Selected quad for the lemma: heaven_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
heaven_n	earth_n	let_v	name_n	5,079	5	5.2748	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

to the Law that was given by them but I say this is no President for them who are under the Doctrine of the Son himself who are not to go back so as to rebel against the Commands of the Son to follow the bare example of the servant Moses in whose hand the Law was given by the dispensation of Angels Moses was faithful in all his house the old Israel as a servant for a Typical Testimony of those true things that were to be spoken after Heb. 3. 5 6 but Christ who is counted worthy of more glory then Moses is the Son over his own House the true Israelites indeed in whom is no guile the Great and chief Shepherd over his own sheep who hear his voice on whom the servants and their Law i.e. Moses and the Angels have now nothing to do to impose read Heb. 1. 1 God who c. to the end We see how the Angels are inferior not only to the Son himself the heir of all but also as Ministers and servants unto the least of those who are heirs of Salvation and of all things both with in and through him whom yet H.D. represents as inferiour unto them as those who are but on Earth may be said to be to such as abide in Heaven For when he comes on to tell of the swearing of Christ from the Angels which Angels he ranks with God among such as swear in heaven Come we quoth he to the Earth as if the Being of Angels were onely in Heaven and the Being of Christ only upon earth whereas that very Angel he instances in as a President of Swearing to us is in that very place Rev. 10. recorded as standing no higher then on the Sea and Earth but Christ the Son were H. D. capable to read the mystery and riddle of it had he sworn in that Iohn 3. 5. where H. D. reckons on him as swearing on Earth might well have been rankt among the swearers in Heaven being at that very present in heaven as he saies himself ver. 13. The Son of man which is in Heaven But H. D. being yet where I once was with him among those who look for the Kingdom of Heaven which is {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} within men even those men that never enter it as Christ said to the Pharisees bidding his Disciples not to go forth to look for it among them who drew outwards with their Lo here and lo there in outward observations with which it comes not is so innocently ignorant where heaven is that though more darkly and diminutively then some others who open wider in some degree witness his two secret jerks at the Quaker and the Light within p. 5 and 8. of his perverting Paper he rather blasphemes the name of God and his Tabernacle i. e. the Light in which God dwells is and is known and those i. e. those Quakers who dwell with Christ in Heaven 3 The next Argument then ab Exemplo urg'd in proof of swearing now is that of Christ of whom H.D. and I. I. both do intimate it as their own conceit at least that he sware and therefore lawfully may we now think they In evidence of his thoughts that Christ sware H.D. alludes to Ioh. 3. 5. saying not positively but suppositively onely p. 3. If the Verily Verily of the Son of God and our Redeemer should not amount to so much as an Oath as some think yet is it more then a bare Yea and Nay In evidence of his more confident conceit and thoughts that Christ did sware and consequently that we now may I. I. cites and alludes to Matth. 26. 63. and that in two places of his prittle prattle des●…anting as emptily as amply on it in them both viz. p. 2 3. and again p. 7. whose words are here set down that he may have no just occasion to say I wrong him in my Answer A man may be solemnly sworn when he is adjured by another for to adjure quoth he in plain English is to charge one to swear or to exact an Oath therefore we read Mat. 26. 37. that the High-Priest Adjured Christ by the living God Beza more plainly reads it that the High-Priest charged him to swear by the living God if he were the Christ the Son of God So p. 7. Swearing was used by Christ himself Mat. 26. 36. the High-Priest adjures him by the living God or as it is in plain English he charged him to swear by the living God to tell him whether he was the Christ the Son of God 〈◊〉 which adjuration Iesus answers Thou saist or I am for so it is quoth he Mar. 14. 62. Now to answer to a matter when one is adjured by the living God though it were but Yea and Amen is sweating Rep. To H.D. I.I. I return two things 1. That if Christ had sworn in the two places and times respectively in which these two men seem to say he did yet it proves not the legality of it now to us 2. As 't is but doubtfully delivered by themselves so it 's utterly denyed by me that in th●…se cases phrases and places of their alledging Christ did swear at all First had Christs Verily Verily and his answering I am when the High-Priest asked charged him to tell him whether he were the Christ amounted to a formal Oath such as is now imposed and pleaded but it was far from it for there was no requiring to lay his hand on a Book and kiss it and swear by God and the Holy Evangelist and such like without which our present Iustic●… wil not own any man as giving sufficient satisfaction or confirmation to end the strife let us speak never so solemnly as in the sight of the living God but strive endlesly with us as suspitious persons from whom the King can't be secured unless we take the Oath in that old mee●…shadowy way yet this was all in the time of the Law and under it before Christ by his death had put an end to it For though in the last a●…d latest of the two Terms which these two men take their texts and talk from to prove Swearing lawful under the Gospel from Christs Example he was so nigh it as to be summon'd before the Priests in order to it yet he was not actually offered no●… had as yet actually suffered so not actually put an end to the Law which till he had he was under the Padagogy of it as the Iews were and therefore might use some such swearing as was used under the Law and that be no warrant neither for us now to swear who together with him that was once made under it himself are now redeemed from under the Law to under the Gospel and are now no more under the Law but under Grace Rom. 6. 14. The Heir himself under age differs not from a servant though Lord of all but is under Tutors and Governors c. so we when children were in bondage

