self-evidence but the evidence of the truth of them depends on the veracity of God the Original Author of them the next thing to be enquired into is what is the great and most principal motive of Credibility to move and effectually perswade the Mind that they are the Words of God surely he who believes that there is a God cannot but assent to this proposition that whatever God hath said is true that all the Words of God are Words of truth it hath as immediate evidence to him that has the least true knowledge of God as that the whole is greater than the part That then which is only requisite to move the Mind of Man to assent to any words delivered to us as the words of God is to have a sufficient motive of Credibility given us why we should believe them to be indeed the words of God That the Prophets and Apostles knew that all the words they delivered to Men as the words of God were infallibly the words of God is generally granted by all that own the Truth of Divine Revelation the manner of their Conveyance to their Understanding being with such a Divine Power Majesty and Glory and making such a Divine Impression on them as infallibly assured them and this many times without all Miracles proposed to their outward Senses Section 8. That the Faithful have as good Assurance of the Truth and Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures by the ordinary Inspirations of the Spirit in the use of the outward Means as the Prophets had by Extraordinary and Prophetical The Distinction betwixt them explained THE great Question therefore that remains now to be considered and resolved is Whither the Faithful cannot have and actually have not as good Assurance in respect of all Fundamentals and Essentials of the Christian Faith at least that the words delivered by the Holy Prophets and Apostles were the Words of God as if they had received them in the same way and manner as the Prophets and Apostles received them which was without any external Medium such as the Ministry of Men and Books whereas the way that we now receive those words is by some external Medium to wit the Ministry of Men and Books I shall not here insist upon the external Motives of Credibility taken either from so many Thousands of the best and wisest of Men in the several Ages of the World since the words were committed to writing who have received and embraced them to be what really they are even the Words of the Living and True God or such as are taken from the Words themselves as outwardly delivered such as the Simplicity Purity Majesty and Efficacy of their Doctrine the Harmony of the several Parts the fulfilling of the many Prophecies contained in them the many other incomparable Excellencies of them the wonderful Effects they have had on many Thousands and Millions of Men in being instrumental to their Conversion from Idolatry and Ungodliness to true Piety and Sanctity all which are of great weight to convince the Reason of Men but because all this doth amount to no more but a rational Conviction and doth not beget a Divine Assent or Perswasion Therefore I conclude with all Orthodox and Sound Christians that our full Perswasion and Assurance of the Infallible Truth and Divine Authority of them is from the inward Work of the Holy Spirit by his Internal and Supernatural Illumination Inspiration and Revelation and secret and most inward Teaching in our Hearts by sensible and perceptible Impressions Sealing to the Truth of them upon our Hearts and Minds And here I think fit to guard against a two-fold Extream that I find too many run into both greatly and dangerously erroneous the one is of some that grant indeed that the Spirit doth inwardly operate in the Souls of Men and more especially in the Souls of the Faithful but this Operation or Agency and Efficiency of the Spirit they will have it only to be effective and no-wise objective that is to say no-wise perceptible or sensible to the Soul in which the Spirit doth so operate Hence it is that some of them have called this Internal Operation of the Spirit even in the Faithful Medium incognitum assentiendi the which Assertion being so repugnant to the Scripture Testimonies in many places that hold forth the Spirits internal Operations and Virtues to be as sensible upon the internal and spiritual Senses of Souls in any good degree inwardly quickned and made alive to God as the Operations of outward Light Heat Cold or the most affecting Objects of Sight Taste Smelling and Feeling are upon our outward and bodily Senses and also being so contrary to the Experience of many Thousands of true experienced Christians I shall not insist here any further to refute it The other as dangerous and erroneous Extream is of such of whom is W.P. and his Party as plainly appears by what he layeth down in this Treatise and oft elsewhere in his Books who hold That the Manner and Kind of the Spirits Internal Inspirations Revelations Illuminations and inward Teachings is the same with that which the Prophets and Apostles had that is to say that whatever they think they have a Divine Knowledge and Faith of the words which are necessary to be the Rule and Medium to the obtaining this Knowledge and Faith must be given them as they were given to the Pen-men of the Holy Scriptures to wit without the external Medium of the Holy Scriptures and without any external Teaching whatsoever and that therefore their Faith and Knowledge so far as it is Divine hath no dependence on the words delivered in the Holy Scriptures but whatever they know or believe by a Divine Knowledge