5. If the _Iewes_ did repute, and hold this action (which is never to be named without an epethite of horrour) necessary, they would not expose themselves to so eminent a danger, to so cruell and more deserved punishment, unlesse they were moved to it by some divine precept; or at least, some constitution of their wise men. Now we challenge all those men who entertain this dreadfull opinion of us, as obliged in point of justice, to cite the place of Scripture, or of the Rabbins, where any such precept, or doctrine is delivered. And untill they do so, we will assume so much liberty, as to conclude it to be no better then a malicious slander. 6. If a man, to save his life, may break the Sabbath, and transgresse many of the other commands of the law, as hath been determined in the Talmud; as also confirmed by R. _Moses_ of _Egypt_, in the fifth Chapter of his treatise of the fundamentalls of the law; yet three are excepted, which are, _idolatry_, _murther_, and _adultery_; life not being to be purchased at so dear a rate, as the committing of these heinous sins: an innocent death being infinitely to be preferred before it. Wherefore if the killing of a Christian, as they object, were a divine precept, and institution, (which far be it from me to conceive) it were certainly to be null’d and rendred void, since a man cannot perform it, without indangering his own life; and not onely so, but the life of the whole congregation of an entire people; and yet more, since it is directly a violation of one of these three precepts, _Thou shalt do no murder_: which is intended universally of all men, as we have said before.