the Church is one The aduersaries withstand this conclusion and infring it with these arguments First the scripture is not written in mens hearts with the finger of God neither is it the primary voice of God Secondly the scripture is of no antiquity Thirdly it is obscure Fourthly ambiguous c. Bellarmine ads more to these of which ye may read in him They conclude that the voice of the Church is the principall and proper voice of the holy Ghost as he is the Iudge of controuersies Their proofe is this The scripture is written in the heart of the Church with Gods own finger this is the primary voice of God And whatsoeuer excellency wee doe ascribe to the scripture that they attribute to their owne Church which is nothing els but a den of theeues And that the spirit being this great iudge is not bound to one sort of men as those of the Ecclesiasticall function the Pope and Councels as they speak but doth performe this office without all respect of persons in whom and by whom soeuer it seemeth good vnto himselfe this is manifest first for if the holy Ghost be not the Iudge both of the very context of the scripture whether it be Gods word and of the interpretation of scripture if he be not I say in man himselfe assuredly there can be no faith For the spirit only begetteth faith in mans heart Secondly the holy Ghost executeth his other offices freely in by any man therefore so may he this function of iudging What is meant by iudging in the holy Ghost For I demand what els is it to iudge but to inlighten to teach that the scripture is giuen of God by inspiration and that this is the naturall sense of this scripture Thirdly the same we be taught by our experience for we find it true by experience that he doth freely iudge in and by whom it pleaseth him Testimonies of scripture proue also this assertion 1. Cor. 12. 11 And all these things worketh euen the selfe same spirit distributing to euery man seuerallie as he will And Esay 54. All thy children shall be taught of God Ier. 31. I will write my lawes in their harts The aduersaries impugne this truth of God with some argumēts of their owne of which ye may reade in Bellarmine And these men binde the holy Ghost to the Pope and to councels confirmed by him which point our men impugne also refute with many arguments of which this is one that of their conclusion this must be the consequent that the Pope and his councels must be aboue the scriptures which thing is absurd to be graunted See more arguments of this subiect in their disputations CHAP. XVI Of the eight propertie and the tenth controuersie LASTLY we auouch that the sacred scripture is of highest authority excellency and 10. Propertie dignity on the earth Here againe by this word scripture we vnderstand both the substance of it and the writing And here wee meane it hath such excellency as makes it most worthie of credit and whereby also it gaines authority and estimation to the Church For which cause the Church is called the Pillar and ground of truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. And it hath many other titles which are giuen to it often in the scriptures This is prooued by the former demonstrations as these The scripture is the word of God it is most perspicuous it is most pure and simple c. Ergo. The aduersaries vary in iudgment touching this authority of Scripture For some of them detract from this soueraigne authority of it affirming that of it selfe it is not authentical but takes authoritie and estimation from the Church Of this minde are these Eckius in Enchiridio Pighius in his booke de Hierarchia and one Hermannus an impudent Papist he with a black mouth auoucheth it that the scripture is of no more validity without the testimony of the Church then AEsops Fables c. Others more late writers and more subtile say that the scripture hath authoritie in and by it selfe and is authentical but not to vs before the church approue it and ascertain it to be so Of this iudgmēt be these Bellarmine Coclaeus Canus Stapleton Canisius c. They which speake thus that the written word of God is not authenticall to vs before the iudgment of the Church be manifested these men I say haue this meaning that we bee not bound to beleeue that the Scriptures bee authenticall before the iudgment of the Church be past of it and that we sinne not at all if wee beleeue them not before the definitiue sentence of the Church But we hold this to be false also to say that the scripture is not to vs authenticall without the authority of the Church For it is the holy Ghost that teacheth euery man to know beleeue that the scripture is authenticall and hath soueraigne authority in it selfe And this he teacheth not by any externall meane How the holy Ghost teacheth vs what authority the scripture hath first but by the very sacred scripture by which alone he properly breeds faith in our hearts to beleeue and apprehend this truth of God And so we resting on this illumination of the holy ghost teaching vs by the scripture that this is the excellencie and authority of the scripture doe beleeue this to be so albeit the whole world did oppose it selfe against vs. And thus farre of the more essentiall questions concerning scripture CHAP. XVII Questions more accidentall concerning the holy Scripture and first of the bookes wherein the same is contained THE first question is concerning the books of holy scripture These bookes are commonly called for the excellency of them The Bible The Bible as it is commonly receiued and caried in hands containes in it two sorts of books the first is of books Canonicall and the second is Apocryphal Regular or Canonicall bookes are such as giue