Wiles and Stratagems, than by open Force; so it is with Satan. Hereby, he doth not only gratify that Lust of love to Sovereignty and Dominion, but also that Lust of Pride: he gratifies a double Lust thereby. I might Instance in his Malice, Revenge, and the like, but I shall contract.  
3. It is from his Enmity against God. Satan acts in a way of the greatest Enmity against God that it is possible for a Creature to do, and he knows that Error and Deceit in the Minds of Men, is highly displeasing and hateful unto him: on what account it is so, may be shown afterwards: at present I only say, Satan knows that it is so. Hence out of mere Enmity unto him, were there no other Motive inducing him thereunto, he would endeavour to promote Error to the utmost of his Power among Men.  
4. It is from his desire more and more to corrupt, deprave and vitiate the Natures of Men: and he knows Error doth so.  
Lastly, It is because Error disposes Men to Sin. And it doth so three ways.  
1. By defiling and depraving their Natures. We may suppose that our first Parents entertaining that Error, viz. That, eating of the forbidden Fruit, they should be like unto God, knowing Good and Evil, had their Natures corrupted, and thereby be come disposed to the actual transgression of that Prohibition.  
2. According to the Nature and Quality of the Error, it takes off that Restraint that the Light of the opposite Truth laid upon the Lusts, corrupt Affections, and Passions of Men.  
3. Error itself leads and carries out Men to Sin. Men through the Error of their Understandings, often think that to be lawful, possibly a Duty, which indeed is a Sin; yea a very great and heinous Sin: as in Paul's Case before his Conversion, Acts 26.9. See also John 16.2. So sometimes they think that is sinful, which is not only lawful, but an important Duty. Peter before he was instructed by that Vision, seems to have thought it to have been unlawful to go into, or converse with the Gentiles, though to preach the Gospel to them; so Acts 28. Hence the Jews forbid the Apostles to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, that they might be saved, 1 Thess. 2.16. Men often, through some Error, sin out of Conscience. Conscience itself, through the Error of the Understanding, becomes a Patron of Sin, and that both of Omission and Commission.  
4. Error sometimes provokes God to give up Men to the Lusts of their own Hearts, and to the Power of Satan; all those Evils and Abominations found amongst the Gentiles, are said to be a just recompense of their Error, Rom. 1.27. Now Satan endeavouring with all his might, to promote Sin amongst Men (his Kingdom consisting therein) endeavours to promote Error, as subservient and introductory thereunto. These are some of the Reasons why Satan so industriously endeavours to promote Error amongst Men, and from that advantage he has against Men, yea, good Men, Partly through that access he has as a Spiritual Being to their Souls, and partly, through that Darkness, Corruption, and natural proneness unto Error he finds in them, he too often prevails. From whence Men, yea good Men, more easily entertain, and more tenaciously hold Error than they would do, from the mere Pravity and Corruption of their own Natures. But,  
III. Many Men's Proneness to, and answerably, their actual embracement and tenaciousness of Error, may, and must be ascribed to the Wrath and Displeasure of God against them; Errors are often sore Judgements, they are the Effects of the Wrath and Displeasure of God against Men: there are, its true, variety of Errors, Mistakes, and Misapprehensions dissonant from, and contrary to that System of Truth contained in the Scriptures, found with the best of Men, which are consistent with the special Love and Favour of God, but for more gross Errors, there is usually a peculiar hand of God in them: they are ordinarily the Effects of his Displeasure, if not vindictive Wrath against Men. And I fear it will at last be found, that many of those Errors taken up, and embraced by Professors in this Age, which possibly may be made but light of, and reckoned amongst the In●rmities of Saints, will yet be found the dreadful Effects of Divine Displeasure, if not vindictive Wrath; and though it is certain, God never gives his own People up to Error, as an Effect of his vindictive Wrath and Justice, yet he may do it as an Effect of his sore Displeasure: God may punish Sin with Sin, and consequently, Sin with Error, in his own People. Hence Men, yea let me say, good Men, may take their embracement of such a Doctrine, or Tenet, and their taking up and walking in such a Practice, as an Effect of the special Love and Favour of God to them, they may think he hath favoured them with the knowledge of that Truth which is hid from others, when as what they conceit Truth, may be a ●●ry gross Error; and consequently, their embrancement of it, may be an Effect of the Anger or Displeasure of God against them: the Consideration whereof, should cause us to walk with a holy Fear and Trembling, and excite to a more full and diligent Enquiry, Whether we have not embraced Error instead of Truth. This is certain, Error is frequently an Effect of Divine Wrath and Displeasure: The Apostle expressly resolves the Errors in the Antichristian Kingdom unto this Cause, in that forecited 2 Thess. 2.11. and when there is the superaddition of this Cause to the two former, when there is not only the Pravity of Man's own Nature, and the ordinary Energy or working of Satan but the Wrath or Displeasure of God is out against Men, and that expressed this way, viz. with reference to their embracement and holding of Error, it must necessarily be that they will be strongly inclined to, and strangely tenacious of it, when embraced by them. Hence it is, that all manner of Errors do so abound in, and are so tenaciously held by the Subjects of that Kingdom: God, saith the Apostle, shall send them strong Delusions, the Greek is, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which may be translated two ways, either God shall put into them the Efficacy of Error, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and then we are to take Error subjectively, for that natural Inclination and Propensity unto Errors, contracted by the Fall; and the meaning is, God shall put into them an erroneous Inclination, that hath an Efficacy in it, or he shall put an Efficacy into that erroneous Inclination, connatural unto Men. Or, 2. God shall send unto them the Efficacy of Error; that is, effectual Error, and so we are to take Error objectively, viz. for any false Doctrine, or corrupt Tenet, whether respecting matters of Faith, or matters of Practice; God shall send unto them Error, clothed with an Efficacy, to the captivating their Minds, to the embracement and tenacious holding of it. But it may be urged How can it be said that God puts into, or sends unto Men the Efficacy of Error? To that in brief, I answer, It implies four things.  
1. God's withdrawment of that common concourse of his Spirit, vouchsafed ordinarily unto Men, whereby there is a Restraint laid upon that corrupt Inclination unto Error, than it doth not work so effectually as otherwise it would do. And,  
2. Hereupon Men are left to the full energy or workings of that corrupt Inclination; that corrupt Inclination exerts, and puts forth itself, according to the degree in which that forementioned Restraint is taken off. And this corrupt Inclination expresseth itself two ways.  
1. In an inward Desire after, or Appetite (so to speak) unto Error, before it be suggested or presented to the Mind. This the Apostle expresseth by a metaphorical Term. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Itching, 2 Tim. 4.3. The time shall come, saith he, when Men shall have itching Ears; the meaning is, Men shall have a strong Inclination to, or Desire after new Doctrine, or after corrupt and unsound Doctrines, that may please and gratify their Lusts.  
2. This corrupt Inclination, when, and so far as that forementioned Restraint is taken off, expresseth itself in an eager or greedy catching at, and embracement of Error, when suggested or presented unto the Mind; whence, as the Apostle speaks of the Gentiles, being left of God, They gave up themselves to Lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness, Eph. 4.18, 19 So when God takes off the common Restraint of his Spirit, from that corrupt Inclination unto Error, that is seated in the Understandings of Men, will work with a mighty Efficacy, so as that Men are carried out to the embracement of it with greediness, and having embraced will hold it fast.  
3. That God doth so order and dispose of things in a providential way, as that Error or false Doctrines shall be brought unto Men. There must be Error, saith the Apostle, that the sound may be made manifest.  
4. And Lastly, God gives them up to Satan, and Satan works to the furtherance and promotion of Men's embracement and tenacious holding of Error, two ways.  
1. By working upon that corrupt Inclination, and Propensity in the Understanding unto Error, and hereby Men given up unto the Power of Satan come to have, as the Apostle speaks, a Spirit of Error: as the Spirit of God infuseth into Believers, a Spirit of Truth; so Satan infuseth into Men a Spirit of Error. Hence we read of a Spirit of Error, and a Spirit of Truth, 1 John 4.6. Every Man is actuated beyond the ordinary working of his own natural Inclinations, whether in a gracious or sinful way, by a supernatural Agent; Believers are actuated by the Spirit of God, wicked Men by Satan.  
2. Satan concurs and joins in with Error, when externally presented to the Mind; whereby it comes to have a mighty Efficacy in it, to the captivating Men to the embracement of it: as it is said of the Word of God, 1 Thess. 2.13. where, we have the same Words used in that Verb; it worketh effectually in them that believe. When the Word of God is accompanied and clothed with the Power of the Spirit, it has a mighty Efficacy in it (and that as the Apostle speaks, 2 Cor. 10.4, 5.) To the pulling down of strong Holds: casting down Imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and to the bringing into Captivity every thought in obedience unto Christ. So when Error, or any false Doctrine is accompanied and clothed with the Power of Satan, it hath a mighty Efficacy in it, even to the pulling down strong holds, or whatever riseth up in the Soul in opposition to it, and to the captivating the Understandings of Men, to the embracement of it. Now, when there is the concurrence of these four things, than God may be said, to have put into Men the Efficacy of Error, or sent unto Men effectual Error; only this may be added as a Close, that God may, and does put into, or send unto Men the Efficacy of Error, or effectual Error in various degrees; but in respect of the Subjects of the Antichristian Kingdom, or the Favourers of, and Adherers to the Man of Sin, God has put into, or sent unto them the Efficacy of Error, or effectual Error, if not in the highest degree, simply, and absolutely possible, yet in a very high degree, he hath sent them strong Delusions; so that in respect of them, there is the concurrence of all these Cases, and that working at a very high rate, they have the same Pravity of Nature in common with all Men. Satan endeavours to promote Error among them, and as an addition unto all, God has sent unto them strong Delusions: he hath in a very great measure, withdrawn that common concourse of his Spirit, which is ordinarily vouchsafed unto other Men; whereupon that natural Propensity unto Error, deeply rooted in Human Nature, exerts itself with great force and violence, they are given up in a very great measure unto Satan's Power, The Coming, and we may add, the Continuance of the Man of Sin, is said to be, according to the working, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the effectual working of Satan. Satan has a very great Power over all wicked Men. The same Word is used to set forth his working in them, that is used to set forth the working of the Spirit of God in Believers; but of all Men, Satan has a peculiar Power over the Men of that Combination; and answerably, works at a very strange rate of Efficacy in them, they want not Men to divulge Errors amongst them, they are given up to Satan, to concur with Error, and heighten its Efficacy, and that from the severity of Divine Wrath against them. And from all it is, that such absurd, ridiculous, and damnable Errors, are taken up and tenaciously held by them. And according, as there is a Concurrence of these three Causes, Men do, and will have a Propensity, eagerly to catch at, and embrace Error, and having embraced it, will tenaciously hold it. And hence as strange, absurd and damnable Errors, and Heresies are taken up, and held with a like strange tenaciousness, by some, who yet stile themselves Protestant's, as those taken up and held in the Antichristian Kingdom. Yea, I may add, that from the same Causes, though working in a lower way, sometimes very strange and palpable Errors, who not damnable Heresies, are embraced, and held with an unrecountable tenaciousness by those, concerning whom there is ground of hope, they shall only lose their work, through the revelation made of it, by that Fire by which themselves shall be saved; but let that suffice for the three Causes, whereunto both Men's proneness to, and tenaciousness of Error, may, and must be in common ascribed.  
But Fourthly. There is yet another Cause that may be assigned, in special, of Men's tenaciousness of Error, when once taken up and Embraced by them, and that is, carnal or corrupted Self-Love. This Self-Love is the Cause and Root of all Evils, and this is an Evil, incident not only to unregenerate Persons, 
Causa & radix omnium malorum. Musc.  but to Saints themselves; yea, there is too much of it in the best of Saints; though there be a true Love to God, yet Self-Love so prevails, as that Love to God is much weakened thereby; though they love God sincerely, yet they may love him too little, and themselves too much; and this Self-Love is over and above the three former, the great Cause of Men's tenaciousness of Error, when taken up and embraced by them. And if it be said, How doth this carnal and corrupt Self-Love work towards Men's tenacious holding of Error, when taken up and embraced by them?  
1. I answer; Self-Love causes Men to over-value, and over-ween themselves, and in particular their own Understandings and Judgements. A deep and piercing Understanding, and a clear and sound Judgement have an excellency in them, and are ornamental to Human Nature. Now, Self-Love expresseth itself, in Men's wishing well to themselves. Hence every one would have, at least would appear to have, what they apprehend an excellency in, and to be ornamental unto them; and, quod volumus facile credimus. Hence, from the excess of Self-Love, Men are easily brought to presuade themselves, that that is true of them, which they would have, at least would have appear to be true of them; and answerably, apprehending an Excellency and Glory in such an Understanding and Judgement, they easily persuade themselves their own are such; and hereupon do overvalue themselves. self-Love, as one speaks, is a multiplying and magnifying-Glass, it represents Men to themselves double to what they are in reality and Truth; Hence, a bad Glass for Men to look on themselves in, yet it is too common for Men to look upon themselves in this Glass: Hence they conceit they have clearer and more piercing Understandings and Judgements than indeed they have: and thereupon, conceit themselves not liable to those Mistakes, Misapprehensions, or false Reasonings that other Men are subject unto; and consequently, suspect not themselves to have a Lie in their right Hand, when yet indeed they have. Lean not to thine own Understanding, saith Solomon, implying a proneness in Men to do it, and that supposes an over value that Men have for their own Understandings; were they sensible, and apprehensive of the Shallowness, Darkness, and Deceiveableness of their Understandings, they would not lean unto them; but when Men over-value their Understandings and Judgements, they lean to them, as sufficient to guide them into Truth, and secure them from Error and Deceit: and no wonder, who Men are very tenacious of Error when they have embraced it, who suppose themselves above the danger of it, at least, in less danger than ordinarily Men are.  
2. Self-Love causes men to conceit themselves higher in the Love & Favour of God, than indeed they are. Men are apt to think the Love of God unto them, must bear a proportion to the value they have for themselves; and hence conceit themselves to be peculiarly privileged with the Knowledge of Truth, and that God from that Love he bears to them, will secure them from Error. It was not form Haman's Desert, so much as from his Self-Love, that he flatters himself with a conceit of being Ahasuerus his Favourite; and consequently, the only Man whom he delighted to honour. Self-Love often causes Men, to think they are higher in the Love of Men, than indeed they are, and answerably, they are apt to over rate the Love of God to them, and suppose themselves to be as high in his Love, as they suppose themselves to be in the Love of Men; not but that there are some, who are especial Favourites of God: and answerably, are privileged with a special Knowledge of Truth, and secured from, at least, any gross Errors, but many merely through Self-Love arrogate this to themselves, when they have no just ground so to do. Hence suspect not themselves of those Errors they have indeed taken up and embraced.  
3. Self-Love begets in Men an unwillingness to take notice of, and blinds their Minds, that they do not see their own Defects, Weaknesess, and Imperfections: The old proverb is, Vbi amor ibi nulla deformitas. And by how much the stronger Love is, by so much the more unwilling Men are to take notice of; the more effectually are their Minds blinded by it, that they neither do, nor can see any Deformity in its Object. It is to admiration, how the excessive Love of some Parents to their Children, will blind their Eyes, that they see not those Evils and Miscarriages in them, which are obvious and plain to all others! Now, as a Man is nearest to himself, so Love ordinarily worketh most strongly towards himself. Hence their Self-Love blinds their Minds, that they see not their own Evils, but flatter themselves as though Innocent, when yet all others cannot but greatly condemn them: See Psal. 36.2. Hence it seems to be, that David himself saw not his Evils in the Murder of Vriah, and committing Adultery with Bathsheba, and after taking her to be his Wife; and therefore, Nathan endeavours his Conviction, by representing his Case in another Man's, where Self Love could have no influence upon him, to blind his Mind, 2 Sam. 12. beginning. Thus, in point of Error, Men through the excess of Self-Love, neither are willing to, nor do see, either the defects of their own Understandings, nor the Mistakes, Errors and false Reasonings, they have taken up and are seduced by: And hence, having once taken up Error instead of Truth, are so tenacious of it.  