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

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

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

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

such swearing and exacted Oaths Rep. How false all that is is sufficiently declared above against both H. D. and I. I. to which satis-diction I refer the Reader for his satisfaction Reas. 5. As much need of Oaths now to end it as ever because as much strife Rep. One sin ever begets another the men of this world are in strife hatred hard-heartedness and unbelief one towards another in fears jealousies suspitions of treachery and deceit among themselves every one measuring others by himself and therefore they lack such sinful security from each other as that of Swearing against Christ's Command Thus the Creation in the fall from the Light within which would lead it forth into love truth and peace wrestles in the chains of its own darkness groans heavily under the bondage of its own corruption But where the Light and Spirit is walk't in there the lusts of the flesh are not fulfill'd but the hatred strife envy c. denyed and the love witnessed which believes and hopes the best of all things and thinks no evil of others because it 's true honest innocent pure peaceable within it self and there 's no lack of Laws to make such swear to be faithful to each other every one living by that by which he is before God and men made a Law to himself But to this Reason more is spoken also in the Book before Having prov'd quoth J. I. that all swearing is forbidden it necessarily follows that those general Terms Swear not at all do admit of an exception Sometimes Universal Prohibitions are taken with Restrictions as Exod. 20. 10. compared with Matth. 12. 5. and Numb. 28. 9. Matth. 23. 9. 15. 42. 44. Luke 6. 30. Rep. How well I. I. hath prov'd all swearing not forbidden is seen above and the wise in Christ though never so weak will judge when they read the foregoing disproof of all his Reasons As for general terms and universal Prohibitions admitting of exceptions and restrictions I know well enough they do so now and then but when they do those exceptions and restrictions are usually in one place or other of the same Testament where they are made either expressed or at least most manifestly and apparently implyed by him that gave out those general terms or prohibitions and so are all or most of those very exceptions from and restrictions of those generals which I. I. himself hath instanced in As for example the exception of such works as pertain'd to sacrifice that the Priests prophan'd it by from thou shalt do no manner of work on the 7th or Sabbath-day is abundantly elsewhere expressed in the Law where the Priest's services on every Sabbath are appointed them and the exception of dressing what every one was to eat was expressed And the exception of doing good and of works of mercy in saving the life of man or beast which was to take place ever against the Typical Sabbath and all its service I will have mercy and not sacrifice saith God was exprest as I. I. also intimates against himself citing Luk. 14. 5. though the Scribes and Pharises more out of malice to Christ then out of ignorance of those expressions would not see all those express exceptions that were made against that general Rule and Prohibition viz. In it thou shalt do no manner of work and therefore grumbled at Christs healing on the Sabbath as I. I truly notes from Luke 13. 14. and forbad the people then to come unto him And when Christ sayes to his Disciples as so Call no man Father on Earth it 's a Prohibition that universally holds among them qua tales for the Saints have no Earthly Father but one is their Father in Heaven even God the Father of Spirits who of his own will begat them into the Image of himself in holiness in which capacity no Fathers of their Flesh are by them to be called Fathers The Rule is general without exception to him that rightly reads it not requiring so much express exception as yet is expressed if other Texts be consulted which speak of God only being the one Father of all believers As for his two Texts that talk of giving to all that ask and not turning from any that would borrow which I. I. is loath so generally to understand as Christ would have him for fear least he should turn himself as he saies out of doors and be reduced to a morsel of bread and therefore pleads a necessity of a restriction in that case Seeing he lacks to be restrained here or else in his common Reason he thinks he must needs perish let him consult but his own confession of it and hee 'l find enough at least to serve his own end and turn so as to save himself from sinking into a morsel of bread of express exception in other Scriptures For to Christ's saying From any one that would borrow of thee turn not thou away Do not other Scriptures quoth I. I. inform us that these general terms must be restrained The general terms also wherein H. D. asserts the antiquity and universality of that practice of Swearing which saith he was used by and in all persons places and times admits also of exception and restriction yet that exception and restriction from his general assertion is expresly made by H. D. himselfe who excepts all the old world and the persons that liv'd therein for the time of 1600 years together of whom and which after his avouching in proof of the lawfulness thereof the antient and universal use of Oaths to shew that his general terms do admit of an exception and are to be taken with restriction expresses that exception p. 2. on this wise as is shew'd above viz. What the old world did in this case i. e. of Swearing the Scriptures do not speak plainly and therefore I will pass it by which is as much as to say Swearing was ever generally and universally used by all the world and Nations of it by all persons times and places excepting onely all such persons times and places by whom and in which it was not used or exceptis excipiendis excepting all such as are to be excepted which is all the old world by whole sale for ought appears by Scripture to the contrary quoth H. D. himself and except so many persons in the New as used it not at all say I which as appears above were Christ his Apostles and Churches the Sect of the Essaeans many holy Martyrs in Maries daies and upward and as appears at this day in this Nation as wel as others the many thousands of sincere hearted Saints and Christians of this Age called Quakers who consent not with the world and actions of it in that or any other vain and evil customs being chosen and redeemed by Christ's blood from among them So Christ uttered many Truths in general terms which must admit of exception but then those exceptions also are expressed Christ said Luk. 13. to all the sinners that