and Faith it is wholly from words inwardly given them from the Spirit without all outward conveyance of Men or Books Hence it is that W.P. calls his and his Brethrens Rule of Faith and Life the eternal Precepts of the Spirit in Mens Consciences but as for the Precepts and Words outwardly delivered in Scripture they are but to him what Pythagoras and other Philosophers quoted by him Page 6. judged of other Writings to wit liveless Precepts Hence many of his Party have presumed to call them a Dead Letter Death and Carnal Yet Page 25. he is so yielding and seemingly kind to the Scriptures that he grants them to be a subordinate secondary and declaratory Rule Such a subordinate secondary and declaratory Rule saith he we never said several parts of Scripture were not Here observe for all his professed kindness to the Scriptures he will not allow all the parts of Scripture but only some parts of it to be so much as a subordinate secondary and declaratory Rule though even the Ceremonial Precepts he has as great reason to believe them to be the Words of God and consequently a Rule of Faith though not of Practise as touching the external Types as truly as any other parts of Scripture But seeing every subordinate
the Light in every Conscience as W.P. saith here in this Book or some New Revelation or discovery that neither Jews nor Turks nor other Deists have nor all Christendom but only and alone the People called Quakers But if these new Revelations be their Rule in the Case it quite overturns W. P's Fabrick of setting up a general Rule of Faith and Life in every Man's Conscience For a new Revelation that only one part of Mankind hath cannot be a general Rule W.P. makes not the Light within which he will have to be the Spirit or God himself or Christ in every Man abstractly considered from the inward discoveries Dictates and Precepts there delivered to be the general Rule which he calls the Eternal Precepts of the Spirit in the Conscience and the Noble precepts writ in Man's Heart Phrases that he has borrowed from some Heathen writers as Pythagoras and Sophocles and which are to be owned in their place to be such and to be a general Rule of Moral Justice and Temperance as is above owned but not either the general Rule of the Christian Religion with respect to its peculiar Doctrines and Precepts nor indeed so much as any Rule at all in that state nor indeed is it at all proper to call the Spirit the Rule in his Sense but rather the Dictates and discoveries of the Spirit which W.P. calls sometimes Revelation to wit Internal and the Internal Testimony of the Spirit Eternal Precepts and noble Laws writ in all Men's Hearts for the Spirit abstractly considered from all Internal and External discovery Revelation and Testimony teacheth Men nothing at all and therefore can be no Rule to them as such And seeing W.P. hath cast away the Holy Scriptures from being the Rule of Faith and Practise even to us Christians that is all and every one of the peculiar Doctrines and Precepts of Christianity that are to be sure no part of those Eternal Precepts and Laws writ in all Mens Consciences not one of them nor all of those peculiar Doctrines and Precepts are so much as a part of the Christians Rule of Faith and Life for if it were then the Christians the Deists the Mahometans and Infidel Jews should not have one general Rule of Faith and Life which he contends for Page 41. He proposeth an Objection and pretends to solve it Obj. But is not the Scripture the Judge of Controversie He should rather have made the Objection run thus Is not the Scripture the Rule whereby the Spirit of Truth who is properly the Judge doth by his inward ordinary illumination in the Faithful determine the Controversie in all the necessary things of Salvation Yea and also in many other things though not absolutely necessary yet very profitable He Answers How can that be since the Question most times arises about the meaning of Scripture I reply yet still the Scripture is the proper Rule to determine the Controversie even when the question ariseth about the meaning of the Scripture because what seemeth obscure in some places of Scripture are opened and made plain by other plain places of Scripture treating on the same Subject that are as a Key to open them with out any other Rule than the Scripture it self only there is need of the Spirits Internal Illumination and assistance to help us to use that Key especially in reference to the saving knowledge of them He proceeds in his answer to the Objection saying Is there any place to wit in Scripture tells us without Interpretation whither the Socinian or Trinitarian be in the right in their differing Apprehensions of the Three that bear record c. Also the Homousian and Arian about Christ's Divinity or the Papists or Protestants about Transubstantiation If then things are left undefin'd and undetermined I mean literally and expresly in the Scripture and that the Question arises about the Sense of words Doth the Scripture determine which of these Interpreters hit the mark From all which he concludes that not the Scripture but the Interpretation must decide the Matter in Controversie and that Interpretation must be given from the Spirit of God to be a true and infallible Interpretation Answ Seeing that Interpretation according to W.P. cannot be given from the Spirit without an extraordinary Revelation the things in Controversie being such according to W. P's Phrase and Confession P. 31. as fall not within the ordinary Discoveries that are absolutely necessary to Man's