4. Self-Love opposes Men, in owning and acknowledging themselves under any Gild, whether of Error itself, or any other Sin, as the effect of it; how hard is it to convince Men, that are under the prevalency of Self Love, that they are under any Gild, through the prevalency of Self-Love? Men are willing to persuade themselves all is well between God and them, and thereupon to speak Peace to themselves; they have more Charity for themselves, than to suppose themselves Guilty; and besides, were they Guilty, they must own the displeasure of God out against them, and that they are in danger of Judgements and Chastisements from him; but this they are unwilling should be, and therefore are willing to persuade themselves that it is not; and yet further, suppose they are Guilty, they must apply themselves to those hard and unpleasing Works of Repentance, and Self-Humiliation, which they are unwilling to do; and hence would fain have all things well with them at present. And hereupon, though they have taken up and embraced Error, yet they are so hardly convinced of it; grant but such a Doctrine or Tenet which they have espoused, to be an Error, they must have lower thoughts of themselves than they have, or are willing to have.  
5. And Lastly; Self-Love makes Men unwilling to be taken notice of, or known by others to be in an Error; they think it will reflect on them, and redound to their Shame; and how unwilling are Men, through this same Self-Love, to bear the shame of having taken up, and entertained Error instead of Truth, though to recede from Error, would more redound to their Honour, than the embracement of it redounds to their Dishonour? To err is Humane, willingly to persist in Error is Diabolical; to acknowledge, and relinquish Error upon due Conviction, is truly Christian; and how much better is it for, and how much greater an Honour to a Man, by a free owning and relinquishing of an Error, to approve himself a true Christian; than by a wilful persisting therein, for the concealing his Frailties and Infirmities, as a Man, to gain the repute of Devilish? But to put a Close to this, and having declared the marvellous proneness of Man, as in this fallen and corrupted Estate unto Error, and his usual tenaciousness of it when embraced, with the Causes of the one and the other.  
I shall now, according to assistance given, make some Improvement of what hath been said. There is, it is true, another Doctrine obvious in our Text, but that I shall take in, in the Application. Several Uses might be made, to point at some few of them.  
1. Hence we may infer, That there is no just Reason, why any should stumble or be offended at the Christian Doctrine, or at Religion, on the account of the variety of Errors and Heresies found among the Professors of it; those Errors and Heresies proceed not from the Doctrine itself. Truth is uniform and consonant to itself, not is there any reason, why any should impute the abounding of Errors and Heresies among Christians, to the Scriptures themselves, as though either they were defective in the Revelations of Truth, or did by their Darkness render the Knowledge of it unattainable by any. There is a full Revelation of Truth made in them, and the Knowledge of Truth, as contained in them, is plain to him that understandeth. Neither do those Errors and Heresies proceed from any influence, the Doctrine of Christianity hath upon the Minds of Men; but they proceed from the Pravity of Man's Nature, from Satan, and the just Wrath and Displeasure of God against Men. Now there are too many that take up a Profession of Religion, that are wholly Flesh, in an unregenerate Estate; and alas! there is too much Flesh, too much of that Corruption and Pravity of Nature, contracted by the Fall, yet remaining in those that are Regenerate; and as for those that are wholly Unregenerate, they are subject to Satan, he worketh effectually in them; and as for those that are Regenerate, Satan has yet too much Power over them, and too many advantages against them; and besides, God is often provoked by Men to send them strong Delusions. The abounding of Errors and Heresies in these Lands, wherein we dwell, is none of the least Evidences of the Wrath and Displeasure of God against them, and Professors in them; and from all, it is no wonder that Errors and Heresies do so much abound: It is to be ascribed to the Grace and Goodness of God, that they abound no more. Let but Errors and Heresies be resolved into, and assigned unto their true and proper Causes, and they will be sound to be no just ground of stumbling unto any, at the Doctrine of Christ, or at Religion professed by Christians.  
2. Hence we may learn, how unmeet and unfit Man, as in himself, is to be entrusted with Truth, in the holding of it forth unto others; and yet that is a Trust God has reposed in his Church, and consequently in every Member thereof, according to their disserent Stations and Capacity therein. Hence the Church is said to be the Pillar and Ground of Truth, 1 Tim. 3.16. and hereby God doth greatly magnify his Church and People: but Men, no not the best of Men, are to be trusted, as absolutely considered in themselves; and therefore, God hath constituted Jesus Christ the Head, Shepherd, and Bishop of his Church; hath entrusted Truth firstly in his Hand: and it highly concerns all Christians to walk humbly with, and in a continual holy dependence on him, to be by him, led into, and preserved in all Truth, that so they may hold it forth unto others; otherwise they will fail in the discharge of their Trust; they will take up and hold fast Error instead of Truth.  
3. Hence we may infer the necessity that Man, as in this fallen and depraved Estate, lieth under some  Means, whereby he may come to the knowledge of, be guided into, and preserved in the Truth. It must be by some Revelation either mediately or immediately from God, that Men must come to the knowledge of Truth. Man, if left to himself, not only his natural Inclination unto Error, but the weakness and shallowness of his own Understanding, will necessarily subject him to variety of Mistakes and Errors; and that in and about those Things, the knowledge of which is indispensably necessary to Happiness and Blessedness. Man's own Understanding is no safe Guide for him to follow, in the concerns of his Soul and Eternity; it will certainly misled him: therefore is that Caution given us by the wisest of Men, and he guided by the Spirit of the Alwise God, Lean not to thine own Understanding, Prov. 3.5. Those that are led by the mere Light of their own Understandings, (as those who pretend to a Light within, in opposition to the Light of the Scriptures, or that which is instrumentally communicated by them, at best are) will infallibly be led into the Pit, even the Pit of everlasting Destruction. It is only the Light and Truth, that is the true Light of God, that Light contained in, and communicated by the Scriptures, that can infallibly lead any of the Sons and Daughters of fallen Adam into his holy Hill, (scil.) Heaven; Psal. 43.4.  
4. Hence we may infer the Goodness of God to fallen Man; in particular to ourselves: And as the Goodness of God is variously expressed; so eminently in the Provision he hath made for our Guidance into, and Establishment in the Truth, and Preservation from Error. What Provision God hath made, with the Fullness and Sufficiency thereof, shall be taken notice of in the close of this Discourse. At present I shall only say, that that marvellous proneness unto Errors, that is connatural unto all, Saints themselves, so far as unrenewed, not excepted, with the strange Influence that it hath on the minds of Men, when once embraced, should greatly raise our Esteem of that Provision made, fill our Hearts with admiration at the Goodness of God expressed therein, and be matter of continual Praise, and Thanksgivings unto him: Praise ye the Lord, Oh Jerusalem! praise thy God, Oh Zion! saith the Psalmist, Ps. 147.12. and the principal benefit he instances in, as calling for Praise, is this, He sheweth his Word unto Jacob, and his Statutes and Judgements unto Israel (ver. 19) These things I do but point at. The use I would at present rather improve the Doctrine unto, is,  
1. To awaken all to a due Jealousy over themselves, lest they should have taken up Error instead of Truth; (and Reader whoever thou art, look not on thyself as unconcerned in this use.) What hath been said either of Man in general, or of good Men in special, is applicable unto every individual Man or Woman, according to their respective States and Conditions. Others are a Glass, wherein we may see ourselves; Prov. 27.19. therefore we should every one be jealous of ourselves; the want of this proves the ruin of many, and is highly prejudicial unto most. men naturally are apt to be over-confident of themselves: Hence the Scripture gives us such frequent warnings of it; thus in those Passages (Prov. 28.26.) He that trusteth in his own Heart (that is, his own Understanding) is a Fool. 1 Cor. 8.2. If any Man thinketh he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing as he ought to know. Gal. 6.3. If a Man thinketh himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself. 1 Cor. 10.12. Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall. Once again, Luke 8.18. Whomsoever hath not, from him shall be taken, even that which he seemeth to have, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which some translate, thinketh he hath. These with other Passages of a like Import, plainly both intimate, that Men are marvellous apt to overact their Confidence, with reference to themselves; and also warn all to take heed of it; and our present Doctrine, may be sufficient to awaken us all to a holy Jealousy over ourselves. But for the further pursuance of this Use, it may be observed, that the Errors, Deceits and Falsehoods that Men are subject to, too often take up, and tenaciously hold, are of two sorts, or are reducible to two general Heads.  
1. Such as respect Truth, as contained in, and revealed by the Scriptures.  
2. Such as respect Men themselves, whether the inward state, frame, and acts of their own Souls, or their external Ways, and Actions, respective unto Truth, as contained in the Scriptures. In respect of the former, Men's Understandings may be said to deceive them. In respect of the latter, they may be said to deceive their own Understandings. Hence, as some are turned aside by a deceived Heart; so we hear of others, who think themselves to be something when they are nothing. A holy Jealousy over themselves, lest they should have taken up, and answerably do hold of the one, or the other of these kinds of Errors under a notion of Truth, both highly concerns and greatly becomes all the fallen Sons and Daughters of Adam. Let us exercise this Jealousy over ourselves, and that,  
1. Lest we should have taken up any Error or Deceit, respecting Truth as contained and revealed in the Scriptures; be jealous lest our Understandings should have deceived us, and thereupon we have taken up such Notions or Sentiments, under a notion of Truth, which indeed are, and will at last be found to be mere Mistakes, Errors and Deceits, utterly dissonant therefrom; and that,  
1. In regard of the main and fundamental Doctrines of the Gospel, such as relate unto God, unto Jesus Christ, or the way of Salvation by him; or those indispensible Duties of Faith and Holiness. Errors and Deceits in and about these Doctrines, are more common among Professors of Christianity, than most Men are ware of, or are willing to believe. This is certain, that the bare Profession or Enjoyment of the most apt, and effectual external means, whether the Word written, or the Ministry thereof, or any other Advantage subservient to their Knowledge of, and Guidance into Truth, secures no Man from Soul●uining Errors and Mistakes in and about these Doctrines. The Apostle James saw it necessary to warn Professors of Errors, about the Nature of God, (Jam. 1.16, 17.) He supposes that they might charge their Sin upon him, who being the Father of Lights, and immutably so from everlasting to everlasting, is and can only be the Author of that which is good. So the Apostle Paul tells the Corinthians, (though it were to their shame) That all Men have not the Knowledge of God: 1 Cor. 15.34. Now all defects in Knowledge supposes somewhat of Error; and if Men may err about God, much more about Jesus Christ the Mediator, the true Knowledge of whom flows purely from supernatural Revelation, and is no way aided by the Light of Nature, as the Knowledge of God absolutely considered, is; and what Mistakes the Galatians, though Professors of the Gospel, were fallen into, about the way of Salvation by Christ, hath been already taken notice of. Let us then not be over confident of ourselves, as though out of danger of having a Lie in our right Hand, respective to these Doctrines; and it may be added, that not only the darkness of our Understandings, and our proneness unto Error; but the Importance of a right understanding of these things, makes a holy Jealousy over ourselves highly necessary. To have a Lie in the right Hand, in matters wherein the Soul, and its eternal Welfare and wellbeing is so nearly concerned, is very dreadful. To have taken up any False Notions, Errors or Mistakes about these Doctrines, is always prejudicial, frequently destructive to the Souls of Men, the loss of which, is an Evil unknowable by Men any otherwise, than by the actual feeling and experience of it, and consequently only known by Devils, and Men partaking with them in the same Misery.  
2. In regard of Doctrines, with the Practices depending on them, that are of an inferior Nature; Errors in and about which, are consistent with a saving State: Thus all those Doctrines and Practices controverted among those who have the like precious Faith, (viz.) The Faith of God's Elect, and who love our Lord Christ in sincerity; and some such there are. It is to admiration, how confident some Men are of having Truth on their side; and how tenacious thereupon they are of their own Opinions and Persuasions; and how immovable or obstinately they persist in the Practices whereinto they are led by them! Who yet have evidently taken up and embraced Errors instead of Truth. Whence, would but such Men be persuaded of the darkness and weakness of their own Understandings, with their proneness to Error, arising from the Causes afore assigned; and thereupon allow themselves the exercise of a due Jealousy over themselves; and laying aside all Prejudices and Anticipations, would sedately review their Notions and Sentiments, duly improving that Light offered for the discovery of their Errors; they might easily come to see, it is Error, not Truth, they have embraced, and are so tenacious of. Now certainly what hath been said concerning Man's proneness to Error, with the Causes thereof, is sufficient to work in all Men a Jealousy over themselves, and excite them to a review of their Principles and Practices; especially such, as are confessedly more darkly revealed in the Scripture; neither will such a Jealousy, with the review occasioned thereby, supposing the one duly bounded, and the other managed with that Sincerity, Care, and Diligence that becomes Professors of Christianity, be prejudicial to any: It may be highly advantageous unto some; thereby they will be either more confirmed in the Truth, supposing its Truth they have embraced; or brought to relinquish their Errors, supposing it is Error they have taken hold of. Truth never fears the Balance, how often soever laid therein, supposing it held with an even hand, and this may be further considered, that in respect of Doctrines or Practices, that are truly controvertible; (for some Men will needs muster up such Doctrines among Controvertibles, which properly are not so:) But I say in respect of Doctrines truly controvertible, as being confessedly more darkly revealed in the Scriptures, there are several Circumstances relating unto them, making this Jealousy over ourselves, respective to them, more or less necessary. I shall only give a twofold Instance.  
1. According to the approbation or disapprobation, the Doctrines or Practices under Consideration have received from God; so is a holy Jealousy over ourselves more or less necessary.  
