hold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations. Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram; but thy name shall be Abraham for a father of many nations have I made thee. And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee. And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee. And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession; and I will be their God. And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee, in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep between me and you, and thy seed after thee; Every man-child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you." Gen. xvii. 1-11.

Such are the terms of the covenant to which the ordinance of circumcision was annexed, and which we affirm to be in substance the covenant of grace.-There are two theories of explanation, by which our baptist brethren have attempted to evade the conclusion to which this would lead. To each of these I must beg the reader's attention.

I. The first of the two, and the more ordinary one, is that which alleges, that the covenant made with Abraham consisted properly of two distinct covenants, the one a covenant of temporal promises, the other of spiritual; the former having reference to the natural, and the latter to the spiritual seed of Abraham; and that it was with the former, and not with the latter, that circumcision was connected.

On this representation of the case let it be observed,

In the first place, that no such distinction appears on the face of the narrative. Circumcision is enjoined, as the token of "the covenant," considered as comprehend, ing all the blessings enumerated as pertaining to it. It is not said, that circumcision was to be the token of that

part of the covenant, that engaged for temporal blessings to Abraham's fleshy seed; but of the covenant throughout, as exhibited in the above passage. There is nothing whatever in the simple statement of the history, not even the most remote insinuation, that warrants the introduction of the distinction in question.

Secondly: No such distinction is any where discernible in the apostle's reasoning. It is neither directly made, nor even incidentally alluded to. The blessings of the covenant in general, all its blessings, temporal and spiritual, and especially the two inheritances, the earthly and the heavenly, the typical and the typified, are there represented as alike given by promise, as obtained and held by the same seed, on the same ground. Gal. iii. 15, 16. Brethren, I speak after the manner of men though it be but a man's covenant, yet, if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made: he saith not, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, and to thy seed, which is Christ."-What we have at present to notice is, not the promises themselves, or the seed to whom they were made, but the simple fact, stated in terms the most plain, and unequivocal, that "the promises" of the covenant, without any hinted discrimination, were made to the same seed on the same ground.

Thirdly: The rite of circumcision itself is admitted by our baptist brethren in general, to be significant of spiritual blessings:—who, indeed, that attentively reads either Old or New Testament, can question it? It is significant, according to a writer on that side of the controversy, of "cleansing from sin"-and "not only of the purity of moral holiness, but also of the cleansing from the guilt of sin in justification." And agreeably to this spiritual import of the rite, we so frequently read of the "circumcision of the heart," with other equivalent phrases; which the apostle finely explains, when he says, "He is not a Jew who is one outwardly, neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew who is one inwardly, and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."-Now it is not easy to perceive,

with what propriety, or consistency, a sign, admitted to be significant of the highest spiritual blessings, should be made the seal, or the token, of a covenant of temporal promises and temporal blessings alone.-Consistency seems to require, either that the spiritual signification of circumcision should be given up, or that the covenant, of which it was the appointed token, should be allowed to have contained spiritual as well as temporal promises.

Fourthly Circumcision is most expressly pronounced by the apostle, to have been a sign and a seal of spiritual blessings, and especially of that first blessing of the gospel covenant, justification by faith:-" Abraham," says he, "received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had being yet uncircumcised; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:"-the meaning of which words evidently is, not that the sign of circumcision was to Abraham the seal of his own personal justification, for this would be incompatible with subsequent trial, and with his "giving diligence," like other believers," to make his calling and election sure,”—inasmuch as it is impossible to arrive at a greater degree of certainty, than that which is given by the sealed testimony of God; but rather, that it was the seal of that covenant, according to whose provisions, all sinners, believing as he believed, were, like him, to be justified by faith.— To this covenant, according to the apostle, circumcision was annexed.

Fifthly: The temporal half of the covenant is supposed, by those who hold this distinction, to have been the same with the law or Sinai Covenant, which was entered into 430 years after with the people of Israel, the natural descendants of Abraham.-Now I must beg the reader to observe, how greatly this view mars the force, and invalidates the conclusiveness, of the apostle's argument, with regard to the ground of Abraham's justification.-His leading design, in those parts of his epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians where this subject is treated of, is to prove, for the establishment of Jewish and Gentile believers, for the conviction of his unbelieving coun

trymen, and for the refutation of false teachers, the doctrine of justification by grace, as having been, from the beginning, the doctrine of the word of God. He selects, as an instance to his purpose, the case of Abraham. He shows that this patriarch, in whom the Jews were wont to glory, was himself justified, not by the law, but on the footing of a covenant which was made four hundred and thirty years before it. Now, if this covenant be considered as entirely distinct from the law, the argument is perspicuous and conclusive. But it requires no great measure of penetration to perceive, how much its force and decisiveness are impaired by the view which I am opposing; according to which, the law, instead of being 430 years after this covenant, and altogether distinct from it, was in fact co-eval with it, and formed one of its branches. I appeal to every candid and discerning mind, if this does not introduce confusion and feebleness into the apostle's reasoning. Surely, without some further explanations and distinctions, which he has not thought it necessary to introduce, it cannot be deemed a very appropriate or satisfactory inference,-that Abraham could not be justified by the law, because he was justified on the footing of a covenant of which the law was a part.

II. The second of the two theories of explanation, by which our baptist brethren parry the conclusion, deducible from the annexation of the rite of circumcision to a covenant of spiritual promises and blessings, is, distinguishing the different appearances of God to Abraham, recorded, respectively, in the twelfth, the fifteenth, and the seventeenth chapters of the book of Genesis, and representing them as having been, not repetitions of the same covenant, in different forms, under different circumstances, and with different degrees of enlargement and particularity of detail, but so many distinct covenants.That which was made first, and which is contained in the twelfth chapter, is conceived to be the one referred to in the apostle's reasoning, as having been 430 years before the law, because, upon calculation, this time corresponds with the date of it, and, consequently, of it only. This is admitted to be the gospel covenant, containing the specific promise, "In thee shall all the families of the earth be

blessed." That, on the contrary, of which we have so particular an account in the seventeenth chapter, is conceived to be a covenant of temporal blessings only, and to bear relation solely to the fleshly seed or natural offspring of Abraham. To this covenant, it is alleged, circumcision was annexed, and not to the former; and it is it that is denominated the covenant of circumcision."

This is the view adopted by the late Mr. Archibald Maclean in his Review of my Lectures on the Abrahamic Covenant. In his previous publications, he had avowed and argued upon the other. Whether, when he adopted this new theory, he had at all felt his former ground insecure, I will not presume to say. But although Mr. Cox, in his late Treatise, pronounces the Review a masterly performance," and adopts, on the subject now before us, the ground on which it proceeds, it does, I confess, appear to me to be ground far less tenable than even the former. If the former was sand, this is quicksand.

66

The following is the brief record of the transaction in the twelfth chapter: "Now the Lord had said unto Abram, get thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father's house, unto a land that I will show thee and I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing and I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." I have formerly quoted the terms of the covenant of circumcision in the seventeenth chapter. It ought to require no more than the simple reading of the two passages together, to satisfy any unprejudiced mind, that the latter, though not containing the precise words which are alleged to be the gospel promise, is yet but an amplification of the former :-especially when it is considered, that the covenant recorded in the fifteenth chapter, on the statement of which the apostle founds his principal argument for the justification of Abraham by faith without the deeds of the law, does not contain the promise, on which so much stress is laid, that "in him and in his seed should all the families of the earth be blessed." It contains no more than the assurance