Salvation and that W.P. also grants that he and his Brethren have no such extraordinary Revelation for it is not needful being none of the absolute Necessaries to our Salvation P. 33. It evidently follows that neither W.P. nor any of his Brethren nor indeed any other Men now living whatsoever have any certainty whither the Socinian or Trinitarian be in the right that is whither Christ is God and whither Christ had any Existence before Mary and whither Christ be in any of the Faithful yea or nay yea W.P. hath no certainty of this Fundamental Principle that Christ is in him or in any of his Brethren the great reason of their Assertion that Christ is in them being that Christ is God so that if it be not certain from Scripture that Christ is God and if the Socinian Doctrine should prove true that Christ is only a Man it will evidently follow as I think W.P. will grant that it is utterly false that Christ is in any Men whatsoever and that that Light that is in Men even the most Faithful is not Christ for how can that which is only a meer Man and a meer Creature as the Socinians say that Christ only is be in all Men. Again If it cannot be determined from Scripture without extraordinary Revelation which W.P. grants neither he nor his Brethren have as touching these Matters whither the Arians or the Homonsians be in the right it evidently followeth that neither W.P. nor his Brethren are certain whither the word mentioned John 1.1 be any other than a meer Creature and consequently they are not certain but that they themselves are Idolaters who give any Divine Worship to Christ as he is that Word Also if it be not certain from Scripture whither the Papists or Protestants be in the right about Transubstantiation without extraordinary Revelation according to W. P's way of arguing If the Papists should happen to be in the right and W.P. by his Confession knoweth nothing to the contrary but that they are he and his Brethren should be guilty of horrid Contempt and Blasphemy to call that which is the Body of Christ nothing but Bread And is not this Assertion of W.P. a fair Inlet to Popery that the Scripture doth not determine expresly without Interpretation and that Interpretation cannot be had without new Revelation whither the Papists Doctrine of Transubstantiation be true So that to him at present it is a Matter of Indifferency and if W.P. should turn Papist or suppose him to be one when he declares himself he
considered as God-Man If by the Saviour of his People he means such a Saviour as saves them with eternal Salvation and makes them Heirs of God and Co heirs with Christ I say without all Faith either explicit or implicit That some of the Gentiles who endeavoured to live up to some Moral Principles discovered to them by the Light in their Consciences and the Improvements that their reasonable Faculties made being enlightned thereby by viewing the Works of Creation and general Providence had a kind of Faith and Hope in God that prompted them to expect Temporal Blessings and some Temporal Rewards from the Observation they could make that Divine Providence did ordinarily bestow such Blessings upon Men that were morally honest may and ought to be granted But this is not the Faith of God's Elect and of the Heirs of eternal Salvation that is grounded upon the Faithful Word of God and his Faithful Promises first delivered to his Holy Prophets and Apostles and by them to us even such a word of Faith as that It is a faithful saying that Jesus Christ is come into the World to save Sinners 1 Tim. 1.15 For to him gave all the Prophets witness as Peter preached to Cornelius that whoever believeth in him should receive remission of Sins Acts 10.43 God's Promises come not to Men nor ever came to them by the common Dictates of the Light within whither they call it God or the Word or the Spirit there are diversities of Operations Gifts and Ministrations inward as well as outward of one God one Lord and one Spirit who is over all in all and through all It is but a faint Hope and Faith that Men can have in God without the Promises and without all special Revelation The knowledge of God's Goodness discoverable by the Light in every Conscience in the Works of Creation and Providence may give Men that are morally honest some probable Faith that he will be favourable to them But the infallible ground of certainty concerning eternal Life and Salvation none ever had or can have without the Promises and special Revelation For all the Light and Knowledge that the Ephesian Gentiles had in their meer Gentile State Paul told That at that time they were without hope and without the Promises and aliens and strangers to the common-wealth of Israel Eph. 2.12 An indigent Man that knows a good Man that is able to help him yet he is not sure that he will help him unless he has his promise and some particular intimation of his mind but if he have that then his Faith hath sure footing But the Faithful have not only God's Word and Promises but confirmed by his Oath that by two immutable things they might have strong Confidence and Hope that is as an Anchor sure and stedfast and which enters within the Vail whither the Fore-runner hath gone But there is nothing of this sort of Faith that I can find as any-wise necessary or essential to the Religion here described in this Treatise of W.P. but pure Deism and at best refined Paganism all along as will further appear in what follows I find in Page 50 of the same Treatise a quite differing Definition of Faith which if not plainly contradictory to the former is very