2. According as the Doctrines or Practices we now speak of, have been more or less generally received, and adhered unto by those, who throughout all Ages have obtained a good Report, both for their soundness in Judgement and holy walking with God; still the more or less necessary is this Jealousy over ourselves. But to proceed;  
3. In regard of Doctrines purely Practical, such as are directive of Christians, as to what is to be or not to be done, in the course of their Lives and Conversations. men's Understandings may, and too often do deceive them about matters of Practice: Hence some account that unlawful which may not only be lawful, but an important Duty. Others account that lawful, yea possibly a Duty, which indeed is sinful and unlawful: Hence a holy Jealousy over ourselves with reference to those Doctrines directive of our Practices, is highly necessary, especially in these times, and as to the Circumstances we are now under. That the hand of God has been stretched out against the Land of our Nativity, as well as against the Nations round about us, and is not as yet turned back; but that greater Judgements are threatened, is the general accknowledgment of all, who have any regard to the Works of the Lord, or the Operation of his Hands: Hence that Repentance, Humiliation, with other holy Exercises, is the incumbent duty of all, according to the interest they have in the Provocations abounding among us, is granted by all, who own a divine Providence, with the reference that Sin has unto Judgements; and Repentance, Humiliation and Reformation, have unto the prevention of them, or the security of Men from them when they do come. But now this will be found true, which might have been a third Observation, and lies as plain in our Text as either of the former, That while Men hold fast Deceit, or those Errors and false Reasonings, through which they have been seduced, and turned aside into any Sin, or sinful Practices, all means used to bring them to Repentance and Humiliation, proves utterly unavailable for that end and purpose. While Men hold fast Deceit, they will refuse to return; hence it is, that whatever Exhortations to these Duties are pressed upon Men, by those whom God hath made Watchmen among them, they meet with the same Reply, though not verbal, yet practical, that the Jews of old made, and that probably the same way to the like Exhortations pressed on them, Wherein shall we return? Mal 3.7. And how confident for the most part are those that themselves are but little, if at all, concerned in those Duties, who yet have the chiefest hand in procuring and bringing down Judgements? And what is the reason but this, that there is some Mistake, some Error or false Reasoning, whereby they are deluded into a Persuasion that all is well with them? hence they say, as the People of old, (to take in both the versions of those words, Hos. 12.8.) He shall have Punishment of Iniquity, in whom is Sin; as for us, God shall find no Iniquity in us; whence they persuade themselves, no Evil shall come nigh them. And thus Men flatter themselves, till Judgement overtakes them as a Snare, and there is no escaping; this will cost many dear. There is some mistake or some false Reasonings, either relating to matters of Sin, or matters of Duties, or to themselves, as doing the one, or neglecting the other, that lulls them asleep in carnal Security, and renders all Exhortations to the forementioned Duties of none effect. Hence such Men will be left in the open Field till Storms of Divine Judgements overtake them: Whereas, would they but exercise a due Jealousy over themselves, and answerably make a through-Inquiry into their own Ways and Practices, and apply themselves to those Duties, they might be secure under the shadow of the Almighty, and only behold the Destruction of the wicked: but Men overacting their Confidence with reference to themselves, hinder their Performance of those Duties, whereby they lie open to the Stroke of Divine Judgements. Some tell us of certain kind of Birds that fly in Flocks, and being lighted on a Tree, the Fowler comes and shoots one, and then another, and they fall; and yet the rest move not, till at the last all are destroyed. Now let us take heed, lest through some Deceit, Error, or false Reasonings, these Birds prove not our Emblem; God's Arrows have been and are abroad, and many have fallen by them; some by one, others by another; and yet, though our Lord Christ tells us, Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish, few apply themselves with seriousness to these Duties. 'Tis true, Men will say, Repentance is necessary, and if that prevent not, we are like to be a ruined People; yet themselves remain secure; and the Reason lieth in an ungrounded Confidence that they have of themselves, nourished by some Error, Deceit or Falsehood, by means whereof they either see not the things they should repent of, and be humbled for, to be evil; or else see not their own Danger, though guilty of them. This will be found true, that whatever Ways and Courses Men turned aside into ways of Sin, may betake themselves unto, for the securing themselves from Divine Judgements, without Repentance, Humiliation, and Reformation, will avail them nothing. See an excellent Discourse of Dr. Owen's on those words (Luke 13.1, 2, 3, 4, 5.) Repentance and Humiliation issuing in a through Reformation, would (if not prevent common Calamities from the Land, yet) secure ourselves from them, at least the Evil of them; but Men not exercising a due Jealousy over themselves, see not their own Evils, and thereupon neglect those Duties. Neither can it be supposed, that while they hold fast those Errors, Deceits and Falsehoods, by which they have been seduced and turned aside into Sin, they should see their Sin, and answerably apply themselves to them, etc. And while those Duties are neglected, they do indeed, however they may flatter themselves, lie open to Divine Judgements. Now let the Consideration of what hath been said, awaken us to this holy Jealousy, and answerably make a through and impartial Inquiry into our Ways and Actions: But this ungrounded Confidence acted by Men with reference to themselves, will prove their ruin; and it's no small Evidence of the Generality of Men's overacting their Confidence, with reference to themselves, that so few Cases of Conscience are brought to them, whose Lips ought to preserve Knowledge. It is a plain Argument, People trust too much to their own Understandings; were there that Tenderness of Conscience in Professors, that becomes Christians, accompanied with a holy Jealousy of their own Understandings, as more frequent and fervent Requests would be put up unto God, that he would teach them what they see not; so more Cases of Conscience would be put unto Men, and more Industry would be used to find out what is the good and acceptable Will of God, and wherein they fail in the doing of it; and by means of all, Men might and would know both the Plagues of their own Hearts, and Evils of their Lives, which being found out, repent of, and reform; they would be safe, what Evils or Calamities soever are coming, whereby though thousands should fall by their sides, and ten thousands at their Right-hand; yet it should not come nigh unto them: See Psal. 93.7, 8. But,  
2. Let us be awakened to a holy Jealousy over ourselves, lest we should have taken up and embraced any Error, or Deceit respecting ourselves. It is possible that a Man that hath a clear and distinct Knowledge of the Doctrine of Regeneration, and is able to give an exact Description of it, to show wherein it doth consist, and what a frame and disposition of Heart is produced by it, may have his own Heart wrought to such a Frame, as bears so great a likeness to the Frame of Heart produced by Regeneration, that he may conclude himself to be truly regenerate, when yet indeed and in truth he is not so. Now such a Frame of Heart deceives a Man's own Understanding; He thinketh himself to be something, when he is nothing: he is deluded by the Counterfeit of what he hath a true Notion of in his Mind. So a Man may put forth such Acts, and perform such Actions, as carry so great an Appearance of being true Grace, and truly gracious, as that the he has a notional Knowledge of the nature of Grace, and all the Requisites to truly gracious Actions; yet is himself deceived by them: he supposes them to be in reality what they carry an Appearance of, when indeed they are but the Counterfeits thereof. A good Nature may be so polished by Education and Industry, with the superaddition of some common Gifts and Operations of the Spirit, that it may seem to be truly renewed; and its Productions may look so much like the Fruits of the Spirit, that a Man, though he has a clear Notion of that Change made by the renovation of the Spirit, and of the Fruits of the Spirit flowing therefrom; yet verily thinks himself to be renewed, and to bring forth the Fruits of the Spirit, when indeed it is otherwise: Thus in respect of those, Divines usually call close or secret Hypocrites; a Man may be an Hypocrite, and yet not know it himself; the Shows and Appearances of Grace and Godliness deceive Men's own Understandings. It is often found, that Men of great Knowledge and Orthodox Judgements, are yet deceived in their own Acts and Actions; every Orthodox Divine is not a sound Christian: Let us then be awakened to a Jealousy over ourselves; it's dreadful to have Lamps in our Hands, with a confidence of having Oil in them, till the time to obtain it is over. But to hasten, Let the Consideration of Men's proneness to Error, awaken us all to a holy Jealousy over ourselves, lest we should have taken up Error instead of Truth, and that as Error and Deceits respect Truth, as contained in the Scriptures, or as it respects ourselves; and answerably make a through Inquiry, whether indeed we have not so done. And if any shall say, Seeing there is such a Proneness in Man unto Error, and consequently all Men are in danger to mistake, and take up Error instead of Truth, than it is possible we may lie under some Error or Deceit, after the utmost Inquiry we can make. In answer, It must be granted, that it is possible it may be so; let me therefore advise to three things  
1. Labour to interest Jesus Christ in the Care of our Souls: Labour to get under his Care, that the prevention of our Ruin, or any Damage we may sustain by Errors, may be his Concern as well as our own. But you will say, How shall we do that?  
Answ. 1. By committing ourselves to him, as the Shepherd and Bishop of Souls; The Poor committeth himself to the Lord, Psal. 10.14. by humble Supplication, that he will undertake the Work for us: See the Psalmist, Psal. 139. ult.  
2. Be not satisfied without the Approbation of God himself. Content not ourselves without the sealings of the Spirit, nor without his bearing Witness with our Consciences, to the Sincerity, Uprightness, and Acceptableness of our Ways and Actions unto him. Take not up with any thing short of what the Apostle had attained unto, a Cor. 1.12.  
3. Take the Comfort of what Grounds of hope we have, that through the free Grace of God we are delivered from Errors and Deceits; yet maintaining a holy Jealousy over ourselves, lest it should be otherwise, and answerably be still making a more full and through search, whether we are not deceived, and have not taken up Error instead of Truth.  
2. Another Use I would more especially make of the Doctrine, is, to caution all against Error for the future: Take heed our own Understandings do not deceive us, and lead us into Error; be very wary we are not imposed upon, either by Satan or Men. Our own Understandings are not only dark and weak, subject to variety of Mistakes and False-reasonings; but there is an Inclination, and strange Proclivity unto Error connatural unto them, and Satan is continually endeavouring to deceive us; and Men have their Slights and cunning Craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive: Eph. 4.14. Hence great Care and Diligence is indispensably necessary unto our Preservation from Error. Hence all Notions and Sentiments arising up in, or suggested to our Minds, as well as all Doctrines or Practices proposed to, and pressed upon us by Men, aught to be carefully weighed and duly examined, before they are embraced and complied with. and let it be remembered that any Notion, Doctrine or Practice, may be weighed and examined with more Impartiality and Sincerity, before it be embraced and actually closed with, than it can after; while it is only suggested to the Mind, or looked upon as another's Opinion or Practice, the Mind may and ordinarily will with more freedom weigh and examine it; but when it is actually closed in with, that a Man hath espoused it as his own Opinion, or as his own Judgement, Self-love will greatly hinder from an impartial and through weighing of, and searching into it. And besides, it is vastly more easy to reject an Error before it is actually embraced, than it is to relinquish it afterwards. Error once taken hold of, is not easily let go again; Error ordinarily is held fast; and therefore let us be excited to the greater Wariness and Watchfulness against Error. When we see how strangely tenacious Men are of Error, let that be the Use we make of it; think with ourselves how careful should we be, that we do not take up any Error instead of Truth. Oh! how much Prejudice do some good Men receive by the Mistakes and Errors they have unwarily taken up and embraced! and yet how tenacious are they of them? let them be warnings unto us. It highly concerns us to be very deliberate before we close in with any Doctrine or Practice, especially that differs from those Doctrines and Practices, that have been generally received and walked in by true Saints; and that throughout all Ages, Men's (especially good Men's) overhasty taking up and embracing Doctrines and Practices that are proposed to, and pressed upon them under the Notion of Truth, without a due use of the necessary means to find out whether they are so or no, has been one of the great Causes of the abounding of Errors among Professors. Men having once embraced an Error, they too commonly are exceeding tenacious of it; and besides, Conscience enforceth them not only to be tenacious of it themselves, but to promote it among others; and hence it is, that Errors so much abound as they do: and therefore I say, let us be wary of embracing Error instead of Truth. And to enforce this, together with the foregoing use, I would offer two things to Consideration:  
1. The Evil and Sinfulness of Error, and consequently the Provocation it is unto God. Few Christians apprehend there is such an Evil in Error as there is, and that it is so provoking unto God as indeed it is, at least that Error as such, and consequently every Error is so evil and displeasing unto God. And therefore that we may be more sensible of the Evil and Sinfulness of Error, let these four things be considered:  
1. That Error blots and defaces the Image of God in Man; the Image of God in Man, is Man's Conformity to, and Resemblance of God, which respects his Understanding, as well as his Will and Affections: Hence the Image of God in Man is said to consist in Knowledge, as well as in Righteousness and true Holiness: Col. 3.10. Eph. 4.24. compared together: We are renewed, (saith Davenant) according to the Image of God; Cum illustrantur & sanctificantur omnes Potentiae & Inclinationes Animae nostrae. All Error supposes a Defect in Knowledge, or is an Effect of Ignorance; Ye err, not knowing the Scriptures, saith our Lord Christ. Hence through Error Men come short of the Glory of God, as well as through any defect in their Sanctification; and all Defects or Blots in the Image of God in his People, are sinful and displeasing to him.  
2. Errordefiles the Nature of Men, as well as any moral Evil; Error it's true, being in the Understanding, it primarily defiles the Understanding; but as it proceeds from affected or voluntary Ignorance, it defiles the Conscience; yea, it diffuses a Defilement throughout the whole Soul. Hence the Apostle, having a peculiar respect to erroneous Persons, tells us, They have their Minds and Consciences defiled: Tit. 1.15.  
3. That as Error itself is a Sin, and is usually, if not always, an occasion of some other Sin, either of Omission or Commission: so both Error itself, and those Sins occasioned by it, are lived impenitently in; Men humble not themselves for such Sins. Now Sin, though it be a Sin of Ignorance, especially when that Ignorance is voluntary, being lived impenitently in, may be greater and more provoking unto God, than other Sins are, that are of a more heinous Nature in themselves, that men through the violence of a Temptation, or the strong workings of a particular Lust, are over-taken with, but are not persisted in.  
4. Errors break that Unity that ought to be, and God delights to see among his People. God would have his People to be of one Mind and one Judgement: Now Error breaks this Unity, whence variety of Evils usually issue. And let it be observed, that though the difference in Mind and Judgement among Christians, will not excuse any in whom those Evils, occasioned by, or arising from them, are found; yet they will be eminently charged upon those on whose part the Errors lie. But,  
Secondly, The other thing I would offer to Consideration is this, That by how much the greater the Provision God has made, is, and the more full the Means he has vouchsafed for our coming to the Knowledge and preservation in Truth are, by so much the more sinful and provoking are Errors. Now consider what Provision God hath made for, and what Means he vouchsafes to us in these Lands.  
1. He has given us his Word, and that in our own Language, we may daily read in, and converse with it.  
2. He hath constituted a Ministry, raises up Men, and furnisheth them with Gifts suitable for that Office, and that with reference to our Guidance into, and Establishment in the Truth, Eph. 4.11, 12, 13, 14.  
3. God hath given his Spirit to abide with his Church here upon Earth; Joh. 14.16. Hence by Prayer we may obtain his Teachings, and that is one of the great ends, with reference unto which he is given to, and left with the Church: Joh. 16.13. Yea, God gives his Spirit to dwell in every individual Believer, and that with reference to the same end; But ye (saith the Apostle John, speaking unto Saints) have an Unction from the holy One, and ye know all things; that is, all Truth necessary to be known; 1 Joh. 2.20. The Apostle speaks of them, as though actually knowing all things. The Scripture sometimes speaks of that as true de facto, which on many accounts either aught to be, or may be so; as if he should say, such an advantage you have by that Unction you received from the holy One, to know all things; that it may well be supposed of, and expected from you, that you do indeed know all things. There can hardly be any Error embraced by a Believer, but it must be through his own Default.  
4. God works providentially with reference unto our Guidance into, and Establishment in the Truth. The Providences of God, as they are designed for; so, if wisely observed and well improved, would highly conduce to our Guidance into, and Establishment in the Truth. I will guide thee with mine Eyes, saith the Lord to a righteous Man, Psal. 32.8. But here is Man's Misery, God speaks once, yea twice, (viz. by his Works), but Man perceiveth it not. Now than God having made such Provision, and vouchsafed such a Sufficiency of Means for our Guidance into Truth, and preservation from Error, our Errors must needs be greatly aggravated, and consequently more provoking unto God. How careful then should we be, to free ourselves from Error? How diligently should we inquire, Whether we have not already taken it up, how wary should we be for the future, that we do not take up Error instead of Truth? I shall close this with that of Solomon; Buy the Truth, and sell it not. But one word more.  
Lastly, In case God has of his free Grace instructed us in Truth, and preserved us from Error, let us praise the Mercy, and be exceeding thankful for it. God has done great things for us, considering the Multiplicity of Errors that now are abroad.    

THE Covenant of Circumcision, THE Covenant of Grace.  
OR, That that Covenant established with Abraham, Gen. 17.7. is the Covenant of Grace, clearly and fully proved.  
Wherein the Mistake of Mr. Nehemia Cox, in his Historical Account of the Foederal Transactions of God with Abraham, are rectified, and the Foundation laid in that Covenant, to the Covenant-Interest and Baptism of the Infant-Seed of Believers more fully confirmed.  
By J. Whiston, Minister of the Gospel.  
And he gave him the Covenant of Circumcision: so Abraham begot Isaac, and circumcised him the eight day:  Acts 7.8. 
LONDON; Printed by J. D. for Jonathan Robinson at the Golden-Lyon in St. Paul's Churchyard, 1682.   

The Covenant of Circumcision, the Covenant of Grace, etc.  
THat there is in Men, as in this fallen and corrupted Estate, a marvellous Propencity unto Error, and that having once taken up and embraced it, they are too commonly exceeding tenacious of it, hath been, as I conceive, sufficiently evinced in the foregoing Discourse. Those Instances therein produced, do evidently declare it: Neither are there wanting too many Instances for the illustrating and confirming the Truth of what is there affirmed, among those who style themselves, and may justly bare the Denomination of Protestants.  
In all Controversies, that are not merely verbal, Error must necessarily lie on the one side, and sometimes on both. Truth cannot, but Error may be contradictory; and that there are such Controversies among Protestants, and they maintained and kept up with great Obstinacy by the Letigant Parties, is obvious unto all. To pass by all others, I shall only single out that between Faedo-Baptists and Antipaedo-Baptists, that no Infants are to be baptised. That some Infants are to be baptised, are Propositions, though not absolutely contrary, yet contradictory the one to the other; hence both cannot be true, Error must lie on the one side, or the other side. And yet with what obstinacy this Controversy hath been, and still is kept up, is sufficiently known; hence as the Parties Letigant do mutually charge each other with the Evils afore discoursed of; so it must be granted on all hands, that the Charge is justly laid on the one party, at least as to what yet appears, seems so to be. Where the Charge justly lieth, I shall for the present leave to the Judgement of all that are sober and judicious, and refer the final Decision to Him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead, who as being in the Bosom of the Father, has a perfect Knowledge of Truth; so being above all possibility of any bias, on the one or the other hand, will truly determine without respect of Persons; in the mean time, being past all rational doubt, satisfied that the Truth in this Controversy lieth on the Affirmative Part, I have judged it an incumbant Duty to appear, according to Grace received, in defence of the Part. Neither am I as yet convinced, but that the same Duty is still incumbant on me, and therefore having now again, as hath been judged by some, a Call by a late Tract published by Mr. Nehemiah Cox (entitled, A Discourse of the Covenants that God made with Man before the Law, where this debate is revived) to appear in defence of the Truth. I have readily complied therewith, not so much that the Truth is like to be wrested out of the Hands of any that are possessed of it, by what he hath said, as that his Discourse treating of the Covenants, and in special that entered with Abraham, I might take the advantage given, more fully to settle the Foundation laid in that Covenant to Infant-Baptism. But to come to the Discourse by which I am called to this Work. In it the Author treats of God's Foederal Transaction first with Adam, secondly with Noah, thirdly with Abraham; they are the last that I judge myself called to the Consideration of. With reference unto these, he makes a threefold Inquiry; see Chap. 4. Sect. 3. p. 72. as a Foundation unto all which, he premises this remarkable Paragraph, which for the remarkableness of it, shall be transcribed verbatim, and thus he gins.  
