Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	speak_v	true_a	word_n	8,834	5	4.4618	4	true

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

charge them to swear there but to read his Epistle and to preach the Word 2. If he had commanded them to Swear or exacted an Oath of them his command was not answered by them For shal we think the Thessalonians did swear to him that they would read his Epistle before they did read it or that Timothy sware to him that he would preach the Word before he preached it Or if they sware not to him did they swear before any other that were his Proxies at that distance which they were in from him who was at Athens when he wrote to the Thessalonians and at Rome when he wrote to Timothy then Bishop among the Ephesians And if there were no Representatives of his person then with them to tender the Oath to them then it appears That I. I's eies are out who cannot see that the commands of Paul to them which they respectively obeyed were to read his Epistle and preach the Word and not to swear that they would do so 2dly As to Pauls own swearing though I will not say as I. I. sayes some say he did evil in swearing for he sware not yet in swearing he had done evil had he sworn in those many expressions wherein H. D. and I. I. assert he did swear and no less then this H. D. and I. I. must be forced to confesse with me if each of them will own his own Book in other places for H. D. and I. I. as busie as they be in banding against our interpretation of Christs Prohibition universally against swearing at all allowing swearing only before Magistrates to end strife yet they both confess that at least it extends to the forbidding of ordinary frequent or common swearing or swearing in our common communication when we are not called before Magistrates But if Paul did swear so often as J. I presents him to us as swearing in the many Epistles of Paul above cited by him and if it were so frequent with Paul to use expressions equal to an Oath that is to say to use Oaths as H. D. says some have noted it was from Rom. 1. 9. with many more of like nature then he had come under the guilt of that swearing commonly ordinarily frequently or in his common communication with the Saints and in his Letters to them uncall'd to it by any Magistrate which kind of swearing these two strict sticklers for Oaths in some cases do both confess are by Christ Matt. 5. 33. 34. condemned and forbidden Obj. But quoth J. I. p. 10. If calling God to witness what we say be not swearing I confess I am ignorant what swearing is but if it be then it was not onely used under the old but under the New-Testament Rep. If it be not then J. I. stands condemned here under his own hand as ignorant of what Swearing is and so is unfit to meddle so much as he hath done in that matter who witness his Title-page takes on him to open that great Case of Conscience about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of swearing But if it be then methinks H. D. and J. I. should sit still and save themselves the labour of writing so much as they do against the Quakers in vindication of the lawfulness of some swearing for such swearing if they will needs have it to be swearing as Paul used when he said God is my witness God is my record I call God to record I speak the truth in Christ I lye not my Conscience beareth me witness in the holy Spirit and such like the Quakers gainsay in solemn cases no more then themselves yet they have put themselves to so much pains as to prove the lawfulness of that the lawfulness of which we know none that do deny 2dly If it be then methinks the wise prudent and potent imposers of the Oath upon the Quakers and others who have been ever willing to express their Renuntiations of the Pope and all forreign Powers and their Fidelity to the King by any of those strong Asseverations or fervent Expressions which Paul used and J. I. calleth Oaths should accept of the like from them but that they neither do nor will as they would not have accepted the like from Jer. Ives himself so as to have excused him from falling under the danger of the like Premunire with such as cannot conform to that ceremonious kind of swearing which he hath sworn in without kissing and laying one of their fingers at least upon a Bible Object But quoth J. I. if any one should confirm the truth of what he speaks after this rate meaning the rate at which Paul spake in the places fore-cited what did ●…e less then Swearing However it were more then Yea and Nay Reply If it was more then Yea and Nay as it was in sound of words but not in substance yea and nay being spoken solemnly as in Gods sight amounting in substance to no less then all that yet it was less then swearing however less then such formal customary ceremonious superstitious swearing as that J. I. is found in which was no less foolish needless vain and superfluous then it was superstitious if less then that of touching and kissing the Book as aforesaid might in the Court where he was sworn have passed for swearing So then all H. D.'s and I. I.'s instances in proof of Oaths being practis'd and used in old time before Christ and since prove altogether useless to that purpose Obj. But quoth H. D. p. 4. it is warranted not onely by Practice but by Precept also Deut. 6. 13. Thou shalt fear the Lord thy God and serve him and shalt swear by his Name Rep. Under the Law it was as other types shadows and ceremonies also were warranted not by practice onely but precept also but still we demand where is there either practice of it or precept for it among Christ and his Disciples under the Gospel If there had been any precept for it for practice of it I have proved there was none among any but men yet degenerate in the New-Testament since the death of Christ we should surely have had it cited by H. D. in this wherein he stood concern'd to have cited it above all other places of his Paper-work but since he mentions none here we may safely take it for granted he had none to mention and since H. D. among all his Old-Testament-talk for swearing which had been better spar'd then spilt in proof of what none denies nor does nor can possibly produce one pittance of a precept for it in the New we shall rather adhere to Christs and his Apostles plain precept against it or positive prohibition of it in the two Texts which these two men H. D. and J. I. as will be seen anon traduce Mat. 5. 33 34. c. Jam. 5. 12. then either to H. D's nameless Scripture-Precepts or J. I.'s deceitful self-saving shuffles for a practice that is now as flatly forbidden with other ceremonial customs of the Law in the Gospel

