Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	ghost_n	holy_a	know_v	4,670	5	4.0762	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A27406	A second testimony concerning oaths and swearing in answer to a book entituled The case of the Quakers relating to oathes stated by J.S., or, An appendix to a book written in the year 1668 in answer to Allan Smallwood ... wherein is fully cleared the command of Christ and practice of the apostles concerning swearing from the corrupt glosses, limited sense and meaning of J.S. / by Gervase Benson.	Benson, Gervase, d. 1679.	1675 (1675)	Wing B1901; ESTC R23681	17,348	24

A Second TESTIMONY CONCERNING Oaths Swearing IN Answer to a Book entituled The Case of the Quakers relating to Oathes stated by J. S. OR An Appendix to a Book written in the Year 1668. in Answer to Allan Smallwood D. D. as he stiles himself Wherein is fully cleared the Command of Christ and Practice of the Apostles concerning Swearing from the Corrupt Glosses Limited Sense and Meaning of J. S. By Gervase Benson Again ye have heard that it hath been said of old Time then shalt not forswear thy self but shalt perform thine Oaths to the Lord But I say unto you Swear not at all neither by Heaven for it is the Throne of God neither by the Earth c. but let your Yea be Yea and Nay Nay for whatsoever is more then these cometh of Evil Mat. 5. 33 34 35. 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 you fall into Condemnation Jam. 5. 12. Printed in the Year 1675. A Second TESTIMONY CONCERNING Oaths Swearing c. READER I Having in the Year 1668. given forth a true Testimony concerning Oaths and Swearing and therein cleared the Command of Christ Mat. 5. 34. c. Swear not at all c. And the Apostle James Jam. 5. 12. Above all Things my Brethren swear not c. from the corrupt Glosses limited Sence and Meanings of Allan Smallwood c. as in and by the said Testimony printed in the Year aforesaid doth and may appear unto which I neither received Answer nor Reply but now of late viz. in this present Year 1674. there came to my Hands a Book entituled The Case of the Quakers relating to Oaths stated by one J. S. as it s said wherein he first hath asserted Sect. 1. That Christians of the highest Rank and greatest Proficiency may lawfully in some Cases confirm the Truth with an Oath and that they so may do he pretends to prove from the Practice and Example of the Apostle Paul who both knew the Mind of Christ and served God in the Spirit in the Gospel of his Son and yet as J. S. pretends did frequently confirm what he asserted in such like Forms of sacred Oathes as these viz. God is my Witness Rom. 1. 9. I say the Truth in Christ I lye not my Conscience bearing me Witness in the Holy Ghost Rom. 9. 1. I call God for a Record upon my Soul 2 Cor. 1. 23. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ knows that I lye not 2 Cor. 11. 37. together with Gal. 1. 20. Phil. 1. 8. 1 Thes. 2. 10. Ye are Witnesses and God also and that these Forms of Speech are sacred Oaths is manifest aith J. S. from Gen. 31. 50 53. where Jacob and Laban are said to swear in these Form of Words So God is Witness between thee and me c. To which for Answer I say That these Forms of Speech used by the Apostle and by Jacob and Laban viz. So God is Witness between thee and me God is my Witness c. are of themselves without the Addition of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge neither Oath or Swearing which Addition of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge was that which then gave the Denomination of an Oath or Swearing unto the Forms of Speech formerly used in Witness-bearing before any Oath or Swearing was for it is evident from the Practice of the holy Men of God as it is recorded in the Scriptures of Truth that there was and is a Diversity or Difference worthy of Observation for the better clearing of my Affirmation in this Particular between an Oath or Swearing and witness-bearing and that the holy Men of God did put a Difference betwixt Swearing and Witness-bearing is evident from the Scriptures which will the more clearly appear if it be observed that Witness-bearing was and the Name of God was used in Witness-bearing before any Oath or Swearing was for before the Fall there was neither Oath or Swearing and yet Eve before the Fall did in Witness-Bearing use the Name of God when she in Answer to the Serpents Question said Yea God hath said ye shall not eat c. Gen. 3. 3. And Sarah after the Fall and before any sacred Oath or Swearing was used the like Form of Speech as Laban did in the Place before-mentioned when she said to Abraham The Lord judge between thee and me Gen. 16. 5. from which Scriptures it is evident that Witness-bearing was before any Oath or Swearing and also that the Name of God was used in Witness-bearing before any Swearing was so that which was before any sacred Oath or Swearing was of it self is neither Oath or Swearing without the Addition of somewhat more as aforesaid And it is further evident by the Scriptures Testimony that the holy Men of God in Causes where no Oath or Swearing was required by the Law did in VVitness-bearing call God to witness and used Attestations of the Name of God when they did not swear at all as for Instances Moses called Heaven and Earth to Record Deut. 24. 26. Deut. 30. 19. Job said My Witness is in Heaven and my Record is on high Job 16. 19. And the People of Israel speaking to Jeremy said The Lord be Witness of Truth and Faith betwixt us Jer. 42. 5. The Prophet Micha also said Hear all ye People hearken thou Earth and all that therein is and let the Lord God be Witness against you Mich. 1. 2. And the Prophet Malachy told the Priests and People of Jerusalem and Judah That the Lord God had been a Witness between them and the Wife of their Youth Mal. 2. 14. From all which Testimonies it is evident that the Servants of the Lord upon urgent Occasions where no Oath was required by the Law did in VVitness-bearing call God to VVitness and used Attestations of the Name of God in their VVitness-bearing when they did not swear at all and for the further manifesting of that Part of my Affirmation viz. That the Forms of Speech used by Jacob and Laban and by the Apostle and others before-mentioned of themselves without adding of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge are neither Oathes or Swearing It is worthy of Observation that where mention is made of an Oath or Swearing in the Scriptures of Truth there is also mention made of some outward Sign or Pledge which was added to the Forms of Speech by them used which somewhat more being added was that which gave the Denomination of an Oath or Swearing to the Forms of Speech without which Addition of somewhat more then Yea and Nay as a Sign or Pledge the Forms of Speech of themselves was neither Legal Oath or Swearing as for Example Gen. 31. 44. to ver 54. It is said Come let us make a Covenant I and thou which may be a Witness between thee and me then took Jacob

a Stone and set it up as a Pillar and Jacob said to his Brethren gather Stones and they brought Stones and made a Heap and Laban said this Heap is Witness between me and thee there is no Man with us behold God is Witness between me and thee Moreover Laban said to Jacob Behold this Heap and behold the Pillar the Heap shall be Witness and the Pillar shall be Witness and the God of Abraham c. be Judge between us but Jacob sware by the Fear of his Father Isaac The like Example we find Gen. 21. 27. to 31. Gen. 24. 2 3. where Abraham caused his Servant to put his Hand under his Thigh and to swear c. The like we read Gen. 47. 29 31. where Israel call'd his Son Joseph to put his Hand under his Thigh and said Swear unto me and he sware unto him c. From all which Examples it is evident That there was an Addition of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge to the Forms of Speech by the Men of God used which was that that gave to the Form of Words the Denomination of an Oath or Swearing without which Addition of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge the Words God is Witness c. of themselves neither were nor are either Legal Oath or Swearing or so intended or accepted by the holy Men of God mentioned in the Scriptures of Truth Conform hereunto is the daily Practice observed in the Courts of Judicature in this and other Nations when and where any Oath or Swearing is required in VVitness-bearing so that the laying aside of an Oath or Swearing in VVitness-bearing is not the destroying of VVitness-bearing but the reducing it unto its Original Purity and Simplicity as it was in the Beginning before any Oath or Swearing was And now by what is before-said it is evident that the Forms of Speech used by Laban and Jacob in their Day and the Forms of Speech used by the Apostle Paul in his Day and now used by the People of God called Quakers in their Witness-bearing in and of themselves neither were nor are