Selected quad for the lemma: law_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
law_n	new_a	old_a	testament_n	23,958	5	8.6166	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63106	A treatise proving by what our Saviour saith concerning swearing, St. Matth. 5. 34 first, that swearing is restrained and explained by him in point of religion and piety, and secondly, that it is not taken away quite in the concerns of civil right and policy : published for confinement unto those that are loose in this matter, and for liberty of conscience unto such as bind themselves where they have no need : the one's excess being a misbehaviour against religion, and the other defect, an errour against governemtn and policy / by an elderly man, a Master of Arts, of above forty years standing ...	Elderly man, a Master of Arts, of above forty years standing.	1682 (1682)	Wing T2097B; ESTC R20581	13,737	16

A TREATISE PROVING By what our Saviour saith concerning SWEARING St. Matth. 5. 34. First that Swearing is restrained and explained by him in point of Religion and Piety And Secondly that it is not taken away quite in the concerns of Civil Right and Policy Published for confinement unto those that are loose in this matter and for liberty of Conscience unto such as bind themselves where they have no need The one's excess being a misbehaviour against Religion and the others defect an errour against Government and Policy Let not the one be overmuch wicked nor yet be foolish for why should he dye before his time Eccl. 7. 17. And let not the other be righteous overmuch nor make himself over wise for why should he destroy himself Eccl. 7. 16. By an elderly man a Master of Arts of above forty years standing during life bound to pray for the good estate of Lincoln Colledge in Oxford LONDON Printed by M. W. in the year M DC LXXX II. Christian Reader WHereas the Doctrine of a right unto Christians to hold a propriety of Goods and substance doth suppose a concession of the like right unto them to wage Law in the defence thereof provided their matters be of weight unto them according to their estates and their cases of necessity and that waging of Law is it that ordinarily giveth such occasion as is just for men to be Sworn I have in a word and by the way touched upon both these Rights to insist upon either would require another Treatise and that may prove needless if in this matter of Swearing which is most in controversy and of greatest difficulty I may be heard in order whereunto I hope to obtain if not of those that gainsay yet of those that scruple the lawfulness of Swearing in any case that they will weigh my Reasons or Arguments without prejudice and the rather because of their so doing they may have this benefit namely be set free in Conscience by Oath both to set an end to strife in particular cases of difference and also to serve the publick in undergoing such Offices and Services thereof as they may be called unto For the performance whereof the more men fear an Oath the more they are to be trusted and the better to be accepted To fear an Oath in this case is very commendable but to refuse to swear at all to deprave and exclaim against it is intollerable the publick is not only hindred but also affronted by this And how can men be so impudently silly as to think wilfully and opinionatively to incommode the publick and yet themselves to take no harm by it I hope such will no longer persist in the one to occasion the other when by this Treatise they shall be convinced that for Conscience sake they have no need to do so Farewel Swearing Disabused but not forbidden quite But I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven for it is Gods Throne c. Matth. 5. 34. OUr Saviour saith Mat 5. 17. Think not that I am come to destroy the Law I am not come to destroy the Law but to fulfil it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set it out to the full I am not come to loose men from any Obligations or duties of the moral Law which formerly lay upon them but I am come to vindicate the Law from such corruptions as the vitiousness of times men and manners hath brought upon it as in this particular of Swearing It was acknowledged by the Jews that men ought neither to forswear themselves nor yet to take Gods name in vain in any wise and yet vain-Swearing was much in use among them so much in use that they did not think much the worse of themselves for it provided that they did not use the name of God in it To avoid this therefore forbearing the name of God they used the names of other things infinitely below God and yet of no small esteem with them as by Heaven by the Earth Jerusalem the Temple the Altar c. thinking by this shift if not to swear without sinning yet to extenuate the sin of Swearing This device possibly they had from the Heathens who were wont to be very sparing in swearing by their Gods choosing rather to make their vain and light Oaths by such things as were obvious to them and present before them the Grecians said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. In like manner Philo reports of the Jews viz. That in swearing vain and customary Oaths they did it not by God but by Heaven by the Earth by Jerusalem c. Though these forms and fashions of Swearing in use among the Jews were born with by those that read the Law unto them of old time yet did not that make them to be lawful therefore Christ being come to fulfil the Law utterly declares against them saying Swear not at all neither by Heaven c. Swearing is the subject of the Text above written the lawfulness and unlawfulness whereof viz. in diverse respects I purpose by Gods help to deliver in two propositions whereof the one is exprest by the words of the aforementioned Text and the other by a just consequence to be deduced from them The first proposition is That no manner of vain and light Swearing under what form or notion soever was or is tolerated by the Law of God In this sense it is that our Saviour who is the best expounder of the Law saith Swear not at all The second Proposition is That the action of Swearing simply considered in it self without any evil circumstances to deprave it is no more forbidden unto us under the New Testament than it was heretofore unto the Jews under the Old Our Saviour taketh not away Swearing it self but the abuse of it Though of the first Proposition there needs little or nothing to be spoken our Saviours words being so plain and peremptory for proof of Doctrine yet may a few words be made of it by way of illustration and for instruction in righteousness Thus therefore Calvin observeth That in all ages and in most Nations the generality of people are very apt to have an use and a custome of idle and vain Swearing such is their incogitancy that they do not duly weigh how great a crime it is to abuse the name of God and if herein forbearing the name of God they use the names of other things they are never the nearer to be quit from blame nay in so doing they commit two evils at once first they give to the creature the honour due to the Creator and then under the names and pretence of the creatures they abuse God himself it being impossible for us to swear by them without reflecting upon him Saith St Augustine If a man swear by a stone and do it either vainly or falsly God is concerned in it the stone heareth not but God will punish the deceiver he will punish the profane Swearer That God is abused under the name

