IESVIT.
Secondly, their exposition is not onely violent against [ E] the Text, but also incongruous against the sence; for Gods prohibition of a thing, doth also forbid the intention thereof. In the precept, Thou shalt not kill, the inten∣tion
To the extent possible under law, the Text Creation Partnership has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above, according to the terms of the CC0 1.0 Public Domain Dedication (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/). This waiver does not extend to any page images or other supplementary files associated with this work, which may be protected by copyright or other license restrictions. Please go to http://www.textcreationpartnership.org/ for more information.
Secondly, their exposition is not onely violent against [ E] the Text, but also incongruous against the sence; for Gods prohibition of a thing, doth also forbid the intention thereof. In the precept, Thou shalt not kill, the inten∣tion
of murther is sufficiently forbidden; so that he who [ A] makes a sword with purpose to murther his enemie, sinnes against the Precept, Thou shalt not kill: wherefore if Gods Precept had beene thus, Thou shalt not weare about thee any weapon, Thou shalt not kill, the prohi∣bition of wearing weapons should haue beene absolute, and not onely with purpose of murther. In like manner, Gods Precept, Thou shalt not adore Images, doth sufficiently forbid intention to adore them, and so consequently forbids [ B] the making of Images, with such an intention; so that if not to make Jmages, be nothing else than not to haue pur∣pose to adore them, a whole long sentence in the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 is superfluous, and without any speciall sence, which is scarcely credible.