Jay Miller

It is inspiring to read of Adoniram Judson's internal wrestling as he became convinced of credobaptism in view of the distinction between the Abrahamic covenant and the new covenant and his resolve to follow Scripture and not fear man: "Here, then, appeared a striking difference between the Abrahamic, and the Christian systems. The one recognized the membership of children, domestics and remote descendents of professors, and tended directly to the establishment of a national religion. The other appeared to be a selective system, acknowledging none, as members of the church, but such as gave credible evidence of believing in Christ. This led me to suspect, that these two systems, so evidently different, could not be one and the same. And now the light began to dawn. The more I read, and the more I meditated on the subject, the more clearly it appeared to me, that all my errors and difficulties had Wginated, in confounding these two eystems. I began to see, that since the very nature and constitution of the church of Christ excluded infants and unregenerate domestics, repentance and faith being always represented as necessary to constitute a disciple, we had no right to expect any directions for, or any examples of, the initiation of such unqualified persons into the church. To search for such directions and examples in the New Testament would be, as if the citizen of a republic should go to search his national code, for laws concerning the royal family, which, by the very nature and constitution of a republic, is excluded. Suppose, that such a citizen, disappointed in his search, should have recourse to the constitution and laws of a neigboring monarchy, for the desired information. This, it appeared to me, would aptly represent the proceeding of those who, unable to find in the New Testament, satisfactory proof of the right of infants, or unregenerate domestics, should have recourse to the Abrahamic and Jewish codes. At length, I adopted the following sentiments, concerning the two churches, and the concern which we have, at present, with the old dispensation. The Abrahamic church was preparatory to, and typical of, the Christian. The constitution was radically different; but it was, nevertheless, wisely adapted to answer the ends which God had in view. Natural descent or purchase was sufficient to introduce a person into this church; but still it appears, that, in every age, there were some who were truly pious; who embraced the gospel promise made to Abraham, before the covenant of circumcision was instituted; who also looked beyond the literal meaning of the requirements and promises, contained in that covenant, to the glorious things typified thereby, and thus exercised true faith in the coming Messiah, and in a better country, that is, the heavenly. When the Messiah appeared, this preparatory and typical system, having answered its end, was destined to cease ; and the Lord Jesus set up his kingdom on earth, the gospel church, composed of such only as repent and believe, or rather give credible evidence of these gracious exercises. The bar of separation between the Jews and the rest of the world was removed; thenceforth, none were to plead, that they had Abraham for their father; none were to rest in the covenant of circumcision, assured that if they did, Christ would profit them nothing; but it was distinctly declared, that thenceforth, there was neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female, but all were one in Christ (Gal. iii. 28). But whereas the Abrahamic system was typical of the Christian, so the spiritual meaning of the requirements and promises still remains in force. Thus, by looking beyond the letter, and regarding the spiritual import, according to the example of the pious Jews, a great part of the Old Testament is still applicable to us, though the New Testament is emphatically the Christian's law book. The natural seed of Abraham typifies the spiritual seed. The land of Canaan typifies the heavenly land. External circumcision typifies the circumcision of the heart, a circumcision made without hands, that is, the putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, even the circumcision of Christ (Col 2:11). Believers, therefore, may embrace the promise of Canaan, in its spiritual application, as made to themselves, the spiritual seed, who have received the spiritual circumcision. Hence, also, all the devotional parts of the Old Testament, particularly the Psalms of David, the modem believer can make his own, adopting the language, as the genuine expressions of his ovm devout feelings. In the same way are to be explained all the New Testament allusions to the ancient dispensation. If when, for instance, the apostle says, 'If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise' (Gal. iii. 29), we are to understand, not Abraham's natural seed, surely, but his spiritual seed, those who by faith are assimilated to him, and thus become his children; not heirs of the land of Canaan, in the literal acceptation of the words, but heirs of the blessing of justification by faith, concerning which the apostle had been discoursing, and consequently, of the spiritual Canaan, the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. But while I obtained light and satisfaction on one side, I was plunged in difficulty and distress on the other. If, thought I, this system is the true one, if the Christian church is not a continuation of the Jewish, if the covenant of circumcision is not precisely the covenant in which Christians now stand, the whole foundation of Pedobaptism is gone; there is no remaining ground for the administration of any church ordinance, to the children and domestics of professors; and it follows inevitably, that I, who was christened in infancy, on the faith of my parents, have never yet received Christian baptism. Must I, then, forsake my parents, the church with which I stand connected, the society under whose patronage I have come out, the companions of my missionary undertaking? Must I forfeit the good opinion of all my friends in my native land, occasioning grief to some, and provoking others to anger, and be regarded henceforth, by all my former dear acquaintance, as a weak, despicable Baptist, who has not sense enough to comprehend the connection between the Abrahamic and the Christian systems? All this was mortifying; it was hard to flesh and blood. But I thought again—It is better to be guided by the opinion of Christ, who is the truth, than by the opinion of men, however good, whom I know to be in an error. The praise of Christ is better than the praise of men. Let me cleave to Christ at all events, and prefer his favor above my chief joy."