rule and direction touching faith and manners The bookes of Moses are the first Canon or president sent from God First Canon which may not be iudged or tryed by any other externall Canon whatsoeuer For there was no booke extant before the books of Moses The authoritie of the writer so holy and the euidence of the spirit so powerfull and the holinesse of these books to passe by other arguments so great hath gained these books this high estimation and authority in the Church The books of the Prophets make vp the second Canon which bee adiudged canonicall Second Canon by that externall Canon of the Mosaicall books by which they were examined Next they were and are discerned of such as be taught of God inwardly by the holy Ghost by the great euidence of Gods spirit which is manifested in them both in words and matter The third Third Canon Canon are the Apostolical books of the New Testament which are adiudged and approoued as Canonicall partly by the Canonicall books of Moses partly by the bookes of the Prophets partly by the spiritual euidence they carry in themselues which the Sons of God instructed by his holy spirit can easily discerne The Canonicall bookes of the Bible are either of the Old or of the New Testament The
Canonicall books of the Old Testament are these 1. The 5. bookes of Moses 2. Ioshua 1. booke 3. The booke of iudges 1. 4. Ruth 1. booke 5. The bookes of Samuel 2. 6. The bookes of Kings 2. 7. The bookes of Chronicles 2. 8. Ezra 1. booke 9. Nehemias 1. booke 10. Hester 1. booke 11. Iob. 1. booke 12. Psalmes 13. Prouerbs 14. Ecclesiastes 15. The book of Canticles 16. Esaiah 17. Ieremiah 18. Ezechiel 19. Daniel 20. The twelue small Prophets The Canonicall books of the New Testament are these which are commonlie receiued 1. The Gospel according to S. Matthew 2. The Gospel according to S. Marke 3. The Gospel according to S. Luke 4. The Gospel according to S. Iohn 5. The Acts of the Apost 6. S. Pauls Epistle to the Romans 7. S. Pauls Epistles to the Cormthians 2. 8. The Epistle to the Gal. 9. The Epistle to the Ephesians 10 The Epistle to the Philippians 11. The Epistle to the Colossians 12. The Epistles to the Thessalonians 2. 13. The Epistles to Timothie 2. 14. The Epistle to Titus 15. The Epistle to Philemon 16. The Epistle to the Hebrues 17. The Epistle of Saint Iames. 18. The Epistles of Saint Peter 2. 19. The Epistles of Saint Iohn 3. 20. The Epistle of Saint Iude. 21. The booke of the Reuelation of Saint Iohn And whereas some haue doubted for a time of some of these bookes as of the Epistle to the Hebrues the Epistle of Saint Iames the last of S. Peter the 2. and 3. of S. Iohn the Epistle of Iude and the Apocalypse yet they were neuer vtterly reiected but for a time onely doubted of whether they might be accepted as Canonical These Canonical books of the Old and New Testament were written by holy men as they were moued by the holy Ghost 2. Pet. 1. 21. And of these some are called the Prophets which wrote the bookes of the Old Testament so called because they were gouerned by the spirit of prophecy Some be called Apostles so called because of their function these wrote the books of the New Testament The books of the old new Testament some haue their writers names expressely set downe or noted by speciall characters or signes some haue no names at all annexed whereby the holy Ghost would signify vnto vs that these men were but instruments onely and not the very authors of such books wherefore we be not so much to respect their names nor so busily to inquire after them if they be not expressed Thus farre of the Canonicall bookes Now as concerning the Apocryphall bookes they be so called because the Church would haue them kept hid and not to be read or taught publickly in the Churches the priuate reading of them was onely permitted The Apocryphall bookes are such as were found onely annexed to the old Testament and they bee eleuen in number 1 Iudith 2 Tobit 3 Esdras third fourth booke 4 The Wisedome of * falsly so called Salomon 5 Ecclesiasticus 6 Baruch 7 The Epistle of Ieremiah Apocryphall bookes 8 Additions to Daniel 9 The Prayer of Manasses 10 The two bookes of Machabees 11 The supplement of Hester from the third ver of the tenth chap. Among these some there are which the verie aduersaries account to be Apocryphall First the prayer of Manasses Secondly the third and fourth booke of Esdras Thirdly the third and fourth booke of Machabees wherof Athanasius maketh mention in his Synopsis But we are to proue that all these before named bee Apocryphall The first Argument is from the Writers All the Canonicall bookes of the old Testament were written by the Prophets But these were not written by the Prophets Therfore they be not Canonical but Apocryphal I proue the Proposition Luk. 16. They haue Moses and the Prophets that is the bookes of Moses and the Prophets Luke 24. 27. of Christ it is written that he began at Moses and at all the prophets and interpreted vnto them in all the Scriptures the things which were written of him Therefore Moses and the Prophets were the writers of the old Testament To the Rom. 16. He cals the scriptures of the old Testament the Propheticall Scriptures And 2. Pet. 1. 