Argument he saith The Spirit of Christ which was in the Prophets fore-told That in the Time of the Gospel the Lord's people should Swear by his Name as an Evidence of their Conversion to him Answ. This we also deny together with his high Applause of Swearing as an Evidence of man's Conversion in the Time of the Gospel and as Divine Service and Homage and as denoting an eminent Act of saving Confession to God and as a part of Divine Worship and as a Sign Witness and Argument of Egypt 's Conversion and the Language of Canaan a pure Language which God promised to restore to all Nations at the Coming of Christ yea the Condition of God's accepting men for his people the Condition of accepting us as sincere Disciples the Way of God's People as may be seen in his 5th 6th 9th 10th 11th and 14th pages All these high Commendations he attributes to Swearing by the Lord As if all those that so Swear must needs be such great Converts divine Worshippers attained to the pure Language of Cananan highly accepted of God sincere Disciples in God's Way c. Mark here Swearing by the Lord is this man's Gospel and the Condition of all his Felicity but such Ignorance and silly Stuff what rational man cannot see His Proof is Isa 45. 23. and Chap. 19. 18. In the first it is said I have Sworn by my self the Word is gone out of my Mouth in Righteousness and shall not return that to me every Knee shall bow every Tongue shall swear In the second it is said In that day shall five Cities in the Land of Egypt speak the Language of Canaan and swear to the Lord of Hosts There shall be an Altar to the Lord in the midst of the Land of Egypt c. Here he applies Swearing to Gospel-Times so takes Swearing as literally under the Gospel to continue as under the Law but not the Altar but confesseth that the Altar here specified is no other then that which St. Paul mentions Heb. 13. 10. We have an Altar c. that is saith he Christ's Stable-Throne of Grace p. 8. So that the Altar he interprets figuratively under the Gospel but swearing literally see his Confusion Whereas if the Altar be Christ's Stable-Throne of Grace then by the same Reason he should have said that by Swearing is intended a Gospel-Confession according to the Apostle's own words Rom. 14. 11. where mentioning the Prophets words before instead of Every Tongue shall swear he saith Every Tongue shall confess to God And likewise Phil. 2. 11. And that every Tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the Glory of God the Father It is not every Tongue shall swear 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Jesus Christ is Lord but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall confess the same word that is in Rom. 10. 10. And with the Mouth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is confessed or Confession is made to Salvation And likewise in John 4. 2. Every Spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh is of God there is the same word He doth not make swearing that Jesus is the Christ that Proof nor commend swearing to God in the Gospel as an infallible Mark of man's Conversion and the Condition of God's accepting them as sincere Disciples as our Opposer doth For many both can and do Swear by God that never came to such Acceptance nor to such a Confession of Christ as is to God's Glory which proceeds from a heart that believes to Salvation For that no man can thus confess to God or say that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 12. 3. But many can and do Swear without the Holy Ghost therefore true Confession is Evangelical and not Swearing It is true Confession from a believing Heart is an Evidence of Men's Conversion and not making Oath or Swearing which this Man seems to confess appertains to common humane Infirmity p. 1. And what was that Infirmity upon which Swearing was occasioned under the Law but man's Diffidence Jealousie or Distrust which if they had fulfilled the Principal and Royal Law of Love both to God and one another there would have been no such occasion of Distrust Therefore Swearing was neither Moral Perpetual nor Evangelical as some suppose nor is it essential to the Divine Worship of God as this man vainly thinks which is in Spirit and Truth for that Worship was both before Swearing and is performed without Swearing That God himself swore by himself who could not swear by a greater we deny not But if this must be made an Argument that therefore in this man may imitate God who is his Maker we deny the Consequence for this were to set up a Creature in the Creator's place Nay as good an Argument did the Serpent bring when he said Ye shall be as God's c. To J. S. his saying That to Swear by the Lord of Hosts is to speak the Language of Canaan that pure Lauguage which God promised c. that pure and undefiled Religion which was at first revealed to man in Paradice p. 10. Answ. First That God promised to return to his People a pure Language we own and that they should serve him with one Consent therefore they should not need to Swear one to another or be Swearers under the Gospel Secondly Nor doth he prove by Scripture that to swear by the Lord of Hosts was that pure and undefiled Religion which was at first revealed to Man in Paradice For this is to tell the World that God taught Adam and Eve to Swear to each other in the State of Innocency when there was no Occasion of Swearing In his fifth Argument to prove Swearing in Gospel Times the Condition of God's accepting Men for his People such a Condition as upon the fulfilling thereof he will number them among his Disciples and account them his People that do viz. learn to Swear by his Name p. 11. For Proof of this erroneous Assertion he cites Jer. 12. 