The Covenant of God Entered with Mankind, Chapter 47
CHAP. XLVII.
ROM. 9. 6, 7, 8. Vindicated.
THough I hear of none that have much to ſay to all theſe Scriptures, as indeed little, rather nothing can be ſaid; they hold forth with ſo clear a light a covenant in that latitude, and with thoſe prerogatives, as you have heard; yet one hath a Text of Scripture, not to clear any one, but to ſilence and overthrow them all, and that is the words of the Apoſtle, Rom. 9. 6, 7, 8. where the Apoſtle (having ſufficiently hinted to them the rejection of a great part of the Jews, in his profeſſion of that great heavineſſe and ſorrow of heart in their behalf, and that he could wiſh that himſelf were accurſed from Chriſt for them) undertakes to anſwer an objection. If Iſrael be caſt off then the Word of God will be of none effect, his promiſe will faile; But the promiſe of God made with his people cannot faile, therefore Iſrael in ſuch a conſiderable number is not caſt off. In which place (ſaith One) this very Text, that now is the apple of our contention, was brought into queſtion. This Argument thus held out in behalf of the Anabaptiſts is borrowed from Stapleton the Jeſuite, at leaſt Stapleton hath gone before him in it, and he hath learned to a haire to follow him. aDicit Calvinus totam Abrahae progeniem eſſe ſauctam, quia foedus vitae Deus cum illo pepigerat his viz. verbis: Ero Deus tibi & ſemini tuo, id eſt, ut Calvinus vult omnibus ab Abrahamo oriundis, omnibus ex ſecundum carnem nat…, ſicut nun…, dirutâ mace iâ omnibus Chriſtianerum parentum liberis ab illis ſecundùm carnem natis. Addit, Deum omnes filios ſuos vocare, qui ex Iſraele ſunt progeniti, Atqui Apoſtolu… diſſertiſſimè contrarium dicit, non omnes qui ex Iſraele, ii ſunt Iſraelitae; neque qui ſemen ſunt Abrahae omnes filii, ſed in Iſ…ac vocabitur tibi ſemen, id eſt, non qui filii carnis, bi ſunt filii Dei ſed qui filii ſunt promiſſionis, aſtimaxtur in ſemine Filii autem promiſſionis ſunt filii ſecundùm Spiritum ſive ex Abraham & Iſaac carn…liter oriundi, ſive non.Stapleton in his antidote, undertaking to make good that Calvin contradicts the Apoſt. (which he puts into his Marg.) ſaith, Calvin ſays, that the whole progeny of Abraham is holy, becauſe God entred the covenant of life with him in theſe words; I will be a God to thee and thy ſeed, that is according to Calvin, to all that ſhall deſcend from him, to all that according to the fleſh are borne to him, as alſo now (the partition-wall being taken away) to all the children of Chriſtians, which according to the fleſh ſhal be born to them; And Calvin addeth (ſaith he) that God calls all of the off-ſpring of Iſrael his children; But (ſaith he) the Apoſtle speaks the contrary expreſſely. They are not all Iſrael that are of Iſrael, neither becauſe they are the ſeed of Abraham are they all children, but in Iſaac ſhal thy ſeed be caled; that is, they that are the children of the fleſh, thoſe are not the children of God, but the children of the promiſe are counted for the ſeed. But (ſaith he) the children of the promiſe are children born after the Spirit, whether they deſcended from Abraham and Iſaac, or no, with much more to this purpoſe. We have drunk up the Proteſtants poiſon, and their great care is, to preſerve their party by the Jeſuites antidote; They are wholly beholding to them for the receipt; what probatum eſt they can write upon it, muſt be examined. And that they may not deny, but in the examination of this triumphing Argument, they have ſquare dealing, I ſhall give you the Authours words at length. I deny not (ſaith he) but there was ſome other promiſe included in that objection, to wit, ſome promiſe made to Iſrael, or the houſe of Iſrael, probably that, Jerem. 31. 33, 36, 37. For ſo the words, verſe 6. They are not all Iſrael which are of Iſrael, do intimate. But without queſtion the promiſe made to Abraham, Gen. 17. 7. was one which was included in that objection; Beza, Twiſſe, Ames, and others anſwering Arminius, call it the Covenant of God with Abraham, which was that, Gen. 17. 