19. The most sure word of the Prophets And for the assumption But these were not written by the Prophets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I proue it Malachie was the last of the prophets and betweene Malachie and Iohn the Baptist there arose no prophet But these bookes were written after Malachies time and this cannot be denied of some as of Ecclesiasticus the books of y e Machabees Ergo. 2. ARG. This is from the language wherin all the canonical Scriptures were written They were written I say in the language of Canaan in the Hebrue tongue which was the speech of the Prophets wherein they wrote their prophecies But these bookes be not written in the Hebrue tongue but all for the most part in Greeke therfore our proposition or assertion is manifest The Assumption is euident that I shall not neede to cite either the testimonie of the Fathers or the aduersaries owne confession ARG. 3. is from the testimonie of the old Church of the Iewes If these books were Canonicall the old Hebrues had heard some thing of them But they neuer heard of them Therefore they be not Canonicall The Proposition is cleere I proue the Assumption In Ezraes time all the canonicall bookes were gathered into one volume and the Iewes care was such of them that they nūbred all the letters which were found in the Prophets set down the sum of thē how much more would they haue had care of these whole bookes if they had heard of them The 4. ARG. is from the testimonie of the late Church of the Iewes which was in Christs time If these books were canonicall then the latter Rabbins or Iewish Writers would haue accepted them but they did not receiue them but reiect them Therefore they bee not canonicall I proue the Proposition For out of all question if they had not receiued the Canonicall bookes Christ would haue taxed them for it for that he so reprehends them for their sinister and false interpretations of the Canonicall Scriptures The Aduersaries grant the Assumption The 5. ARG. is from the testimonie of Christ and his Apostles If these before named books were canonicall then Christ and his Apostles would haue cited them somewhere for confirmation of their doctrines but that can neuer bee found they did no not in all the new Testament therefore they be not Canonicall The proposition is manifest The matter it selfe will make sure the Assumption The 6. ARG. These Apocryphall bookes containe some things differing from the canonical scriptures some things contrarie some
things false some things fabulous and some things impious Therefore these bookes be not canonicall I proue the Antecedent Tobit 3. 8. and 3. 25. 5. 15. and 11. 12. Iudith 8. 6. and 9. 2. and 9. 13. and 16. 8. Baruch 6. 2. the Additions of Daniel 13. 1. and 14. 32. the Additions to Hester 15. 1. 2 Mach. 2. 1. 7. 8. 27. and 12. 43. and 14. 37. and 15. 39. The 7. ARG. These bookes containe contrarieties and points repugning one another Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 8. with 2. Mach. 1. 16. and 2. Mach. 9. 5. Conferre 1. Mach. 9. 3. and 2. Machab. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Machab. 4. 36. and 2. Mach. 10. 1. Conferre 1. Mach. 6. 17. and 2. Mach. 10. 11. The 8. ARG. is taken from an humane testimonie first of Councels secondly of Fathers the ancient first next the latter writers The Councels which giue canons touching the canonicall bookes and the Apocryphal are these for the most part The Laodicen Councel which was held in the yeere after Christs incarnatiō 300. The 3. Councel of Carthage in the yeere 400. The Trullan in the yeere 600. The Florentine in the yeere 1150. The Tridentine in our age Of these we may reason thus The Laodicen Councell the most ancient here numbred reiects these bookes as Apocryphall See the 59. Canon of that Councell Ergo. But the aduersaries obiect heere that at this time before the third Councell of Carthage the canonicall bookes were not distinctly known I answer first that this councell was not held till foure hundred yeeres after Christ but it is absurd to say that there was no Canon knowne or that the canonicall books were not discerned till this time Ergo. Secondly I answer that Councell was not general but prouinciall But a prouinciall Councell may not prescribe any canon for the Catholike Church Ergo. But they say this Councell was confirmed by that of Trullan I answer that the Laodicen Councell also was approued by this and that the Trullan Councel is reiected by the Papists themselues in manie things Thus far of Councels now for the ancient Fathers they also did reiect these bookes as Apocryphall Ergo. I proue this by an induction 1. Athanasius in his Synopsis 2. Cyril of Ierusalem 3. Hilary Bishop of Pictauia 4. Melito bishop of Sardinia 5. Nazianzen in his poem 6. Hierom in his prologo Galeato which is prefixed before the books of Kings 7. Gregorie the Great 8. Ioseph against Appian 9. Ruffin in the exposition of the Symbole Apostolicall 10. Augustine The aduersaries here except saying But these men haue spoken of the canon of the old Testament of the Hebrues say they not of Christians I answer first as if the Hebrues had one canon the Christians another Secondly they did approue that very canon of the Hebrues But it may be say they that then peraduēture there was no Canon known or determined of by the Church I answer and I demand then when was this decreed and in what Councell was this done in the Councell of Trent but this is too late for this Councell was euen in our age Was it decreed in the Florentine Councell that is but little elder Was this Canon agreed vpon in the third Councell of Carthage But that Councell 1. was but prouinciall 2. and this is reiected of the very Papists themselues in some things as in the canon of the high Priest which in number is the 26. They will say this Councell was confirmed by the Trullan Councell I answer 1. So was the Laodicen 2. So the canon was concluded or established later to wit in the yeare of Christ 400. 