16. And it shall come to pass that if they will diligently learn the Way of my People to Swear by my Name the Lord liveth as they taught my People to Swear by Baal c. Answ. This was in the Prophets Time and to be fulfilled under the Law There is not the same Reason for Christians under the Gospel to swear by the Lord to divert them from Swearing by false Gods as there was in those former dayes For those that had learned to swear by Ball viz. As Baal liveth by the Life of Baal c. p. 12. which was opposed by swearing As the Lord liveth under the Law and now confessing his Name and making Confession to his Glory under the Gospel His telling us of a diligent Learning to Swear by God's Name and a learning this way of God's People c. p. 12 14 15. is as if he should tell us that to swear by the Name of the Lord is such a difficult and hard Lesson
And were not this most grosly to charge Paul with Transgression both of Law and Gospel Whereas in a Formal Oath as made amongst Men there is First Swearing by the Great God intended Secondly An Imprecation or Curse contained Thirdly Some Ceremony or Sign used besides the bare words of invocating or calling upon God or so help me God For that the same Invocation may as well be used without an Oath even in our praying for God's Help and Assistance The words So help me God or I call God to witness may be used without any Intent of Swearing as well as in an Oath in desiring his Help and simply as owning him for Witness to the Truth spoken in Christ which as such is not an Oath but when thus intended viz. So let me have or want the Help of God according as I speak the Truth or so let God be Witness or judge for or against me In this latter Sense is an Oath implying a Curse as Let God be Witness or Judge against me if I speak not the Truth but the bare words so God help me or God is my Witness or God knows I speak the Truth in Christ I Lye not cannot be a Swearing nor a Formal Oath without an Intention thereof or of an Imprecation or Execration implyed as of old some time an Oath of Cursing was used among the Jews and there are several Sorts of Oathes and several Wayes or Ceremonies expressing Formal Swearing as among the Heathen Laying the Hands upon the Altar and Swearing by the Gods Abraham's Servant putting his Hand under his Thigh the Angel Lifting up the Hand towards Heaven among the professed Christians a Laying the Hand upon a Bible and Kissing it or Swearing upon the four Evangelists according to the Pope's Imposition However we taking the last as the Magistrates general Sense of an Oath the Definition thereof is not so much the Matter in Controversie as the Lawfulness or Unlawfulness of Swearing among Christians His Instance that Jacob Swore by the Fear of his Father Isaac proves not that Laban's simply saying God is Witness makes up a formal Oath seeing he also said This Heap viz. of Stones is Witness between me and thee see Gen. 31. VVill any presume to say That he Swore by the Heap of Stones which was a Witness or a Memorial His accusing St. Paul notwithstanding Christ's prohibition that he did frequently confirm his Sayings with an Oath is both a gross Abuse of Paul and contradicts this man's confessing that he delivered the Truth with great Demonstration of the Spirit and of Power and that by Manifestation of the Truth he commended himself to every man's Conscience in the Sight of God 1 Cor. 2. 4 13. 2 Cor. 4. 2. Surely the Demonstration of the Spirit and Manifestation of the Truth was not Swearing to every man's Conscience for there was no need of Swearing where the Truth was so manifest among the Saints But to say that Paul did frequently confirm his Sayings with an Oath renders him both of very little Power Manifestation or Credit as a Minister of Christ among his Saints and Churches none of them excepted and them also to have as little Knowledge and Confidence of Paul and his Testimony Further He varies between saying God is Witness and mens calling him for a Record against their Soul where he brings Augustine for a Proof that Paul Swore in these words If so Augustine is not constant to himself nor with other Fathers particularly Basil. on Psal. 14. pag. 155. of his Works impr at Paris 1618. where he saith There are some Speeches which have the form of an Oath which are not Oathes but are Remedies for the Hearer as the Apostle to the Corinthians willing to shew his Love said Yea or by your Rejoycing c. for he was not disobedient to the Doctrine of the Gospel who was intrusted with the Gospel but he gave a small word in the Form of an Oath that their Rejoycing was most desirous to him he shewed by such a manner of Speech Thus far Basil though we know the Particle by is not alwayes a Note of Swearing In his second Argument he grants that Justice may be administred according to the Rule of the Gospel by the Testimony of Two or Three Witnesses Mat. 18. 