among all Nations which yet is an evil that ought not to be found among Christs Disciples nor true Christians I have done with H. D. as to his disputative doings in this point of Swearing from these two Common places or Topicks that are common to him and Papists viz. Antiquity and Universality neither of which can prove the things they plead for so Catholick as to either time place or person but that we can shew both when where and by whom they were dissented from and both impleaded and disproved So that how lame these two legs are upon which H. Dens false witness walks he must be well-nigh as blind as they are lame who cannot see We have seen also how pedlingly these two men have proved the lawfulness of that practice of Swearing from the consideration of its being prophesied of and also its being practised by precept in former dayes by holy men viz. the Prophets under the Law and the Apostles under the Gospel Under the Law we grant holy men us'd it as they did the other types figures shadows and ceremoni●…s that pertained to it but its being practised then by precept pr●…es not that there 's any precept now for its being practised Under the Gospel it would prove it practicable now had it been both practised and enjoined by either Christ or his Apostles but here they can give us neither President nor Precept for though we bring them no less then express prohibition of such a practise Obj. Christ forbids not swearing by God but swearing by any thing besides God as Heaven Earth the Head the Temple the Altar as Ier. Ives saith p. 14. whose words are these They did not matter what they sware by so they performed the things they promised therefore Christ forbids their swearing any Oath either by Heaven or Earth or the Temple or Jerusalem or by their Head but would it not be illogical to conclude from hence That therefore we must not swear by the Lord in things lawful So that by this Text and that in James we are forbid to swear by anything below God it also forbids all voluntary Oaths which they swore to perform to the Lord by any Creature And p. 13. All swearing in our common communication is forbidden quoth he as appears by these words but let your communication be yea yea Our Saviour and the Apostle forbid all common swearing in our ordinary conversations and not solemn and sacred swearing Also as H. D. saith p. 7. It appears to be the aim of our Saviour not to forbid solemn Oaths before the Magistrate c. and between man and man upon grave and mature deliberation but onely to put a stop to common and frequent light and trivial swearing And p. 6. Christs words in proper speech should be read Let not your whole Conversation be interwoven with Oaths And p. 8. Christ indeed forbids those exorbitant and extravagant Oaths meaning whether by the Name of God or other matters in ordinary conversation whereof the streets and Houses are full Rep. Christ does indeed forbid all such voluntary Oaths as were in use under the Law and all swearing by any thing besides or below God also all swearing in common communication and ordinary conversation as I. I. confesseth but that he doth not forbid also all swearing even that which H. D. calls solemn Oaths before the Magistrate which I. I. pleads for under the term of solemn and sacred swearing is more then H. D. I. I. have yet made good or ever will whose confession of that which none can deny viz. That common and frequent swearing and also all swearing even by God himself in common communication and ordinary conversation is forbidden will serve us sufficiently to make it good against H. D. I. I. or any other that he doth forbid all that swearing before Courts and Magistrates which H. D. and I. I. having of late so publikely practised it begins now with shame enough as publikely to plead for for if Christ forbids as I. I. pleads he does all swearing by God in our common communication ordinary conversation wherein yea and nay should serve the turn and all swearing commonly frequently ordinarily as H. D. to the same tune phrases it out doth he not then forbid that ordinary common frequent swearing by God which is now in Courts and imposed by Justices then which nothing almost is more ordinary frequent and common If our Communications and Conversations must be without swearing and not interwoven with Oaths is not this exclusive of swearing before Iustices and Magistrates as well as other men in Courts and Consistories as well as other places where men have their Conversation and Communication with each other as ordinarily frequently and commonly as elsewhere Which considered I have often mused why these men are so inconsiderate as to interpret Christ's Prohibition as exclusive of mens swearing in their ordinary converse and discourses and not in their entercourses with Magistrates and in Courts where Oaths whether de jure they ought so to be or no are yet de facto as ordinary frequent and common as in any places whatever especially that some men plead so much for Oaths before Magistrates onely and yet can bring no proof for swearing before them nor of their right to impose Oaths more then others among the many false Instances they bring of Pauls swearing frequently in his ●…etters to the Churches and imposing Oaths upon them 2dly As to H. D. Christ does indeed forbi●… all such exorbitant and extravagant Oaths as H. D. means let him by those phrases of exorbitant and extravagant mean what he can o●… will I say Christ forbids such exorbitant and extravagant Swearing as above-said but whether more swearing then that onely which H. D. accounts on for which the Land mourns be not by Christ forbidden as exorbitant and extravagant now is worth H. D. and I. I.'s most deep inquiry yea whether swearing by God now be not as exorbitant and extravagant i. e. beside Rule forbidden as well as by ought else and that as well in serious as in trifling matter Wshich if it be then swearing at all or all swearing though some is much more so then some will seem to be beside the Way and Will of God as well as some and that it is there needs not much proof to him that is not minded to wink against Matth. 5. 33. Iam. 5. 12. And here I shall take occasion to fall in with H. D. I. I. about those two Texts from whence as to our Scripture-grounds we conclude against them the now unlawfulness of any swearing yea the cessation of such swearing as not onely was then in use but by permission and commission from God as a Type for a time is yeilded by us to have been lawful under the Law and to the end it may be the more clearly seen on which side the Truth lies whether ours who speak plainly according to the Text and the true intent of