3. The Trullan Councell is reiected in many things of the verie Papists 4. After the Trullan Councell there were Fathers which would not receiue the Apocryphall bookes And so now let vs come to the second classe of Fathers that is to the latter Writers Heere then I reason thus The late Writers doe not reckon these bookes among the Canonicall Ergo. This I proue by an induction * Lib. de Officiis Isidore Iohn Damascen Nicephorus Leontius Rabanus Maurus Radulphus Lyranus Carthusianus Abulensis Antoninus Hugo Cardinalis Erasmus in some of his writings Cardinall Caietanus All these were after the Trullan Councell yea some of them were reputed for sonnes by the Church of Rome after the Florentine Councell By these testimonies first of Councels next of Fathers it is euident that none of these bookes was accepted for Canonicall in anie lawfull iudgment for if there had beene anie such matter so manie ancient and late Writers would no doubt haue so acknowledged Wherefore these bookes are Apocryphall and so to be accounted The aduersaries for their defence alleage also humane testimonies and this in a manner is all they can say They cite the Councels before named as the third of Carthage the Trullan Florentine and the Councell of Trent But we reiect the two latter as tyrannicall and congregate purposely to oppresse the truth and light of God And touching the Trullan and the third Councel of Carthage we haue set downe our iudgment And as for Fathers they bring forth for this matter principally the Popes themselues as Pope Innocentius and Gelasius and Augustine in some place But I answer that they cannot bring so many as we can nor so ancient for themselues Secondly when these Fathers which they name call these bookes canonicall which we reiect as Apocryphall they take the name of Canonicall bookes more largely then we to wit for bookes which haue some such sanctity as in prophane Writers cannot be found and they call them so not for that they meane that they are of like authoritie with the Canonicall bookes of Scripture And we denie not but that in many of these such holinesse may appeare as cannot be found in the bookes of prophane authours And thus farre of the Apocryphall bookes CHAP. XVIII Of the authenticall Edition of the Bible WHereas there be extant many Editions of the Bible in diuers languages as the Hebrue Greek and Latine other proper tongues it is a question which of these must be reputed for authenticall I answer the Hebrue edition of the old and the Greek of the new Testament is authenticall so must be accounted so that all things are to be determined by these all other editions must be approoued so far as they agree with these Wee will therefore first speake of the Hebrue edition of the old Testament we auouch then that the Hebrue edition of the old testament is authenticall This proposition shall haue his confirmation after we haue giuen a short preface touching the Hebrue tongue and the writing of the old testament in that language and the preseruation of these bookes of the old testament written in the Hebrue tongue to this day The Hebrue tongue was the first and the * The Hebrue tongue onely before the floud Gen. 11. 1. only language on earth to the floud and to the building of the tower
repay and recompense this your loue with manifold comforts of his spirit euen then specially when the comforts and props of this present life shall most be wanting Now the God of hope fill you with all ioy and peace in beleeuing that ye may abounde in hope through the power of the holy Ghost that so ye may perseuer in this your holy faith in Christ and loue to the Saints vnto the end Amen Yours to vse in the Lord Christ Iesus HENRIE HOLLAND To the Reader ALthough the greater part both of authors and translators of bookes may be taxed of officiousnes and not a few of vngodlines yet are there some whose merits in this kinde doe out-way the demerits of the other These are either those worthie lightes themselues or else those second candlestickes to translate the light into which God specially in these latter yeares hath bestowed as gifts to vse Saint Paules word vpon his Church to the edification of it It is true indeede in one sense that both the one and the other are but candlestickes for the light is Gods but otherwise comparatiuely the author is the light and the translator is as it were an other candlesticke to translate the light into and that for those which thorough ignorance of the tongue could not attaine to the light when it shone out of the authors owne lampe Now although there seeme no great gifts to be required in a translator yet the truth is that if he be not of good discretion to choose the fittest workes of good speech to expresse the authors sentence with fittest wordes and of so great apprehension and former store that by that which he seeth in the author he hath attained to more then paraduenture the author himselfe saw or minded his defectiuenes will bring him in daunger of shewing what gifts are required in a translator for a good translator is neither a paraphrast nor a periphrast which is committed by needeles chaunging or adding words He so behaueth himselfe that the comparing of the originall will commend his fidelitie and that they which know of no originall would take the translator for the author himselfe He must naturalize his translation for the reader without miuring the gift of the author in the natiue worke But these seeme criticke rules to the irregular which offend against their authors to please themselues for as there are many translations of vnworthie workes so are there many transportations of worthie workes which like plantes ill taken vp reioyce not to growe in the soyle into which they are translated And yet neuerthelesse it cannot without iniurie be denied that this age hath afforded many excellent translations of excellent and learned authors to the benefit of our people amongst whom Maister Rollocke the reuerend Author of this worke deserueth an eminent place as also this worke it selfe is very acceptable together with the translators godly labour in this and other things commodious to the Church of Christ This inclined me the rather to commend it to thee in these few lines not as taking vpon me any thing but as a poore man where he is better knowne is sometimes engaged for a rich This labour is become ours not onely because it is thus well englished but also because the Author is a Scottishman which is now to the wise hearted a synonymie of an Englishman And it shall be to the praise of both the Nations to receiue both mutuall and common benefits without that emulation which was betwixt Israel and Iuda It is a comely thing to speake in the words of that King that was so miraculously restored to declare the signes and wonders of the high God which we see this day euen this vnanimitie in receiuing the King wrought no doubt by diuine instinct rather then grace in some which otherwise mendaciter deduntie as Dauid saith Let vs on the otherside goe out in our sinceritie and meete the King of Kings with Hosanna And I beseech you by the wonder of our neighbours which is our innocent aggregation to this scepter let the solution of an obiection by King Henry the seuenth of noble memorie and of so renowned wisedome be our satisfaction that the soueraigntie is deuolued where it is not onely by the prouidence but also by the ordinance of God to the comfortable vniting of that Nation rather then Nations which at the first vpon the matter was indeede but one though for some yeares past it were diuided by conceit Let vs take vp the argument of Abraham We are brethren c. And as this is a worke of vocation so let vs hold the comming of our King to bee the worke of reuocation to call vs backe to vnitie And so gentle reader I commit thee to the God of peace and vnitie Thine in Christ Francis Marbury To the Reader CHristian reader I pray thee pardon all faults in this first impression I could not well be present with the workemen for their direction Some schoole poynts and phrases of schoole men doe not so well relish in the English tongue nor could be rendred to my content whatsoeuer is wanting in word or matter in this edition I will amend in the next if the Lord permit farewell Thine in Christ Iesus Henry Holland The Contents 1OF our effectuall calling 1 2 Of the word of God or of the couenant in generall and of the couenant of workes in speciall 6 3 Of the couenant of Grace 11 4 Of such as be comprehended in may truely be said to be vnder the couenant of God 27 5 A comparison of our iudgement and of the aduersaries concerning both these couenants 31 6 Of the written word or of the written couenant of God 38 7 Of the number of the controuersies which are concerning the written word and first whether the scripture be the word of God 40 8 How it may appeare that the scripture is the word of God 45 9 Of the first proprietie of the sacred scripture 54 10 Of the second proprietie of the sacred scripture 57 11 Of the third proprietie of the sacred scripture 62 12 Of the fourth proprietie 66 13 Of the fift proprietie of the scripture 70 14 Of the sixt proprietie of the scripture 74 15 Of the seuenth proprietie of the scripture 77 16 Of the eight proprietie of the scripture 80 17 Questions more accidentall concerning the holy Scripture and first of the bookes wherein the same is contained 82 18 Of the authenticall edition of the Bible 90 19 Of the Greeke edition of the new Testament 97 20 Of the translations of the old Testament 102 21 Of the Syriacke translation of the new Testament 108 22 Of the Latin translations of both testaments 110 23 Of the translation of the Bible into the mother tongue 113 24 Of sinne in generall 127 25 Of originall sinne 133 26 Of concupiscence 144 27 Of actuall sinne 146 28 The controuersie concerning the sinne against the holy Ghost 153 29 Of iustifying faith 158 30 Of the improper significations
in all succeeding ages God himself with his owne hand did first write in tables of stone the words of the Decalogue Next after this he gaue it in charge vnto Moses that he should afterwards write and record all things which hee receiued at Gods owne mouth and that the people of God might be assured that the bookes of Moses came not by mans will but were giuen by diuine inspiration the Lord sealed 2. Tim. 3. 16 and testified these writings to be his heauenly oracles by manie great wonders before they were written when they were written and after they were written And Moses wrote the Word of both couenants of both I say Legall and Euangelicall but whereas he gaue but as it were the first lineaments of the Euangelicall couenant he set forth the Legall couenant clearely and in full measure For the legall couenant in the bookes of Moses is cleerely recommended and vrged but the Euangelical more darkly set before vs. For which cause all the doctrine of Moses is said to be legall The Law came by Moses Ioh. 1. After Moses God stirred vp his Prophets whose writings also he confirmed with his great miracles and gaue them great authoritie yet were they not to set forth any thing diuers or contrary to the doctrine of Moses and the Patriarches nor to publish any thing but what was grounded in the bookes of Moses but by diuine reuelation they did ad more cleere interpretations as the morning starre of the new testament did more neerely approch These holy men wrote the summe and chiefe heads of their doctrine euen so much as God himselfe thought meete to be reserued for posterity And these records being written were laid vp with the holie books of Moses which were kept in the side of the Arke Iosh 24. 