disingenous and full of Equivocation but whatever way it be taken if he adhere to it and allow it to be a proper Definition where the Definition it self in the parts of it ought to be essential to the thing defined and such as the thing defined cannot be without it yields as sufficient Argument against his Position That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith His Definition is this Faith is yielding up to the requirings of God's Spirit in us in full assurance of the Remission of Sins that are past through the Son of his love and Life everlasting Several things are faulty in this Definition First That he confounds the Effect or Concomitant of Faith with Faith it self for the yielding up or Resignation to God's Requirings is rather an Effect or Concomitant of Faith than Faith it self especially in the present case as it hath respect to the Rule which determines what is to be believed or assented unto upon the Credit of Divine Authority Secondly That he makes Remission of Sins to be antecedent and prior to Faith which is the Error of the Antinomians and plainly contradictory to the Scripture that holds forth both Repentance and Faith to be necessary Requisites in order to Forgiveness Thirdly That he makes full Assurance of Remission of Sins to be of the Nature of Faith whereas there is a Faith of Adhesion that is true Faith that many of the Faithful have who have not arrived to that full Assurance But that which I principally notifie in this his last Definition is That he makes this full Assurance of the Remission of Sins to be through the Son of God's love Where that the Equivocation and Fallacy may be discovered I ask him what he means by the Son of his Love through which this Assurance if Remission of Sins is obtained If he means by the Son of his Love only the Light within every Man's Conscience it is a palpable Equivocation and inserted on purpose to deceive the Christian Readers who generally by Mens having Remission of Sins through the Son of God's Love do understand the Son of God's Love to be the Word Incarnate to wit Jesus Christ God-man as he died for our Sins by his Death to purchase to us the Pardon of them But this sense of the words which is the true Scripture sense and the sense of all true Christians W.P. doth not admit if he adhere to what he hath said both here and in his other Books for in his Serious Apology Page 146. he saith in behalf of himself and Brethren That that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem was properly the Son of God we utterly deny And here in this Book he makes it not any of the absolute Necessaries in Religion but some considerable Matters superadded P. 44. That God was manifested extraordinarily in the Flesh that he gave his Life for the World that such as believe and obey his Grace in their Hearts receive Remission of Sins and Life everlasting But which way soever he understands these words The Son of God's Love seeing he makes the Rule of every Man's Faith not to be the Words of God declaring his Promise of Forgiveness as outwardly delivered in the Holy Scriptures but the Light in every Man's Conscience he is bound to give us some better proof than his simple Affirmation That the Light in every Man's Conscience or indeed in any Man's conscience reveals to him God's Will to forgive Sins without all special Revelation or Declaration of God's Will as contained in the Holy Scriptures seeing the Holy Scriptures do hold it forth as one of the great Secrets and Mysteries of God's Will declared to Men by the special Revelation of the Holy
Spirit through his Holy Prophets and Apostles even Remission of Sin and Free Justification by Jesus Christ through Faith in him and not by any Works or Obedience that either the Jew did perform to the outward Law or the Gentile did perform to the Law writ in the Heart When Peter preached Remission of Sin by Faith in Jesus Christ whom the Jews hang'd on the Tree to Cornelius he confirm'd this Doctrine not from the eternal Precepts in every Man's Conscience or the common Dictates of the Light in every Man but from the general Testimony of the Prophets Acts 10.43 To him said Peter give all the Prophets witness that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive Remission of Sins But according to W. P's Doctrine the Apostle Peter should have said To him the Light in every Conscience gave the Dictates of that Light in every Conscience witness That whosoever gave up to the Requirings of the Light in them without all Faith in Christ God-man without them shall receive the Remission of their Sins And seeing whatever is the Rule of Faith must teach us all that is needful to Salvation by it self as W.P. argueth he must prove that the Light in every Man's Conscience dictateth to him this Proposition That is thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved Rom. 10.9 Or if it doth dictate some other way than this then that and the like places of Scripture contradict the Dictates of the Light within But that this Proposition laid down Rom. 10.9 is no Dictate of the Light within in Mens Consciences is evident from W. P's plain Confession P. 32 33. who saith That the Light within should tell us that Christ suffered Death and rose again is not needed inasmuch as an account of that is extant in Scripture Whereby it plainly appears he holds it not needful to our Salvation to believe that Proposition Rom. 10.9 seeing the Light within that is the Rule of Faith doth not reveal it and such Revelation is not necessary and consequently according to him the belief