Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
lord_n command_v day_n sabbath_n 10,415 5 9.9260 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A44801 Oaths no gospel ordinance but prohibited by Christ being in answer to A. Smallwood, D.D. to his book lately published, being a sermon preached at Carlile, 1664, wherein he hath laboured to prove swearing lawful among Christians, his reasons and arguments are weighed and answered, and the Doctrines of Christ vindicated against the conceptions and interpretations of men, who would make it void / by a sufferer for Christ and his doctrine, F.H. Howgill, Francis, 1618-1669. 1666 (1666) Wing H3174; ESTC R16291 80,066 92

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

upon him that gives false evidence or speakes an untruth about any proceedings in judicature or otherwise called to bear evidence in any controversie if found out let them suffer as them that sweares falsely and as perjured and the case is one and here all scruples and contentions about swearing would end and there would not be the least obstruction in legal proceedings or in administration of justice and let me tell Doctor Smallwood and the rest of his Brethren that if they would move such a thing in Parliament peradventure it would be readily received from them and in so doing they would do as acceptable a piece of service and as well pleasing to God and would conduce as much to the peace and tranquility of the Nation as any thing that ever they will do in their age or hath been effected many ages and so all these heart-burnings contentions and evil surmisings and evil representing one another would cease and end and which if not effected nothing can be looked for but sad suffering and great oppression and persecution which will provoke the Lord to anger and ever did against all them that were the cause of it in ages past but I come to his second Argument Second Argument Some without any colour reason or possibility of proof will need have swearing a Ceremonial write but God ranks it with his fear and service therefore it must needs be moral and therefore what at all times as well under the Gospel as under the Law as well amongst the Gentiles as the Jewes tends to the glory of God that is not a Ceremonial Ordinance nor forbiden by Christ but such is swearing and therefore it cannot be thought to be prohibited Reply to this It hath been said and often asserted that all the ten words and Commandements were moral and perpetual as well under the Gospel as under the Law then I wonder what A. S. and divers others intends to do with the fourth Commandment if it be moral and perpetual and to be observed in the same manner and with the same service as then commanded and the same day and time then he and most of them who contend most for the morality of these ten Commandments are great transgressors and if he grant there was something Ceremonial in it and typical or figurative which then was the seventh day which was given for a signe of the Worlds rest from its labour and of keeping after it an everlasting Sabbath to the Lord by Mans cessation from his own works as God did from his Isai. 58. and the last Heb. 4. which Iewish observation of the seventh day as a Sabbath now though never so solemnly as then commanded will have no acceptation at all no more then he and he as much that is none at all that never so solemnly swears by the name of God in such ceremonious ways as the Iewes did of old or goes beyond the bare asseveration or testimony of truth with some attestation of Gods power and veracity which hath never been denyed which to do we do not only think but know it to be a superfluous Ceremony of Judaism not to say brat of Jewish extraction as A. S. doth now circumcised and cut off from Christians by Christ and what though God did Deutro 10. 20. rank it with his fear and service was there any service or worship in that Covenant that had not some signe and shadow in it and was Ceremonial and was to end in the substance was there not prayer and praysing and were not these service and worship and had these not the Ceremony of Incense and Sacrifice which then attended these Services but the substance was lifting up of the heart unto the Lord and making a melody in the heart and circumcision is now that of the heart Rom. 2. which was outward before the killing of a Lamb at the Passeover was an Ordinance in that Covenant the substance thereof is Christ the Passeover the other now under the Gospel would be no more then cutting of a Dogs neck these were all Ordinances of God to be observed and in their time and day and they that did according to the command of God tended to the glory of God in that first Covenant but in the second under the Gospel whosoever should observe them in the Figure Ceremony and shadow should much dishonour God and his Christ the substance and Christ would profit him nothing see that Ceremony of swearing the morality that only abides under the Gospel is testifying the known truth from the heart with some attestation of God to witnesse who is witness of all we do or say and that no more then confession or deniall by yea or nay which is no oath is that standing substance and the moral if A. S. will have it called so that remaines under the Gospel which answers that ceremonious way of swearing under the Law which is most evident by the Apostle Pauls rendring of that terme swearing as it was spoken in way of prophesie concerning its continuance then Isa. 45. 23. To me every tongue shall swear under that tearm confessing only under the Gospel Rom. 14. 11. Every knee shall bow every tongue shall confess to God confession under the Gospel is made equivolent with an oath under the Law but this rendring of it A. S. doth not like but would pervert Pauls words to have it confession but put to his own addition by oath so that his Argument is void swearing was binding in that ceremonious way which it was commanded under the Law but not under the Gospel nor among the Christians who are come to the substance and to confess and speak the truth in Christ to the glory of God acknowledging his power and omnisciency and his justice in discerning whether truth be spoken and in punishing them that speak falsely and his wisdome in discerning the secrets of all hearts and A S. might as well have said that offrings and oblations and sacrifice tends much to the glory of God under the Gospel as under the Law as swearing but saith he swearing is a part of Gods peculiar service that is incommunicable to any creature the like I say of the former offring and sacrifice and incense was incommunicable to any creature but was due unto God alone yet it doth not follow as well under the Gospel as under the Law for that were to set up the figure and deny the substance so this second Argument is insufficient and the third is somewhat related to it which I now come unto Thirdly This third Argument is that if Christs purpose be utterly to abolish all swearing as an illegitimate brat of Jewish extraction not to be admitted into the Christian Church then it must be either as it is repugnant to our duty to God or else to our neighbour for into that summary he hath contracted the whole Law Reply We must still distinguish that which was once a duty to be performed under the Law because commanded is
Logick they will seem to turn things any way and go about to prove darkness is light and light is darkness and what as in them lyes make it so to appear if they take a matter in hand and therefore the Apostle exhorted to beware of Phylosophy and vain deceit for by this Men have been cuning and crafty and lie in wait to deceive the Innocent and harmless and to lead them out of the way In the fourth page he saith he will clear his intention and that there are two sorts of Men that do violence to this Text the one winds it up too too high a note as though Christ had forbidden all Swearing whatsoever And in the tenth page he saith this error is masked under a fair colour of a more then ordinary piety but tends to overthrow all Judicatures and takes away the decision of all emergent suites and controversies and were it granted saith A. Smallwood we should be necessitated if not to disown the Magistrates authority yet to disobey their loyal command as having a countermand from Christ Swear not at all and the other sort of men are such who in despight of this text do commonly rashly prophanely and falsely swear Answ. Who doth the greater violence to this Scripture whether A. S. who in his Doctrine he hath raised from these words to be the foundation of his Discourse who makes Christs plain and express words one thing and his intentions another I leave to all unbyassed spirits to judge off or they that say Christ intended what he spoke and spoke what he intended I say let all see and consider where the violence lies and in whom and whether he doth not wind it up by that not or contrary to it to use his own words otherwise then Christ intends it as after will be made more evidently to appear and we say it s not error but truth to believe Christs words who are truth more then A. S. his conjectural supposition neither do we believe it to be error masked but truth revealed and Christ spoke and declared it that we might beleive it and obey it And we believe that A. S. and many more hath put a mask and a vail upon Christs words and would hoodwink all and lead them blindfold after their imaginations and crooked pathes winding and turning this way and that way that leads into darkness and trouble and confusion from the path of life And what doth Christs command viz. Swear not at all doth it overthrow all Justice and Judicatories It is not the seat of Judgment established in Righteousness and truth and they that sit in Judgment ought they not to give sentence and Judgment in Righteousness and truth and as the causes are represented unto them and brought before them and may not every truth be confirmed out of the mouth of two or three Witnesses and all emergent suits and controversies ended according to the best evidence after diligent inquisition and judgment given accordingly and that without the needless and cumbersome formality of an Oath which is sometime this and sometime that and changable when as every true confession and testimony is equiv●lent thereunto in the presence of the God of all truth and who ever denyed this And there is no necessity so to judge that he that fears to swear and take an Oath yet refuseth not to g●ve true testimony about any matter whether it do concern the Lord or his Neighbour that therefore he denies the Magistrates authority or yet disobeyes their legal commands so that though all Swearing should be denyed yet that which answers the cause in hand is not denyed true testimony and therefore the Magistrates authority and their lawful commands may well stand and be obeyed and right done unto every man and command stand also these are but the secret smitings and suggestions of A. Smallwood to render them odious to the Magistrates and all people who dissent from him in judgment And indeed such like Discourses and instigations from such like mouths and pens as his is who is accounted learned and eminent hath not a little added afflictions unto our bonds and they have made wide the wound and hath made the breach seem greater then it is and the matter more grievous then there hath been any cause for I desire they may consider of it and repent And in 13. page from this Text Mat. 5. 