26. Finally after the incarnation of Christ the Euangelicall doctrine or the Gospell first beganne for certaine yeares to be deliuered by voice and to be preached by Christ himselfe and then after by his Apostles And lastly the same was written by the Apostles The works of Gods law and nature are commanded in the bookes of the new Testament And the verie moral law is expounded by Christ himselfe freed from the leauen and corruption of the Pharisees but the works of the law and nature are not recommended to the end that by them men might be iustified and saued but they be commended either to prepare men to intertaine grace offered or to quicken them to proceed and grow in grace receiued as is before shewed Againe the works of regeneration be commanded not for iustification but as testimonies of that iustification which is by faith and of thankfulnes vnto God for which cause so soone as the Apostle hath taught the doctrine of faith he descends to the works of the lawe teaching men that their life and conuersation must be worthie that high calling whereunto we are called in Christ Iesu See Ephe. 4. 1. 1. Thess 2. 12. But faith in Christ is that which is principally required in all the books of the new Testament And thus farre generally of the written word of the couenant CHAP. VII The number of the controuersies which are concerning the written Word and of the first controuersie whether the Scripture be the word of God THere be two kinds of controuersies concerning the holy Scripture The first kind is of such controuersies as bee more essentiall that is which concerne the very essence if I may so speake or being of the Scripture The second kind is of those controuersies which bee more accidentall and doe not so neerely concerne the essence of the Scripture Of the first kind there are ten controuersies or questions the first is Whether the Scripture Propheticall and Apostolicall bee the word of God The second is How it may appeare that this Scripture is Gods word The third is Of the antiquitie of it The fourth is Of the perspicuity or cleerenes of it The fift is Of the simplicitie or plainnesse of it The sixt is Of the viuacitie quickening power or life of it The seuenth is Of the simple euident necessitie of it The eight is Of the perfection sufficiencie thereof that it is sufficient and perfect in it selfe without all vnwritten verities or traditions whatsoeuer The ninth is Whether the Scripture may bee the iudge to determine all controuersies The tenth is Whether the Scriptures Propheticall and Apostolicall must haue the chiefe place of excellency and be in authoritie aboue the Church As for those eight controuersies which follow the two first they are touching the properties of the holie Scripture and these when we shall haue proued that the Scripture is Gods word will appeare euidently for they are necessary consequents of that Theoreme For grant we this that the Scripture is Gods word then these things must follow necessarily first that it is most ancient secondly most cleere thirdly most simple or pure fourthly most powerfull fiftly most necessarie sixtly most perfect seuenthly the greatest best iudge of all controuersies without exception eightly most excellent But for as much as the aduersaries denie these eight properties therefore as is a foresaid there is of euerie one of them a speciall controuersie We are then to handle these controuersies in order and first of that which by due right naturally is to haue the first place Whether the Scripture be the word of God The Aduersaries graunt generally that the holy Scripture is the word of God but when they are brought from the generall to a speciall they break from vs. To speake more plainely the word of God at this day is twofold in the Church of God 1. immediate 2. mediate I call that the Gods written word immediate word of God which doth proceede immediately out of Gods owne mouth and that I call mediate which the Lord speakes by his preacher or Minister We hold then and auouch that the holie Scripture is that immediate and primarie word of God and to bee vnto vs in steed of that first immediate and liuely voice of God himselfe yea that it serues vs in place not only of that liuely voice of God but also of the secret and insearchable mind of God and of Gods vnspeakeable mysteries Our arguments are these 1. For that this is the verie will of God They haue Moses saith he and the prophets that is the bookes of Moses and the Prophets Luk. 16. 29. 2. If we had nothing to supply the defect of the liuely voice of God then doubtlesse our state were worse then that of the old Church of the Iewes which had the oracles of God but it is against all light of reason so to Rom. 3 1. 2. affirme 3. Our third reason is this The first ground of our faith must be either the liuely voice of God or the verie mind and counsell of God or something to supply the want of Gods liuely voyce and of the secret mind of God which must also be