16. but not of one without an Oath as taking in God to witness with him where there is but one Witness as in the Case instanced Exed 22. 10 11. However that Testimony of Two or Three Witnesses may decide a Controversie without an Oath and where there is but one faithful Witness God is Witness with him and for him therein and hath a Witness for him in men's Consciences And the Law-makers to whom we have applyed and not to such busie Opposers as this Agent against us have Power to make Provision for such a one as cannot for Conscience sake Swear that his Testimony may be taken instead of an Oath especially he being willing to undergo the same Penalty that is due to perjured Persons if he be found false in his Testimony as we have proposed however this Opposer takes little notice thereof And many in Authority have confessed our Proposition therein to be fair and sufficient and not at all tending to obstruct the Administration of Justice nor to patronize Injustice as is most falsly insinuated against us pag. 3. In his third Argument he asserts That the Spirit of Christ in the Old Testament Prophets did commend Swearing by God as that which was to be the practice of his Elect Servants in the Christian-Church after his Rejection of the Jews and chusing the Gentiles Answ. We deny this Assumption that they did so commend Swearing as a Practice to continue in the Christian-Church among Jews and Gentiles For Christ and his Apostles Prohibition of Swearing at all either by Heaven or Earth or any other Oath was of an Universal Extent to both Jews and Gentiles that come to be of the Christian-Church both forbidding such Swearing as the Jews of old time used under the Law viz. by the Lord and the Apostate Jews and Gentiles Swearing by Idols or the Creatures or any Oath whatsoever He attempts to prove his Assumption from Isa. 56. 15. And ye shall leave your Name for a Curse to my Chosen that is saith he the people that I shall chuse from among the Gentiles shall use your Name in Execration when they have a mind to denounce a Curse c. And this he brings to prove Swearing a Practice to continue amongst God's Elect Servants in the Christian-Church And so he would perswade them not only to Swear contrary to Christ's Command but to use Execrations and to denounce a Curse when they have a mind as he supposes which is contrary to Christ and his Apostles Doctrine who taught the Elect to Bless those that Curse them and to Bless and Curse not for to Bless God and Curse man ought not to be In his fourth
J. S. undertakes further to expound James 's words But above all things my Brethren Swear not He saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is no-where else rendred in Scripture above but before and it should be so here pag. 29. And then he thus paraphases Let not an Oath lie uppermost upon your Heart and come first of all before all things out of your Mouth pag. 30. This is a kind of an easie Meaning but a plain Perversion of the Apostle's Testimony which does not allow of any such Liberty at all for swearing as this doth as if he only forbad Swearing in the beginning of our Discourses wheâ—as the Prohibition is plain and positive Above all things Swear not neither by Heaven neither by the Earth neither by any other Oath but this man will still have some other Oath So whether must we believe him or the Apostle James judge Reader And though we do not look on Swearing as worse then Adultery or Man-slaughter as is queried upon the words Above all things Swear not yet doubtless the Apostle saw the Consequence of it might be bad and sad enough or else he would not so strictly have Forbidden it to the Twelve Tribes J. S. makes these the Consequences of our sticking to the express Command of Christ and his Apostle viz. That Paul's calling God to witness came from an Evil spirit That our Saviour as often as he said Amen Amen had those words put into his Mouth by the Evil One pag. 31. To the first we say No it was Christ the Son of God that spoak in Paul whose Witness God is and the Son 's simply owning the Father for his Witness we do not look upon as making up a Formal Oath To the second Neither can we own that our Saviour swore as often as he said Amen or Verily Verily which was but a Note of Affirmation and not of Swearing and more then Yea Yea Nay Nay Again He infers That the Elect Angel which Christ sent from Heaven to communicate the Knowledge of future things to St. John was inspired by the Devil when he swore by him that liveth forever Answ. No that he was not for he spoak as God's Representative or Ambassadour having a peculiar Commission Power and Dispensation therein which men may not imitate which extended through the Law and the Prophets in which the Swearing was and wherein the Angels were sent as God's Messengers and Representatives Ministring Spirits and Servants to the whole Seed of Abraham and Heirs of Salvation to whom God's Promise was confirmed by an Oath And this was a Vision represented in Figures His telling us That Christ prohibits the use of whatsoever is more to be intrinsecally Evil pag. 31. Answ. Though Oaths when lawful could not be accounted intrinsecally Evil yet there was an Evil that was an Occasion of Oaths before permitted among the Jews as that of Diffidence Jealousie Instability Liableness to run after other Gods and to do Injustice Distrust one of another c. and as this man confesseth common humane Infirmity Ambiguity pag. 1. and pag. 17. How plain is it it was Weakness Distrust and Fear in Abimelâ—ch which was the cause of his requiring Abraham to Swear that he would not deal falsly with him and a Covenant with Isaac that he would do them no Hurt Gen. 21. 