34. But I say unto you Swear not at all he layes down this Proposition or Doctrine viz. Our Saviour did not intend by these words Swear not at all an absolute universal and limited prohibition of all manner of swearing and goes on to prove it by divers Reasons The first he gives is That the Father and the Son are one in nature power wisdom immutability and eternity and one in will and wisdom therefore they cannot give forth contrary commands but God the Father hath commanded Swearing in these words Thou shalt fear the Lord and swear by his Name and serve him Deut. 6. 13. And therefore it is not possible that God the Son should forbid it Answ. Though the Father and the Son be one in nature power and wisdom and immutability and will as in themselves and alters not but keeps Covenant from age to age and from generation to generation there is no contrarity in them yet there are diversities of gifts but the same spirit and there are differences of administrations but the same Lord. It is granted that after sin entred into the World and death by sin and diffidence and unbelief variance and strife and many transgressions for which the Law was added and because of which the Law was added and the command given forth unto the Jewes to swear by the Name of God as Jerome saith upon the 5. of Mat. 3. 37. It was permitted the Jewes under the Law as being tender and infants and to keep them from Idolatry which the rest of the Nations did run into they might swear by the Name of God not that it was rightful so to do but that it was better to swear by the Lord then by false Gods or devils but the great Evangelical sincerity and truth admits not of an Oath Secondly For the ending of strife and variance being in the unbelief which was the occasion of the adding of the Law and the cause of the command given forth Deut. 6. 13. with divers more words specified by Moses and the Prophets And though Christ came not to destroy the Law but to fulfill it and to destroy that which the Law was against and which it took hold upon and to finish sin and transgression and bring in everlasting Righteousness and to restore to the beginning and we say according as we have believed and received of the Lord and have a cloud of Witnesses both them that are gone before and of them that yet remain alive As Christ said of Divorcement It was not so from the beginning so we say Oaths was not from the beginning but
of Hen. 8. and Edward 6th in their time all swore against the Popes Supremacy either in Church or State and how much security was the Nation in when Queen Mary came to the Crown though the Nobles and the Bishops and Prelates did all swear against the Supremacy yet behold it was brought in again and confirmed by Oath again and yet in the days of Elizabeth renounced again and of latter days what Oaths have been exacted first by one and then by another and one party contrary to another though every party fancyed a security for the time but it proved of no more effect neither were they in any degree more secure then if there had been none at all for indeed that frequent swearing hath made men being got into a custome of it that it is become a light thing unto them though otherwise they look upon themselves as bound Generals how have they turn'd one way and another way and Souldiers the like so that one may conclude indeed that Oaths are made no more of but even to stand in force while that bears up head and is exalted that to please the present time and power they seem to be devoutly obliged to it but if it come under any eclipse or demunition then they reckon themselves no longer obliged so that indeed their Oaths are becom'd of little or no force at all and for Controversies we see they begin many and is the cause of much dissention and discord but ends few for why may not all these foresaid States and conditions be secured and as well and the good and great ends accomplished that A. S. pleads for by true evidence of every one concerned in any of the foresaid relations by declaring and confessing the truth and speaking it unto Men as necessity requires without oath yea and all the foresaid states have as much security and subsist as well if not better then by all this swearing which more properly belonged to the Judaism then to Christians and there is no such necessity of them among Christians if any at all who dare not swear for fear of offending Christ or denying his Doctrine and yet will not lie but speak the truth and indeed it is the custome of swearing that have been used in the Nations since the Apostacy entered in that is more looked upon then any thing else more then any legality necessity or security under the Gospel seeing in the Primitive times truly so called it was enough to say Christianus sum and that sort of swearing that is imposed now hath no other ground but custome which Jer. 10. 