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

if the Law had no force on the lives of Christs Disciples now as if they were short of its righteousness but they were not now and 't is his Disciples to whom he here directs his speeches and not the Pharisees and such as were guided and gull'd by their Glosses So 't is Oaths lawfully taken of old time that Christ here forbids which the Iewes when they had taken did not keep though they should have kept them as in the points of that Circumcision Passeover Sacrifice c. which were injoined before so in that of Swearing by God to end strife Christ puts an end to the Ceremony and the Type fulfilling it and resolves it by the sacrifice of himself into the very substance and Truth it self the Circumcision not made with hands Himself our everlasting Passeover the everlasting Word Covenant or Oath of God So that saving that men make so much ado about the shadow we indeed are in the very substance of all Oaths ●…n Christ Iesus the Truth it self in whom all the promises of God are Yea and in Him Amen We are in that Truth in which and from which speaking promising and witnessing though but by Yea or Nay we witness more Evangelically more acceptably to God more credibly to men more substantially more unchangeably our Word standing without variation when once past from us our Yea being Yea and our Nay Nay then all the unconstant shuffling shadowy and ceremonious Swearers upon a Bible with touching and kissing or by the sacred Sacrament by the blessed Eucharist by the holy Evangelist c. that are in all the world Yea our Yea and Nay is as firm as free from change and fit to be trusted as all their Oaths upon a Book with whom there is nothing but yea and nay so and no and subjection to forswear and lye our Adversaries themselves being Iudges so that as there is not cause for it sith as I. I. saith he that will swear wickedly or against his conscience will lye and he that cannot violate his conscience so as to swear against it cannot violate it by lying neither so there is not more belief begotten in each others hearts by their own Oaths then is by the bare word of an honest man yea they confess they believe we are innocent as from Plots faithful to the King peaceable with all men But alas Heu quam facile est invenire Baculum ad caedendum canem we are made worse then Dogs by the misrepresentations of malicious men and then it 's an easie matter to find a matter against us a staff to beat us Et Damnati lingua vocem habet vim non habet the tongue of a condemned man let him speak what he wil hath a voice but little force to free him from such as have more resolution of mind then reality of ground to persecute him otherwise Christ who had more innocency would have had more indemnity then any man if innocency might indemnifie a man from the envy and merciless cruelty of the wicked who watcheth the righteous seeking to slay him gnasheth upon him with his teeth but though the Lamb hath the clearer and the better Cause yet the Wolfe hath the longer and the bigger teeth and therefore the Lamb must be worried and devoured by him for no more then meerly drinking at the Fountain Many more circumstances there are that clear the 2. Texts aforesaid to be intended as we take them as an universal Prohibition of all swearing but verbum sat sapienti a wise mans faith needs few words to confirm it I shall therefore onely take notice of what H. D. and I. I. our joint opposers herein do make against it and so shut my hands at once of these two shufflers and their shuffles beginning first with I. I. who last appeared 1. This Text quoth I. I. p. 7. of Matth. 5. 38. cannot be understood to forbid all such swearing as was under the Law His reasons which are five four of which have been spoken to above already and therefore need no more refutation are as follows R. Because some such swearing was used by Christ himself ep. 1. That Christ did not swear 2. That if he had sworn to the High-Priest as I. I. falsely sayes he did yet it being before the Law ended at his death to which till then Christ was conformable it had been no more president for us then his eating the Passeover and other things is shew'd above Reas. 2. The Ordinances of the Law or Old-Testament of which Swearing was one ended not till Christ's death the Testator but swear not at all was spoken before his death therefore all such Oaths as were commanded under the Law are not forbidden by that Text Matt. 5. 38. Rep. Though spoken before his death yet with reference to the Gospel-times after his death And ad hominem if all that was uttered or instituted by Christ before Christs death ended at his death let I. I. leave baptizing in water and breaking Bread which both were enjoined and actually used before Christ's death but that he will not do to this day And if he plead a reiteration of the Commands for Water-baptism and breaking bread Acts 10. ult. 1 Cor. 11. let him own the prohibition of swearing to be reiterated Iam. 5. 12. after Christ's death Moreover if I. I. had had his wits well about him when he wrote this Reason he might clearly have seen how it renders his foregoing Reason reasonless as to the end he renders it for this weakens the force of his argument for some swearing from the example of Christs swearing for the time wherein I. I. but falsely sayes Christ sware was before his death for he had not yet suffered and that first Testament which the Ceremony of Swearing belonged to continued till the Testators death And after his resurrection J. I. himself who falsly sayes he sware before it will not say he sware God concerning him sware once for all even that Oath of which there 's no repentance which stands for ever saying as concerning the everlasting Righteousness and Peace that ends all strife Thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec And as concerning the day of his Resurrection Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee Psal. 110. No more Oaths now to him that stands fast in this Oath or Covenant of God which is of Truth and Righteousness Life and Peace Reas. 3. The Prophets prophesie some such swearing shall be us'd in the times of the New-Testament therefore neither Matth. 5. nor Jam. 5. forbid all such swearing as was lawful under the old Rep. That the Prophets in the places cited by H. D and I. I. intend not such swearing as was under the Law but the substance it self i.e. speaking the truth in righteousness denominated by the name of the shadow or type of Swearing is shew'd so abundantly above that here needs no more Reas. 4. The Apostle Paul both practised and enjoined

