A collection of the several books and writings of that faithful servant of God, Richard Hubberthorn who finished his testimony (being a prisoner in Newgate for the truths sake) the 17th of the 6th month, 1662.

But on the contrary, from the Scripture it is proved, that the Believers and Christians are not to swear at all; Therefore to them that are in Christ Jesus no Oath is lawful.

WE read in the Scriptures of truth, Matt. 5.19. That who∣soever breaketh the least commandment, and teacheth men so, he shall be least (or not at all) in the Kingdom of God.

But we do find some men, especially John Tombs breaking the commands of Christ, and teaching men so, therefore he is guilty of that judgment: but to the first proposition which is this:

That some swearing is lawful.

His proofs are these:

That which is not de toto genere, in its whole kind evil, may be lawful; but swearing is not de toto genere, or in its whole kind e∣vil therefore some swearing may be lawful.

Answ. This argument is thus disproved.

To break any of Christs commands, or to deny the Apostles Doctrine, is de toto genere, in its whole kind evil; but to swear at all by any Oath is to break the command of Christ, and to de∣ny the Apostles doctrine, as Mat. 5.35, 36, 37. and Jam. 5.12. Therefore to swear at all is not lawful, but evil, according to Christ and the Apostles Doctrine and in the state of condemna∣tion, Jam 5.

Again John Tombs concluding that his major is manifest of it self, goes

To prove this minor thus.

That is not wholly evil about the use of which some Directi∣ons

are given by God; but God giveth directions about the use of swearing, as Jer. 4.2. And thou shalt swear the Lord liveth in truth and judgment and righteousness; ergo.

Answ. By the same argument may it as well be proved that the Christians and believers in ••hrist may be circumcised, offer incense, burnt-offerings and sacrifices, because for the use of it God gave some directions, and therefore it is lawful: but as circumcision, incense, burnt-offerings and sacrifices of the Law is ended in Christ, so is the Oaths which was among the Jews in him ended also to the Believers, and by him forbidden: for it was said of old time, Thou shalt swear, and shalt perform thy oath to the Lord; but Christ in the 5. of Mat. makes men∣tion of the Jews oath which God gave once directions for, yet saith he, Swear not at all; here Christ puts an end not onely to frivolous and vain oaths, but to the true oaths which the Jews was once commanded of God to swe••r; for these oaths are they which Christs words hath relation to; for he came to end the Jews worships and oaths, who is the oath of God; Christ the truth and righteousness of God saith, Swear not at all, which ends the Jews, which was to swear in truth and righteous∣ness.

2 Argument.

That which is approved by God is lawful; but some swearing is approved by God, Psal. 63.11. Every one that sweareth by God shall glory; ergo.

Answ. That Scripture Psal. 63.11. saith thus, but the King shall rejoyce in God; every one that sweareth by him shall glory; but the mouth of them that speak lyes shall be stopped. This was spoken of David the Anointed of God, who was in that co∣venant of the Law, wherein he might swear in truth and righteousness, that oath, As the Lord liveth, and as my soul liveth; but there was some in that time, which if they used that Oath, the Lord liveth, surely they swear falsly, Jer. 5.2.

But what is that to the Christians under the new Covenant who are under Christs command, who saith, Swear not at all, neither by that oath which David and the Jews swore by, nor any other oath? but if upon any occasion they were required to testifie their obedience whether they would be subject to

such or such things, their answer was to be yea or nay, and to keep their words; which is more then the hypocrites and hire∣ling Priests in these times hath done by their oaths; for this we have good experience of, that such as do now plead to swear for a thing, hath sworn against the same thing, and do now preach against that which they have preached for, so that they will preach, pray, or swear any thing for their belly, and for filthy lucre; and the oath which David was to swear in truth and righteousness who called Christ Lord, he that was Davids Lord and glory saith, Swear not at all, who hath all power and glory.

Again, whereas John Tombs instanceth Abraham, Isaac, David, Solomon, Elijah, Micah, Elisha, the women of Shunem, and Itai, Uriah, and Samuel, &c. their swearing and entring into covenant to be examples for swearing.

Answ. All these were under the first covenant, and was in that which Christ called the old time, Mat. 5. and proves nothing that Christians in the new covenant should swear; for although A∣braham swore, and Solomon swore, yet Christ which was before Abraham, and greater then Solomon, saith, Swear not at all; and al∣though David swore, ye•• he was Davids Lord which said, Swear not a•• all; and though the Angels swore by him that liveth for ever, yet Christ unto whom all the Angels shall bow and worship, saith, Swear not at all; so that all these arguments and Scriptures doth not prove that it is lawful for the Believers and Christians to swear at all, but it is Tombs ignorance in his applying Scripture in disobeying Christs command.

