472 * Antecedens fag nititur hypo thef qus5f verbis illis formula feederis gratia contíneretur. Contr:c verb fc dus proprie obligationem duarum partium certis utrinque conditionib co compleffi certurn eft , qualem hoc loco extare pro bare non poteft ideoque nec fiedur propriè eft. An Appendix. Riles it,) Gen, 3;17 , where the feed of the woman is promifed to break the Serpents head , * he denies that thofe words containe the forme of a Covenant ; becaufe it is cer- taro (as he fayes) that 4 Covenant properly fo called, container an obligation of two parties, with conditions on both jades; which cannot be proved (faith he) in thofe words , and there- fore it is not a Covenant properly fo called. From which learned hand we fee. I. That a Covenant properly fo called , is of two parties. s. That both parts have their conditions. 3. That there is aCovenant between God and man properly fo called, in which God and man are both obliged. 4. That no Scripture-expreffion holds out this Covenant, that holds not out thefe conditions. This is the proper acceptation for which we contend, and im- proper acceptations (as they do not hold forth the nature of a Covenant fo) we confeffe they do not imply mutual! contracts or mutuall performances. Hither,Mafter Tom6es his Argument is brought. A Covenant is fometimes in an improper fenfe, faid to be made with thofe that cannot make mutual contraes ; therefore a Covenant is no mu- tuall contra ±, it hath no mutuall engagements. He might as well argue , that becaufe a flone is called a witneffe, 7ofh.24.27. a heap of flones is fo called, Gen. 31.48. which have neither eyes, nor eares, to-fee or hear what is done or faid , nor yet a tongue to utter it ; therefore there is no ufe of eyes, or eares, or of a tongue, in any one that is brought for a witneffe. As the He- brew word Berith is improperly ufed , or at leaft ufed in a fenfe more large then to denote a Covenant ; wherefoever it doth not hold out an agreement of two parties with engagements on both hands : So the word drat en, whenfoever it is ufed in that fenfe, feemes to be taken improperly, teeing in its received lignifica tion (according to good interpreters) it doth not denote a Covenant but a mans laft Will and Teftament which never is of forme , but by the death of the Teftator, Hebrews 9. iw, 1:7. which is not true of a Covenanter, his death is not required to make the Covenant valid. aS'oj
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTcyMjk=