Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	adversary_n	former_a	great_a	71	3	2.1246	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39572	One antidote more, against that provoking sin of swearing, by reason of which this land now mourneth given forth from under the burden of the oppressed seed of God, by way of reply both to Henry Den's epistle about the lawfulness, antiquity, and universality of an oath, and his answers to the Quakers objections against it, recommended (by him) to all the prisons in this city and nation to such as chuse restraint, rather then the violation of their consciences : and also to Jeremiah Ives his printed plea for swearing, entitituled, The great case of conscience opened, &c. about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of swearing, which said reply to these two opposers of the truth, as it is in Jesus, is recommended not onely to all the prisons in this city and nation, and to all such real Christians, as chuse restraint rather then the violation of their consciences, but also, to all such nominal Christians out of prison, as, rather then restrain, chuse to purchase their earthly liberties by swearing, to the violation of the command of Christ, who saith, Mat. 5.33, swaer not at all. Jam. 5.12, above all things my brethren swear not / by Samuel Fisher ...	Fisher, Samuel, 1605-1665.	1660 (1660)	Wing F1054; ESTC R5750	69,157	84

it rather then Gods own plain Precept against Swearing Brother Pitman and Brother Shewell I Am at this time surprized with a holy passion and though Ionah could not say concerning the Gourd that he did wel to be angry yet if my experience in the Word of the Lord doth not deceive I can truly say I do wel to be angry with you who I have had a godly jealousie of all along viz. That you would be as easily perswaded to part with as unwilling to suffer for your Spiritual Liberties Oh my Brethren where is your first love How unlike the Christians in former times are you whose zeal was so hot for God that their eyes prevented the morning that thereby they might prevent the rage of the adversary who as it is now Commanded them no more to worship in the Name of the Lord I always did conclude that those that would quit the Cause of Righteousness would quit the Ways of Holiness as yesterday sad experience hath taught to the perpetual joy of your adversaries and the sadning the hearts and adding afflictions to the bonds of the Prisoners of the Lord I do therefore conjure you as you wil answer the great God another day to consider That now is the time for you to look to your Ministry and to the Flock over which the Lord hath made you overseers that you may be able through grace to say You are clear from the blood of all men and observe that God is now come to prove you to see whether you wil keep his commandements or not Remember when that Apostates Case was debated you had no zeal nor indignation against him but you smothered all with this If it were in a matter of Faith and Worship that he had fallen from you would have been as one man against it Wel behold the Lord is come home to you the matter now is purely for worshipping God now God is proving to see if you wil obey him or no and did not yesterdays work witness that you were willing to prefer the fear of a man that must dye before the fear of the great God and the fear of them that can kill the body before the fear of the Lord that can cast body and soul into Hell I have no more to say but this That your Cowardly Temporizing and complying with the precepts of Men makes me jealous that your fear towards the Lord is taught by the precepts of Men I would not be too censorious but my Grounds are great and my Bonds are my Crown but your Cowardly spirit is my great Cross you little think what a scandal it is amongst us to hear it affirmed that one of you should say You had rather a given fifty pound then haue sworn and yet swear that you swear willingly Oh for the Lords sake do somewhat that may roul away this Reproach which that you may is the praiers of your Brother who could be contented to write himself your Companion in Tribulation Ier. Ives Ian. 14. 1660. Brother Ward my Fellow-prisoner desires to present his love to you and so do some others Which Letter above printed is here represented as a Looking-Glass for J. Ives to see himself in not so much to shame him as if yet it may be by the sight thereof which being his own may yossibly have more force upon him then another mans to recover him again to that true Honor of taking the shame of his fall to himself and also of suffering shame with the Saints for the Name of Christ which he once stood in and since very easily fell from and that he may remember from whence he is fallen and repent and do his first works for his last have not been found perfect before God and do somewhat that may roul away that reproach he hath rais'd against that Righteous Cause now suffer'd for by the Saints lest the Light be at last totally taken from him For as Humanum est errare so Humanius nihil est quam errantem revocare Or at least if J. I. be too far gone and past recovery then to recover the Honor of that Truth which to the utmost that in him is he hath dishonored by his shameful shuffles that is to say 1. By his shuffling departure from it in his sinful passion of slavish fear of man so soon after his holy passion as he calls it of Anger against his Brethrens lesse shameful because less sinful departure for J. I.'s suffering for it first as its likely they two did not declares his Conscience was convinced that he should not swear 2dly By his shuffling so much to defend and vindicate that same Evil of Swearing when it became his own which he had but a little before so egregiously condemned wh●…le it was found not in himselfe but in his Brethren and this in order meerly to the palliating of his meer painted Piety in that his paultry departure For he that builds again those legal things which once himself destroied therein makes himself no smal transgressor Gal 2. 18. 3dly By his shuffling so much though with as little success among such whose eyes are in their head being once departed from the Truth himself to draw all others after him into the Ditch Had he onely when he saw no other way to escape suffering contented himself rather to swear to his own inward loss then to suffer loss outwardly for refusing it his recovery might likely have been more hopeful and his Relapse less hurtful in all likelyhood then now it is But seeing he sets himself so zealously to solicite others to sin by swearing together with him the danger of its infecting others who are set to see with his eyes as well as the desperateness of his Disease in respect of himself calls for a more desperate Cure and searching Corrosive then need else be used And if by all that is in no less then true love to his soul though never so sharply tryed towards him his wound appears to be uncurable then Ense recidendum est ne pars s●…cera trahatur THE END * A Copy of a Letter from one that professeth the Truth but fell from it and took the Oath MY dear Friends I desire to lay before you this my condition in this my fall that my fall may be no cause for you 〈◊〉 stumble but that you by it may be the more ●… ouraged to stand for I have yeilded to the ●…etrayer and so betrayed the innocent Seed in ●…ne ●…or I forsook the counsel of the Lord and ●…onsulted with flesh and blood and so I fell in●…o the snare of the world and yeelded to ●…he ●…ovenant and so I rested satisfied in what I ●…ad done for some certain hours but when ●…he Lord in his Power looked back upon me ●…hen I remembred what I had done then I remembred that I had denyed Truth which once I had professed though once I thought I should have stood when others fell So the terrors of ●…he Lord have taken hold on me and I lye under the judgements of the Lord And now I feel the truth of ●…he words that were spoke by Ch●…ist Tha●… h●… that faileth in one tittle is guilty of all and now I feel th●… truth of that That it is better to forsake wife and children and all a man bath even life it self for Christ and the Truths sake then to break one tittle of the Law of God written in the heart So I hope tha●… by mercy and judgement the Lord will redeem me to himself again The Lord may suffer some to fall that the standing of them that stand faithful may seem to be the more glorious a●…d for them to take heed least they fall Now I know and feel tha●… it is better to part with anything of this world though it be as dear to one as ●…he right hand or the 〈◊〉 ●…hen to break our peace with God Pray for me for my Bonds are greater than yours Windsor the 22. of the 11th Month. 1660. Edw. Chilton * So called of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} and {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} for a season onely So H.D. himself seems also to call it p. 3. quoting Gen. 14. 22. I have lifted up my hand c. i. e. I have sworn to the most high God because the Ceremony of lifting up the hand was used in Swearing * It seems the Baptists in these dayes many of whom do swear for fear against th●…●…nsciences to their terror afterward as I could instance in some at Nor thampton and elsewhere and many of whom plead in print for swearing are now degenerated from that integrity which the Baptists of old coli'd then as now by the name of Anabaptists did keep to at the first in that point of swearing And as for such for there are a few and but a few of those that are counted to the Quakers whose fall I mention that I may not seem partial as one justifying them more then the Baptists in their denyal of the truth who have taken the Oath they fall into the same condemnation with them witness not only the ●…etter above printed but also this Relation that came concerning two or three more lately from Ilchester and is here underprinted in way of warning to such ●…s stand that they may take heed l●…t they fall Ilchester 5th d. of the 1. m. ONe R. Moon at Perin in Cornwall formerly own'd a friend took the Oath through slavish fear but afterward had no peace till he went to a Iustice and denyed what he had done and now he hath some peace in Lanceston Prison in denying what he hath done in disobedience to Christs Command and the last week two on the same account were sent to this Prison So that all people may see the eminent hand of the Lord in it for we know none else in all these parts that denie the truth and the Lord hath found them out and executed judgement speedily upon them T. S. † Laert. in vita Pythagorae * Philo Iudaeus