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

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

another as shall end all strife without Oath●… or more ado Yea to see that in the Light of the Gospel which under the Law was not seen by Prophets and righteous men while under that Paedagogy Yea as Christ said to his Disciples so say I to those that are turn'd to learn of him now Blessed are your eyes for they see and your ears for they hear for verily I say unto you that many Prophets and Righteous men in former dayes of the Law have desired to see and hear those things which ye do and yet have neither seen nor heard them And this above may serve for a return to H. D. who insists much on it that this Testimony that an an Oath is to end strife is after the Law the Apostle sayes men do swear and I have written do swear quoth he because the Greek word Heb. 6. 16 is in the present tense and the rather because one Preacher perswading his Hearers against all swearing told them it ought to be read did swear and was a confirmation not is Rep. Who that was I know not I can afford to grant it 's written do and is and yet give H. D. and I. Ives no ground in their controversie against us against whom in two respects that consideration of Oaths being used in Pauls time can't prove the lawfulness of them among the Saints either then or now there were many customs in use and contended for by many Naturalists about which the Apostle says But if any man list to be contentious yet we have no such custom nor the Churches of God 'T is but among men still though 't was in the Apostles dayes and now is and not among the Saints and true Churches of God which are in God who is light and love and not in the enmity the curse and strife where the oaths are used among men under the Law and so under the curse as all are that live in sin and strife but not among Saints who walk and live in and are led by the Spirit and bring forth the fruits of the Spirit love joy peace meekness c. such are not under the Law but Grace and against such there is no Law Rom. 6. 14. Gal. 5. 18. 23. But H. D. and I. I. makes much a-do to as little effect to evince it that the Apostle Paul himself sware yea and that very frequently too Some have noted it quoth H. D. p. 5. as frequent with the Apostle Paul in serious matters to use such expressions as are equivalent to an Oath as Rom. 1. 9. God is my Witness whom I serve c. with many more of the like nature which are well known to you And quoth I. I. pag. 9. 10. as one of his brown-paper Pellets against our proof of no swaring from Matth. 5. 34. some such swearing as was commanded under the Law not onely Christ but the Apostle Paul did both practice and enjoyn using his words 2 Cor. 11. 19. As the truth of Christ is in me Rom. 1. 9. God is Witness Phil. 1. 8. God is my record 1 Cor. 1. 23. I call God to record upon my soul Rom. 9. 1. I speak the truth by Christ quoth J. I. because Beza sayes so though it is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} in Christ most properly in the Greek I lye not my Conscience beareth me witnesse in the holy Spirit there he renders {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} right in and not by and why not in the former part of the verse Gal. 1. 20. Before God I lye not And as they practis'd swearing so they did exact it in the like solemn cases upon others for to adjure quoth J. I. is to exact an oath or charge one to swear 2 Tim. 4. 1. Paul charged Timothy before God and Thess. 1. 5. 27. I charge you by the Lord that this Epistle be read Beza reads it Adjuro vos per Dominum I charge thee to swear by the Lord to this agrees that of the High-Priest who adjured Christ Now if all swearing now were forbidden by those two Texts Mat. 5. 34. Iam. 5. 12. the Apostle would neither have done it nor charged others so to do Rep. 1. That to use such expressions as these above was frequent with the Apostle is well known to us indeed as H. D. saies but that this was at all such swearing as is contended for by H. D. and I. I. who hath sworn upon a Book and kissed it as the custom is I am yet ignorant and yet not so ignorant as to give such an Answer as I. I. saies some do for want of a better viz. That the Apostle did evil in swearing for I as verily believe as I. I. saith he himself doth in the same place That he that will swear wickedly and contrary to Gods Law so he does in my judgment that swears at all sith Christ Mat. 5. 33. 34 c. forbids it {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} omnino in any wise or altogether the same wil Lye also upon occasion yea 't is my Faith and the Faith of some who are set to swear others also that thousands of those who now swear out their present and future saithfulness to the King for fear of some malicious Magistrate that exacts it out of envy more then any true love to him would for all their swearing prove more unfaithful if occasion should happen suitably to their hopes of insurrection in arms against him then those Thousands of Quakers who living in the true fear and love of God can in conscience neither for fear or love of themselves or any man either take up arms at all for themselves against King or any man or to escape the loss of all they have swear at all But the Answer I give shal be as follows 1. Some things though swearing is none of them Paul did by permission then which we are not now to do because he did them witness his circumcising Timothy shaving his head and taking a Vow upon him according to the Law Act. 16. 3. 21 23 24 25. which things were parts of the Law then by right abolished in favour of the Jewes weakness who yet could not bear the actual abolition of them For as for the Gentiles that believe we command say the Apostles that they observe no such thing So that if Oaths had then been de facto used by the Apostles that of it self would not prove they now are de jure to be used by us But 2. That Paul either sware or exacted Oaths upon others I deny 1. As to his not enjoining or exacting swearing on others which I. I. draws by the head and shoulders from the place where Paul saies to the Thessalonians and Timothy I charge you by the Lord I charge thee before the Lord in which places quoth he he charges them to swear by the Lord I have said so much before that here I shall add onely this consideration viz. That Paul did not