the forbidding of that which is abusefull and evil always supposing the granting of that which is useful and good What reason have we to understand him otherwise in this instance concerning Swearing he alloweth us to be angry but not without a cause to look on a woman but not to lust after her to put away wives but not except for the cause of fornication So in this case of Swearing to swear idly vainly prophanely superstitiously rashly and inconsiderately as it is sinful and evil in it self So is it forbidden by our Saviour Christ but to Swear by the name of God and in his fear soberly and judiciously either in an assertory Oath for the vindication of a truth and the decision of strife or in a promissory Oath for confirmation of faith giving and promise making this is usefull and good and therefore by our Saviour Christ it is left as supposed granted allow'd That it is so appears in that our Saviour in this instance as in the rest is pleased to explain himself so far as to express what abuse it is that he would have to be reform'd namely to Swear by Heaven by the Earth or any other such Oath Herewith doth altogether agree even in terminis that which St James writes Chap. the 5. ver 12. saying Above all things my brethren Swear not neither by Heaven neither by the Earth neither by any other Oath i. e. of that kind form or manner But let your yea be yea and your nay nay i. e. let your speech be single without the addition of idle Oaths lest ye fall into Condemnation i. e. lest ye be found to sin against God and be convict thereof for idle Swearing such as that by the Creatures is is not a thing indifferent or an offence not to be taken notice of as ye may be apt to think it is By St. James his delivering himself thus in the matter of Swearing almost in the very words of Christ and by our Saviours explaining himself as he doth I think that against mens partial application of the words Swear not at all reading them so far and no farther my proposition stands firm and sound viz. That the action of Swearing simply considered in it self without any evil circumstance to deprave it is no more forbidden unto us under the new Testament than it was unto the people of God under the Old Our Saviour by expounding the Law took not away Swearing it self but the abuse of it Our Saviours sentence endeth not at Swear not at all to look to making a sentence of our Saviours words without reading them along to by Heaven by the Earth c I take to be great partialitie a Comma is the utmost point that can be between these words and that not otherwise than because of the distinction following viz. neither by Heaven nor by the Earth c. To make a sentence of the words Swear not at all without reading farther is a meer fallacy viz. of dividing those things that ought to be joyned together Another argument yet I may draw from the Laws being altogether one and the same both before and after the coming of Christ Our Saviour himself saith He came not to destroy the Law therefore it abides The old Commandment of the Law and the new Commandment of the Gospel is but one and the same Commandment 1 Joh. 2. 7. 8. Our Saviour came to fulfil the Law Whereas it had been said by them of old time Thou shalt not forswear thy self c. our Saviour saith not But I say unto you thou shalt forswear thy self that had been to destroy the Law indeed He leaveth that to stand and addeth unto it that which should have been also said namely neither shalt thou Swear vainly at all no though it were but indirectly i. e. not by God himself but by Heaven by the Earth c. this indirect kind of Swearing the Jews devised on purpose to favour their fond humour of Swearing so as to make of it but a light thing Saith Calvin the whole Law agreeth with the Gospel both in condemning the same vices and also in commanding the same vertues It was the part of the Messias at his coming to take away nothing of the Moral Law but to explain to reform and to restore it in all things Saith Ireneus Christ fulfilled the Natural and Moral things of the Law by setting them out more clearly and fully than they were before and saith St. Hierom even as a Painter in making a Picture by making a second draught doth not blot out the first but illustrate and make it plain no more doth our Saviour Christ in what he doth by the Law it is still the same Law for him only it is more fully and amply set forth by him as in a second Edition I contract my Argument into an Enthymeme thus viz. To Swear by the God of Heaven and Earth was allowed by the Law unto the people of God of old time as a thing natural and moral they being duly called unto it therefore it is allowed unto us in like manner From whence had Abraham his warrant to Swear his Servant was it not from Nature such Swearing being a natural worshipping of God the like may be said of Abraham Swearing to Abimelech of Abimelech also and Isaac swearing each to other of Jacob swearing to Laban c. I presume the Arguments I have used hitherto may pass for demonstrative what I shall add shall be but illustrative viz. Arguments taken from things so familiar that the consequence of them is easy and the deduction manifest As thus If the action of Swearing were a thing that were simply evil then should not the Angels be made to do it as is done Rev. 10. 5 6. much less would God himself do it as is done Heb. 7. 21. And what did our Saviour when the High Priest adjured him by the living God to tell whether he were the Christ the Son of the Blessed yea or not did he refuse to submit to this adjuration or did he make direct and plain answer to what was thus rigorously demanded of him Among the Jews the person that was adjured thought himself as much concerned as if he had taken an Oath and indeed in effect what was or is it less Our Saviour therefore having held his peace otherwise even unto Pilates wonder yet when by the High-priest he was adjur'd by God he made answer straight Matth. 26. 63 64. What shall we think of St. Paul who in his Epistle to the Romans to assure them that he did alwayes make mention of them in his prayers takes God to witness saying For God is my Witness Rom. 1. 9. and 2Cor 1. 23. I call God for a record upon my Soul and Gal. 1. 20 he saith Before God I lye not Now whereas St Paul Swears not but in things of a Spiritual concern there have been those and those good men too that would restrain the lawfulness of swearing only unto