and out in Kent and elsewhere being misled by the crooked examples and mis-taught by the crude conceptious of their untaught Tea chers that it is lawful to swear in some cases do chuse rather to purchase their Liberty by Swearing then either to come into or continue in prison Yea and three or four of those who have sometime gone under the denomination of Quakers also to the great terror distraction and wounding of their spirits so that some of them have cryed out for horror of heart and have confessed they were in greater bonds then those in prison * Witness the tenor of a Letter from one of them at Windsor for a Warning to such as yet stand set down here in the Margent have rashly subiected themselves for fear to mans will against God's in that particular Now that I may prevent the impendent evil consequences necessarily following those men first or last who for fear of man shall venture to violate Christs Command against Swearing to which not only I. Tombs in his late trifling Treatise replied to already by my self briefly in the Epistle to my Book stil'd the Countrey correcting the Clergy and more fully by R. Hubberthorn but also more lately H. Den in his Epistle to all Prisons and more lately yet Ier. Ives in proof of the lawfulness of Swearing have done their best to perswade men I shall first examine the weakness of H. D's and I. ●…'s proofs for it 2. Strengthen those of ours against Swearing from those two Capital Texts Matth. 5. Iam. 5. which they two with as little strength of Reason as to little purpose labour to overturn I shall begin first with H. Den's Do-little since his Sheet came came out first a man that was wont to do better and much more being a man of more than ordinary ability when he disputed against the Priestly Darkness behind him yet here left justly of the Lord to bewray great weakness for his pushing at a people that are in the Light before him So let all the Wisdom of such as know not thy hidden ones in that in which alone thou and thine can be manifest perish from them O God and be converted into foolishness Next I shall shew the n●…rrowness and shallowness of those two sheets under which lest H. D's single one should not be enough Ier Ives having sham'd himself among the Saints by Swearing seeks more subtilly and shufflingly then su●…cessfully to shroud himself out of sight that the shame of his nakedness may not appear to all men Yet where their words and arguments are coincident I shall take notice of them so as to return answer to them both together In proof of the Lawfulness of some Swearing now Henry Den propounds two things First the Antiquity Secondly the Universality of that practice In proof of its Antiquity he propounds two Periods The first is about three hundred years after the Moon in the daies of Seth. The second about four hundred years after the Flood in the daies of Ahraham From the first of which he conjectures onely that probably it might be From the second he concludes undoubtedly that it was then in being As to the first of these two Periods I have two things to say to it whereby to discover its invalidity to evince the now lawfulness of that once confessedly lawful or at least allowed Course or Custom of Solemn Swearing First that 't is but upon a meer fallible uncertain unwarrantable conjecture at best by H. D's own confession on which he derives the now-warrantableness of solemn Swearing from so high as those daies of Seth witness his own words here under-cited out of p. 3. of his Paper viz. For the Antiquity of it although I cannot say that the practice is as old as the Moon yet I have cause to conjecture that it is not above 300 years younger Indeed what the old world did in this case the Scriptures do not speak plainly and therefore I will pass it by By which we plainly see as concerning the first P●…riod pitch'd upon by H. D. as his proof of the Antiquity of Swearing that were it an Antiquity high enough from whence to argue the lawfulness of that Ceremonious Custom yet it is but doubtfully conjectured and but probably concluded by him That it is so Antient as to be in use at all in the Old World before the Flood for he confesseth That what the Old World did in this Case the Scriptures do not speak plainly And can H. D's cloudy conjecture that probably 't is not above 300 years younger than the Moon be a cogent consequence to 20000 tender Consciences in a Case of such Concernment as this wherein they prizing their