readest thou saith hee and haue ye not read Haue ye neuer read How is it written Againe the Apostles of Christ for all their assertions bring proofe and testimonies out of the old Testament Apollos was a man mighty in Scriptures He strongly confuted publiquely the Iewes with great vehemency shewing by the Scriptures that Iesus was that Christ Act. 18. 24. 28. The men of Beraea receiued the word with all readinesse and searched the scriptures daily whether those things were so Act. 17. 11. Thus the primitiue Church and the fathers refuted heresies by the Scriptures To conclude this point most memorable is that worthy fact of Constantinus the Great who propounding the Bible to the Fathers assembled in the Nicene councell spake on this manner Here I set before you the writings Euangelicall of the Apostles and the sanctions of the auncient Prophets which can informe vs concerning the sacred law of God To beat back therefore the dint of the sword of the aduersarie let vs learne how to answer all obiections of the aduersarie out of the words which are giuen vs of God by diuine inspiration Lastly this I haue said that the Scripture is in it selfe liuely and vocall for as concerning deafe and dead men that is the naturall neuer taught of God vnto such I say it is but as deade mute Here the aduersaries blaspheme and reply saying that y e sacred scripture is but as a dead letter mute and not able togiue answere to any man not able to decide questions and controuersies in religion And contrarily they glory that the voice of the Church which proceeds from the Scripture as they speake which is in grauen by Gods own Spirit in the hearts of men they boast I say that this is vocall and able to answer the demaunders of all questions appertaining to saluation that this cannot be wrested nor peruerted but euer abides the same in al respects The answer to this calumniation and blasphemy is cleere of that which is before shewed for we made it cleere and manifest that the sacred Scripture is most liuely and vocall in it selfe And whereas controuersies are not so soone decided by the Scriptures the cause is not in Gods word but in men which be either so naturally blind and dull that they cannot heare vnderstand the Scripture speaking answering yea crying in their eares or they be so malitious and obstinate that they will not heare and vnderstand yea that they will full often against their owne conscience wrest the voice of the Scripture into another sense and that to their owne perdition Wherefore we conclude this point that the scripture is in it selfe 2. Pet. 3. and by it selfe most liuely and vocall And further we be to remember that to the end it may speake as a liuely voice vnto vs and to the end we may vnderstand it concerning all controuersies in religion we must vse the meanes before mentioned our very Grāmar Meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the scripture is one speciall instrument for this purpose For our eies eares are opened by such meanes to vnderstand the Scripture and to attend vnto Gods voice speaking in the scripture if it shall seeme good to the holy Ghost to worke effectually by them in our hearts and minds If so be that the spirit worke effectually by the aforesaide meanes then the Scripture shall answer to all controuersies concerning faith and religion with a more cleere liuely intelligible and distinct voice then all the men in the whole Church shall answer who can auouch nothing sound and certaine vnlesse first they haue receiued it from the mouth of the Scripture and answer in the verie words of the scripture For whereas these men say the voice of the Church is liuely and vocall heard of all men and cannot bee peruerted and wrested To this I answer first that the voice of the Church as is aforesaid doth depend on the voice of the scripture Next that the voice of the Church is subiect to errours and change so that they may this day answer one thing and to morrow another and this serues no better in a manner then a Lesbian rule to decide controuersies concerning faith religion As for the church of Rome they haue so long and so corruptly answered concerning faith and religion that they haue caried the world from the truth to lies and errours and infinite heresies that there is now no cause wherefore these men may so put forth to sale the voice and sound of their Church which is become so corrupt and adulterous CHAP. XIII Of the fift property of the Church and of the seuenth controuersie NOw it resteth that we proue that the sacred Scripture is simply most necessarie Here then I say that if by Scripture yee vnderstand the substance and the verie matter contained in the words written it cannot be denied that the scripture is so necessarie that without it there can be no Church in earth for the church is borne and bred not Fift propertie Scripture is most necessarie of mortall but of immortall seede which is the word of God 1. Pet. 1. 23. But if ye vnderstand by the scripture the verie writing and forme of reuelation I say that in this respect also it is so necessarie that without this there cannot be a Church For the liuely voice of God is simply necessarie The scripture after a sort is the liuely voice of God therefore simply necessarie I graunt it that when as the liuely voice of God did sound and was heard in the Church this writing and this forme of reuelation was not then so necessarie but when as God did cease to speake and that the scripture came in place of Gods own voice then the scripture was no lesse necessary then the liuely voice of God For the voice of God must euer be in the Church that the church may haue her being and may continue on the earth yea this voice must be heard by the Church either by it selfe or by that which may best supply the want of the liuely voice of God Before Moses time this voice it selfe was heard after his time this voice sounded and spake in and by the voice and writings of Moses and the Prophets When Christ was come his owne liuely voice was heard After Christs ascension for a time the 2. Cor. 5. 19. 1. Pet. 2. 19. preaching of the Apostles and the bookes of the old Testament were receiued for the liuely voice of God himselfe and of his sonne Iesus Christ Then followed the Apostolicall Scripture which together with the holy scripture of the old Testament continue in the Church to supply not only the liuely voice of the Apostles but also of God and of Christ himselfe By the premisses it is euident y t it is simply necessary at all times that the liuely voice of God sound euer in the Church of God either by it selfe or by this supply which wee
