does not refer to the simple practice of circumcision; but to the perverted notion of it which was propagated by the Judaizing teachers, viz. "That except they were circumcised and kept the law, they could not be saved." It was this view of circumcision that he was opposing, and not the simple institution as a token of God's covenant with Abraham. Hence he says, "whosoever of you are justified by the law, ye are fallen from grace," i. e. from the scheme of grace. Certainly if they were circumcised upon this principle," Christ would profit them nothing;" for grace and works could not be intermixed.

Yet circumcision might be continued on other grounds, and was so continued by the purest and best Jewish believers. We have already traced its continuance down to the period of the council which sat at Jerusalem. And we shall be able to trace it still farther. If, therefore, the mere practice of circumcision after the death of Christ rendered him unprofitable to the circumcised, the whole multitude of believing as well as unbelieving Jews, hereby excluded themselves from the benefits of his atonement, and made themselves debtors to do the whole law; for they were all in this practice. But this cannot be. Therefore, Paul unquestionably refers to the aforesaid corrupted view of this rite and the customs of Moses.

He himself allowed of simple circumcision to the Jews, though he would not consent to have it imposed on the Gentiles. He was, indeed, accused of opposing circumcision altogether: but it was not so. This will clearly appear, together with the continuance of circumcision among all the Jews, believing as well as unbelieving, from Acts, xxi. 17–26. “And when we were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly. And the day following, Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present. And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry. And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law: and they are informed of thee, that thou teachest all the Jews which are among the Gentiles, to forsake Moses, saying, that they ought not to circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs. What is it therefore? the multitude must needs come together: for they will hear that thou art come. Do therefore this that we say unto thee: we have four men which have a vow on them; them take, and purify thyself with them, and be at charges with them, that they may shave their heads: and all may know that those things, whereof they were informed concerning thee, are nothing; but that

thou thyself also walkest orderly, and keepest the law. As touching the Gentiles which believe, we have written and concluded that they observe no such thing, save only that they keep themselves from things offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication. Then Paul took the men, and the next day purifying himself with them, entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the days of purification, until that an offering were made for every one of them."

The date of this transaction must have been several years after the time of the aforementioned council; and yet "the many thousands of Jews which believed were all zealous of circumcision and the law of Moses." It is sometimes asked, did the believing Jews continue to practise circumcision? In this passage we have a definite answer. They did, all of them. Even Paul did not teach the believing Jews that were among the Gentiles that they ought not to circumcise their children, as it had been reported. Otherwise, his compliance with the measure proposed by the brethren at Jerusalem to silence the clamour of the people, was practising a lie. For the very object of this measure was to counteract the report that he had so taught. And Paul's freely consenting to this measure was a full and publick declaration that he had taught no such thing as was reported. He allowed of circumcision to the Jews, let them live where they would.

Here, again, when the circumstances of the case plainly demanded that the change of the seals, and the discontinuance of circumcision to the Jews, (if such had been the fact,) should have been noticed; not a word is uttered, or an intimation giNor is there any mention of this afterwards.

ven.

Instead of this, circumcision was strenuously practised" by the many thousands of Jews which believed," as well as others, long after the introduction of the Christian dispensation; yea, through the whole period of the New Testament history. They were so precise in regard to this subject, that the report that a single individual had set himself against the practice and the prevailing customs, excited the indignation of the whole multitude of Jews, and exposed him to the fury of the populace.

Yea, there is nothing in the whole of the New Testament records which contains any notice of baptism's taking the place of circumcision, or of circumcisions's being discontinued to the Jews, or ever intended to be. But if such had been the fact, this notice must certainly have been taken.

I am, therefore, warranted in saying, that the seal of the Abrahamick covenant was never changed from circumcision to

baptism, and that circumcision was never abolished to the Jews, but remains to this day in full force.

Especially will this appear, when we take into consideration the perpetuity of the covenant to which it belonged, and the order of God to Abraham that every man-child among his descendants, without limitation, should be circumcised.

Great stress is often laid on the silence of the Jews respecting the privileges of children, as though this could not have been, if infants had not been baptized during the apostolick age. But from the above view of the case, this silence is easily accounted for, allowing that infants were not baptized. There was no occasion to complain, seeing the Abrahamick covenant was not abridged, nor their right to circumcise their children called in question. If circumcision were ever a privilege, it was a privilege to Jews still; and upon Gentiles, in their separate national capacity, it had never been conferred. What ground, therefore, existed for the Jews to complain? Evidently none. And we do not hear any complaint from the Gentiles, for they did not, under all the circumstances, consider circumcision a privilege to them. Believers among them were brought upon a level with believing Jews in point of spiritual privileges, and this was enough. They had cause to be satisfied with their circumstances in other respects. Hence we hear of no complaint from any quarter. But this furnishes no argument whatever for infant baptism.

CHAPTER VI.

The fact that the kingdom of heaven was set up, or the New Testament dispensation introduced during Christ's life and personal ministry, particularly illustrated and proved.

IT was predicted by the prophet Isaiah, that " a king should reign and prosper"-that a "child should be born, and a son given, who should be called the mighty God, the everlasting Father, the prince of peace; that the government should be upon his shoulder, and that of his kingdom there should be no end."

It was foretold by Daniel, that in the time of the fourth great kingdom that should arise, i. e. in the time of the Roman monarchy," the God of heaven would set up a kingdom which should break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and

stand for ever."

The Lord Jesus Christ was the king thus promised, and his New Testament church the kingdom which he should establish and reign over.

Moreover, the prophet Jeremiah foretold that God would "make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which he made with their fathers when they came out of Egypt," wherein he engaged to "write his law in their hearts, and that he would be their God, and they should be his people." "This is the same as the New Testament, of which Christ is the mediator.

This covenant evidently began to take effect during our Lord's life and ministry. A very important change then began to be effected in the constitution of the church; and the kingdom of heaven was then set up. A chosen people was called out and separated from the publick mass, and brought under a peculiar set of laws and regulations. And Christ then began to claim and to exercise, in various respects, the prerogatives of Zion's king.

The true rise of his kingdom was when he began to make disciples and baptize them. For he said that "except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of