peace of Conscience with prison and confiscation before Liberty and All they have with the violation of them do lack no less evidence to their Conviction and Satisfaction then infallible and Scientifical Demonstration Secondly That if it were as certain as 't is but conceived by H. D. that That practice of Swearing by him now pleaded for was then in use and were it as undoubtedly as 't is but doubtfully derived thence yet that is not a Period so Antient as can serve to prove the now-lawfulness of any sort of Swearing since Christ who put an end to it any more then it may serve to prove the lawfulness of now sacrificing the fruits of the ground and the firstlings of the flock in that Ceremonious manner as was once and that long before that of Swearing apparently in use till Christ the substance of all Ceremonies and Sacrifices ended it by the sacrificing of himself yea no more than it may serve to prove the lawfulness of sin it self which though not de jure yet de facto was apparently practised by mankind before either Sacrificing or Swearing Which said Ceremony * of Swearing as now used and imposed with the hand laid on a Book with kissing or lifted up is now ended in Christ the Witness Covenant or Oath of God That it was used de facto before Christ had it been clearly derived from the time pretended to by H. D. cannot clearly prove that it now is in use de jure God under Moses and the Law as he suffered other things that were not so from the beginning because of the hardness of men's hearts so because of the hardness of men's hearts to believe each other while they are besides the Light and Truth in the fall in the lye in the deceit in the darkness and the strife and so under the Law suffered it so to be as it was in the case of Swearing in order to their satisfaction of each other but from the beginning before sin entered it was not so nor is it now so among the Saints and true Churches that are in God nor shall it be so in the end as men by the Light come back out of the strife and other deeds of darkness into Christ the Image of God after which man was at first

made the substance of all shadows the end of the Law that Alpha and Omega the first and the last the beginning and end of all things And as to H D's second sort of new Antiquity wherein he sinks well nigh two thousand years lower and falls almost as far below the Flood as he fell below the Moon in the former which second period he mainly insists and puts the greatest stress upon though it is not denied but that Swearing was then in use and so H.D. might have spared his pains in proving it for I know none deny it to have been used from that time to Christ's yet it is such a young piece of Antiquity as is not worthy to bear that denomination of Antiquity being but a time of meer novelty to the former which former yet is but meer novelty with us Much less then is it an Antiquity old enough to be urged in proof of the Lawfulness of all such actions as were used i●… its dayes For as when H.D. argues probably from Seth's time thus Then began men to call on i.e. according to his meer Conjectural Construction to Swear by the Name of the Lord Therefore swearing by the Lords Name is now lawful I might lawfully by way of Argument from Seth yea higher from Cain Abel urge thus Then began men to burn Sacrifice to the Lord therefore to burn sacrifice to the Lord in the old ceremonious way is now lawful yea higher yet from Adam thus Then began men to Sin against God therefore to Sin against God is now lawful So when H.D. argues more positively from so low as Abraham's time thus Abraham sware by the Name of the Lord therefore to swear by the Lords Name is now lawful Let him but excuse me in stepping but two or three Rounds low●…r i. e. two or three generations further viz. to Ioseph from Abraham who was but his Great Grandfather and on the same account of but a little younger Antiquity if any man's practice and not Christ's Precept onely were a Christians Rule a man may prove it now lawful to swear by other matters which all men judge it unlawful now to swear by as namely by the Life of Kings and Princes on this wise viz. to swear by the Life of Pharoah was in use in Joseph's days and usual also with Joseph himself therefore the Christians who are Brethren of Ioseph whose afflictions men mostly forget may now lawfully swear by the Life of Charles the lawfulness of which H.D. himself I deem and all his Brethren also the modern Baptists do utterly deny I have done with H. D.'s Argument of Antiquity which he makes so much of as to judge it clearly carryes the case his way glorying in it in this manner viz. Ye see the practice may justly plead Antiquity as if he had urged some great important and impregnable matter whenas as it brings not a jot of Prejudice to our purpose who implead that practice of Swearing so it adds not a pins worth of profit or proof to his own who is pleading for it sith as the highest Antiquity he pretends to can by his own confession for ought appears