any Legal Oath or Swearing without the Addition of somewhat more as an outward Sign or Pledge which Addition being more then Yea and Nay is therefore in Obedience to the Command of Christ denyed the Original Ground or Cause thereof in Man being Evil and therefore Christians in Christ Jesus and in the Faith of him may not do Evil knowing that no Good can come to any by doing Evil. And for further Answer I say That it is evident from the Scriptures Testimony that the Apostle Paul as he was made an able Minister of the New Testament not of the Letter but of the Spirit so also he was a Witness of those Things which he had received of Christ and of the Things which he had seen Acts 26. 16. and having learned of the Spirit of God to put a Difference between Names and Things that differ and so between an Oath or Swearing that was temporary and might be shaken and true Witness-bearing which was Eternal and therefore was and is to abide in the House of God forever And therefore in his Testimony for God and of the Truth of what he writ and declared to the Churches of Christ in his Witness-bearing did as the People of God had in all Ages done before upon Occasion of great Concern call God to Witness or appeal to the Witness of God in Men concerning the Truth of what he writ unto them or declared among them and so by Manifestation of the Truth he commended himself to every Man's Conscience in the Sight of God 2 Cor. 4. 2. without observing any set Form of Words or adding of any outward Sign or Pledge whereby it might be distinguished from Witness bearing and known to be an Oath for how could the Apostle who was dead to the Law by which an Oath or Swearing in some Cases was required live in the frequent Practice of Swearing contrary to the Command of Christ in the Gospel Swear not at all c. and yet have the Testimony of the Spirit of God that he served God in the Spirit in the Gospel of his Son and not in the Oldness of the Letter Rom. 7. 2. 2 Cor. 1. 23. For if he had frequently confirmed his Sayings with an Oath he had been a common Swearer which would rather have weakened then confirmed his Testimony amongst the Saints of God because the Saints of God do give little more Credit to a common Swearer then to a Lyar Moreover if the Apostle had frequently sworn then had he not walked according to the Rule of the Gospel but according to the Law in the Letter because it is evident that there is no Command of Christ in the Gospel for any Man in any Case to swear or to confirm their Sayings with an Oath but on the contrray an express Command of Christ I say unto you Swear not at all Now these Things being so as afore is said I may conclude That there being no Example Command or Precept in the Gospel of Christ for any of the Disciples of Christ Jesus to confirm the Truth of their Sayings with an Oath that therefore no Christian in Christ Jesus is oblieged to swear at all and that therefore J. S. is blame-worthy in asserting that the Apostle Paul did frequently confirm what he asserted with an Oath and that the Quakers do actually swear even then when they say they cannot swear And now I proceed to his second Argument where he saith Arg. 2. That without the Interposition of an Oath it is impossible in many Cases that Justice can be administred according to the Rule of the Gospel and he instances in one Case for all Exod. 22. 20 21. If a Man deliver to his Neighbour an Ox or Ass or Sheep to keep and it dye or be hurt or driven away no Man seeing it then shall an Oath of the Lord be between them both that he hath not put his Hand to his Neighbours Goods and the Owner of it shall accept thereof and he shall not make it good it is the Righteous God's Will that Justice be administred in this and the like Cases but in such Cases saith J. S. it cannot be determined according to the Evangelical Rule who shall bear the Loss without the Interposition of an Oath for if the Man 's bare Word be taken for the Proof of his Innocency the Controversie will be decided by one only Witness directly against Christ's Precepts Mat. 18. 16. That in the Mouth of two or three Witnesses every Word may be established therefore saith J. S. the guiltless Party in such Cases must in Vindication of his Innocency take in God to witness with him that so the Matter may be decided by two Witnesses at least c. For Answer to all which I first do say That J. S. in asserting that without the Interposition of an Oath 't is impossible in such Cases that