as ever it was required in the Law Obj. It is also confirmed by Prophesies quoth H. D. p. 4. the Prophets prophesie that some swearing shall be used in the time of the New Testament quoth J. I. p. 9. of his piece of proof and to make good their ground against us who plead Christs Precepts both these two Archers who plead old prophesies 1. Unite their strength and discharge at us with one single string 2ly Lest that should prove too slender for it one of them viz. J. I. has two more strings to his Bow wherewith he hopes to carry the Cause without controul 1. They jointly urge that one prophesie Isai. 65. 16. He that sweareth in the earth shall swear by the God of Truth because the former troubles are forgotten c. the meer mention of vvhich H. D. deems enough and therefore actually urges nothing from it but J. I. dilates at large upon it insisting o're and 〈◊〉 that circumstance of time vvhich H. D. hints as that vvhere the stress lyes vvhich J. I. thinks clears his case beyond all controversie Here 's a prophecie quoth J. I. that foretells some svvearing shall be lawful in those times that are to come after the Ascention of Christ and the death of the Apostle James then he that swears shall swear by the God of Truth THEN when the former troubles are forgotten When shall that be the 17 ver. resolvs us It shall be when the New Heavens and the New Earth are created and the former Heaven and Earth is forgotten So that here is a Concatenation of Divine Truths Men shall swear by the God of Truth because the former troubles are forgotten their former troubles shall be forgotten because the former Heaven and Earth shall be forgotten That this prophesie respected the times of the New-Testament let Peter witness 2 Pet. 3. 13. We look for a new Heaven and a new Earth wherein dwelleth Righteousness So that these Scriptures foretell that though under the former Heavens and upon the former Earth men sware by false Gods yet in the times of ●…the new Heavens and new Earth wherein dwelleth Righteousness men shall swear by the God of Righteousness To all which somewhat must be said by way of Reply Reply That this is spoken with reference to the time of the new Heavens and Earth I deny not but I deny that this clause He that sweareth shall swear by the God of Truth is understood of swearing at all formally and properly so taken much less as I. I. sayes 't is of such ceremonious swearing as was under the Law and as I. I. contrary to his former professions as I have heard conforms himself to now in this day of the Gospel 1. Because often the name and phrase which is peculiar and proper only to the Type under the Law is by the Prophets speaking of the times of the Gospel attributed to the Anti-type or Thing it self thereby deciphered yea how ordinary and usual was it with the most Evangelical Prophets to speak of Evangelical matters under the then usual though but legal phrases and to hold forth the substantial eternal and everlasting Gospel truths under the dark shadowy forms of ceremonious and legal phrases which if any should now interpret as spoken of the meer ceremony or figure by the name of which the truth figured out onely with reference to Gospel times is express'd one might thereby usher in well nigh the whole bulk of outward eatings drinkings divens baptisms circumcision passeover sacrifices and other carnal ordinances and ceremonious Rites which belonged to that Paedagogy of the Iews as well as that ceremony of swearing See Ier. 31. and compare v 31. 32. 33. which none deny to be spoken of the Gospel glory which transcends that of the Law which is done away though a glory with v. 38. 39 40. Will any take that as spoken of the old legal Ierusalem that was in bondage with her children and not of that onely which is above free and the Mother of all Saints for it 's not a truth of the other for it though built after the Babylonish ruines was pluckt up and thrown down again So Zach. 14 from v. 9. 10. to the end How are the Pots of the Lords House now as bright as the Golden bowles before the Altar but as those that have lien among the pots as black as they have been shall be as a Dove covered with silver and her feathers with yellow gold So Ezek. 36. 25. There speaking of the Gospel purity I will sprinkle clean water upon you and ye shall be clean Will any think this is that water onely that puts away the outward filth of the outward flesh So Ezek. 40. to the end of that Prophesie The Temple Worship Sacrifices orders of the holy City of which its said Iehovah Shammah the Lord is there are described under the legal phrases and according to the old ceremonial orders Will the Baptist think therefore there 's a material Temple made with hands Rev. 21. confuteth him where it s said I saw no Temple there but the Lord God and the Lamb are the Temple of it An hundred more there are of the like nature yea all the Prophets speak over the external type and ceremony of that eternal Truth which is one one sacrifice one passeover one oath of God which ends all strife and wrath to such as look to it one circumcision for ever and yet under the name of the temporal Type onely which was in the times of the Law wherein they wrote and wherein those were used That of Circumcision was calld an everlasting Covenant and an everlasting sign in the flesh of Abrahams Seed yet we are that Seed that Circumcision they but the Concision and the bastard Seed of scoffing Ishmael not of Isaac nor of Israel yea in that very place of these mens quoting and those following many things are said which in words found out the Laws by which is intended onely the Gospel-services and the Gospel-superstitions He that sacrificeth a Lamb cuts off a Dogs neck He that burns Incense blesses an Idol n●…w as well as then if his soul delight in abomination yet the Sacrifices and Incense now is not of fed Beasts and sweet smells but prayers and praises which who offers to God from an unclean conscience is in it abomination to the Lord as the sacrifice of the wicked is ever said to be Prov. 15. 8. They that eat Swines flesh and the abomination and the Mouse shall be consumed in the Anti-type that 's done in these dayes to which that Prophesie ultimately relates I create Ierusalem a rejoicing her people a joy yet the Ierusalem which then was is now a curse among Gods chosen and her Name translated unto these Semblably he that sweareth in those days shall swear by the God of truth is not spoken of the Ceremony which these times practice and these men plead for but of a substance a speaking though calld by that name