from Scripture at best but probably and therefore not justly plead its patronizing of or claim any acquaintance with that practise of Swearing so were it as infallibly evidenced as 't is but dubiously conjectured that it was at all before the Flood or but three hundred years younger then the Moon yet even this much more that which was since the Flood is but an inferior Antiquity in comparison of that from which sacrificing and sinning may both be proved to have had a being yea but an upstart piece of novelty in the eye of that Church which is now coming out of the Wilderness fair as the Moon clear as the Sun terrible as an Army with Banners even the Woman that bears the Man-Child and is clothed with the Sun of Righteousness himself by whom the Moon was made and hath the Moon also even all moveables under feet Thus H.D. hath faultred fowly in ipso limine at the very entrance of his Work in alledging that in proof of another thing which he dares speak but conjecturally of himself and its ill stumbling at the threshold H. D.'s next is the universality of this Ceremonious course of swearing and that as to persons places times All sorts of persons quoth he God Christ Angels Apostles Kings Princes Priests Prophets righteous holy men in all places Heaven Earth and all Nations by Practice Precept Prophesie at all times swear warrantably without blame therefore so may we now Here 's the sum●…nd strength of H. D's second stilt on which stands the decrepid proof of his crazy cause or piteous poor plea for Swearing all which particulars with most of I. I's miserable matters which fall in very fitly with them for it are now to come under consideration Rep. 1. That God sware we affirm deny not but that confirms what we deny against H.D. and I. I. who affirm it that swearing is now to be us'd among men as in dayes of old God's Word of the Oath which is since the Law under which as a Type of the Truth of God's Word Covenant and Promise to men in Christ men used to swear by God one to another which Word of his Oath also consecrateth not such men High Priests as were of old who were subject to change and had infirmity but him who is holy harmless undesiled separated from sinners higher then the Heavens a perfect High-Priest for evermore after the Order of Melchisedec of Salem King of Righteousness and also King of Peace made not as they after the Law of the Carnal Commandment but after the power of the endless life I say That Word of Gods Oath is that one Eternal Substantial Oath that ends all strife of which all Oaths us'd for confirmation by men that are in strife with God and one another were but the Figure Ceremony or Shadow for a time and before which at Christs coming in they though de facto they do not yet de Iure ought to end cease decrease vanish and flee away as sacrifice and all other fleshly Forms and Figures Ceremonies and Shadows of Christ the Truth ought which are not the very Substance or Thing it self Heb. 10. 1. for the Law or Letter in the time before Christ having but the shadow of things to come and not the very substance of the things themselves gives way with all its sacrifices and ceremonies to Christ wherefore it 's said when he cometh into the World Sacrifice and offering thou delightst not in but a Body hast thou prepared me in which as 't is written of me in the Volume of thy Book or everlasting Counsels Lo I come to do thy will O God So God taketh away the first Will Testament or Covenant that he may establish the second the first sacrifices that he might establish the second the sacrifice of himself the ceremonies and

it or on theirs who most palbably pervert it I shall set down the words as they lye in both those places of both Christ and the Apostle Iames Matth. 5. 33 34 35 36 37. Ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform unto the Lord thine Oaths But I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven for is is Gods Throne neither by the Earth for it is his footstool neither by Ierusalem for it is the City of the great King Neither shalt thou swear by thy head because thou canst not make on●… hair white or black But let your communication be Yea yea Nay nay for whatsoever is more then these cometh of evil Iam. 5. 12. But above all things my brethren swear not neither by Heaven neither by the Earth neither by any other Oath but let your yea be yea and your nay nay lest ye fall into c●…demnation In which two Texts say we in the affirmative all manner of swearing is forbidden for the truth of which construction there are many reasons to be given as 1. Because All manner of swearing is expresly instanced in those Disjunctive clauses which are expresly conclusive and confequently because spoken by way of Probibition exclusive exceptive of all swearing that ean be thought on Swear not swear not at all say the Texts that 's enough to any save such as list to be contentious ye●… that none might imagine as H. D. and I. I. would make men do that this general Rul●… here admits of any exception but all know that the prohibition is so strict as to allow of no permission in that point to swear by any thing but God he adds●… either by Earth neither by Ierusalem neither by the Head And lest any should think he forbids onely and no more then the extravagant Oaths of such as swear by the creatures as Earth Ierusalem the Head and such like when as who ever sware lawfully under the Law was to swear by none but God himself he adds not by heaven for it is Gods Throne Which is exclusive of all swearing novv by God himself by whom men might swear in old time For 23. 