There is one thing more to be premised to the Consideration of God's Covenant-Transactions with Abraham in particular, which we have most clearly stated in the New Testament, viz.  
That with respect unto them, Abraham is to be considered in a double Capacity, both as the Father of all true Believers, and as the Father and Root of the Israelitish Nation. And for both these Seeds, God did enter into Covenant with him; howbeit these Seeds being formally distinguished the one from the other; their Covenant-Interest must of necessity be divers, and fall under a distinct Consideration, and the Blessings appropriated unto either, must be conveyed in a way agreeable to their peculiar and respective Covenant-Interest; and these things may not be confounded without a manifest hazard of the most important Articles in the Christian Religion; and yet such is the mutual respect of all God's Covenant-Transactions with Abraham, and such was to be his Dispensation towards the Church for some Ages following, as did require a present Intermixture of the Promises, and an involving of Spiritual Blessings in the stead of Temporal; and of a Spiritual Seed in a Natural; this I suppose is more evident than to admit a Denial.  
This one thing that Mr. Cox premits, as a Foundation unto the ensuing Inquiries, is complicated and made up of several Particulars; As,  
1 That Abraham is to be considered in a double Capacity, viz.  

(1.) As the Father of all true Believers.  
(2.) As the Father and Root of the Israelitish Nation; and he means, he is to be considered in this twofold Capacity, with respect to God's Covenant-Transactions with him, so he expressly declares himself.   
2. That these two Seeds, or kinds of Seed, are formally distinguished the one from the other, viz. with respect to the Covenants, for so he supposes them to be two distinct Covenants, that God made with them as Abraham's Seed; or, as he speaks, entered with Abraham for them.  
3. That hereupon their respective Covenant-Interest must of necessity be divers, and fall under a distinct Consideration, and the Blessings appropriated to either, must be conveyed in a way agreeable to their peculiar and respective Covenant-Interest; and if we compare this with his ensuing Inquiry, it evidently appears, though he expresseth himself very darkly, that his plain meaning is, that these distinct Seeds, or kinds of Seed, as a Father unto which Abraham was now considered, being, as he had just afore supposed them to be, formally distinguished the one from the other; there must of necessity be two distinct Covenants, the one the Covenant of Grace, the other the Covenant of Works; the same with that made with the People of Israel at Mount Sinai. And these two Covenants conveying quite distinct kinds of Blessings, were entered with Abraham for them respectively.  
4. That there was, and it was necessary there should be, an intermixture of the Promises conveying those distinct Blessings, Spiritual Blessings being involved, as he speaks, in the shade of Temporal, and a Spiritual Seed in the shade of a Natural: these four particulars are included in that one General here premitted by our Author. Now there are four things in this Paragraf, that make it exceeding remarkable to me.  
1. That Mr. Cox should affirm, that this thing, including those four Particulars, is most clearly stated in the New Testament, and yet give us no Intimations where.  
2. That he should say, there is a necessity that two distinct Covenants should be entered with Abraham for those two kinds of Seed, and yet give us no reason why he so judges,  
3. That he should affirm these things cannot be confounded without hazard to the most important Articles in the Christian Religion, and yet not instance in any one that is hazarded thereby.  
4. That which is most remarkable unto me is, That he should say this is more evident than to admit of a denial. I conceive he must needs intent the same thing, that before he had said was most clearly stated in the New Testament, and so that Particle, this, must have reference to all those four Particulars before mentioned. But how Mr. Cox can possibly imagine, that all those Particulars, yea, or any one of them in his sense, should be more evident than to admit of a denial, is to me matter of great Admiration; sure he cannot but know that the whole of what he has said, excepting that; first Clause, viz. that Abraham must be considered in a double Capacity, and that as abstracted from that account he gives of it, and that Passage concerning the involving of Spiritual Blessings in the shade of Temporal, is vehemently denied, not only by me, but by many others; yea, that the whole of what he hath said, taken conjunctly, and in the sense intended by him, is uno ore denied by all that have hitherto pleaded the Cause of Infant Baptism from Abraham's Covenant. Now that Mr. Cox should suppose that to be more evident than to admit of a denial, which is denied by Hundreds or Thousands, yea, almost by the whole Universal Church, without giving us any reason at all of that his supposal, is certainly matter of great Admiration.— But Sand must be laid for a Foundation by the ablest Builders, where better Materials are not to be had. Mr. Cox having laid this Foundation, such as it is, proceeds to the Inquiries bottomed thereon; But for me to follow him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 through them all, would be utterly impertinent, seeing there is no just Foundation at all for the one or the other of his two last Inquiries: I shall therefore in a direct Opposition to the very design of his whole Discourse, as it concerns the Federal Transactions of God with Abraham, lay down a fourfold Proposition, and offer somewhat for their Confirmation, especially of the two former, and consider whatever he has said, that carries the least Appearance of Opposition to any of them.  
Prop. 1. That God in making, or when he did make those Promises unto Abraham, recorded Gen. 12.2, 3. did not enter or establish the Covenant of grace with him. This lieth directly opposite to what Mr. Cex affirms, p. 74. where saith he, in the Transaction of God with Abraham, recorded Gen. 12. he did solemnly confirm his Covenant with him; he means, he then established, so he expresseth himself, p. 74. or made so; he expresseth himself p. 77. His Covenant evidently intending the Covenant of Grace. Now this I absolutely deny, and on the contrary affirm, That in these Transactions of God with Abraham, he did not make or establish the Covenant of Grace with him. The truth is, he did not then make any Covenant at all with him, and consequently not the Covenant of Grace: And though the Proof lies upon the Opponant, and it might be enough for me to deny, yet I shall offer a threefold Argument to prove the Negative.  
Arg. 1. Where we have neither the Name of a Covenant, nor the thing itself, there no Covenant, and consequently not the Covenant of Grace was made: But in those Transactions of God with Abraham, we have neither the Name of a Covenant, nor the thing itself. Therefore, etc. That we have not the Name of a Covenant, Mr. Cox acknowledges, and that here was nothing like a Covenant, taking that term (Covenant) in a proper Sense, as it is always taken when the Covenant of Grace is intended, is alike evident. Here are, it is true, some absolute Promises made to Abraham personally considered, but not any made to his Seed, whether Natural or Spiritual, conveying unto them any particular Good; neither is here any Restipulation required, as there is, as I suppose Mr. C. will grant in the Covenant of Grace, as in all other Covenants, when that term is used in a proper sense, there is. See Mr. Cox his Discourse pag. 5. So that neither having the Name, nor the Thing itself, it is utterly unscriptural, yea unreasonable to affirm, that any, in special that that Covenant of Grace was at this time entered with Abraham, it was only the preaching of the Gospel to him, so the Apostle expressly tells us, Gal. 3.8.  
Arg. 2. If the Covenant of Grace were at this time entered with Abraham, and this be a distinct Covenant from that mentioned, Gen. 17.7. then there were two distinct Covenants of Grace entered with Abraham: but there were not two distinct Covenants of Grace entered with Abraham; therefore at this time, the Covenant of Grace was not entered with him. That that Covenant mentioned, Gen. 17. is the Covenant of Grace, shall be after proved: Whence in case this Covenant were the Covenant of Grace, and that a distinct Covenant from that, than there must needs be two distinct Covenants of Grace: which is false.  
Arg. 3. The Covenant of Grace was made with Abraham, as actually constituted the Father of the Faithful; but at the time of this Transaction of God with him, he was not actually constituted in that Relation; therefore at that time the Covenant of Grace was not entered with him; it may seem that Abraham was not constituted in that Relation till the Change of his Name, Gen. 17.5. However this is certain, he was not to be looked upon in that Relation, till after those noble Acts of his Faith, of which we have an account, Gen. 15.6. seeing the Apostle expressly tells us, he put forth those Acts of Faith, That he might become the Father of many Nations, Rom. 4.18. plainly implying he was not so before. Indeed in that Gen. 12. God intimated to him that he should be for the future constituted in that Relation, but doth not then actually constitute him in it: but now, I say, the Covenant of Grace was made with him as the Father of the Faithful; so that at this Transaction God neither did nor could enter the Covenant of Grace with him. But let us see what Mr. Cox hath said in Confirmation of his Affirmation, viz. That God in this Transaction with Abraham, Gen. 12. did enter or make the Covenant of Grace with him, and all that I can find is only this, viz. That the Covenant of Grace was, as the Apostle tells us, Gal. 3.17. Confirmed of God in Christ 430 Years before the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai. Now, saith he, from the giving of that first Promise to Abraham, recorded Gen. 12.2, 3. unto that very Night in which the Children of Israel were delivered out of their Egyptian Bondage, is the Computation of those Years to be made, which he thinks will be evident to any that shall diligently compare the Chronology of those times, with the express Testimony of Moses, Exod. 12.41. Now to this I shall say in the general, that had Mr. C. given us an exact Computation of the Chronologies of those times, it might have given some more light into this matter, but that I suppose he knew would be a matter of no small difficulty to do: I remember what Illyricus saith, Ab hoc tempore, meaning the time of Jacob's Death, 
* Illyricus de Ratione Lib 4. p. 52.  Seriem annorum non possumus pari facilitate deducere. And he gives this reason for it, Nam Geneologiae haud quaquam eadem ratione pertaxuntur, in Aegypto qua hactenus factum est; so that how evident soever Mr. Cox supposes it will be, yet this learned Man was of another mind: but more particularly, I shall offer these few things to consideration.  
1. That it is very uncertain where to fix the Epocha of these four hundred and thirty Years mentioned by Moses, and after him by the Apostle. There needs no other Proof of this, than the Disagreement and sharp Contests found amongst Interpreters and Chronologers about it; vix duo hactenus inter se conveniunt, saith Pareus. I suppose Mr. C. is not ignorant of what he hath said to prove that these Years must necessarily be reckoned from the Establishment of that Covenant, Gen. 15.18. which he takes to be the same with that, Gen. 17. I shall not determine; only this I shall say, the uncertainty is so great, as that no Argument can be taken therefrom to prove that the Promise or Covenant the Apostle hath reference unto, is that mentioned Gen. 12.  
2. That it is utterly improbable that these (430) Years do, if not absolutely certain that they do not bear Date from the giving of those Promises Gen. 12. unto Abraham: for let but these three things be considered.  
1. That there is a probability at least, that those (400) Years mentioned Gen. 15.13. and those (430) Years mentioned by Moses, and by the Apostle, intent one and the same number of Years, both Pareus and many other Interpreters conclude, and answerably must begin & end at the same times, the thirty odd Years not being at first mentioned; though after, when there is a more exact account of the time of the Israelites abode in Egypt, including their Peregrination in Canaan, is given, they are expressed. Now it is agreed on by many, if not by most, that those 400 Years bean either at the Birth of Isaac, or at Ishmael's mocking of him; and that they must begin at the one or the other of those times, seems evident, because the Predictions expressly concern Abraham's Seed, and not Abraham himself; the Words are, Know of a Surety, that thy Seed shall be a stranger in the Land that is not theirs: So that supposing these distinct Numbers, viz. 400, and 430. intent, as to their beginning and ending, one and the same Period of time, they must at least publicly be dated, either at Isaac's Birth, or Ishmael's Persecuting, as the Apostle interprets his mocking of him.  
2. Suppose the 430 Years must begin 30 Years before the 400, yet this 430 Years must be dated at, if not after Abraham's coming into the Land of Canaan; this is not only expressly affired by the 70 Translators, in their Version of that Exod. 12.40. but is necessarily implied in the Text, for so the Words run, And the sojourning of the Children of Israel, who dwelled in Egypt, was 430 Years. It is not said indeed they did sojourn so long in Egypt, but their sojourning was so long. Now they cannot possibly be said to sojourn in Canaan before Abraham come into it, and that of their sojourning in that Land, and in Egypt, the Text there speaks I conceive is agreed on by all; whence it appears, that those 430 Years, must necessarily begin after Abraham's coming into Canaan. Hence,  
3. That those Promises, Gen. 12.2, 3. were gien to Abraham sometime, how long, is hard to determine, before he came into Canaan; they were given him while in Vr of the Chaldeans, after which he dwelled sometime in Charran, yea, and a considerable time, as appears Gen. 12.5. Now should we date these Years intervening, between the giving of those Promises, and the coming of the Children of Israel out of Egypt, they would amount to many more than 430, seeing, as all agree, yea, Mr. Cox himself affirms, there passed exactly so many Years from Abraham's coming into Canaan, unto the Children of Israel's going out of Egypt: From the whole it is, if not absolutely certain, yet exceeding probable, That that cannot be the Promise, or Covenant, from the giving of which, to the giving of the Law, there are said to be 430 Years; it may rather seem it was that Promise mentioned Gen 12. v. 6. But,  
4. Suppose, which yet I grant not, that the 430 Years are to be reckoned from God's giving those Promises, 12. Gen. 2, 3. Yet it cannot be from thence concluded, that the Covenant of Grace was then, or in them established with Abraham. Mr. Cox himself grants, that the Covenant of Circumcision, as he call● ●t, viz. that Covenant mentioned Gen. 17.7. which they take to be the old Covenant, but we affirm to be the Covenant of Grace, was not perfected at one Transaction, nor all the Promises of it made to Ahraham at one time; and this I shall readily grant, that God in making those Promises, Gen. 12. did begin to deal with Abraham, with reference to the Establishment of the Covenant of Grace with him; and answerably, that those Promises did prepare the way thereunto, and do contain the Blessings of it, as more generally revealed. And which was afterwards more particularly expressed, and the Apostle might compute the Years intervening the making that Covenant, after confirmed in Christ, and the giving the Law, from the first Transaction of God with Abraham with reference thereunto, which is no Proof, that the Covenant was then established between God and Abraham. But Lastly,  
Suppose we should grant that the Covenant of Grace was entered with, or, as Mr. Cox expresseth it, revealed to Abraham in those Promises, Gen. 12. Yet that is no Argument at all, that that Covenant Gen. 17. is not the Covenant of Grace. The first Lines of the Covenant of Grace might be then drawn, as Mr. Cox saith, the first Lines of the Covenant at Mount Sinai, were first drawn in the establishment of that Covenant, Gen. 17. and yet the same Covenant might be more fully and explicitly entered in that Transaction recorded Gen. 17. and that is enough as to my present purpose. This I suppose I may safely say, is more evident than to admit of a denial, at least by Mr. Cox; and from the whole of what hath been said, we may evidently see of how little use this Observation about the Years, intervening between the Covenant confirmed in Christ, and the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai, is as to Mr. Cox's purpose.  
But to proceed to the second Proposition, the more full Establishment of which is, that I peculiarly designed these Sheets for, and that is this:  
2. Prop. That that Covenant established with Abraham and his Seed in their Generations, Gen. 17.7. is the Covenant of Grace, or that gracious Covenant confirmed in Christ, according unto which, all the Elect always have been, still are, and yet shall be saved. And for a more full Establishment of this Proposition, wherein the Covenant-Interest, and by Consequence the Baptism of the Infant-Seed of Believers, is peculiarly concerned, I shall speak to it both negatively, and positively.  