of swearing which was the shadow the truth from the heart a speaking in righteousness though by no more then yea nay in his sight in whom Gods oath and promises are all yea or truth itself as Christ is said to do of whom the Saints are Isa. 63. 1. a saying though call'd a swearing the Lord liveth in truth and in righteousness in these days by such as know their Redeemer living In old time there was a saying calld also a swearing the Lord liveth in falshoold unrighteousness and deceit by such as know him not living in themselves of whom God sayes Though ye say God lives yet ye swear falsly i. e. who though ye say the truth yet ye know not that to be truth which ye say while ye say it not feeling him living in your selves Men sware then by the God of Truth in a sound of words and ceremonious forms though J. I. sayes they sware by false Gods as if they had not at all sware by the God of Truth but they did not swear by him in truth and righteousness when they mentioned his Name but in deceit as a company of hypocrites so that God counted them as swearing falsly when they uttered the very truth And that those Oaths these men plead as necessary to end strife are in no wise meant here is evident by that very circumstance on which they insist most strictly in proof thereof if considered but a little more exactly For 1. whereas they both intimate it and I. I. very strenuously urges it as a clause necessarily clearing the present lawful use of such oaths because 't is foretold there shall be such swearing at that time sayes H. D. THEN yea THEN sayes J. I. when Jacob and Judahs former troubles and the former Heavens and Earth shall be forgotten in the new Heavens and Earth wherein dwelleth righteousness Any of those wise men whose eyes are in their head when the fools are abroad in the ends of the Earth would from that self-same clause have seen clear ground to conclude no less then the very contrary i. e. the unlawfulness because the utter uselesness of any such oaths at all in those dayes as among men are for confirmation and end of strife seeing that very place expresses that all the former troubles which arise from strife which is it self the most troublesome thing to it and the grand ground of all other troubles in the World for where envying and strife is there is the confusion and every evil work Iam. 3. 14. 15. 16. shall in those days totally be done away See also Rev. 21. 1. I saw a new Heaven and a new Earth for the first were past away and there was no SEA that is trouble strife tossing tempests tumults wars hatred nor contention Where trouble is forgotten or ended there all strife which is its cause must be forgotten and ended else as posita causa ponitur effectus where the cause is the effect will be so where strife is confusion and trouble will be and where all strife is forgotten and ended there those Oaths which these men plead for the very e●…d of which is as themselves say to end all strife must necessarily cease end and be forgotten also Again this Prophesie say they truly enough relates to the time of the new Heavens and Earth wherein dwelleth Righteousness when the old wherein unrighteousness dwelt together with its unrighteousness is removed Which if so where is any room or use for strife and the oaths that are to end them when strife which is unrighteousness and the root of all unrighteousness is buried in the bottomless pit from whence it came J Ives argues p. 11. in his fifth Reason as is above said from the being of strife to the necessity of a being of Oaths to end them but to run down and rout that reason I shall render another reason out of J. I's paper p. 9. viz. in the latter days when the new heavens and earth are created wherein dwelleth righteousness and former troubles are forgotten there shall be no more of that unrighteousness those fleshly works which strife is none of the least part of therefore no more need of Oaths then to end all stri●…e Thus as of those that argue against our Tenet of perfecting holiness as to purging from sin here from the necessity of sins continuance in them to this end that they may be kept humble I would fain know what need of sin to humble when perfect holiness which can't be without true humility which is a prime part of it is brought in and what shall become of Pride when all sin which it 's not the least of is done away So of them that say in the new Jerusalem there 's need of Oaths to end all strife I would as fain know if they be able to tell me what must become of all strife which is such a troublesom piece of unrighteousness and the root of all other trouble unrighteousness also in the day when all such sin and transgression as strife is must be finished and made an end of and nothing but the everlasting righteousness brought in by Christ who to such as wait for it in his Light is bringing near that his righteousness so that it shall be revealed and his salvation from sin so quickly that it shall not tarry We see then how these two men make one head agaist one man viz. H. Den and J. Ives against J. Ives to push him down and how both these men well weigh'd interfeer and hack their own shins so as to come limping home in that lame cause they ventured out in What need we any further witness against them Ye your selves O people who have but half an eye and do not shut it may see their confusion under their own hands and how instead of building their house as Wisdom doth hers they have with folly pull'd it down with their hands So as H. D. and J. I. hath done let all hasty Opposers of Christs plain Commands in print when to save themselves a whipping they have violated them contrarily to their own comfort if not their Conscience make Rods for their own tayles and soundly slash themselves with them when they have done H. D. does no more as to this point of Prophesie in proof of Swearing but J. I. doubles his Files and fights on as follows pag. 9. J. I. That Text Psal. 15. 4. is by many understood to respect the time of the New-Testament and if so then one of the great Qualifications that is required of those that shall dwell in Gods holy Hill is that they shall swear to their own hurt and change not Rep. If so that it relates to the New-Testament as it s understood by many to do This is a supposition onely therefore can be no sound proof of the point unless I. I. durst lay it down in a position that so it is 2. Yet to take it as I. I. would have it let I. I. consider