22. He that shall swear by Heaven sweareth by the Throne of God and by him that sitteth thereon And lastly that there may be no root at all left for any reasoning for swearing against this flat prohibition of it he concludes and shuts up all in such universal terms as exclude both all Oaths and all possible pretence of plea at all also for any swearing adding neither by any other Oath when these are What words so few as these if one would devise a form of speech to speak in to such a purpose can be more expresly exclusive both of all kinds or sorts of Swearing and of all sorts of particular Oaths of every kind 2. It 's most evident that Christ prohibits somewhat more here then was forbidden under the Law yea whatever Oaths were lawful under the Law therefore it must be either all swearing at all or else none at all either all such swearing as was lawfully used and allowed as a type for a time in the Law Oaths made lawfully and acceptably to God or else nothing more at all then what was forbidden in the Law for all false swearing and forswearing or breaking solemne Oaths made as unto God was forbidden in and by the Law see Numb. 30. 2. the place which Christ seems to allude to therefore here swearing it self or nothing Mat. 5. Ye have heard it said by them of old time not of late by the Scribes and Pharisees onely putting their false Glosses on the Law as I. I. intimates out of other authors with whose Heifer he plows p. 13. saying the words But I say Imply not that there was any thing in his precepts which was not in the Law but rather somewhat that he would reinforce from the Law which by reason of their false Glosses upon it had no force upon their lives but of old by Moses and the Law Thou shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform to the Lord thine Oaths But I say Swear not at all no not by any Oath at all Note the opposition in that adversative particle But which is between the old lawful legal swearing and no swearing at all not between no swearing and such prophane swearing as was unlawful under the Law The summe is thus The Law said Break no Oaths but I say Take none For if he intends no more in these phrases Swear not at all not by any Oath c. Then thus Swear not vainly prophanely ordinarily exorbitantly extravagantly in your common communication forswear not your selves What forbids he more then the Law forbad which Law he came not to destroy but to fulfil by taking away the Ceremony of swearing establishing the substance in its stead which is speaking the truth as in the sight of God from the heart yea what saies he more to his Disciples else then the Scribes and Pharisees from the Law to theirs For they said Swear not prophanely exorbitantly but by God onely Swear not falsly forswear not swear and perform to the Lord thy Oaths they were as touching that righteousness which was in the Law blameless therefore Christ saies more to his Disciples and that must be as 't is in express terms swear no Oath at all otherwise how could their righteousness exceed that of the Scribes and Pharises which except it did they could in no case enter the Kingdom The perfection and righteousness of the Law therefore in this point of swearing was Not forswearing the perfection and righteousness of the Gospel in the same is Not swearing at all So the Gospel exceeds the Law in every point the Law says Kill not the Wisdom of the Gospel Be not angry the Law Commit not Adultery the Wisdom it self in the Gospel Look not on a woman lust not the Law Love thy Neighbour hate thine Enemy for the Iew that was of the Law might spoile the Gentiles their Enemies but must lend to each other the Wisdome Love Enemies Which thing though it might be spoken in the time of the Law yet 't was the Wisdom and the Spirit spake it and not the Law which allowed the Israelite to spoile the Aegyptian and the Amalakite he was to help his Enemies Ox or Asse under a burden i. e. if he were belonging to a Iew that personally hated him and not an Amalakite one of the cursed race But this Type is a riddle I see too hard for I. I. to read and unfold who saies the Law required to love the Enemy The Law said An eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth The Gospel Resist not ev●…l but put up pass by bear In all points the Word of the Wisdom went beyond the Law also in this of Swearing yet it did not if now there be any swearing at all Moreover I. Ives his words would imply as