First, Negatively. And here I shall first offer somewhat to prove, that this Covenant was not the old Covenant, or the same with that entered with the People of Israel at Mount Sinai: And then consider what Mr. Cox hath said in confirmation of his Supposition, viz. That it was the old Covenant; and that this is his Opinion, (though he expresseth not himself in totidem verbis, that I have yet observed) is sufficiently evident from the whole design of his Discourse, at least so far as it concerns the Covenant-Transactions of God with Abraham; and more especially pag. 104. and 113. and frequently elsewhere; as also by his constant distinguishing of it from the Covenant of Grace. Now in a direct opposition unto this Supposition of his, I shall endeavour to prove that it was not the old Covenant. Indeed I should sufficiently discharge the part of a Respondent, to answer what he hath said to prove that it is; and besides, to prove that it is the Covenant of Grace, will sufficiently overthrow this Supposal of his; but yet ex abundanti, I shall offer somewhat to prove that it was not the old Covenant. And,  
1. If the Scripture continually declares, that the Covenant made at Mount Sanai was the old Covenant; and no where declares that this Covenant made with Abraham was so: Then that Covenant made at Mount Sinai, and not this made with Abraham, was the old Covenant. But the Antecedent is true, therefore the Consequent. As God is the Author and Establisher of all Covenants, that have passed between Himself and Man; so we are to be regulated in our Notions and Conceptions of them, by the Revelation he hath made of them in his Word. Hence, for any to affirm, that this Covenant established with Abraham was the old Covenant, when God hath no where declared that it was so, is openly to declare themselves to be guided by their own Fancies and Imaginations, and not by the unerring Light of the Scriptures. But especially, when God himself hath declared expressy in his Word, yea once and again, that there is another Covenant, viz. that made at Mount Sinai, that he gives the denomination of the old Covenant unto. And this may be further observed, That the sameness of some particular Good promised, and Duties commanded, in this Covenant established with Abraham, and that made at Mount Sinai, cannot justly be interpreted a Revelationg from God, that the Covenants are one and the same; there may be observed an Identity, or Sameness, both of Good promised, and Duties commanded, in the Covenant of Nature, and the Covenant of Grace, in sundry Particulars; and yet the Covenants are not only distinct, but of quite different natures and tenors. Now that the Scriptures declare, that the Covenant made at Mount Sinai, is the old Covenant, is plain; see Jerem. 31.32. with Heb. 8.10. and let our Opponants show wherever the Covenant made with Abraham is declared in Scripture to be the old Covenant.  
Arg. 2. The Law or the old Covenant was ordained by Angels in the hand of a human Mediator, a Mediator that was a mere Man: but this Covenant established with Abraham, was not ordained by Angels in the hand of a humane Mediator: therefore this Covenant was not the Law, or the old Covenant. The Major is expressly affirmed by the Apostle, Gal. 3.19. If any shall affirm that the Covenant made with Abraham was so ordained, it concerns them to prove it,  
Arg. 3. The Law or old Covenant was given 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace was established with Abraham: but this Covenant entered with Abraham was not entered 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace was entered with him; therefore this Covenant cannot be the Law or old Covenant. The Major is evident from the express Words of the Apostle, Gal. 3.17. The Minor is evident from the History of God's Covenant-Transaction with Abraham.  
Arg. 4. God himself expressly denies that this Covenant established with Abraham was the old Covenant: Therefore, that God expressly denies the Covenant established with Abraham to be the old Covenant, is evident, Deut. 5.2, 3. where saith Moses, speaking by the Spirit of God, The Lord our God made a Covenant with us in Horeb: The Lore made not this Covenant with our Fathers. Now, that under this Term Fathers, we must necessarily include Abraham, cannot be denied: Whence it is evident, that the Covenant made in Horeb (that is at Mount Sinai) was not made with Abrham. And that which may yet further confirm us, if it needs any further Confirmation, is this, that the Lord himself expressly distinguisheth that Covenant made with Abraham, from that Covenant made at Mount Sinai, Deut. 29.1. These are the Words of the Covenant, viz. which they were not entering with God, as is expressed ver. 10. and so on: And that this was the Covenant made with Abrham, is expressly declared, ver. 13. Now this Covenant is expressly said to be another Covenant, besides that made in Horeb; so ver. 1. they could not be one and the same Covenant. Now, what can possibly be more plain? who can with any pretence to any attendance to divine Revelation, question, whether that Covenant made with Abraham, Gen. 17.7. be the old Covenant, or the same Covenant with that made with the People of Israel at Mount Sinai, when the Lord himself not only denies that that Covenant made at Mount Sinai, was made with Abraham, but evidently, and in plain Words, distinguisheth the one from the other? And that which may yet further confirm us, is, that the Scriptures  speak of the Covenant made with Abraham in the singular Number; and no where give the least intimation, that there were two Covenants, the one of which can possibly be supposed to be the Covenant of Grace, and the other the old Covenant. These Arguments are so plain, that nothing can be rationally replied. Not that I suppose, nothing at all can be by the Wit of Man invented (Alas! 〈◊〉 hath found out many Inventions) to deceive ●●●●self, and others: But I say nothing can be said, that shall carry any appearance of a just Reply. But let us see what Mr. C. hath said in Confirmation of his Supposition, whether that may not counterbalance what hath been now said, to prove, that this Covenant was not the old Covenant, and in passage, I shall only remark, that in case he expected that his Discourse should be of any use for the clearing up that great Point, concerning the right Subjects of Baptism, as he professedly designed it, he should have applied himself with the utmost diligence, to have proved this his Supposition. Of all that he affirms in his whole Discourse, this required the clearest and most convincing proof. Certainly he could not but foresee, that his Reader, suppose him inquisitive after Truth, would expect a clear, solid, and substantial Proof of this Supposition: But alas! that must not be expected, seeing he declines the handling of things in a polemical way, but that quite spoils his design, and renders his whole Discourse utterly useless, as to such Readers. And he might easily have foreseen that it would so do, two things among others made it indispensably necessary to his attaining the end professedly aimed at, that he should either have produced some plain and express Scripture one or more: Or else, that he should have laid down some sound Arguments, well bottomed upon the Scripture. The first is, the Interest that this Covenant under Consideration, is pleaded to have in the practice of Infant-Baptism. Himself tells us, he had observed that the main hinge of the Controversy, about the right Subjects of Baptism, does turn upon that Covenant, Gen. 17. thus in his Preface, page. 2. Neither do I think he is much mistaken in that his Observation. Now he knows that we that plead for Infant-Baptism, do affirm that that is the Covenant of Grace; surely then, when he not only denies that, but affirms the quite contrary, (viz.) that it is the old Covenant; in which we readily grant, that Infant-Baptism is not concerned, he should have well established that his Affirmation, otherwise he might well see, he would leave us where we were. 2. That which made this necessary, is the opposition that his Supposition bears to the judgement of the generality, if not universality, of those, who among Protestants have had the repute of Orthodox, and its falling in, and exact Compliance with the Notions that both the Papists and Socinians have of this Covenant; and what an ill repute both these Sects have among Protestants, is not unknown. Now though it is true, it's not sufficient Proof of any Doctrine or Tenent, that it is held by the generality of Orthodox Divines, nor a sufficient Confutation to say it is held by Papists and Socinians; yet he might well conclude, that those that are Protestants, and resolve so to continue, will not, without very good Proof, embrace a Notion so directly opposite to the judgement of all Orthodox Divines, and so exactly complies with the Sentiments of those who are of so ill Fame amongst them; and the consideration of the time our Lot is cast in, with the Circumstances we are under, adds to the necessariness of a clear Proof of any Doctrine or Tenent of this Nature; so that though in other parts of his Discourse, naked Suggestions might be more tolerable, yet here they are intolerable. And if it be said, that though Mr. C. has declined the handling of this Question, between him and the Paedobaptists, relating to this Covenant in a Polemical way, yet he hath given a sufficient enforcement to this his Supposition; whether he hath done so or no, shall now be considered.  
And that I might not pass by any thing that he hath said, in Confirmation of his Supposition; I have with what diligence I could, searched again and again the whole of his ensuing Discourse, and can find only these few Passages scattered here and there, that can with any show of Reason, be supposed to carry on that Design, which I shall briefly weigh. The first is that pag. 104. line 13. where, says he, having respect to this Covenant, it is observable, that in this transaction of God with Abraham, we first meet with an express injunction of Obedience to a Command, and that of positive Right, and that as the Condition of Covenant-Interest; and the whole is ushered in with this Prologue, I am the Almighty God, walk thou before me, and be thou perfect. In which Words, a strict and entire Obedience to his, (that is, God's) Precepts is required, in order to the inheriting of the good things that were to be given by this Covenant.  
In answer unto which I must say, I should never have imagined that this Passage had been designed as a Proof, that this Covenant was the old Covenant, had it not been ushered in with such an observable Term: I shall only add, that let that mistake be rectified, viz. that obedience to a Command of positive Right (he means the Command concerning Circumcision) was required as the Condition of Covenant-Interest; for Circumcision was not required unto Covenant-Interest, but did suppose it; compare Gen. 17.7, 8. with 11. I say, let this Mistake be rectified, and I shall not be so uncharitable, as to think it needs any Answer at all; sure none will deny, but Baptism, though a positive Duty, with strict and entire Obedience, is required in the Covenant of Grace.  
Secondly, The second Passage that occurs, wherein the same Design seems to be carried on, is in his 108. pag. Where having said, there is no way of avoiding confusion and entanglement in our conceptions of these things, but by keeping before our Eyes the distinction of Abraham 's Seed: what things he intends is hard for me to imagine: but be they what they will, sure they are some things, that he had immediately before laid down, which if so, I must say they are only such as have a being in his own Imagination, and none in the Scriptures.  
Hence the avoiding or not avoiding of Confusion or entanglements in our conceptions of them, is of no concern as to the Controversy under debate, but having thus expressed himself, he immediately subjoins, Neither can I see any reason for an assignment of Covenant-Interest in all Spiritual Blessings, typified as well as in the Temporal, that were the Types of them to the carnal Seed; and yet not to admit the coveyance of the same Covenant to hold good in point of Temporal Blessings, to the Spiritual Seed; seeing, as some conceive, both are directly included in the same Covenant, and the Promise of both was sealed with the same Seal.  
Now tho Mr. C. express himself somewhat oddly, and obscurely, yet as his Design is, or at least seems to be, to disprove our Assertion, viz. That this Covenant is the Covenant of Grace, and by Consequence to establish his own Supposition, viz. That it was the old Covenant; so he seems to reason thus, Seeing we affirm that this is the Covenant of Grace, and answerably that it did convey both the Temporal Blessings to Abraham's Natural Seed as Types, and also the Spiritual Blessings typified by them; so now under the New Testament, it must convey Temporal Blessings as the Type, as well as the Spiritual Blessings typified by them, to his Spiritual Seed. To which I answer, How far the Covenant did extend to Abraham's Natural Seed; and how far, or to whom of them it did convey either Temporal or Spiritual Blessings, merely as such, hath been elsewhere declared, and is unnecessary here to be repeated, at present, as previous to the discovery of the frivolousness of this Reasoning; I shall only say, that it might have been of some use, had our Author shown us what Temporal Blessings he means, which, as Types of Spiritual Blessings, were conveyed to Abraham's Natural Seed. By this Covenant, he seems to distinguish them from the Land of Canaan: but now certainly he cannot but know, that the only Temporal Blessing that we affirm, was conveyed to Abraham's Natural Seed, by this Covenant, as a Type of any Spiritual Blessing, was the Land of Canaan itself. Whence the only scruple that can arise from what we affirm is this, viz.  
How the Promise of the Land of Canaan could convey both a Temporal Blessing, viz. that Land itself, as a ●ype of a Spiritual Blessing, and the Spiritual Blessing typified by it, to Abraham's Natural Seed, and yet only conveyed the Spiritual Blessing typified to his Spiritual Seed. And the only Reason, that Mr. C. assigns why this cannot be, is this, because he cannot see any Reason, why under the first Testament, both a Temporal Blessing as a Type, and the Spiritual Blessing typified, should be conveyed to Abraham's Natural Seed, and yet only the Spiritual Blessing typified should be conveyed to his Spiritual Seed, seeing both are directly included in the same Covenant, and the Promise of both sealed with the same Seal. To which I shall say three things.  
First, That it is no Reason to prove, that such a thing cannot be, because one Man cannot see any Reason why it should be.  
Secondly, That whether any Reasoncan be seen by him, or any body else, or no, yet it is certain it hath been so; and that from the very first establishment of the Covenant with Abraham to this very day, this Promise hath coveyed to very many the Spiritual Blessings typified, when yet it hath not conveyed to them any Interest in, or Right to the temporal Blessing, as the Type. It did so to Abraham himself, and it did so to many of his Children.  
That it did convey the spiritual Blessing typified to Abraham himself, is evident from that of the Apostle, in Heb. 11.10. By virtue of what Promise did Abraham look for that City, if not by virtue of this? And yet it did not convey unto him the Land of Canaan itself; no, not so much of it as whereon to set his Feet, as Stephen speaks. And that it did alike convey the spiritual Blessing to many of his spiritual Seed under the First Testament, who had no Interest in that Land, is alike evident.  
Witness all those of Abraham's natural Seed, that were also his spiritual Seed, antecedent to their actual Possession of that Land. So witness all the sincere Proselytes, that joined themselves to the Lord during the standing of the Jewish Church, they had a Right to the spiritual Blessing typified, and that by virtue of this very Promise, and yet no Possession, no, not so much as whereon to set their Feet, as it is said of Abraham, in the Land of Canaan; and why should any question how this can be under the New Testament, which was so common under the Old, is unaccountable as to me.  
Thirdly, The plain Reason of this Assignment of Covenant-Interest in Spiritual Blessings, typified by the Land of Canaan, as well as in that Temporal Blessing as a Type, unto Abraham's Natural Seed, and yet of Covenant-Interest only in the Spiritual Blessing typified to his Spiritual Seed, so far as such an Assignment was to be made, is, because it was the Will and Pleasure of God, that the Natural Seed should enjoy both the Temporal and the Spiritual Blessings, but that his Spiritual Seed should only enjoy the Spiritual Blessings and not the Temporal: God, as I may so speak, first gave the good of the Covenant in the Shell, but after gives the Kernal without the Shell, and no other Reason is to be assigned hereof, but his mere Will and Pleasure. But however, this is enough for us to prove, that in this Promise of Canaan there was included a Spiritual Good, viz. Heaven as typified by that Land, and that that Promise does still convey an Interest in that Spiritual Good, to all Abraham's Spiritual Seed; if any shall judge themselves to have sufficient ground still, to lay claim to the Temporal Good as the Type, they shall not be opposed by me.  
Now that that Promise did imply or include a Spiritual Good, is evident, by Abraham's looking for a City that hath Foundations by virtue of it.  
Mr. C. himself, I suppose, will readily grant this, and that this Promise doth convey the same Spiritual Good to all his Spiritual Seed, is evident from this Covenant, its having received its confirmation in Christ, and consequently its being not disannuled, and the promise thereof unrevoked, and consequently applicable to all the Spiritual Seed of Abraham, only let this one thing be added, that it is not unusual for the Prophets and holy Men of God, to promise spiritual Things in terms, that according to the letter only, intent a temporal good, when yet those, to whom the Promise does appertain, can only lay claim to the spiritual good typified, and not to the temporal tipifying: take only that one instance, Isa. 57.13. He that putteth his trust in me (they are the words of the Lord by the Prophet) shall possess the Land, and shall inherit my holy Mountain.  
Now I would desire to know whether this Promise be not applicable to Beleivers under the New-Testament; and hence whether Believers may not now lay claim to, and appropriate to themselves the spiritual good typified, when yet they can lay no claim to any part of that Land? and why the like Assignment may not be made with respect to this Promise of the Covenant, I cannot conjecture. From the whole we may see, how insignificant this reasoning of our Author is, to prove that this Covenant under consideration was the Old-Covenant.  
But to proceed, in his Pages 122 and 123 we have three Scriptures cited, in pursuance of the same design, namely, to prove that that Covenant, Gen. 17. was the Old-Covenant, and his design in the general is this, to prove that Circumcision did belong to the Mosaical Oeconomy, and consequently that this Covenant whereunto Circumcision was annexed, must needs be the Law or old Covenant.  
In answer to this, I shall offer these two things.  
First, That it cannot be certainly proved that Circumsition did at all, much less that it did equally and alike, belong to the Mosaical Oeconomy as well, or as Mr. Cox expresseth it, no less than any other part of the Law given by him. As for the passages cited by our Author, they are very far from proving any such thing, let us briefly review them. The first is Rom. 3.1, 2. where the Apostle makes these two terms, the Law and Circumcision; convertible terms, and tells us, that the Jew or the Circumcision, that is the Circumcised, had much advantage every way above other Nations, and instances in particular in their having the Oracles of God committed unto them. But how this should prove that Circumcision did no less belong to the Mosaical Oeconomy than any other part of the Law, is to me unimaginable, nay I doubt not but to show it proves the direct contrary, of which more anon.  