Again, To prove swearing lawful John Tombs saith that Paul put an oath on the Thessalonians, 1 Thess. 5.27. which words are these, I charge you by the Lord that this Epistle be read unto all the holy bre∣thren: Now saith Tombs the Greek word transl••ted I charge you by the Lord, is, I put the Lords oath on you, or swear you that this Epistle be read to all the holy brethren; a like charge are 1 Tim. 6.13. 2 Tim. 4.1. &c.

Answ. This is the long and thick mist of darkness which hath been long kept over the understandings of people, that when the plain Scripture will not prove their ends and intents, then they tell people it is otherwise in the Greek, or Hebrew; did not the Translator of the Bible understand Greek as well as John Tombs? or are we not to believe the Scripture as it speaks,

till again it be translated by him? but lest he should be wise in his own eys, as it is in the Greek it is here set down, that all that can read and understand it, may judge whether Paul did put an Oath upon them, or did swear them to read that Epistle to the brethren.

As 1 Thess. 5.27. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, I oblige or charge you in the presence of God, &c. Not, I put the Lords oath upon you, or swear you, as John Tombs saith; for if they did read the Epistle among the brethren, then his obligation or charge to them was fulfilled; but seeing John Tombs saith he swore them, he might have declared in what manner they were sworn, seeing Paul was at Athens when he wrote to Thessalonica.

Again he saith the like charge is in 1 Tim. 6.13. which accord∣ing to the Greek he would make an oath; the words are these, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, I enjoyn or command thee before God, not a putting an oath upon them, or causing them to swear, as John Tombs saith.

Again, he saith there is the like charge (or oath) put upon them in 2 Tim. 4.1. which in the Greek is thus, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉; that is, I charge thee in the presence of God, &c. Not that he took him sworn, or put an oath upon him, that the should preach the word but did charge him to be instant in season▪ and out of season in his Ministery.

Again John Tombs saith in the times of the Gospel Paul used this Oath 2 Cor. 1.8. But as God is true, &c.

Answ. Now those that mind this Scripture may see that Paul doth onely justifie Christs words in keeping to yea and nay, say∣ing that with him it was not yea and nay; for saith he, ver. 18. but as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay, and ver. 19. for the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among you by us, even by me and Sylvanus and Timotheus, was not yea and nay for all the promises of God in him are yea, and in him Amen.

So that; this Scripture is so far from bringing people to Oaths and swearing that he labours to bring them all to yea and nay in all things, and so to Christ the substance, in whom all the promises of God are yea; so that the Apostle might well use these vvords, That as God vvas true, &c. so also vvere they true to their yea and nay, the end of all oaths; other Scrip∣ture

Tombs bring to prove the Apostles did swear, as Rom. 1.9. and 9.1. Gal. 1.20 Phil. 1.8.

Answ. As to the first, Rom. 1.9. where the Apostle saith, for God is my witness whom I serve with my spirit in the Gospel of hi•• Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you alwayes in my prayers; is this a proof for men to swear and take oathes ei∣ther for men or against men? hath not the man here lost the un∣derstanding of a man? thus to compare and call this the Apostles oath when he takes God to witness that he prayes for the Saints continually; and his saying in Rom. 9 1. I speak the truth in Christ, I lye not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the holy Ghost, that I have great heavinesse, and continual sorrow in my heart &c, and Gal. 1.20. where the Apos••le saith. Now the things that I write unto you, behold before God I lye not, is this an oath to testifie the truth of his writings against lyes? indeed this we desire that John Tombs and the rest of the Priests in this Nation would write nothing but what God would witness unto the truth of, and that they would speak truth before God and not lye; then they would not thus abuse the Apostles words, and plead for swearing from them, when as the Apostles intend no such thing in their words here asserted: and whereas it is again said that the Apostle took and oath. Ph••l. 1.8. where he saith for God is my record how greatly I long after you in the bowels of Jesu•• Christ. Now let all honest and sober-hearted men consider whether the truth of God and the Apostles that speak it forth be not abused, that from a novice that is lifted up in pride, and that would do or say any thing for his hire, he should bring those Scripture to plead for swearing and that lawfulnesse of oathes, in all which the Apostle took God to witnesse his love to the Saints and labour in the work of his ministry, signifying to all that understand how that he spoke the truth and did not lye, and kept to his yea and nay according to Christs doctrine (and did not swear at all.)

Now further to prove swearing Lawful, John Tombs brings

This fifth argument.

That which hath a necessary use for the benefit of humane society is not unlawfull; but some swearing hath a necessary use for the benefit of humane society; ergo.