7. and the very phraſe of Abrahams ſeed (in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called, verſe 7. The children of the promiſe are counted for the ſeed, verſe 8. Sarah ſhall have a ſonne, as verſe 9.) do evidently ſhew, that the promiſe (objected to prove, that if the Jews were rejected from being Gods people, then God failed in making good his word) was that promiſe to Abraham; I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeed; whereto I may adde that the anſwerers of Arminius, and the cited Remonſtrants, to wit, Baine, and Ames, do ſay it was the word of promiſe, not of the Law as Arminius conceived; for the word of promiſe ſaith Ames, Animadv in Remonſtran. Script. Synod. de praedeſt. Cap. 8. Sect. 4. is diſtinguiſhed and oppoſed to the words of the Law, Gal. 3. 17, 18. Now the word of the promiſe there is to Abraham and his ſeed, verſe 16. and this is there called by him verbum foederis, the word of the Covenant; now let us conſider how the Apoſtle anſwers it. He denies that Gods Word made to Abraham did fall, though the Jews were rejected; becauſe that promiſe, I will be thy God, and the God of thy ſeed; as it comprehended ſaving grace, was never meant by God of all Abraham poſterity, or of any barely as they were deſcended from Abraham by natural generation; but of the Elect, whether deſcended by natural generation from Abraham or not. And this is apparent, both from the words, verſ. 7. Neither becauſe they are the ſeed of Abraham, are they all children, but in Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called, verſ. 8. It is expounded thus; that is, they which are the children of the fleſh, theſe are not the children of God, but the children of the promiſe are counted for the ſeed. Whence it is apparent, that the ſame are not always the ſeed by calling, which are the ſeed of Abraham by natural generation; and that the children of the fleſh are not the ſame with the children of the promiſe, and that the Apoſtle conceived this the right may of anſwering thoſe that objected the falling of Gods word; upon the rejection of the Jews, by reſtraining the promiſe of being God to Abrahams ſeed, only to the Elect, whether of Abrahams natural poſterity or not; with ſo little reſpect to any birth-right-priviledge, that he not onelyonly rejected Iſhmael, and took Iſaac, but alſo loved Jacob, and hated Eſau; by prophecie declaring his minde, The elder ſhall ſerve the younger, and in this, the Apoſtle acquits God from unrighteouſneſſe, in that he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardens; notwithſtanding his promiſe made to Abraham and Iſrael, or any Birth-priviledge they could claime. Yeelding that this Text in that place is brought into queſtion by the Apoſtle: Before I come to the Apoſtles words themſelves, I have divers Queres to put.
1. How Baine and Ames come to the name of Remonſtrants? I had thought they had been on the party that are called Contra-Remonſtrants?
2. Where it appears that Arminius conceived that the covenant there ſpoken to, was the word of the Law, and not of Promiſe; I am ſure in his Analyſis on this Chapter to the Romans he ſpeaks in another manner, even in our authours own Dialect, as though the ones Comment had been ſpit out of the mouth of the other. bFilii carnis Apoſtolo hoc loco ſunt qui per o era legis juſtitiam & ſalutem conſectantur. Filii verò promiſſionis ſunt illi qui fide in Chriſtum juſtitiam & ſalutem quarunt.The ſons of the fleſh, with the Apoſtle, (ſaith he) are thoſe that by the works of the Law, follow after righteouſneſſe and ſalvation. The ſinnes of the promiſe are thoſe that ſeek after righteouſneſſe and ſalvation by faith in Chriſt, and he thus frames the principal Syllogiſm of the Apoſtle, for confutation of the Jews arguing from the rejection of the Jews, Gods failing in his promiſe. cSi verbum Dei ſolos filios comprehendit, excluſis filiis carnis, …um ſ…quitur verbum Dei non ex idere, etiamſi filii carnis reji…iantur imò exidere ſi admitterentur iſti qui …riptione ipſa conditionis foederis ex…lu…luntur, t…ue…bum Dei …los filios promiſſionis comprehendit, excluſis filiis. carnis. Ergo verbum Dei non excidit, etiam filii carnis r…jiciantur.If the word of God comprehend only the ſonnes of the promiſe, ſhutting out the ſons of the fleſh; then it follows that the word of God doth not faile though the ſons of the fleſh be rejected: But the word of God comprehends only the ſons of promiſe, ſhutting out the ſonnes of the fleſh: Therefore the word of God doth not faile, though the ſons of the fleſh be rejected. Armin. Anal. Cap. 9. ad Ro. p. 781. Let any now judge whether he can interpret this of the Law and not of the promiſe.