2dly. The next passage, is that of the same Apostle, Gal. 5.3. where, says he, I testify again to every man that is Circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole Law: and Mr. C. thinks this was the direct, and proper use of Circumcision, viz. to oblige the Jews to keep the Law, and that according to the first institution of it. To which I would say three things.  
First, That the Apostle here, may, as he seems evidently to do, speak of Circumcision, according to the false Notions that the false Teachers had of it, and answerably, though we read not of its appointment to any new use different from what it had at the first Institution of it; yet the false Teachers might, as it's evident they did, mistake that use of it, and pressed it upon the Galatians to a quite different use from what God had appointed it unto at the first: A Learned Man glosses it thus: If any Man be Circumcised, scilicet, eo animo, out of such a conceit as the false Teachers had taken up about it, or for such an end, as they preached it up with reference thereunto, he is a Debtor to do the whole Law. Vide Calvin. in lo.  
Secondly, Suppose it be granted, that Circumcision was taken in, and inserted into the Law, as given at Mount Sinai, yet it cannot be proved from thence, that it did oblige to keep the whole Law, ad such less  it did belong to the Mosaical Oeconomy, no less than any other part of the Law did.  
Thirdly, That though Circumcision was merely the Token of the Covenant of Grace, and had no place at all in the Mosaical Oeconomy, yet the submitting unto it under the New Testament, might bring Persons under an Obligation to keep the whole Law, and that according to the intendment of God in given of it: The Jews were obliged by the Covenant of Grace, to keep the Law according to the true use, and end of it; this is evident, Deut. 29.9. compared with 25.  
But then, Thirdly, The last Passage is that of the Apostle, in Phil. 3. Where boasting in Circumcision, is esteemed a boasting in the Flesh; I shall only say, he that can prove from hence, that the Covenant of Circumcision was the old Covenant, may prove quidlibet è quolibet. Certainly to boast in any holy Action, supposing the giving the Body to be burned for the sake of Christ, would be but a boasting in the Flesh, and yet that will not prove that that is a legal, and no New Covenant Duty; so that there is no Passage, at least that is as yet produced, either out of the Old or New Testament, will prove that Circumcision did at all belong to the Mosaical Oeconomy.  
But Secondly, This I would offer, that though Circumcision by reason of somewhat in it that was Ceremonial, or Typical, might be inserted in the Law; yet it will not follow from thence, that it was not at the first Institution of God, and so continued under that Administration: the Token of the Covenant of Grace it might be, and continue to be the Token of the Covenant of Grace, though after, as having something of a Ceremonial Nature in it, it was inserted in the old Covenant, and thereupon abolished at the ceasing of that Administration.  
There is yet one Passage more, that I met with in the Discourse, that apparently carries on the same Design, with all those hitherto taken notice of; and that we have pag. 123. and it is this, That Levi paid Tithes in Abraham. But now, this Mr. C. himself seems to lay little weight upon, and he had a great deal of reason for it, seeing that paying of Tithes by Levi in Abraham was before the establishment of this Covenant, and therefore could not possibly be by virtue of it. But Mr. C. laying himself so little stress upon this, I shall not insist upon it; and that shall suffice for the first Branch of our second Proposition.  
And I shall proceed to the second Branch.  
Secondly, That the Covenant mentioned (Gen. 17.7.) is the Covenant of Grace, that very Covenant according unto which all the Elect always have been, still are, and shall be saved. Now this hath been afore proved. See Infant-Baptism from Heaven, Book 1. pag. 181. to 195. As also Infant-Baptism plainly proved, pag. 46, 47. where the Reader will find these two Positions laid down and proved.  
First, That this was a Covenant of Grace.  
Secondly, That it is the Covenant of Grace under which Believers now are.  
That former of these Positions was proved by four Arguments, the latter by two. The second of the four former, was taken from the subject matter of the main Promise of the Covenant, and that is, that God would be a God to Abraham, and his Seed in their Generations. Now this Good (the subject matter of this Promise) being a Spiritual Good, (as was there showed) can only be conveyed by the Covenant of Grace, and consequently this Covenant must needs be the Covenant of Grace.  
Now I find Mr. C. is otherwise minded. Thus in his 142, 143, 144, & 145. pages, where he inquires what that Good and Blessing is, which by this Covenant was insured to the Seed of Abraham mentioned in this Covenant? though he deny not that this Good, viz. for a People, or Person, to have God engaged by Promise to be a God unto them, is a Spiritual Good; yet he conceives there is no particular Good insured by that Promise, only that by it a general assurance is given, that the Promises of the Covenant, whereunto it is annexed, shall not fail on God's part. And for the further satisfying his Reader, that this is the true import of, and as he supposeth the only thing intended in this Promise, he quotes a Passage out of my Essay, of that import; and hence he conceives this Promise may be, and answerably is annexed both to the Old and New Covenant: so pag. 145. In answer whereunto, I shall say in the general, that I shall not contend with any, whether this Promise may or may not be annexed to the Old or New Testament; and therefore shall not examine the Scriptures quoted by him to prove that it may, whether they make to his Purpose, or no. The Question is only, Whether when this Promise is an essential, or constitutive part of any Covenant, as it was undoubtedly of this, that Covenant can be any other, than the Covenant of Grace? Now that I deny; and on the contrary affirm, that it must necessarily be a Covenant of Grace; and that for the reason before given; and for further clearing up, and evincing this, I shall offer two things.  
1st, That when it is an essential or constitutive part of any Covenant, it doth constitute a mutual Relation between God and the Parties with whom the Covenant is made. So much I have affirmed in the place cited by him; so that he citys only a part of which I there affirmed. Tho its true, supposing this Promise did give only such a general Assurance as Mr. C. speaks of, it might have been indifferently annexed to the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace: but seeing it not only gives that Assurance, but also constitutes such a mutual Relation betwixt God and Man, it cannot possibly be made an essential or constitutive part of the Covenant of Works. The Covenant of Works neither doth, nor can constitute such a mutual Relation between God and Man. To have an Interest and Propriety in God, as their God, is a greater Good than can be conveyed to any of the Sons of Men, as in their fallen and corrupted Estate, by a Covenant of Works. There is a vast difference between Men's having all the Attributes of God engaged to make good a particular Promise by virtue of his Truth and Faithfulness in his Promises, and a Man's having a personal particular Interest in God as his God, and consequently having an Interest in all the Perfections of his Nature, as Mr. C. himself acknowledgeth is conveyed by this Promise. The former an Heathen may have, as in Nebuchadnezzar's case, when God had promised him, as a Reward for the Service done against Tyrus, Ezek. 29.18. The latter is peculiar to those that stand in a New-Covenant-Relation unto God. Hence this Promise is never made, but it doth constitute or suppose a new Covenant-Relation between God and the Party to whom it is made.  
2dly, That though that God might lay in (to use our Author's words) all his Divine Perfections as Pledges, that the Promise of any Covenant (as it may possibly be entered) shall not fail on his part, yet it is impossible that he should so lay in his Attributes, or Divine Perfections, as Pledges that the Promises of this Covenant (were it a Covenant of Works) should not fail on his part; the Tenor of this Covenant renders that impossible. Seeing then he should have laid in his Attributes as Pledges that th●se Promises should not fail on his part; which in respect of many thousands of those to whom they were made, he never intended to, nor did make them good: See my first Book pag. 181. So that we may see how little our Opponent's Cause is advantaged by what I have said, and answerably that as that, so all the other three Arguments urged for the proving this Covenant to be a Covenant of Grace, yet abide in their full force; and upon Supposition of te Truth of this former Position, the second will be more easily granted. Hence I used only two Arguments to prove it, both which were drawn from the Discourse of the Apostle (Gal. 3. 16, 17, 29.) and they are both grounded upon this Supposition, that the Covenant the Apostle there speaks of, and hath reference unto, is this Covenant recorded (Gen. 17.7.) which I proved by the Tenor of the Promise constituting the Covenant, said by the Apostle to be confirmed in Christ. The Promise was to Abraham and his Seed; so that the Covenant made with Abraham, the Promises of which are to his Seed, or run in his Tenor, To thee, and to thy Seed, that must needs be the Covenant the Apostle hath reference unto, and consequently, must necessarily be the Covenant of Grace, under which Believers now are. And that this Covenant (recorded Gen. 17.7.) must necessarily be this Covenant, I prove, because there is no other Covenant made with Abraham, that the Apostle can possibly intent; the Promises of which are expressed in those Terms, or run in that Tenor. Now these things being so plain, and carrying such convincing Evidence along with them, it may seem exceeding strange how they can be gainsaid by any. Yet Mr. Cox denies that that is the Covenant the Apostle hath reference to, and to evade this so plain and demonstrative Evidence that it is, he doth two things:  
First, He insinuates that some of those Promises that ultimately respect Abraham's Spiritual Seed, and Spiritual Blessings, were sometimes given to Abraham under the covert of those Terms that have an immediate respect unto his Natural Seed and Temporal Blessings, as made Types of the other, and when they are so, the Promise still runs to his Seed in the singular Number. Now to this in general, I must say, (neither am I careful what Censures I may fall under thereby) a stranger Evasion of any Scripture-Argument, rarely if ever occurs in any of those Polemical Treatises that are extant in the Would. And I cannot but wonder, that Mr. C. would commit such an Evasion to writing, seeing litera scripta manet. I shall not anatomize it (as I might do) without a further Call, but more particularly, I shall say only two things at present.  
1. That the thing insinuated, is utterly false; there are no such Promises (as those Mr. C. speaks of) given to Abraham, that did not appertain to the Covenant of Grace: Let any one Instance be produced.  
2. I say, where this true, yet the Inference drawn therefrom, is nothing to the purpose, seeing the Question is not, whether the Promise is made to Abraham's Seed, both Natural and Spiritual, or Mystical, in one and the same Tenor; That's nothing to the present purpose, whether it be or not; the only Question is, Whether the Promise (Gen. 17.7.) be the Promise the Apostle here refers unto; which that it is, in this his Evasion Mr. C. denies not, but rather grants that it is, and that is all that at present is contended for. Let that be granted, it will undoubtedly follow, that that Covenant (one constitutive part of which that Promise is) is the Covenant of Grace, seeing the Apostle in the very next Verse assures us it was the Covenant confirmed in Christ 430 Years before the Law was given; for having said, Verse 1, That though it be but a Man's Covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no Man disannulleth, or addeth thereto; he subjoins (ver. 16.) Now to Abraham and his Seed were the Promises made; it is all one, as if he should say, now with Abraham and his Seed was the Covenant made. For the Promises in this 16th Verse, and Covenant both in the foregoing and following Verses, are convertible or synonimous Terms, intending one and the same thing. And then for the Proof of what he designed to prove he expresseth the Tenor of the Covenant made with, or Promises made to Abraham and his Seed, it was made with, or they were made to him and his Seed; not with or to Abraham and his Seeds, but with or to him and his Seed; whence the Covenant or Promises expressed or running in that Tenor, must necessarily by the Covenant or Promises here intended; but that was the Covenant, or those were the Promises recorded Gen. 17.7. And then the Apostle immediately adds in Verse 17. The Covenant which was confirmed before of God in Christ, the Law which was 430 Years after cannot disannul. Now can it possibly be imagined that the Apostle sold intent any other Promise or Covenant than those, or that just before recited? How absurd, and utterly unreasonable would it be so to do? So that that is the Covenant, that Apostle must necessarily, past all rational Supposition, have reference unto. Indeed that which Mr. C. would seem to insinuate is this, That who the Apostle may have reference to that Promise, Gen. 17.7. yet it is so as only to recite the bare Words of it, but indeed intending another Covenant, and that of a quite different Nature from, and made long before this, the Words of which he recites. But then I would know, how we shall be sure that either the Apostle, or other Penmen of the Holy Scriptures intent, according to the Letter of their Words in any other place of the Scriptures? But Mr. C. himself seems to be sensible of the insufficency of this Evasion, and possibly, was not altogether inapprehnsive of the ill consequence of avoiding such plain Scripture as this would be, supposing it granted that the Apostle did recite the Words of that Promise.  
Hence he attempts the Evasion of this Evidence given, to what we affirm concerning the Covenant, by this Discourse of the Apostle, another way. And so,  
Secondly, He endeavours to persuade his Reader, that the Promise given Gen. 17. was not the Promise, and consequently the Covenant there established with Abraham, was not the Covenant that the Apostle refers unto, but that it was the Promise made with Abraham Gen. 22.18. Thus pag. 78. which the Apostle calls the Covenant, so he expresseth himself. Howbeit, I conceive the Apostle hath here a direct and special Eye to that Promise Gen. 22.18. In thy Seed shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed. But then he foresees (as well he might) that this Objection would arise in the Minds of Men, That whereas the Promise that the Aostle had reference unto, and intends, is expressed in these Terms, and runs in this Tenor, To thy Seed, that Promise of Gen. 22. is only made concerning Abraham's Seed, that Promise there is not, To thee and to thy Seed, but, in thy Seed; and consequently, cannot be the Promise the Apostle here refers unto. Now let us see what answer can be given to this Objection. Why saith, Mr. C. Let it be minded, that all the Promises made of this Seed, viz. Christ, in one respect, may be said to be made to this Seed, in another, because they are originally established in the everlasting Covenant of Redemption that was between the Father and the Son. In answer whereunto it must be said, that this is an Evasion of a like import with the former, seeing it signifies nothing at all as to the present Purpose; for the Question still concerns not the sense or meaning of the Promise, but is only what Promise the Apostle hath reference unto, and doth intent. And besides, it doth imply that the Apostle may cite one Promise, and yet intent another. Hence, unless any Promise made to Abraham with reference to his Seed, expressed in these Terms, To thy Seed, can be produced, we may, and necessarily must conclude, that it is the Promise of this Covenant that the Apostle hath a reference unto, and intends. By such an answer as this, the plainest Scripture may easily be evaded. But surely when the Apostle expresseth the Promise he hath reference unto, and directly intends in the very Words and Tenor of the Promise, Gen. 17.7. and there being no other Promise recorded in Scripture, expressed in the same Words, or running in the same Tenor, that he can possibly have reference unto, but only this; it will hardly be questioned, by any Man that is not resolved to turn away his Ears from him that speaketh from Heaven, whether that he the Promise referred unto, and intended by the Apostle, or no? This I shall be bold to say, that this one Testimony of the Apostle concerning this Covenant, will bear the weight laid upon it, will evince to the Judgement of all Men (whose Minds are not blinded with excess of Prejudice) the infallible certainty of the Covenant, (Gen. 17.7.) its being the Covenant of Grace, let Men or Devils do their utmost to weaken it. From the whole, we see the ground of those two Arguments lying firm, the Arguments bottomed thereupon are valid; and consequently, those six Arguments to prove this Covenant to be the Covenant of Grace, remain in their full force. Now then, before I proceed any further, I shall briefly recapitulate what Evidence we have from plain and express Scripture, that this Covenant under consideration is not the old Covenant, or Covenant of Works, but is indeed the Covenant of Grace. And  
1. The Scripture positively thus affirms this to be a Covenant, I will establish my Covenant, and this is the Covenant Mr. C. himself acknowledgeth to be a solemn Covenant.  
2. The Scripture expressly declares, that there was but one Covenant made with Abraham, wherein his Seed were taken in as joint Parties with himself.  
3. The Scripture expressly declares, that the old Covenant was ordained by Angels in the Hand of a Mediator, which this Covenant with Abraham was not.  
4. The Scripture expressly declares, that the old Covenant was made 430 Years after the Covenant of Grace established with Abraham, but this Covenant was made with Abraham himself, and that within 40 Years after the very first Transactions of God with him in a Covenant-way.  
5. The Scripture in express Terms affirms, that the old Covenant was not made with either Abraham, Isaac or Jacob. And,  
Lastly, The Apostle expressly declares, that it was this Covenant (mentioned Gen. 17.7.) that was confirmed of God in Christ, which all must, and will confess was the Covenant of Grace.  
