for neglecting to purify himself. And from premises which we have already shewn are admitted by Baptists and Pedobaptists, we fairly conclude that this visible church of God is meant by the people from whom the uncircumcised man-child is said to be cut off in Gen. xvii. 14. "And the uncircumcised man-child, whose "flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall "be cut off from his people; [that is, from his church ;] " he hath broken my covenant;" [that is my ecclesiastical covenant,] made four hundred and thirty years before my Opponent's ecclesiastical covenant, at Sinai.

If I be not egregiously mistaken, my Opponent's own argument operates with irresistible force against himself. He reasons that the Jews were not a church until they came to Sinai, because they were not called a church until that period. Then if they had been called a church before, this would prove that they were really a church before the Sinaitic covenant. But we have shewn several proofs that they were called a church, in the ecclesiastical sense of the word, before they left Egypt, and we have shewn that they were called by a name "confessedly equivalent" in the covenant with Abraham, where the violation of that covenant is given as a reason for excommunication from that church. This subject we hope, with divine permission, to pursue farther before we are done with the proposition that "Abraham and his seed were divinely constituted a visible church of God."

When we speak of Abraham's SEED, take notice that this is the language which the scriptures use on this very subject. God says to Abraham, "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."(u) This term is not used to embrace the children of Hagar and Keturah. "And God said, "Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou "shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my co"venant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with "HIS SEED after him."(v) "And God said unto Abra66 ham, let it not be grievous in thy sight, because of the "lad, and because of thy bond-woman; in all that Sarah "hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice: for in "Isaac shall thy SEED be called.”(w) "Neither be"cause they are the seed of Abraham, are they all chil"dren: but in Isaac shall thy SEED be called. 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."(x)

This ecclesiastical SEED does not embrace the descendants of Isaac universally. Reprobate Esau, and, to a great degree, his progeny, were excluded, with every uncircumcised male of Jacob's posterity, according to Gen. xvii. 14. Moreover, the excommunication of even circumcised persons must have sometimes occurred. Instances are mentioned in the New Testament.(y) At an earlier period, Ezra proclaimed a general meeting, from which, if any man were absent, "all his sub"stance should be forfeited, and himself separated from "the church of those that had been carried away.” On this passage, Dr. Gill, the greatest Baptist Commen

tator, says that the absentee from this meeting "should be excommunicated from them as a church, and be no more reckoned of the body politic, or a freeman of Israel, and so deprived of all privileges, both in church and state."(z) That very excommunication which the Doctor says was here threatened, was afterward inflicted upon the great body of the Jewish people, the old branches of the ecclesiastical olive tree. Paul says, "because of unbelief they were broken off."(a) If, therefore, there had been no engrafting of foreign cions, the church would have been nearly or altogether extinct.

We observe, therefore, that the ecclesiastical SEED did not embrace the descendants of Isaac exclusively. According to Moses, Edomites were permitted to "enter into the church of the Lord in their third generation."(b) In Isaiah, (c) God has promised great additions from Egypt and Assyria. And we are informed of the actual accession of Ebed-Melech, the Ethiopian, Rahab of Jericho, and Ruth the Moabitess. (d) Besides this, there is an innumerable multitude whom Paul represents as saying "The branches were broken off, that I might be grafted in."(e) Concerning these he says, "They which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham ;”(ƒ) upon the ground, that “to Abraham and his SEED were the promises made."(g)

These materials afford the following definition, viz. The SEED of Abraham are his descendants in the line of

Gill's Commentary on Ezra x. 8.

(b) Deut. xxiii. 7, 8.

(d) Jer. xxxviii, 7-12. Matt. i. 5.

Gal, iii. 9.

(a) Rom. xi. 20.
(c) xix. 23, 24.
(e) Rom. xi. 19.
(g) Gal, iii, 16,

Isaac, in good standing as professors of the true religion, with others added to them. Substituting this periphrasis for the word SEED, in the proposition now under discussion, it will read as follows, viz. Abraham and his descendants, in the line of Isaac, in good standing as professors of the true religion, with others added to them, were divinely constituted a visible church of God.

It will, of course, be understood that the phrase visible church means a society, distinct from the body of the elect, and distinct from that portion of the elect who are already in glory. These are called the invisible church, and the church triumphant; from which the visible church, whether under the old or the new dispensation, is quite distinct. It is a visible society, acting as the consecrated depository of the oracles and ordinances of revealed religion. With the substitution of this explanation, for the phrase which it is intended to define, the proposition under consideration will read as follows, viz. Abraham and his seed were divinely constituted a visible society, acting as the consecrated depository of the oracles and ordinances of revealed religion.

In oppugnation of this position, it will not avail to prove that the Jews were a body politic; for this is quite consistent with their being an ecclesiastical body also and the fact of their being both a church and a state, is admitted in the extract just now given from the great Baptist commentator, Dr. Gill. It is equally futile to produce instances of a simultaneous tenure of civil and ecclesiastical offices; for this is quite common amongst us, where church and state are certainly

distinct. Neither will it do to alledge the moral turpitude of individual members against the existence of the Jewish, any more than the Christian church; for spotless purity belongs to the church triumphant only, and even universal sincerity to the invisible church only. I would also wish you to remember that the question is not now concerning the sameness of the Jewish and Christian churches, but whether the Jews were a church at all. That they were, I shall endeavour to prove, by shewing that they had the qualifications and constituents of a church, in the following order:

1. The oracles of a church.

2. The ordinances.

3. The members.

4. The officers.

5. The constitution.

6. The inspired name of a church.

If all these points can be proved from the word of God, we shall have good reason for believing that Abraham and his seed were divinely constituted a visible church of God; and we shall have advanced one step to the conclusion that a command given to him, for administering to infants the initiatory seal of the church, is still binding.

POINT I.

The Jews had the ORACLES of a visible Church of God.

Paul says, "unto them were committed the Oracles of "God."(h) The character and design of these oracles

(2) Rom. iii. 2.