3. When he affirmes that to be borne after the fleſh is all one with the Apoſtle, with legal juſticiaries, as he doth (which is Arminius his Interpretation) how then can he by that diſtinction of children of the fleſh, and children of the promiſe, ſhut out the natural ſeed of Abraham? are the natural ſeed of Abraham, and legal juſticiaries one and the ſame?
4. If the Apoſtle exclude all the natural ſeed of Abraham from this Covenant of God (as Stapleton argues, and from him the Anabaptiſts) and takes in only his ſpiritual ſeed, how can he be reconciled to himſelf? in the words immediately before this objection, he ſpeaks of the Jewes (as his kinſmen according to the fleſh, which were the natural ſeed of Abraham) and ſaith, To them pertaine the Adoption, the Glory, and the Covenants, &c. How then can his diſtinction be interpreted to throw them out of Covenant, when in expreſſe termes he had affirmed that they were in covenant? How can he deny that theſe are children, verſ. 7. when he had affirmed that to them pertaineth the Adoption, verſ. 4. Which may be confirmed by abundant other Texts of Scripture; Ye are the children of the Lord your God, Deut. 14. 1. Out of Egypt have I called my Sonne, Hoſea. 11. 1. It is not meet to take the childrens bread, and caſt it unto Dogges, Matth. 15. 26. where all that were not Gentiles, all to whom Chriſt was ſent, are called children; Ye are the children of the Prophets, and of the Covenant which God made with your Fathers, Acts 3. 20. Doth the Covenant appertaine to them, and they ſtiled the children of the Covenant, and yet are they out of Covenant? Are they children to whom the Adoption pertaines, and yet no children? When they have given any faire anſwer to theſe Quere's, eſpecially the two laſt: we ſhall conceive ſome probability of truth in their Gloſſe on the Apoſtles words; in the meane time we cannot but look upon it in full oppoſition and contradiction to that which the Apoſtle expreſſely delivers. For the Text of the Apoſtle, it will be beſides my purpoſe to make any full Comment upon it; it will be ſufficient to take it out of their hands, and vindicate it from that which they would aſſert from it, and to let the Reader know the Apoſtles ſcope in that place, which is not to make a full Comment on thoſe words, Gen. 17. 7. but only to free it from an objection which the unbeleeving Jews might raiſe from it. God hath made a Covenant with them, to be their God, and the God of their ſeed. If he now caſt them off as the Apoſtle doth affirme, the Covenant then is broke, and the word of God is of none effect. The Apoſtle denies that this follows, and ſhews that the terme [Iſrael,] or [children of Abraham.] admits of diſtinction, and produces a Scripture, verſ. 7. where one diſtinction is implied, viz. Gen. 21. 12. In Iſaac ſhall thy ſeed be called, and ſo a numerous company by Iſhmael is excluded (who were Abrahams ſeed after the fleſh) and only the ſons of promiſe by Iſaac are accounted the ſeed, verſ. 8. that come from Iſaac, borne by miracle. And verſe 10, 11, 12, 13. ſeconds it with others concerning the children of Iſaac, Eſau and Jacob. As then there was a diſtinction of ſeed; ſo alſo now, one member he had laid down before, viz. Iſraelites according to the fleſh veſted in all thoſe priviledges there reckoned up, ver. 4, 5. Theſe they pleaded, and the Apoſtle yeelds them; And theſe men (according to the diſcovery of theſe times) deny them. The ſecond member he after falls upon, the eternally beloved and choſen of God, and largely amplifies. In theſe Abrahams ſeed may continue, though the other be caſt off; to whom