Now then, having thus demonstrated the Truth of this second Proposition, both negatively and positively, by so many express Scriptures, it seems utterly unnecessary, that I should add any thing more in the confirmation of it. And the Truth is, those that after so much plain Scripture, will deny this to be the Covenant of Grace, and affirm it to be the old Covenant, seem to be Persons rather to be pitied and prayed for, as under the highest efficacy of Errro, than to be disputed with: They will remain Instances to succeeding Generations, of men's tenaciousness of Error, when once taken upon and entertained by them. Neither can it be judged unreasonable though I should dismiss them with a like answer, with that of Abraham's to Dives, They have Moses and Paul, they have the Old and New Testament, let them hear them.  
But yet that I may give our Opponents full Measure, heaped up and running over, I shall add one Argument more, to prove that that Covenant is the Covenant of Grace; and it is this:  
Arg. That Covenant, the being under, or taking hold of which, gave Persons a Membership, or a right to Membership in the Jewish Church, or the Church of Israel after the Flesh, was the Covenant of Grace; but it was the Covenant of Circumcision, or that Covenant established with Abraham, that the being under, or taking hold of which, gave Persons a Membership, or a Right to Membership in that Church; therefore that Covenant was the Covenant of Grace. The Minor Proposition I judge will meet with no Opposition. Mr. C. expressly affirms, \That Circumcision was the entrance into, and boundary of Communion in the Jewish Church, so pag. 12. Hence it will, and must necessarily be granted, that all that had a Right to Circumcision (which all that were under, or did take hold of that Covenant had) had a Membership, or a Right to Membership in that Church: and therefore not to spend time in the Proof of that, which neither can, nor will be denied, 'tis the Major Proposition that only needs Proof. ' That then which I am to prove is this, viz. That that Covenant, the being under, or taking hold of which, did give Membership, or a Right to Membership, in the Jewish Church, was the Covenant of Grace. And for the Proof of this, take these Arguments.  
1. By the Covenant, as under, or taking hold of which, Persons had a Membership, or Right of Membership in the Jewish Church, Jesus Christ and they came to have, and had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other; but it was by the Covenant of Grace, that Jesus Christ, and any of the Children of Men, came to have, or have had a mutual Interest or Propriety in each other: therefore that Covenant must needs be the Covenant of Grace. For the Major Proposition that is evident, past all rational Contradiction, by a twofold Consideration:  
1. That Jesus Christ, and all those that had a Membership or Right of Membership in the Jewish Church, had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other. This is expressly declared Cant. 2.16. My Beloved is mine, and I am his. They are the Words of the Church, speaking of herself, in a collective Notion, as the Spouse of Christ. Now whether we take this Song of Solomon's as a Prophetical History, or an Historical Prophecy, and so apply the several Passages, passing between Christ and his Church, to different periods of Time, or take it as applicable in the whole of it, to the Church indefinitely in all periods of Time; we must necessarily understand the Jewish Church, or Church under the first Testament, consisting of the natural Posterity of Abraham, speaking here unto Christ under the notion of a single Person, as his Spouse. Some that take this Song as a Prophetical History, understand this as spoken by the Spouse in Nehemiah's time; however the Church under the First-Testament-Administration cannot be excluded. Now saith she, My Beloved is mine, and I am his. Here was a mutual Interest and Propriety that Christ and that Church had one in the other; and what the Church here speaks of this mutual Interest and Propriety that Jesus Christ and she had in each other, may be spoken of, or by every particular Member. So that whosoever, by being under, or taking hold of the Covenant, were Members of the Jewish Church, Christ and they had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other: Christ was theirs, and they were his. Whosoever were indeed and in truth under, or had indeed and in truth taken hold of the Covenant, Christ and they had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other, in Foro Dei; so whosoever were visibly under, or did visibly take hold of the Covenant, Christ and they had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other, in Foro Ecclesiae.  
2. That it was by that Covenant, as under, or as taking hold of which, Persons had a Membership, or a Right of Membership in the Jewish Church, that Christ and they came to have a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other. This is evident, seeing it must be by some Covenant that Jesus Christ and the Jewish Church collectively taken, and consequently the particular Members of it came to have that mutual Interest and Propriety in each other: and what Covenant can it possibly be imagined to be, but that as under, or taking hold of which they came to be a Church, or to have a Membership therein: So that the Major Proposition stands firm.  
2. For the Minor, viz. That it was by the Covenant of Grace, that Jesus Christ and they came to have a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other. This is so plain throughout the Scriptures, that it's hardly to be supposed it should be gainsaid by any that own the Scriptures to be of Divine Original. It must either be by the old Covenant, or the Covenant of Grace; but it could not be by the old Covenant, and that for a double Reason:  
1. Because the very Design of the old Covenant was only to lead Men unto Christ. It was (as the Apostle expressly declares, Gal. 3.24.) A Schoolmaster to bring Men unto Christ. By it none ever had, nor could have an Interest and Propriety in him.  
2. Because could Christ and Men come to have had a mutual Interest and Propriety in each other, by the Law, or by the old Covenant, the Covenant of Grace had been unnecessary. So much the Apostle plainly implies, Heb. 8. v. 7. compared with 10. Hence it must necessarily be by the Covenant of Grace. Now both the Propositions being true, the Consequent is undeniable.  
Arg. 2. If it were the failing in, or non-performance of the Covenant of Grace, that did forfeit or disannul their Membership in the Jewish Church, who were actual Members of it; than it was the Covenant of Grace, that their being under, or taking hold of which, did give them Membership, or Right or Membership, in that Church: But the former is true, therefore the latter.  
For the Consequent in the Major Proposition, that carries its own Evidence along with it. It must necessarily be the same Covenant, that the failing in, or the non-performance of the Conditions of which, they did forfeit or disannul their Membership, that their being under, or taking hold of which that did give them a Membership, or a Right of Membership in that Church: their continuance to have performed the Conditions of that Covenant, through their being under, or taking hold of which, they came to have a Membership in that Church, would have continued their Membership therein; and the failing or non-performance of the Conditions of any other Covenant, could not have forfeited or disannulled that their Membership. So that look what Covenant it was, that the failing in, or the non-performance of the Conditions of which, did forfeit or disannul their Membership in that Church, must undoubtedly be the Covenant, that through their being under, or taking hold of which, they first came to have a Membership therein.  
This istoo plain then to admit of a Denial: Therefore.  
2. For the Minor Proposition, viz. That it was their failing in, or non-performance of the Conditions of the Covenant of Grace, that did forfeit or disannul their Membership in that Church, who before were Members of it. This is expressly affirmed by the Apostle, Rom. 11.25. It was their Unbelief, that did forfeit and disannul their Membership in that Church: They were broken off, because of their Unbelief. And that Unbelief is Man's failure in, or non-performance of the great Condition of the Covenant of Grace, in unquestionable.  
Now I would willingly know, what Mr. C. or any others, who are  with him as to the nature of the Covenant, do judge the Jews through their Unbelief where broken off from. I conceive, they must either say, it was Abraham, or the visible Church; seeing there is no breaking off from the invisible Church. If they say it was Abraham, as the Root of that Nation they were broken off from, than the meaning must be that through their Unbelief, their Relation unto Abraham as his Children was dissolved; their natural Relation it could not be: hence it will necessarily follow, that hitherto respective to the Covenant, they had only stood in that Relation of Children unto Abraham through Faith, viz. that Faith required under that first Administration. But that will utterly overthrow their own Supposition, viz. That the Jews stood in their Relation to Abraham as his Children, merely by virtue of their Natural Descent from him, and will fully prove what I have elsewhere affirmed, of which more by and by.  
If they say it was the visible Church which they were broken off from, (which is the thing that we affirm) than they must either say, that their Church was the only visible Church, or it was part of the visible Church. Let them say which they please, it comes all to one, seeing it was the same Covenant as under, or by taking hold of which, they were, or came to be Members of that particular Church, and Members of the Universal Visible Church. Now, it was the Covenant of Grace, that by their being undere, or taking hold of which, they were of the Visible Church, seeing it was by the failing in, and non-performance of the Conditions of that Covenant that they were broken off: and that was (as before is proved) the Covenant of Circumcision; therefore that must needs be the Covenant of Grace.  
Arg. 3. That Covenant as under, or by virtue of which, the Jews had the Oracles of God committed to them, was the Covenant of Grace: but it was the Covenant of Circumcision, or that Covenant established, Gen. 17.7. that, as under, or by virtue of which, the Jews had the Oracles of God committed to them; therefore that Covenant is the Covenant of Grace.  
The Minor Proposition is expressly affirmed by Mr. C. himself, and therefore is secure from any Opposition from him: See Pag. 122. Sect. 7. As for the Majro Proposition, as previous to the Proof of that, let it be observed, That by the Oracles of God, we are to understand chief and primarily, the Word of God, whether only as written or preached: 1 Pet. 4.10. Tho we exclude not any other Means whereby God communicates his Will unto Men: Yet, I say, the Word of God is chief and primarily intended. Now that the Jews had the Word of God committed unto, and entrusted with them, as under, or by virtue of the Covenant of Grace, is evident; because the Vouchsafement of this Privilege, as necessarily implied and included in those Promises, that do undeniably appertain, and must be referred to the Covenant of Grace. As for Instance, that Promise in Deut. 30.6. where the Lord promiseth to circumcise their Hearts. That that Promise is to be referred to the Covenant of Grace, will not, I suppose, be denied. Now in the Promise the outward Means, which are eminently the Word of God, whereby God doth in an ordinary Way, effect the Good promised, is included and implied. See my Essay, p. 85.  
Arg. 4. If the Jewish Church were a Spiritual, and not a Carnal, or a mere Typical Church, than the Covenant it was built upon, or the being under, or taking hold of which, gave a Membership, or a Right of Membership in it, was the Covenant opf Grace: but the former is true, therefore the latter. The Consequent in the Major Proposition needs no Proof: and for the Minor, that the Jewish Church was a Spiritual, and not a mere Carnal or Typical Church, is evident these three ways: Only I shall premise this, that it is readily granted, that that Church, at least in most Ages, was too carnal; many of them were wholly Strangers to Regeneration and true Piety; and the major part, even of those that were truly Godly, yet had but a lower measure of Grace: they had Spiritual Life, but it was in a lower degree, and so in a sense, may be said to have been a Carnal Church, that is, comparatively they were so.  
Thus the Church at Corinth is said to be carnal, 1 Cor. 3.3, 4. So much shall be readily granted; but that that Church by Divine Constitution, was to be, and answerably at the first Plantation of it was, a truly Spiritual Church; that is, a Church consisting of such as were truly Godly, according to the Measure of Grace then given. See for this my Answer to Mr. Danver's p. 102, 103. And after, throughout all Ages, there were so many among them true Saints, as that that Church in general, might be denominated a Spiritual Church, in the same sense in which the Church at Corinth, or any other New-Testament-Church may be so called; and this, I say, is evident these three ways.  
First, 'Tis evident from the Relation constituted between God and it, as a collective Body: as for Instance;  
1. He was a Father to it, and it his Child. Sometimes it is called his Son: so Jer. 31.9. Hos. 11.1. Sometimes his Daughter, so in Psal. 45.10.  
2. God was a Husband to that Church, and it (as collectively considered) his Spouse. Jer. 31.32. Hence the Entrance or Renovation of the Covenant between God and that Church, is called her Espousals. Now, can it be supposed, that God would take a mere Carnal Church, that is, a Company of ungodly and unholy Persons, into such nigh Relation to himself?  
2dly. What we affirm, is evident from the special Love that God bore unto that Church. She is called his Beloved, Isa. 5.1. Jer. 11.15. The dearly Beloved of his Soul, Jer. 12.7. So how many Titles doth our Lord Christ give his Church, in the Book of Canticles, from which that Church cannot be excluded? importing the specialty, yea the strength of his Love to it; 'tis needless to mention them. Now, would an infinitely holy God bear such a Love to an unholy and ungodly Association of Men?  
3dly. (To add no more.) It is evident from the constant Design of all the Prophets, to bring up that Church to the Power of Godliness in case of their Degeneracy therefrom. But not to enlarge, at present, I shall only add, that it seems to me to argue very low and carnal Conceptions of God and Jesus Christ, to talk of his Church as being for many Generations a mere carnal Church.  
As a Close of this, we may remark how greatly Mr. C. is mistaken in his Historical Account of God's federal Transactions with Abraham. In brief, the History lies plainly thus. When Abraham was in Vr of the Chaldees, serving other Gods, (as Joshua speaks) God of his own free Grace, in a pursuance of his eternal Purposes concerning him, appears to him, and calls him out of his own Country, to go into a Land that he would show him; and for his Encouragement so to do, makes those Promises, Gen. 12.2, 3. whereby he prepares the Way to, but doth not then enter his Covenant with him: Hereupon Terah, Abraham's Father, taketh Abraham, and Let his Grandchild by Haran, and they with Abraham's Wife go into Canaan, in order to their passing on unto that Land God had called Abraham unto: Here they stay for some considerable Time, how long we cannot determine: But there Terah, Abraham's Father, dies: after which Abraham and Lot (whether upon a new Call or no, is not certain) come into Canaan, and immediately upon their coming into that Land, the Lord appears to Abraham, and tells him expressly, that was the Land he had promised to show him: Thus in Gen. 12.6. About nine or ten Years after this, the Lord appears to him again, and settles this Land upon his Posterity by Covenant, yet not to be possessed by them till the fourth Generation: so in Gen. 15. latter end. Whether this Covenant was the same with that after established (as some think) I shall not determine: But about fifteen Years after this, when Abraham was ninety and nine Years old, the Lord appears to him again, and both constitutes him the Father of the Faithful, and thereupon changes his Name from Abram to Abraham, and now as the Father of the Faithful, as well as of a natural Seed, establisheth the Covenant of Grace with him and his Seed in their Generations, and ordains an outward Token, which he and his Seed were to keep in their Generations. And then lastly, about six and twenty Years after this, the Lord appears to Abraham again, and as before he had confirmed this Covenant in Christ more implicitly, so now more expressly, In thy Seed (meaning principally Jesus Christ) shall all the Families of the Earth be blessed, Gen. 22.18. And this was the last time that we read of, that God dealt with Abraham in a way of federal Transactions. This being noted, I return and come to the third Propsition.  
Prop. 3. That under that Term [Seed] in the Promise, Abraham's natural Seed, (namely those proceeding immediately from his own Loins) were included and primarily intended. This I need not insist upon, having sufficiently proved it formerly. See Infant Baptism from Heaven, Book 1. pag. 19 to 32. Neither doth Mr. C. absolutely deny it; in his 120 pag. saith he, We exclude not the immediate Seed, meaning of Abraham: only he dissents from me in this (which also some Paedo-Baptists do;) he thinks only Isaac was intended, but that Ishmael and Abraham's other Children by Keturah were excluded.  
Answ. But be it so, I see not how either the Cause of Anti paedo Baptism is much advantaged, nor the Cause of Paedo-Baptism prejudiced, thereby; unless it could be proved therefrom that this Covenant was the old Covenant, and not the Covenant of Grace; which I shall not so much as suppose that Mr. C. designs: Certainly to any considering Man it rather proves the quite contrary. But (saith Mr. C.) We make a Believer's Interest in this Covenant, of larger Extent than ever Abraham 's was, seeing (as he supposes) only Isaac was a joint Confederate with Abraham; but we make all the Seed of Believers Confederate with their Parents. Thus p. 131.  
To which I answer: Supposing it should be granted, (which yet I am far from doing;) that only Isaac was included with Abraham in this Covenant, that would not at all weaken the claim we ground upon the Extent of this Covenant, to the Covenant-Interest of all the Seed of Believers: and the Reason is obvious, viz. Because the Promise runs in indefinite Terms, which are equivolent to universal; I will be a God to thee and thy Seed in their Generations. Now supposing we are to understand that Phrase, in their Generations, as extending the Covenant to, and taking in the natural Seed of Abraham's Seed, viz. Believers; (as I have elsewhere proved that we are to do, and of which more immediately.) Hence though God, who knew his own Eternal Decrees, should have for some special Reasons, by express Revelation excluded all Abraham's immediate Children, excepting Isaac, from an Interest in the Promises, and done the like also in respect of Isaac's Children; yet after when no such exclusion was made by any immediate Revelation from God, the Promise was and is to be understood in the full Latitude in which it is expressed, and answerably it so was understood in all succeeding Generations. God may exclude whom he will from his Promises by immediate Revelation, but when no such Revelation is made, we are to interpret the Promise and Practice thereupon, according to the true and proper Sense of the Terms it is expressed in. But.  