of that Proposition Rom. 10.9 is not necessary to any for Salvation And if that be not necessary by the same method of Argument according to W.P. nor is the belief of all the other parts of Scripture necessary to Salvation which are not the common Dictates of the Light in every Conscience The only use of the whole Scripture according to W.P. is meerly Historical which though perhaps true is nowise necessary to our Salvation to believe the truth of it but we are left at liberty to believe or disbelieve all and every part of what is contained in the Scripture without any danger to our Salvation excepting these few absolute necessaries that the Light within every Conscience teacheth us as well as the Scriptures But none of all the twelve Articles of the Apostle's Creed according to the true Sense of Scripture or the common received Sense of all true Christians are taught by the Light within without the external Revelation of the Scripture therefore according to W.P. the belief of none of these twelve Articles is necessary to our Salvation The which being the plain Import of W. P's Doctrine laid down in his Book whither it be not Plain Deism appearing with open face I appeal to all sincere Christians Section 2. His Arguments from Scripture that the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life Answered HE begins with his Proofs Page 4. That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the general Rule of Faith and Life from Matt. 11.27 and 1 Cor. 2.11 he argues That because the Father cannot be known but by the Revelation of the Son and Holy Spirit consequently that Light metioned John 1.3 or Spirit must have been the general Rule of Mens Knowledge Faith and Obedience with respect to God Answ His Consequence is denied he gives no proof of it yea it is manifestly false and to discover its Fallacy observe how he confounds the efficient Cause and Author of Knowledge and Faith with the Rule which he ought to distinguish He might as well argue no Man sees what hour it is on a Sun-dyal but by the Sun and consequently the Sun and not the Dyal is the Rule whereby he knows the hour Page 5. His next Argument is from Eph. 5.13 Whatever makes manifest is Light therefore the Light in the Conscience is the general Rule Answ The Consequence again is denied it has the same defect as the former as will appear by forming the like Argument Whatever makes manifest an outward object to our Eye is some outward light of Sun Moon or Candle c. Therefore that alone without the object manifests it and also without the Organ of sight who sees not the Fallacy of this Argument and as much he may see the Fallacy of the other The next place of Scripture he argueth from is Rom. 1.19 which he falsly quotes as I have observed he hath misquoted this place both here and in pag. 21 for thus he quotes it WHATEVER might be known of God was made manifest within for God who is Light hath shewn it unto them But let the place it self be considered and it saith not WHATEVER but what is to be known of God is manifest in them to wit the Gentiles or Heathen Nations who had not the peculiar Doctrines of the Christian Faith revealed to them or Preached among them And that the words what is to be known of God cannot be meant of WHATEVER can or is to be known of God was manifest in them as the Text doth not say it so it is a manifest Falshood It cannot be said of the best Christians â—hat whatever is to be known of God is made manifest in them for the best know but in part and there is still more to be known of God even in the best of Christians than what is at present revealed or made manifest in them And it is very evident from the following words what Paul meant by that saying What is to be known of God or as it is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 viz. The Eternal power and God-Head which was made manifest partly by the things made or created without Men and partly by some Divine Illumination within them But doth it therefore follow that because those Heathens had some knowledge of the Eternal Power and God-head that therefore they knew all the fundamental Princiles of the Christian Religion By no means more than it followeth that W.P. knoweth some things of England and some other Countries partly by History and partly by his sight of them therefore he knows the whole Earth so far as it is habitable He brings another Proof That the Light in every Man's Conscience is the Rule of Faith and Life from Micah 6.8 He hath shewed unto thee O Man what is good and what God requireth of thee
Light within which all Mankind had as well as the Jews but the outward Word of Doctrine delivered by the Prophets according to Psal 147.19 He shewed his Word unto Jacob c. The which external Word he calls Sect. 1. Aliud melius adminiculum i. e. another and better help which was necessary to direct us rightly to the Creator of the World comparing it with whatever other helps God had given to Mankind without them or within them which he calls Communia illa Documenta those common Documents the which external Word he saith is Rectior certior ad ipsum Cognoscendum nota i. e. a more right and more sure Mark whereby to know him which also he calls the Rule of the Eternal verity and cap. 9. Sect. 1. l. 1. inst He calleth them Nebulones i. e. Knaves and chargeth them with Nefarious Sacriledge that divide the Word to wit the external Word from the Spirit which God hath Joyned together by an inviolable Bond and in the Title of that Chapter he calleth them Fanaticks and saith They overthrow all the Principles