again whether this be one of the great qualifications that 's required of such as shall dwell in Gods holy Hill viz. that they shall swear to their own hurt Does God or did he ever require any man on pain of exclusion from his holy Hill to swear to his own hurt I. I. sayes so and the simple may believe every word that he sayes but the prudent will look well to his going And if I. I. sayes I abuse him in taking the two Clauses as under that he puts together affirming it a blessed duty when a man hath sworn though to his own hurt not to change I grant that unless it be so that no Oath being any bond at all to any iniquity a man hath sworn to do any sin as I do not say I. I. hath in swearing to be peaceable toward the King though I judge he hath so far sinn'd in swearing that which had he feared God more then man he speaking the truth in his heart should but have promis'd or asserted that he may lawfully change so as to repent of his rash act of swearing otherwise if a man have rashly sworn or spoken to his loss or damage in outward things it appears by this place he had better keep that oath or word then break it But what will I. I. get by all this if to swear in this Text were not as in truth it is to be understood the same way as in that above spoken viz. for speaking in righteousness or uttering no more then the very truth from the heart viz. thus much and no more then we freely do and can afford to grant namely that this Text commendeth in no wise much less commandeth swearing any more then Matth. 5. which condemns it altogether as no Gospel-duty but onely condemneth Forswearing a thing in use in these days and in fashion well-nigh as much as swearing is which sin of Forswearing though it s fear'd it may befall many seeming Saints that for hast and fear make no conscience of some swearing both we and Christ also approves not in that place where he downrightly as an evil reproves the other I. I. Isa. 45. 23. God sweareth That to him every knee shall bow and every tongue shall Swear and because sacred swearing by GOD is a confessing of him the Apostle translates every tongue shall Confess Rom. 14. 11. plainly expounding the prophesie to relate to New-Testament times Rep. This I. I. saies proves what I said above as fully as I need or can desire to have it proved my self for it shews to him that 's willing to see it that the Antitype now in the times of the Gospel answering to the Ceremony of Swearing which was the Type of it under the Law is Confessing and not denying when we witness affirmatively though by but Yea or denying onely though by but Nay when we witness negatively to any truth If confessing and denying to God from our hearts or before God now who knows our hearts but by yea or nay be so under the Law then confessing or denying from our hearts to men by but yea and nay as before God who knows our hearts is the substance of those shadowy Oaths that were under the Law and that eternal Truth into which that Temporal Type or Ceremony is now resolved so that whereas J. I. sayes thus viz. And because sacred Swearing by God is a confessing of him the Apostle translates every tongue shall Confess I return thus viz. And because the confessing in truth of the spirtual holy Seed which is the substance of that carnal holy Seed which was the Type is the Sustbance of that sacred ceremonious Swearing which was under the Law The Apostle who wrote in the dayes of the Gospel expounds that thus Every tongue shall confess which the Prophet that wrote in the times of the Law when the Type of Swearing was in use expresses thus Every tongue shall swear H. D. in pursuit of the proof of his propounded universality proceeds to the eonsent of all Nations I will add one thing more quoth he which is the consent of all Nations whatsoever whether Jews or Gentiles Greeks or Barbarians between Princes Subjects Enemies Friends for the reconciling differences ending controversies assuring of faith one towards the other This appears among the Greeks by several unquestionable Authors and Authentick Records amongst the Romans by the Laws of the twelve Tables among all other Nations under Heaven by sufficient evidence and demonstration which is able to put it out of all doubt Now how great is this Authority namely the consent of all Nations It is doubtless a demonstraiion of the second rate some there are that account it of the first rate viz. That the consent of Nations is taken for Divine Evidence and in many things we do so take it What doth it speak less then that the taking of an Oath is one of the dictates written and engraven in the heart of man by Nature●… finger seeing that there is no Nation so barbarous but doth acknowledge the solemn and religious use of an Oath in calling their God to witness which considered I have sometimes wondred why the people distinguished by the name of Quakers should say that the Light within them teacheth them to deny an Oath when as that Light which is Universal teacheth all the Nations of the earth the contrary Rep. This seems to be given out by H. D. with more pomp and triumph and shew and ceremony then all its fellows as some grand ground that adds weight to all those as light as lightless ones that went before it but mole ruit su●… saving its greatness it hath not so much goodness in it as will make good the ground against the Qua who by H. D. like as Ioshua and his fellows of old to the Light-hating Professors are as men wondered at nor so much force as will save it from falling by its own falshood to the ground and were it as true as H. D. onely saies 't is that Swearing was us'd amongst all Nations under heaven by sufficient evidence and demonstration which is able to put it out of all doubt yet that would not put it out of all doubt nor be sufficent evidence and demonstration that Swearing is now to be used among true Christians But alas as great as H. D. saies this Authority is namely The consent of all Nations which quoth he is a demonstration of the second rate at least and some account it of the first rate yet as 't wil not prove Swearing lawful among Saints were it true that it hath been so used so neither is it true that it hath been so universally used as he supposes by universal consent among all Nations There 's yet no demonstration or evidence scientifical afforded by H. D. that there 's the use of an Oath among all Nations whatsoever Iews or Gentiles Greeks or Barbarians especially that it hath been us'd as universally in all times and places as by all

