A09432:447
A godly and learned exposition of Christs Sermon in the Mount
A godly and learned exposition of Christs Sermon in the Mount: preached in Cambridge by that reverend and judicious divine M. William Perkins. Published at the request of his executors by Th. Pierson preacher of Gods word. Whereunto is adjoined a twofold table: one, of special points here handled; the other, of choice places of Scripture here quotedA godly and learned exposition of Christs Sermon in the Mount: preached in Cambridge by that reuerend and iudicious diuine M. William Perkins. Published at the request of his exequutors by Th. Pierson preacher of Gods word. Whereunto is adioyned a twofold table: one, of speciall points here handled; the other, of choise places of Scripture here quoted
Cambridge : Printed by Thomas Brooke and Cantrell Legge, printers to the University of Cambridge, 1608Cambridge : Printed by Thomas Brooke and Cantrell Legge, printers to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge, 1608
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Reasons against this form of swearing by the creatures, are these.1 First, an oath is part of Gods worship, as hath before been showed: now every part of Gods worship must be referred to God directly; so we pray and give thanks unto God directly, and not in the creature, and so we ought to swear; but in indirect swearing by the creatures, the oath is directly referred to the creature, and indirectly unto God, namely in the creature; which is not lawful. Secondly, a man must ⟨p. 160⟩swear aby him that is greater then himself, and therefore bGod sware by himself because there was no greater to swear by; where it seemeth, the holy Ghost takes it for granted, that there is no lawful swearing by the creatures; because they are not greater then man, and so there must be but one only direct kind of swearing, by God himself. Thirdly, Deut. 6. 13. Thou shalt swear by my name: there it seemeth he prescribeth4 such a form of swearing▪ wherein the name of God in some plain manner is expressed; but in indirect oaths, an other besides him that sweareth, cannot tell whether he swear by God or not, because the oath is by the creature, and directed to God only in the mind of him that sweareth. Fourthly, Math. 13. 16. He that sweareth by the 5Temple, sweareth by God: whence I gather, that an indirect oath is superfluous, because it is sufficient that a man swear by God only, and not by the creature also.
Reasons against this forme of swearing by the creatures, are these.1 First, an oath is part of Gods worship, as hath before beene shewed: now euery part of Gods worship must be referred to God directly; so we pray and giue thankes vnto God directly, and not in the creature, and so we ought to sweare; but in indirect swearing by the creatures, the oath is directly referred to the creature, and indirectly vnto God, namely in the creature; which is not lawfull. Secondly, a man must