3. is accounted to be vain neither hath it so much as an inch of ground from the Scripture and therefore doth not bring so much glory to God as A. S. tells on because whatsoever is added or superadded to whatever God commanded as to matter or forme is but Will-worship at the best and a making whatsoever was said or commanded or practised before imperfect and no way sufficient but more of this shall be said after if the Lord permit Fourth Argument Had Christ intended universally to forbid all kind of Oaths in the words Swear not at all then those amplifications neither by Heaven nor by Earth neither by Jerusalem neither by the head had been useless as being generally included in the general prohibition but had he meant that no oath should be used upon any occasion the subsequent words are so far from giving light to the preceeding that they much obscure them but had he said no more then swear not at all it might have been said he disallowed all oaths but he descending to this or that creature may rationally imply that his purpose was only to forbid such swearing and not that which was formerly enjoyed and his conclusion is only creature swearing or swearing by Creatures is that he would have forbidden Answ. Christ knew better what he intended then A. S. who would make his words one thing and his intention another it is evident by the preceeding Doctrine and by that which follows after the Text that Christ prohibits all swearing which shall be further spoken on when the second part of the discourse is spoken of some stumble ignorantly and some wilfully would pervert and turn aside from that which they have no mind to receive and would hold up that which they assert true or false that makes all this disputing and reasoning about the plain words of Scripture Christs words But I say unto you Swear not at all by heaven or earth is a general Negative of all Oaths even of those which before were used in the time of Moses and by Heaven and Earth and Jerusalem are more ample expressions of Christ to make the Scribes and Pharisees understand his mind of his dislike of these Oaths by Creatures that they frequently used and though these and much more were included in the general Negative Swear not at all yet they are not to be excluded as superfluous neither do they obscure the former Swear not at all but gives more light to the former to any but them that fees with A. S. his eyes for by Heaven by Earth by Jerusalem are more ample expressions of his mind and a further explication of the former Swear not at all and though they seem to A. S. to obscure and darken Christs words if he did intend all Oaths yet they that see with another eye then he doth is that they are only more large expressions thereby to make the Pharisees understand who were in the unbelief and dull of hearing that he did not only forbid what the Law had forbid before but even those Oaths that they frequently used under those terms and forms which the Law had not spoken of in those words as Heaven Earth Jerusalem head and foot and therefore he enumerates them as an amplification of his former prohibition and so they are to be joyned and we shall not stop as A. S. says some doth at the words swear not at all but shall joyne that which Christ hath joyned viz. Heaven Earth and Jerusalem and to be enumerated only and joyned to the former negative and spoken as to their capacities in those ful and large terms that they might understand his mind that he prohibited not only by Heaven and Earth and Jerusalem but even any other Oath which the Law had commanded or the Jewes permitted to swear before and though A. S. would have it limited only to swearing by Creatures which indeed were forbidden under the Law but Christ who taught a more Evangelical and exact obedience then the Law he said It hath been said of old time thou shalt not forswear thy self But I say unto you who saith more then the Law hath said Swear not at all but let your yea be yea and nay nay for whatsoever is mere cometh of evil And of this mind was BP Vsher late of Armaugh who pleaded the cause of the W●ldenses or Leonists whose names are famous amongst the
the Prophet of him before that he should be as a Lamb dumb before the shearer as sometime he was both to the chief Priests and Elders to Pilote to Herod which was all in some authority and sometime he answered them in the wisdom of God and sometime he spoke and bore witness to that and prophesied unto them which was not at all either as to the matter or forme of the high Priests adjureing for the very next words but thou hast said nevertheless I say unto you hereafter shall you see the son of man sitting on the right hand of the power and coming in the clouds of Heaven Mat. 26. 64. and therefore this showes A. S. his argument to be frivilous and vain and Marke saith the chief Priests accused him of many things Marke 15. 