persons which is the uuiversality of swearing at first propounded by H. D. to be proved in prosecution òf his proof of the universality of the use of Oaths by all persons in all times who after he had only conjectured that practice of swearing to be not above 300 years younger then the Moon falls a confessing p. 3. as is shewed above that for ought he knows by Scripture which speaks not plainly what the old world did in this case 't is no elder then about 400. years younger then the Flood Now how can that be said to be universally us'd in all times and places by all persons and Nations by consent of which 't is not plain by Scripture-evidence that 't was in use at all for 1600. years together in the old world nor till 400. which with the other amount to 2000 years in all were spent and gone even of the new Who is so blind as not to see how H. D. dashes himself against himself by pinching his own propounded universality into a meer particularity as he renewed his first propounded high Antiquity into no less nor more then that meer novelty of 2000. years after the Moon But 2ly admit it had been 2000. years elder then H. D. makes it appear to be and so in all times yea and by Consent of all Nations used also yet was it used neither by the consent of all nor without the dissent of sundry persons and parties in sundry Nations and so H. D.'s Authoritative Doctrine still goes down the wind and can't be own'd at that high rate at which he prizes it Now that it neither is nor hath been so universally assented to by the Nations as H. D. nakedly affirms it hath but dissented from by sundry in the Nations where it hath been used and that not single persons of note onely but whole parties and by those persons and parties still that were grown to discern best between the Ceremony and the Substance and to prefer the truth power equity and end of the Law before those thin empty thred-bare trashy and chaffy forms and formalities which like as Pharaohs seven lean Kine and blasted ears of corn that did eat up the fat and well-liking devoured ever the equity it self and destroied things as to their first good honest innocent and true intents is evident enough to be seen in sundry instances of men eminent in their generations among whom was Philo who saith It is best and most profitable and to the rational nature most convenient to abstain from Swearing and so to accustome ones self to veracity that ones Word may be taken for an Oath Also we read of the Essaeans the honestest of the three Sects of the Jewes in Christ's time of whom some judg most of the believing Iewes came in Christ's time that by faith in him became Christians because the Scripture mentions none but the other two viz. the Sadduces and Pharisees few of which heeded Christ and most of which did ever vehemently oppose both him and his few followers Of those Essaeans I say we read in Iosephus That Whatsoever they say is firmer then an Oath and to Swear is among them accounted a thing superfluous Also from the Essaeans and those Hebrews whom the Essaeans followed the same seems to be received by Pythagoras whose sentence was on this wise Let no man swear by the Gods but every one take care of his credit that he may be believed without an Oath And whereas H. D. speaks of all Nations yet if he had heeded what Curtius writes and relates of the Scythians in their sayings to Alexander he would have found them testifying to him thus of themselves viz. Think not that the Scythians confirm their friendship by Oath they Swear by keeping their Word And because H. D. speaks so much of the Laws of the Greeks and Romans by which they in their twelve Tables so strictly ratifying and injoining that practice of Swearing he might have considered how according to Cicero's relation in one of his Orations when one at Athens who had lived among them in great repute for his gravity and sanctity had publikely given his testimony and approached the Altars to make his Oath all the Iudges with one accord reclaimed and would not let him swear upon this account viz. Because they would not have it thought that Truth depended more upon the Religion of an Oath then upon the Word of an honest man All which serves to refute H. D. his peremptory position concerning the consent of all Nations under heaven to the solemne and religious use of an Oath at least if by all Nations he means as he well may denomination being ever more ex meliori then ex majori the best most solemne and truly religious persons in those Nations Thus we see to the confusion of H. D. that Heathens consent it 's needless just men swear Forbid it and cry out for shame forbear However ●…et it be ne'er so universally now assented to by all Nations yet all in the Nations assent not to it nor yet that peculiar people and holy Nation that is redeemed unto God by the blood of the Lamb from among the Nations Tongues Kindreds and People of the Earth even the holy Seed that is the substance of that holy Seed or Iewish Nation which with their Ceremonies were but Types for a time of them and their more spiritual and substantial services And this dissent from that practice of Swearing upon a Bible with fingering kissing holding up the hand or other vain superfluous customs of man's imposing so much consented to as H. D. saies among all Nations is not now so newly entered in this Nation of England but that we can give Presidents of holy Martyrs suffering for it as well as for other things before us even in Q. Maries daies and before whose sufferings H. D. and I. I. do what in them is to make of none effect Take some Examples and Testimonies of some Martyrs concerning Swearing In the Reign of Richard the second William Swinderby said The Pope the Prelacy neither any Ordinary can compel any man to swear by any Creature of God or by the Bible Book In the Reign of Henry the fourth William Thorp was accused that the second Sunday after Easter he said openly in St. Chaddes Church in his Sermon That Priests have no title to Tythes and that it is not lawful to swear in any wise Again Will Thorp accounted it not lawful to swear upon a Bible-Book it being made up of divers Creatures and that he ought not to swear by any Creature The Arch-Bishop menaced him with great punishments and sharp except he left that Opinion of Swearing He replyed It is the Opinion of our Saviour and St. Iames and doth conclude if Chrysostome counteth him worthy of great blame that bringeth forth a Book to swear upon it must needs follow that he is more to blame that sweareth upon that Book Then as William Thorp relateth the Clerk said