2. I absolutely deny that God did then exclude either Ishmael, or any other of Abraham's immediate Children; and affirm on the other hand that they were all (one as well as another) included and intended in that Term Seed. And this I have (as I conceive) undeniably proved in the place before referred unto. It is true, Mr. C. hath seen meet to call those Arguments Conjectures. To which I shall only say, if he sees meet to engage any further in this Controversy, will he but show their invalidity, let them then bear that Denomination; till than I shall presume to call them irrfragable Arguments.  
But let us see, what ground Mr. C. has to suppose the Promises were limited to Isaac; and it is this: Their Extent (saith he) was restrained by the express Caution of God himself; referring us to Gen. 17.19, 20, 21. with Gen. 21.12.  
To this I answer, That the one or the other of these Scriptures, are far from restraining the Promises at the first making of them to Isaac alone: See Infant Baptism from Heaven, Book 1. p. 37. The Lord doth not say that he had established his Covenant only with Isaac, indeed Isaac was not then born: nor doth he say, that when he promised to be a God to Abraham and his Seed, he only intended Isaac; but he speaks with reference to the Time future: I will establish my Covenant with him (speaking of Isaac) for an everlasting Covenant: So, In Isaac thy Seed shall be called. The plain meaning is, that this Covenant should be, and we may add, should only be, continued in Isaac's Line, who was made subordinately a Father of the Faithful with Abraham: And as these Texts will bear this Sense, 
Vid. Rivet. Vitab. Calv. in loc.  so the Arguments referred unto, do evidently prove they must be so understood. And therefore till those Arguments are better answered, than by an insipid Insinuation, that they are but Conjectures; I shall surcease any further reply, and conclude, that although the Covenant was continued only in isaac's Line, yet at the first Establishment of it, it did include all Abraham's natural Seed, immediately proceeding from him: And proceed to the last Proposition, which is this:  
Prop. 4. That this Covenant, with the Promises of it, considered definitely, did extend to, and include only Abraham's immediate Seed. The meaning of this Proposition is this, that as this Covenant did only constitute an actual Covenant-Relation between God and Abraham, and his Children immediately descending from him, with such others as were so incorporated into his Family, as that they were properly his own, and he had a full Right and Power to dispose of them as his own: So the Promises of it did only appertain to them so, as that they severally and particularly considered, had a present actual Right to, and could make for themselves a particular Claim to the Good promised.  
I easily grant, that the Promises of this Covenant had a more general respect to Abraham's natural Seed in after-Generations; but I say, it did not constitute an actual Covenant-Relation between God and any of them in particular, beyond those immediately descended from him, so as they, merely as his Seed, had a present actual Right to the Good contained in the Promises of it. This I have proved by six Arguments: See Infant Baptism plainly proved, pag. 19 to the 26. But Mr. Cox overlooking all those Arguments, and thereby leaving his Reader at an uncertainty, whether they are demonstrative or no, hath asserted the quite contrary; so pag. 117. His Words are: The immediate and remote Seed of that Line, to which the Promises of the Covenant of Circumcision did belong, were as fully included, and interested in them as the immediate Seed. Yet whether he do differ from me so much as his Words seem to import, to me is utterly uncertain. His Words seem plainly to assert, That the Promises of the Covenant did equally and alike appertain to all Abraham's natural Posterity, descended in the Line of Isaac and Jacob, and that when adult, as well as while in their Infancy, as they did to his Seed immediately descended from his own Loins: And yeet elsewhere he seemeth to hold, that this Covenant was a conditional Covenant; which if so, it is impossible the Promises of it should appertain to any of Abraham's natural Posterity, beyond their pure Infant-State, merely as his Seed. So that how far Mr. C. agrees, and how far he differs from me, I cannot positively determine; and therefore shall only say in the general, in case he thinks all the mediate and remote Seed of Abraham, and that when grown up, as well as during their Infant-State, where as fully included and interested in the Promises of this Covenant, as his immediate Seed were, I shall refer him to the Arguments already offered to prove the contrary; judging it utterly unnecessary to add any more, till those are satisfactorily answered. But if he thinks it was only during their Infant-state, that they were as fully included and interested in the Promises as Isacc was, I would over and above those Arguments, desire him seriously to consider, to what end or purpose that Covenant, suppose it were (as he fancies it was) the Old Covenant, should be extended, so as to include all, yea, or any of Abraham's remote Posterity. Alas! What was the Good or Benefit they enjoyed thereby? especially such as died in their Infancy, or were born in any Foreign Land. I judge he will not be able to assign any such Good or Benefit, as that himself will think God would lay in all his Divine Perfections as Pledges, that the Promises of it should not fail on his part. But however, let us see what he hath faid in Confirmation of this his Assertion: And thus,  
1. He thinks the Truth of it sufficiently appears in the express Terms of the Promises; so in the Page last cited. Yea, he thinks, and is bold to say, that in special this Phrase, Thy Seed in their Generations, will admit no other Sense. To which I shall say, He knows there is another Sense given of that Phrase, which he hath not made any Attempt to disprove, nor show why it may not be admitted, as well as this himself gives; yea, he knows that it is by several Arguments proved, that it cannot possibly admit of the Sense now given of it by him. And therefore, instead of any other Answer to this, I shall only say, That such Confidence without any Ground (as far as yet appears) to me is unaccountable. But,  
2. He attempts to prove his Assertion by this Reason, viz. Because the immediate Seed of those Israelites that fell in the Wilderness, under the Displeasure of God, were made to inherit the Land of Canaan, by virtue of this Covenant with Abraham, who otherwise could never have enjoyed it by virtue of the Steadfastness of their immediate Parents in the Covenant. To which I say three things:  
1. Should I deny that there were any such Infants, whose Parents, at least both of them, fell in the Wilderness, who were made to inherit the Land of Canaan: He would, I judge, find it a hard Task, to prove that there were any such, and then this Reason immediately falls to the Ground.  
2. Suppose there were any such Infants as he speaks of; yet it's unimaginable that they should be left to the wide World, and should not be taken up, and incorporated into some other Family. But,  
3. Suppose we should grant they were not incorporared into any other Family, but were carried into Canaan by some body, whose Children either as descended from, or adopted by them, they could not be accounted to be, yet they might have a Right to the Land of Canaan by virtue of their own immediate Parent's Interests, though not Steadfastness in the Covenant.  
I suppose Mr. Cox will not imagine that all that fell in the Wilderness under the Displeasure of God, did forfeit their Covenant-state. So that it must be said, that this is a very feeble, yea, reasonless Reason, to prove, that Abraham's Covenant did extend to, and include his remote as well as his immediate Seed.  
3. Mr. Cox, hath one Reason more, viz. Because when the Israelites fell into gross Idolatry, yet God claims an Interest in their Children; which he supposes must needs be by virtue of this Covenant made with Abraham; because he thinks it will not be denied, but gross Idolatry was a manifest Breach of the Covenant; so pag. 118, To which I answer, That though it be not denied that gross Idolatry is a manifest Breach of the Covenant, yet all gross Idolatry doth not immediately dissolve the Covenant-Relation between God and his People. Adultery and Murder are as manifest Breaches of the Covenant as Idolatry, and yet David's Sins of that nature, did not dissolve the Covenant-Relation between God and him. God always doth, but in those times more especially, did bear with his People for a while in their Sins, though very gross, using the means to bring them to Repentance; and that was the Case of the People of Israel at the time referred unto by Mr. Cox. God was then dealing with them by his Prophets to bring them to Repentance, and designed to try another Means, viz. by delivering them into the hands of the Babylonians; which did effectually reduce them from that Sin; so that notwithstanding their Idolatry, God did yet own them for his Covenant-People; and answerably might and did claim an Interest in their Children, not by virtue of their Relation to Abraham, but as the Children of the Covenant, though greatly degenerate Parents. But now after, when through Unbelief, their Covenant-Relation was dissolved, God cast off both Parents and Children.  
As for what is added out of the Apochryphas in Confirmation of this Reason, its Insignificancy excuses from any Consideration of it.  
He needed not to have shown us the Sense of the Jews, concerning the Covenant-Interest of Parents or Children, out of the Apochryphas, the Holy Scriptures fully declare and confute their gross Mistakes about it. But the Frivolousness of our Author's Reasons being detected, I shall at least (till the Invalidity of the Arguments I have urged be shown, which I expect ad Graecas Calendas) conclude, that whatever the Sense of the Jews, or any others that espouse their Defence, was or is; yet indeed that Covenant established with Abraham and his Seed in their Generations, did (as the Pomises of it are to be understood definitely) only reach to, and include Abraham's immediate Seed; and shall add, that in the same Latitude, and with the some Limitations, it hath always been, and still is, continued to his Spiritual Seed; 'tis entered with them, and their Natural Seed immediately proceeding from their own Loins; yet not as though they were coordinate Parents of the Faithful with Abraham, but as Abraham's Seed have Abraham's Blessing come upon them through Jesus Christ.  
I have only one more Paragraph in Mr. Cox's Discourse to reflect upon, and that is in his pag. 85. Where he deduces this Corollary from what he said concerning that Transaction of God with Abraham, recorded, Gen. 12.2, 3. wherein he fancies the Covenant of Grace was entered with him.  
Now though having before proved, that no Covenant, and consequently not the Covenant of Grace, was then entered with him, his Corollaries can be looked upon but as mere Impertinencies; yet because what I have elsewhere affirmed is concerned in what he there saith, I shall briefly reflect upon that Paragraph; And he thus expresses himself, That the proper Heirs of this Blessing of Abraham, have a Right not only in some, but in all the Promises of the New-Covenant; and that not in a limited Sense, and as suspended on uncertain Conditions, but in a full Sense, etc. Now to this I shall only say, that as the Inference is impertinent, so the things inferred seem to be very unsound, and of a dangerous Consequence to the Souls of Men. I say they seem to be so, because I know not how he will interpret those two Expressions; A Right in all the Promises of the New Covenant, and suspended on uncertain Conditions. And therefore shall only desire Mr. Cox to review, and seriously consider, whether what he here says be consistent with Truth, or with what himself hath elsewhere affirmed, in particular, in his 5th; so 142, 143, 144 Pages; and shall go on. And Mr. C. having added somewhat in Confirmation of this Inference, he adds the Limitation therefore of a New Covenant-Interest, to the Grant of an external and temporary Privilege, only I conceive it to be utterly inconsistent with the Promises of the Covenant itself; citing, Isa. 54.13. and 29.21. Jer. 31.33, 34. Ezek. 36.26, 27. with Heb. 8. In this Mr. Cox and I differ, not as to the thing itself; though I conceive such a Limitation of a New-Covenant-Interest, as he speaks of, is no way inconsistent with those Promises.  
But to come to that wherein I am peculiarly concerned; and thus he adds, Neither will these Texts admit of another Notion of late insisted on, for the Commendation of Paedo-Baptism. Here I suppose Mr. Cox hath a direct respect unto me; and therefore it's necessary that I should briefly take notice of what he hath said. And this I would in passage remark how far Mr. C. will extend that Expression [of late] I know not; but if he thinks this is a new Notion started by me, it argues him to be but little acquainted with this controversy. But for the Notion itself, and that is, That the Infant-seed of Believers have all of them a certain and definite Interest in the Covenant of Grace, by virtue of which, they are completely justified before God from the Gild of Original Sin, both Origans & Originatum; and yet not having their Natures renewed, they may after fall away. This Mr. Cox thinks inconsistent with those Texts before mentioned; but whether it be so or no, I shall refer him, with all others, to what I have written once and again, to show its consistency with them. Only let it be observed, that I say not they are completely justified before God, only I say they are discharged or freed from the Gild of Original Sin, and that as the necessary result of the change of their States. See Infant-Baptism from Heaven, p. 46. to 63. So again, p. 208. to 213. See also my Essay, p. 89, and so on. And having spoken so much to this already, I shall add no more at present.  
2. Mr. C. thinks this Notion is inconsistent with the Analogy of Faith. So pag. 86. To which I would say, That Men wedded to an Opinion, are apt to conceit that inconsistent with the Analogy of Faith, which only opposes their own private Opinion, possibly by them styled Faith, and so is only inconsistent with the Analogy of their Faith. Sure Mr. C. cannot but know that many great Divines, who sufficiently understood the Faith of the Gospel, judge this Notion is no way inconsistent with that Faith. But,  
2. I would rather say, The great Question is, Whether the Covenant of Grace do indeed extend to, and include the Infants of believing Parents: And that it doth, as I conceive, I may say is fully and (as to all  and unprejudiced Persons) satisfactorily proved: That that Covenant, Gen. 17. is the Covenant of Grace, I judge, is, if not before, yet now convincingly demonstrated. Now Mr. C. grants that Isaac was included in this Covenant; and I suppose he will grant he was so, merely of Abraham's natural Seed.  
Hence it will undeniably follow, that the natural Seed of Believers, and that as such, may have, and have had an Interest in the Covenant of Grace; and then some Good must be assigned them, by virtue of that their Interest therien.  
Hence I would desire one of these two Things of Mr. C.  
1. That in case he persist in his Opinion, and denies this to be the Covenant of Grace, and thereupon denies Infants to have any Interest in that Covenant, that then in case he send forth another Impression of his Book, or think meet to engage any further in this Controversy, he will not fail to give us a clear and ingenuous account of his Judgement, relating to the future State of Infants dying in their Infancy, especially the Infants of Believers; and in case he judge any of them to find Mercy at the Hands of God, how they come so to do.  
2. That in case he acknowledgeth this Covenant to be the Covenant of Grace, that then he will give us his Thoughts about the Good and Benefit that the Infant Seed of Believers have by their Covenant-Interest; as in case this be the Covenant of Grace, a Covenant-Interest some such must necessarily have.  
And this I shall say, if he can assign them any considerable Benefit in a way more consistent with the Analogy of Faith than I have done; I am not so fond of this Notion, but I can relinquish it: if he cannot, than his utere mecum. But let us briefly see, what he hath said to prove the inconsistency of this Notion with the Analogy of Faith. And thus he proceeds: having supposed that it must be granted, as it readily shall, That either the stain of Original Sin in these Infants is purged when their Gild is pardoned, or it is not. The former he knows I affirm not, and therefore he proceeds to the latter, and saith, If he saith their Gild is pardoned, but their Natures not renewed, nor the power of Original Concupiscence destroyed, so as Sin shall not have Dominion over them? To which I answer, Mr. C. knows well enough what I have said. I say, they are discharged from the Gild and condemning Power of Original Sin, but have not their Natures at present renewed. But then, saith he, it will be replied, That then notwithstanding their supposed Pardon, they remain an unclean Thing, and so uncapable of Admission into the Kingdom of Glory: Which is readily granted. And I suppose, Mr. C. will not deny, but that Believers have so much of Original Corruption inherent in them, as to render them, as so depraved and corrupted, uncapable of Admission into the Kingdom of Glory. And why may not God purge Infants from the whole Mass of Original Pollution at their very reception into Glory, as well as purge Believers of the remainders of that Pollution in them at theirs? But he proceeds: But the Truth is, none are at any time justified before God, but such as Christ hath loved and washed from their Sins in his own Blood, and none are washed by him, but those that are in him as the second Adam: Which is again granted. But then, saith he, None can have Union with him but by the indwelling of his Spirit. This I deny, and desire to see it proved. There is a Political, as well as a Physical Union with Christ. The former is made by the Covenant: The latter by the indwelling of the Spirit. See my Essay, pag. 65, 66. Till what is there said be substantially confuted, and the contrary proved, viz. That none have any Union with Christ, but those who have the Spirit dwelling in them: I shall conclude, that the Benefits afore mentioned are assignable to the Infant-Seed of Believers, in a full consistency with the Analogy of the Faith of the Gospel. As to what Mr. Cox adds, I shall desire that he will explain, what he meaneth by the Spirit of God's applying the Blood of Christ for the remission of Sin, and prove what he there affirms, and I hope he will find me no way tenacious of Deceit. But having dispatched what I mainly intended, and Mr. C. proceeding in his two last Chapters upon a Supposition, that the Covenant under debate is the old Covenant, and that it did run in the extent pleaded for by him, the groundlesness of both which Suppositions being very apparent, they need no further Consideration.  
FINIS.