Answ This argument is thus disproved, and both the major and minor, to be false.

For to break any command of Christ is of no necessary use for humane society; but to swear any oath is to break his command; ergo. For Godlines•• is profitable unto all men, in all their soci∣eties; bat he that swears goes from Godlin••sse into ungod∣linesse and trangression, which trangression is of no use nor service amongst Christians; so that John Tombs might as well have thus stated his Argument, that to break Christs command is of benefit to humane society, therefore to break Christs command is lawfull &c. and might thus have proved it, that exc••pt we break Christs command, we cannot preach for hire nor sue men at the Law for tythes, nor live in pride, ease, and vanity, nor keep our places of profit, and benefit, which is necessary for our society (of Priests) ergo.

But we whose eyes God hath opened, do see that all his book tends to the perswading of people to swear, when Christ hath said Swear not at all, and that which he now would swear for, again; he vvould svvear against for the same advantage & profit vvhich he hath in his eye; yea or he vvould persvvade all men not to svvear and bring Scripture to prove it upon the same account, so that vvhat he doth in this kind is because of advantage: for tvvo years since he did not preach this doctrine nor vvrite those arguments.

Novv it being proved that the follovvers of Christ, and belie∣vers in him are not to svvear at all, then all those promissory oaths upon vvhich John Tombs hath grounded his other propositi∣ons, is not to be taken: But again to prove an oath of suprema∣cy to King Cesar, he brings the example and rule of Christ, and argues thus, If the Lord Christ in the dayes of his flesh did ac∣kovvledge Cesar as supreme Governor in his dominions, and did subject himself to his jurisdiction in ansvvering before the Roman Deputy, and vvas obedient to his parents real or supposed; then all Christians even the highest Ecclesiastical Prelate should be subject to the King as supreme Governor in his Dominions; and for proof of this he brings Mat. 22 21. vvhen the Pharisees shevved sus the Tribute money, Christ bid them Give unto Cesar that vvhich vvas Cesars, & unto God the things that are Gods; so then it vvas the tribute money that vvas due to Cesar: but doth this prove that Christ did swear, or vvas any example of svvearing to Cesar, or account C••sar the head of the Church & Ruler in Eccle∣siastical things? so that this Scripture proves the contrary then for

that which thou brings it; for those Pharisees that brought the money to Christ, said they knew that be respected no mans person, but taught the way of God in Truth; so then if Christ be our ex∣ample and rule in this, then to the supream King or Kings we must not respect their persons, but give them their due, which is that tribute wh••ch hath their own superscription upon it; and we must teach the way of God in Truth, & give unto God the things which are Gods, which is all honour, glory, and rule in spiritual matters, and give to Ch••ist alone the pr••heminence, which is head of his body which is his Church, and we must not swear at all, nei∣ther for nor against any man; for Christ did not swear neither for nor against Cesar, and we must live peaceably with all men, nor envy nor fight for nor against any man; and this is quite con∣trary to what Jo. Tombs would perswade people, or to what he understands from the Scripture, which would make people believe that Christ was an example of the oath of supremacy to Cesar, so that people may well be blind & ignorant who hath such Teachers.

But we also shall follow the example of Christ, as 1. Tim. 6; 13. who did witnesse a good confession before Po••tius Pilate; and this is a good confession before any King or Ru••er now to say that we have obeyed the Truth from our heart, and have not broken the Commands of Christ by swearing for, or against any; neither have we transgrest the example of Christ in respecting any mans person, neither do we in our hearts envy any man, King, Ruler, or people, but hath love even to our enemies, and can do good to them that hate us, and can pray for them that persecute us, and do desire and daily labour that all men might come to the knowledge of the Truth, that they might be saved. And this good Confession we can witnesse before the King, or any in Authority, and say that God is our witnesse, and our Conscience also bears us witnesse in the sight of God, as the Apostle did, and we can say also that we speak the Truth before God, and lye not; for our eyes is not blinded with gifts and rewards, neither have we taken Oath, Covenants, nor Protestations for Parties, Powers, or Religions, but since we knew the way of Christ, we have walked in it, and kept to his Commandement & Oath, which is yea & nay in all things, & so have not entred in condemnation with those that are given to change; but the unchangeable Priest, the unchangeable Covenant, and unchangeable Law hath been

our Rule, and of this we need not be ashamed, but in Gods power and Authoritie can we hold up our heads, when others do bow down their backs alwayes (crouching under every power and change of Government) as Davids enemies did, Psal. 69.23. for that is their place & condition, as the Apostle doth witness, Rom. 11.10

Again Jo. Tombs saith, that Paul a Saint was subject to the judge∣ment of Cesar and appealed to him; then he acknowledged him supream, &c, ergo.