23. and chap. 26. 28. Therefore Christ's words are plain Let your Communication be Yea Yea Nay Nay for whatsoever is more then these that is in Affirming and Denying cometh of Evil or of the Evil One. And many Things Ceremonies Circumstances and Shadows under the Law that in themselves were not intrinsecally evil did wax old and grew out of use and vanished as the old Covenant it self did being accounted Weak Insufficient and of a Decaying Nature when a higher and more eminent Dispensation was brought in as that of the New Covenant which therefore to oppose with any of those inferiour things before lawful cometh now of the Evil One. And J. S. his Consequence and Doctrine appears both Gross Impious and Antichristian where he saith That if the Christian-Churches do not perform Homage to the God of Truth by Swearing as well as Blessing in his Name if their Tongues do not as well Swear as their Knees bow to him then the Christian-People are not the People of the Messiah and the Messiah is not yet come but stâ—ll to be expected Then the Blessed Jesus is not the Christ of whom the Prophet speaketh but as the Jews at his Arraignment and their Posterity Blasphemously stile him a Deceiver and a Counterfeit pag. 34. Answ. Oh Monstrous and Blasphemous Stuff First Thus insolently to attempt the engaging of the Christian Church to Swearing as well as Blessing yea to Cursing and daring God to his Face challenging the Divine Vengeance to do its worst as before he hath defined an Oath as well as Blessing in his Name bowing the Knee or performing Worship to him What people of a christian-Christian-Spirit can believe this Doctrine Secondâ—y His rendering Swearing such an eminent Proof of Demonstration of the Messiah's Coming against the Jews Opinion of him and as reasonable as to tell us that the effectual Means to convince the Jews that Jesus is the Christ is to swear that he is so instead of the Apostle's plain Confession of him that Jesus is the Christ who preferred Confession instead of Swearing Again His scornful Talk of the Reign of the Quakers Christ and saying That the Quakers Gloss defrauds God of his due Homag robs the King of Saints of one of the Prime Jewels of his Crown presents the Ever-blessed Jesus in the Form of an Impostor and False Christ leads directly to the Gulf of Gross Infidelity and Denyal of Christ pag. 35. This is as Wicked and Blasphemous as his Consequence before and shews this man to be a most gross Idolater in thus unscripturally applauding of Swearing as the Prime Jewel of the King of Saints his Crown whereas the King of Saints and his Servant have plainly forbidden Swearing which is not to make the Gospel contradict the Holy Prophets as to their spiritual Intent and End which was to confess to God and to Christ as is falsly inferred And as falsly he represents the Prophets as saying Christ should teach his Disciples to Swear The Lord liveth but where the Prophets so say we are all to seek but not where they testifie against Swearing see Jer. 23. 10. Hosea 4. 15. chap. 2. 3. Zach. 5. â— Zeph. 1. 5. Eccles. 9. 2. But if Swearing were that Divine Homage or included the whole Worship of God that is to be among Christians why is Christ so silent in it and the Apostles as not expresly to command it but on the contrary expresly forbid it Or if Swearing were the most August Act of Divine Worship surely the Apostle James instead of saying Above all things my Brethren swear not should have said Above all things my Brethren swear ye There was a time when the Iews
â—eared an Oath but through the Custom of Swearing they run into False Swearing And though they said The Lord liveth yet surely they swore falsly And because of Oaths the Land mourned and this Land mourneth And therefore even in the Prophets time Oaths Swearing were testified against as Though thou Israel play the Harlot yet let not Iudah sin Come not ye unto Giâ—gal neither go ye up to Bâ—thaven not swear The Lord liveth Hos. 4. 15. If it be said that this forbidding to Swear was because of their Wickedness and Prophanation we say by the same Reason we may now testifie against Swearing and for Conscience sake cannot uphold the Custom thereof nor submit to the Imposition thereof though this man is not ashamed for all this Abuse and Prophanation to urge and applaud it as the highest Act of Divine Worship and the Condition of God's receiving people which if it could be granted as it is not it only signifies thus much That only the Righteous and such as are converted to God must swear and that upon a very sacred Account to God himself Now judge serious Reader what the Tenor of this man's Work amounts to it is that Righteous Men must obliege themselves to God and adore him by Swearing What is this to swearing to men in litigious Courts And what is this to the Imposition of Oaths we desired the Parliament to remove Under the Law Oaths were used in two respects namely First To prevent and end Strife among men and these both in private and pubâ—ick 2dly â—o God himself or between man and man And man and God or Swearing to man and Vowing to God See Gen. 24. 