Chap.36 of the iffiie of Beteevers. 263 the other. b The fonnes of the flefh with the ,d b Filü conj.; hoc loco ftnt, pa file, (faith he) are thole that by the worlds of cdo u i per óperr. a legis juftitiam 6y flutcm the Law Ì ollow a f ter ri g hteottfne e and f alva- Fuji vers prdmiffianis pit illi, qui tia ». The Tonnes of the promife, are thofe that fide in Chriftum jufitiam é falucera PA after rigbteoufne f fe and falvation .by faith in quarunt. Chrifi and he thus frames the principal Syl- logifine of the A poltle, for confutation of the Si verburrt Dei fobs filias compre- bendit, exclufis film cards, turn te- Jewes arguing from the rejeaion of the Jews, quitur verbum Dci non excidere, ctiamfi Gods failing in his promife. e If the word of frlii carvis rejiciantur; imò excileret fi God comprehend only thefuns of the promife,Phut. admitterentur i fti qui dc(criptione ipfá ting out thefuns of the flefh ; then it follon es that conditíonis fiederis exctudutrtur. eflt the word of God cloth not aide, thou hthe fans of verbum Dei fobs lilies promifflortis f g comprehen lit, exclujis filiis carvis. the flefh be rejec`led : But the word of God corn- Ergo verbum Vei non excidit, etiamfi prebends only the fort or promife , fbutting out fzlii carnis rejiciantur. the fons'of the flefh: Therefore the word of God cloth not faile, though the fins of the flefh be rejefled. Armin. An al. Cap. 9. ad Ro. pag. 781. Let any now judge whether he can in- terpret this of the Law and not of the Promife. 3. When he affirmes that to be borne after the flefh is all one ( with the Apoftle,with legal jufticiaries, Apolog. pag. 114, (which is Arminiuo his Interpretation) how then can he by that dif}i i Ì on ofthildren of the flefh, and children of the Promife, Phut out the natural feed of Abraham ?- are the naturali feed of Abraham, land legali jufliciaries one and the fame? j 4. If the Apoflle exclude all the naturali feed of Abraham from this Covenant ofGod with Abraham (as Mailer Tombes from Stapleton argues) and take in only his fpiritual feed , how can he be reconciled to himfelf? In the words immediately before this objec`fion, he fpeaks of the Jewes , (as his kinfinen according to the flefh, which were the natural feed of Abraham) and faith, To them pertaine the Adoption the Glory and the Covenants, Vic. How then can his diftin &ion lie interpreted to throw them out of Covenant , when in expreffe termes he had affirmed that they were in Covenant? How can he deny that thefe are children, verf.7. when he had affirmed that to them pertaineth the Adopti- tion, vfrJ. 4. Which may be confirmed by abundant other Texts of Scripture; Ye are the children of the Lord your Go!, Deut. 14.1. Out of Egypt have I called my Sonne, Hofea . , . It is not meet to take the childrens bread and call it unto dogs, Matth, 15. 26. 1 _ where
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=