Answ. Paul was a Prisoner for the word of God and testimony of Jesus, and appealed to Cesar for justice, because he was unjust∣ly accused, and had not done any thing worthy of bonds or of death; therefore according to their Law he ought to be set free; but Paul did not call Cesar the supream head of the Church, and chief Ruler in Ecclesiastical things; for if Cesar had been the supream head of the Church of which Paul was a member, he would have needed but little appealing unto for setting of him at liberty; but in such Arguments as Tombs hath used, is manifest the ignorance of foolish men, wherein their folly appears to all men, as the Scripture saith, 2 Tim. 3.9.

And whereas thou sayest that there is holy and harmlesse Christians, and many upright soules whose Consciences are very tender, and many godly persons that have excepted against that Oath, and the lawfulness of taking of it, as fearing it may take away the liberty of their Consciences, which is dearer to them then their lives?

Ans. These that are so, are in a better condition then thy self, and to such thy ministery if received, would beget them from their holy and harmlesse state, into trangression of Christs command, and from the tendernesse of Conscience into hardnesse of heart; and now to answer their objections thou tells them that it was imposed for excluding of the Popes jurisdiction, &c. if so, why doft thou preach it up to be imposed upon the holy, harmlesse, godly Christians, who are redeemed from the Popes power and jurisdiction, and is come into the doctrine of Christ and into the life of Christ, which is out of all such Oaths.

Thou art a miserable Comforter to tender Consciences; but thy end is seen, & therefore thou canst not deceive many; but for those that thou hast before mentioned, who are holy, harmless upright,

and godly, which are tender of an Oath; they ought to be thy Teachers, who thy self art far from righteousness or tenderness of Conscience; therefore for thee it is a shame to be an imposer of Oaths upon tender Consciences, who professest thy self a Minister of Christ, who did forbid all swearing; and his Ministers did preach against it, and said, Above all things swear not at all, lest they fall into condemnatien, and not into the obedience to Christ's command; therefore they that fear God, will turn away from such. 2 Tim. 3.5.

Now saith John Tombs, the grand objection against swearing is our Saviour words, Mat. 5.34, 35, 36, 37. and Jam. 5.12. which words (saith he) doth seem expresly and fully to forbid any swearing at all, excluding some sorts of Oaths by name, and the rest by general terms, that our communication should be yea, yea, nay, nay, and what is more, cometh of evil, or of the evil one; yet saith he, We must of necessity find out a limitation of the speeches, as we do; and the limitation is this, that is, fre∣quent, vain, light, prophane, unnecessary, customary, passionate swearing, or in secular matters of no importance, in these Scrip∣tures are forbidden.

Ans. Indeed it doth plainly app••ar that thou must of necessity either disprove Chris••'s words, or else deny thy own, seeing they are contrary the one to the other; so therefore thou saist that it was those oaths abovementioned that was forbidden by Christ and the Apostles. And I shall shew it plainly that thou hast no necessity to limit Christs words to vain and prophane swearing, (but only that thou wouldst have thy words true, and his false) for Christs words in Mat. 5. doth not intend such Oaths; for he speaks of the true Oaths which was used among the Jews, and such Oaths as Christ told them they were to perform; for it was not said in old time, that they should perform vain, light, pro∣phane, unnecessary, customary and passionate oaths, but such as they were to perform betwixt the Lord and them, & the solemn vows & covenants which they made in old time to their Kings, and one unto another, the Christians now by the command of Christ was not to swear these Oaths, neither any Oath true nor false; so that Christ is not to be limited to intend vain Oaths; when as for instance, Christ mentions the Jews swearing, who was in the Commandment, who did deny all vain, customary, false, and passionate swearing; so that Jo. Tomb's limitation is

taken away, and Christs meaning must be as large as his words, which is not to swear at all by any Oath, but to keep to yea and nay in all promises, professions and engagements upon all occa∣sions, and so to keep out of the condemnation, whereby all peo∣ples consciences may be kept clean to the Lord in all things, and they brought to the exercise of a good Conscience; for the Lord is now teaching his people himself, and bringing them to obey the doctrine of his Son, in which they may find peace for their souls, and not to be in bondage unto such Teachers as are given to change with every Government, who preach as the false Pro∣phets did, for handfuls of barley, and pieces of bread, & such are they who preach the lawfulness of swearing (or sinning) a∣gainst Christs command; but the Lord hath made them manifest, and is redeeming his Elect and Chosen from amongst such who have made a prey upon people, and fed upon their sins, but not upon the life which the Saints was in.