yet God hath continued (in ſucceſſive generations) a God in covenant, and continued to them the priviledges of being his people, though now he was upon the rejection of them: And that it may appear that I go not alone, I ſhall give an Expoſition of this Text from a more able Penne, above the ſuſpition of an Arminian, which is here charged, namely Gomarus, who (having in his Analyſis on that Chapter, ſpoken to the Jews objection, and the Apoſtles anſwer) makes this inference;aUnde perſpicua eſt Apoſtoli ſententia quâ negatur excidere ſeu irritum reddi Sermonem de foedere cum Abrahamo & ſemine ill us, deque benedictione & ſalute per promiſſum Meſſiam, Gal 3. 7 uamvis Judaeorum maxima pars a Chriſto & benedictione excluſa ſit Anathema, Idque probat diſtinctione Iſraelitarum & ſeminis Abrahami; …áque ratione oſtendit promiſſionem Dei ratione efficaciae illius eſſe indefinitam ac ſenſu particularem, non autem univerſalem, ac proptere… univerſalim perperam indè conſtitui; …am quamvis Iſraelitae plerique pereant promiſſionem tamen Dei minimà reddi irritam inde conſtat, quia in elect is eſt efficax, Now enim omnes, ut v. 6. ait, qui ſunt ex Iſraele patre prognati ſecundùm carnem, ſunt veri illi Iſraelitae; ad quos foederis gratiae Dei non ſolum oblatio cum conditione officii praeſtandi; ſed etiam collatio & hareditas coeleſtis reipſâ pertineat. ut ver. 7. exponitur clariùs, & Rom. 2. 28. & 19. Neque quia ſemen Abraham… ſunt, ideo omnes ſunt filii ſeu haeredes benedictionis illius & …juſdem gratiae gloriaeque participes, Rom. 4. 12. Gal. 4. 28. Quamvis enim hac videantur & inter ſe & cum ſuperioribus puguare quibus d…cuit Apoſt…los Judae… incredulos eſſe Iſ…aelita… & Abrahamit…s, non ſolum origine carnis, ſed etiam ratione foederum & promiſſionum acceptarum; nulla eſt diſſentio. Etſi enim ad omnes Iſraelta… & patres & Adoptio & foederaac promiſſiones pertineant; non prop…e rea tamen ſunt omnes verè filii & haeredes ſalutis. Illa enim quae objectantur. Judaeis infidelibus ab Apoſtolo tribuuntur, quidem ratione vocationis externae (quia ſalus iis ſub conditione obedientia annunciats & oblata eſt, & oblatio illius Circumciſione obſig…ata; unde omnes Iſraelitae filii foederis dicuntu… communiter, Act…r. 3. 25.) Sed non ratione vocationis, internae & efficacis ſecundùm propoſitum electionit, qua ſalus non ſolùm exterius cum conditione fidei vivae annunciata & oblata eſt verbo ac ſignota Sacramentis, ſed etiam interiùs efficaciter donata conditione ſeu fide confertura Spiritu ſancto. Hoc enim ſolùm genuinis filiis & verè electis Iſraelitis convenit non autem promiſ…uè omnibus. From whence (ſaith he) the Apoſtles concluſion (in which he denies that Gods word concerning the Covenant with Abraham and his ſeed, and the bleſſing and ſalvation by the promiſed Meſſiah, Gal. 3. 17. did fall, or become void) is manifeſt, though the greateſt part of the Jews be ſhut out from Chriſt, and accurſed. And this he proves by diſtinguiſhing Iſraelites and the ſeed of Abraham; and thereby ſhews that the promiſe of God, reſpective to the efficacy of it, is indefinite, and therefore particular, not univerſal, and ſo an univerſal promiſe cannot rightly from thence be concluded: for though the Iſraelites for a great part periſh, yet that the promiſe of God is not thereby made void appeares, in that it hath its efficacy in the Elect; for as he ſaith, verſe 6. All which are of Iſrael (borne according to the fleſh) are not true Iſraelites, to whom not only the tender of the Covenant of Grace, with condition of duty to be performed; but the heavenly poſſeſſion and inheritance only belongs, as in ver. 7. and Rom 2. 