9. 31. 53. 21. 23. 26. 28. 47. 31. Num. 30. 23. 1 Sam. 20. 3. chap. 14. 26. 1 King 8. 31. Neh. 10. 29. chap. 5. 12. Now this man's Work renders Swearing by God in general to be the highest Act of Divine Worship which only they that are converted to God can perform in his Sense and such none of the Wicked or Unconverted are capable to perform Judge whether this Distinction be made in the usual Practice of Swearing or Hath this man taken so much Pains with the Magistrates as to instruct and warn them not to impose Oaths upon the Unconverted nor especially upon those Excommunicated by the Bishops For it needs must be granted on all hands That they that are Wicked and Unchristian prophane the Name of the Lord if they swear by him and they must needs partake of their Sin who force them to it And as for the Converted and Righteous they are of Credit and there is no need to force them to Swear being under a greater Bond and Covenant with God then that of Oaths imposed by man Christ being to them their Covenant and Bond the End of Oaths under the Law and the Substance of God's Oath to the Heirs of Promise So we leave this man's Doctrine for all serious Readers to judge of concerning Oaths and Swearing As what an OATH is and concerning SWEARING these are his Affirmations 1. It is an Invocation of God's Name 2. Nothing else but a calling God to Witness to the Truth of what we say 3. A calling God for a Record against their Soul 4. An Execration or Denouncing a Curse 5. An Evidence of Conversion to the Lord. 6. Divine Service and Homage 7. An eminent Act of Saving Confession 8. One part of Divine Worship 9. A Sign Witness and Argument of Egypt's Conversion to the Lord of Hosts 10. The Language of Canaan that pure Language which God promised to restore to all Nations at the Coming of Christ. 11. That Pure and Vndefiled Religion which was at first revealed to man in Parad se. 12. Such a Condition as upon the fulfilling thereof God will number men among his Disciples 13. That Confession of God without which they do not sufficiently glorifie him either by Prayer Thanksgiving Attendance on the Word and Sacraments 14. A Daring God to his Face challenging the Divine Vengeance to do its worst in case he swear falsly 15. That God esteems this Swearing as the Highest most August Act of Divine Worship that the Creature can possibly exhibit to him 16. That which comprehends the whole Condition of the Gospel all the Wayes of God's People confessing to him 17. That Swearing by God implies the whole Worship of God 18. That Men ought to learn diligently to Swear by the Name of God to learn this as the Way of God's People 19. To Swear Religiously by his Name yet but in extream Necessity 20. That in the Forms of Oaths we are to Swear by Heaven Earth c. and call them to Witness lawfully because he that swears by Heaven swears by him whose Throne it is 21. We must subscribe to this that in such Forms of Swearing we name some Creature 22. That to Swear by Heaven by Jerusalem c. are Camel-Oaths 23. That strong Asseveration by Oath as a solemn Invocation of God's Name is the Celebration of the most august Act of Divine Worship and Adoration that can possibly be tendered to Divine Majesty 24. That Christian-Churches ought to perform Worship to God by Swearing as well as Blessing their Tongues must swear as well as their Knees bow 25. That Swearing is one of the Church's strongest Bull-Works one of those Demonstrations of the Spirit whereby the Champions of the Christian-Faith have irrefragably proved that Jesus is the Prophets Christ viz. Because since the calling of us Gentiles we have worshipped the True God in Swearing by his Name 26. That this Swearing is one of the Prime Jewels of the King of Saints his Crown 27. That the Prophets say That he Christ should teach his Disciples to learn to Swear The Lord liveth 28. That it is and alwayes was the will of God that Oaths should be reserved and sequesterd to the Service of God Thus having summ'd up this man's Fruitless Work for Swearing to make it conspicuous we proceed to his Accusations and Aspersions in his Third Section Sect. III. The Anthorities and Testimonies Rescued THat some of the most eminent primitive Christians Martyrs and Fathers were of the same Mind with us in their Conscientiously refusing to swear not only by the Heathen Gods but also more generally in Obedience to and Pursuance of the Doctrine of Christ and his Apostle James before urged against swearing at all and that we have alledged Examples pertinent for Tender Conscience not only against swearing in particular Cases but swearing in general and have neither bewrayed the Want of Ingenuity or Honesty therein as most falsly and malitiously our Antagonist hath asperst us But that he himself hath bewrayed his own Want of both Ingenuity and Honesty will appear though those Examples that we have alledged in this Case are but a very few to those we could alledge 1. About Polycarpus that eminent Martyr who was said to be the Disciple of St. Iohn the Evangelist and who