3. but he answered nothing either to their accusations or took notice of the high Priests adjuring to answer him in matter and forme as A. S. would have it neither did he look upon himself so oblig'd but answered sometime and spoke the truth always when he spoke and that which always displeased and dissatisfied the Jewes when he answered and for ought can be perceived by his arguing that every Examinate is to answer directly to every matter and forme to any that pretends power to administer an oath or to adjure he goes about to establish the Popes inquisition and create matter as sometime they did here in England in the heighth of the Popes domination forged matter out of their own wicked hearts to ensnare the Lambs of Christ and then to require them to swear that they might destroy them and accuse them out of their own mouths even as the high Priest sought to destroy Christ and to ensnare him which methinks A. S. hath sayed too much in vindication of his adjuring and will needs have Christ to be of his mind and at last concludes that Christ swore but it s but upon his own presumption and supposition and is more then ever he is able to make evident from what is written And A. S. tells us over and over again Swearing was a part of Gods Worship wherein Gods wisdom power and justice is acknowledged and then incommunicable to any Creature or false God as is answered before so was Circumcision then and the Oblations and Burnt Sacrifice and Offrings and new Moons to be performed only to the Lord and was peculiarly to be performed unto God and not communicable to any Creature and we say and prove Deut. 6. 13. 10. 20. that these was a part of the service and worship of God and which as we shall grant that an oath under the Law was commanded as well as these services or in his own terms an oath was equally commanded with his service as is proved above In this he hath no adversary but what doth this prove in respect of his argument which makes it more then equally commanded for he will yield that these services were but temporary but swearing is perpetual and so he hath given it a priority above the rest his argument all along hath been chiefly drawn from the Moseick Law that it was joyned equally with fear and service under the Law and so hath striven without an adversary but now it must needs be above the service of God then and yet from the same command he would only prove it for he hath no better strength nor ground and we may as well alledge as he doth and say consequently to this sort of service that was commanded by the Lord as well as swearing for God hath joyned them together in the text above said obligeth equality at all times as well under the Gospel as under the Law yet then A. S. would call this absurd it it be so as it is indeed then we may as well conclude the other absurd because one is standing as well as the other and binding as well as the other by the vertue of this command although he tells us that an oath in its substance hath not any type at all so we say for the substance is Christ the oath of God in whom all the promises and oaths are fulfilled and this is its substance but as under the Law it was a type of the substance and not the substance it self and that Circumcision the Passeover and the legal Offrings under the Law had as much goodness in them as Oaths had what ever A. S. say and served to as good ends and purposes in that Ministration as they were ordained and conduced as much to the glory of God and were subservient to but not against the morality of the Gospel for the shadows were not against the substance nor the Ceremonials against the Morals though the Apostle says the Law is not of faith yet not against it for as ministerial as the Ordinances of the Law was to the Gospel then yet the Gospel may be and now is without it But to conclude this Argoment A. S. were it so indeed that oaths were ceremonial then it follows that Christ in this text did not forbid them for he didnot forbid the Ceremonial Law but observed it all his life eating the Passeover with his Disciples the night before his death unless some would interpret his words I command you that you do not swear yet I am content for a year or two you may swear by Heaven or Earth as you have been accustomed but after my Crucifixion and Resurrection swear no more and there let these that disallow swearing as a part of the Ceremonial Law argue no more the unlawfulness of swearing from these words swear not at all Reply Though Christ did observe the Ordinances of the Law as being that Ministration appointed by God untill the time of Reformation and the bringing in of a better hope Heb. 9. It became him to fulfill all Righteousness so was he Cireumcised and eat the Passeover and was Baptized washed the Disciples feet which were not enjoyned by the Law though not against it and that Ministration not fully ended though he see it must end and spoke of a further thing and of the time then and also it should be ministred more afterward after his Resurrection Joh. 4. 20 21 22 23. the time cometh and now is neither at Jerusalem nor this Mountain but they that worship the Father shall worship him in spirit and truth so that he prophesied of the end of all those things and of the cessation of them which were sometime commanded respecting both the place and the worship and to them that did believe the Disciples unto whom it was given to know the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God then was the time to them it was come even then before Christ suffred and therefore A. S. his consequence is not true that Christ did not forbid all swearing from this text and though he had both prophesied of a clearer Ministration and laid down in Doctrine a more Evangelical precept then the Law yea and more strict obedience