28, 29. is more fully ſhewn; Neither becauſe they are the ſeed of Abraham, are they therefore all children, or heirs of that bleſſing, and partakers of the ſame grace and glory, as Rom. 4. 12. Gal. 4. 28. For though theſe things ſeem contradictory to themſelves, and to that alſo which was delivered before, where the Apoſtle affirmes that the unbeleeving Jews are Abrahamites, and Iſraelites; not only by reaſon of their birth after the fleſh, but alſo by reaſon of acceptance of the Covenants, and promiſes, yet there is no contradiction; For though the Fathers, and Adoption, and Covenants, and Promiſes belong to all the Iſraelites, yet all are not therefore true children, and heirs of ſalvation. For theſe things which are objected, viz. The Jewes great priviledges, are attributed by the Apoſtle to the unbeleeving Jewes, by vertue of their outward call, becauſe ſalvation is revealed and offered to them under condition of obedience, and that offer ſealed with Circumciſion, from whence all Iſraelites are promiſcuouſly called children of the covenant, as Acts 3. 25.) and not by reaſon of their inward call according to the purpoſe of Election effectual, becauſe ſalvation is not only outwardly under condition of a lively faith revealed and offered in the word, and ſealed in the Sacrament; but alſo inwardly and efficaciouſly, (the condition, that is, faith being given them) is conferred by the Holy Ghoſt. For this belongs not indifferently to all, but only to the genuine Sonnes and true elect Iſraelites. Thus farre Gomarus, in which we have theſe three things. 1. This objection wholly ſ…lved. 2. The Apoſtle reconciled to himſelf. And, 3. The Doctrine of Covenant-holineſſe from the Apoſtle fully eſtabliſhed, which when they have well conſidered, with that which was ſpoke before, (having the whole current of Scripture againſt them) they will have little liſt to make this one Scripture their aſylum.
It is farther ſaid, Object. that when the Phariſees and Sadduces came to Johns Baptiſme, and were about to plead this Birth-priviledge; John beats them off it, and takes that plea out of their mouths: Think not to ſay within your ſelves, we have Abraham to our father, Matth. 3. 9. that plea could not ſtand when the men were carnal.
I anſwer,Sol. Firſt, when thoſe that were no better than theſe, make the ſame plea, John 8. 33. We be Abrahams ſeed, and were never in bondage to any; Chriſt yeelds it, verſ. 37. I know that ye are Abrahams ſeed; he allows them all that upon this account they can claime. And for Phariſees he doth not barely yeeld them to be Church-Members, but alſo Church-Teachers, Matth. 23. 2. 2. I ſay John Baptiſt doth not deny what Chriſt yeelds, but lets them know, that this plea, will not ſerve to avoid wrath, while they live in impenitence; They may periſh notwithſtanding this plea, and yet Gods Covenant with Abraham hold; being able of ſtones to raiſe up children unto Abraham, to make good what in Covenant he had ſaid. He no where ſayes that they are not entitled to priviledges of Ordinances, and thereby intereſſed in the prerogatives of Gods viſible people. What Paul, Rom. 9. 4, 5. ſo largely yeelds them, John Baptiſt in that place doth not deny them, which alſo now they had in viſible poſſeſſion. All ſorts of men, fare better by priviledge of birth in civil things, Prov. 19. 14. Houſe and riches are the inheritance of fathers. The Jews fared better reſpective to Religious things, Rom. 3. 1. VVhat advantage then hath the Jew, or what profit is there of Circumciſion? Much every way▪ Priviledge of Ordinances in the Church of God, is a Birth-inheritance.