of Piety who despising the Scripture to wit considered as the Rule flee over to Revelation pretending to be taught by the Spirit without the external Word Where it is evident he doth not mean that whoever are taught by the outward Word are sufficiently taught without the Spirit but that whoever are taught Savingly to know God as the Creator or Christ the Redeemer they are taught of the Spirit with and by the external Word as the instrument of the Spirit which he hath given to us for a Rule of Faith and Life not that it 's the Rule to the Spirit but the Rule to us of the Spirits giving and preparing and which he perswades us to be Truth by his secret operation in us And as unfair and fallacious as W.P. hath been in wresting misapplying and abusing Calvin's words to prove that he was not of another Mind than W.P. viz. That the Scriptures is not the Rule of Faith and Life he is as unfair absurd and fallacious in his quoting other late Protestant Authors as Bish Jewel Dr. Ames Dr. Owen all which are sufficiently known by their Books to be of a contrary Mind as much as one thing can be to another The Quotations indeed taken out of those Authors prove that they did assert the necessity of the Spirits inward Operation in the Souls of Men to perswade them to believe the Truth of the Scriptures and the necessity of his Internal Illumination to give the Saving understanding of them as particularly the quotation given out of J. Calvin instit lib. 1. c. 8. who gives the Sense of all those Authors and indeed of all true Christians viz. It is necessary the same Spirit that spake by the Mouth of the Prophets should pierce into our Hearts to perswade us that they faithfully delivered that which was committed to them of God which he illustrates by the word Obsignare elsewhere in that Book that is by Sealing to the truth of them but this does not prove that this inward Obsignation of the Spirit is the Rule of Faith even in Calvin's sense or that the Scripture was not that Rule Page 36 It 's strange that W.P. should bring a proof against the Lawfulness of Swearing from the Conviction of the Light within some Jews long before Christ came to wit the Esseni that when the Scriptures of the Old Testament made it lawful to Swear in some Cases if W.P. believes that the Spirit of God did Dictate these Scriptures that the same Spirit in the Esseni should teach them that it was unlawful even while the Mosaical dispensation was yet standing But how proves he that the Esseni did think Swearing unlawful from a Conviction of the Light within them when others of the most faithful of the Jews both then and before that time did Judge Swearing Lawful and that from the declared and revealed Will of God in the Old Testament that came from the Light within in Moses and the Prophets that was in force until Christ suffered as to all the other parts of it If he will allow that the eternal Precepts of the Spirit in the Conscience command one thing to some and the quite contradictory to another surely at this rate the Light within must be a very uncertain Rule for by this Concession one may take the liberty to say his Light within commands him to Kill to Steal to commit Adultery though the same Light in another forbids it I had thought that by the Eterprecepts in the Conscience W.P. had meant those unchangeable Precepts and Laws of Justice and Temperance c which in all Ages have been the same to all Men and will ever be the same to all so long as the World lasteth But now it seems even the Precepts of Light within are not Eternal but Temporal and may be changed and one may be commanded to Swear or permitted without Sin to Swear and another forbidden But there are two things that W.P. in his instance of the Esseni that would not Swear which he quotes out of Josephus and Philo. That they shun Oaths worse than Perjury for they esteem him Condemned for a Lyer who without it is not believed should prove neither of which he hath done First That they held it Unlawful in any Case to Swear even when called before Authority for it may rather be thought it was common Swearing they were against a thing that was too ordinary among the Jews seeing the Law did allow Swearing in a Judicial way Levit. 5. that was then in force Secondly Suppose they were against all Swearing that they had this from the Light within them it is much more probable it was an erronious Opinion in them which could not proceed from the Light within otherwise it had contradicted the standing Law of God without then in force which not only allowed Swearing but commanded it upon necessary Occasions And as idle and impertinent are his Instances of Pythagoras the Scythians in King Alexander's time and Clinias all which lived some hundreds of Years before Christ came in the Flesh Now if Swearing was lawful by the Law of God among the Jews in those Ages How can we suppose it unlawful among the Gentiles since I know not one Instance can be given that the Light in any Gentile did condemn what the Light within or Law of God without in the Jews did justifie for this were to set Light against Light It 's nothing to the purpose if some in these ancient Times were against Swearing but the Question is Whither it was the Light in them that taught them so or rather whither it was not an erronious Opinion like that of not eating Flesh said to be taught also by Pythagoras was that thinks W.P. from the Light within If so How does the Light in him allow him to eat it and to take his liberty in diverse things that the Severity of Pythagoras's Doctrine did not