now auouch to be only the sacred Scriptures of the old and new Testament Wherefore we plainly conclude the Scripture is most necessarie The Aduersaries oppose themselues against this assertion as against the former and they denie that the scripture is simply necessarie it is necessary say they that is it is profitable or commodious for the well being of a Church but is not so necessarie for the being nor no such thing as without which the Church can haue no being And for this cause do these men denie the necessitie of the Scripture that they may open the doore to their authoritie and traditions that is to their owne dreames which they say be simply necessary and preferre them before the scripture They are easily answered by the rules before set downe For if by scripture they vnderstand the substance of the scripture it cannot be denied that the scripture is simply necessarie but if they vnderstand not the substance onely but also the verie writing in this respect also we haue shewed it by cleere demonstratiō that the scripture is simply necessarie for that it is vnto vs in place of y e liuely voice of God himselfe Wherfore their assertion is false howsoeuer they take this word Scripture either in this sense or the other But they say the Church wanted the scripture neere two thousand yeares all which time religion was preserued by tradition only Therefore the Scripture is not simply necessarie I answer If you vnderstand by Scripture the verie substance of the couenant then your argument followeth not for the substance of the scripture was in those verie traditions whereby the Church was edified and kept But if by this word ye vnderstand the verie writing then I grant the scripture was not extant so manie yeares and I say that it was not then necessarie for that then the liuely voice of God it selfe was heard If they conclude that because it was not then necessarie therefore it is not now necessarie or that it was not necessarie after that God had commanded it and after that it began to be extant surely the consequence is very euill for as ages and times haue changed so diuers formes of reuelation were necessarie Or we may more briefly set downe this controuersie in this forme THe scripture is necessarie not onely for the well-being as Popish Schoole-men speake but also for the being of the Church Et hactenus est simplex necessitas And this necessitie is in respect of time only for there was not a necessitie of the scripture in all ages I vnderstand The word written not necessary in all ages Heb. 1. 1. 2. by the word Scripture not onely the substance of the written word but also the manner or forme of reuelation but this simple necessitie must bee auouched of the substance and forme of reuelation in diuers respects For the scripture as touching the substance of it was necessarie to the Church in all ages but in respect of the manner of reuealing the same it was necessarie for a certaine time only to wit vntill it seemed good vnto Almightie God to teach his church by the scripture ARG. 1. For the Lord God had not giuen his Church the Scripture if he had not thought it necessarie euū for the being of his Church ARG. 2. The liuely voice of God was necessarie in the time appointed for it ergo the Scripture also is necessary in the time the Lord hath decreed for it for there is but one and the same reason of both ARG. 3. It is necessarie that Gods will be reuealed and communicated to the Church at all times in one forme or other either by Gods own liuely voice or by writing or by both but now the liuely voice of God hath ceased therefore now the word written is necessarie The aduersaries deny this absolute necessitie moued hereunto with these arguments following First from Adam to Moses there was no Scripture Ergo. I answer the Lord God thought it not necessarie for all that time But when as the Lord himselfe began to write and that the 2. Pet. 1. 18. 19. 21. holy men of God were acted and moued by the holie Ghost first Prophets then Apostles then the Scripture began to be necessarie euen simply necessary ARG. 2. From Moses vnto Christ Iob and his friends both beleeued and were saued without the Scripture I answer It is most like these also read the scriptures as may appeare by the Eunuches story Act. 8. Next I answer that so manie as were called without the visible Church God dealt with them in an extraordinary manner ARG. 3. They did more attend the traditions of the Fathers then the written word euen in the second age I answer this is false ARG. 4. In the third age there was no scripture of the new Testament extant for a long season Ergo. I answer the Apostolicall scripture beganne not long after Christ Next all that time I grant it was not necessarie but when the Apostles were dead and when their liuelie voice ceased then began it to be necessary CHAP. XIIII Of the sixt propertie of the Scripture and the eight controuersie THE Scripture is perfect containing in it all things necessarie for faith and manners not onely sufficiently but also abundantly for this is the perfection which heere wee doe auouch The sense then of the Proposition is this This kind of reuelation containes all things c. The proofe is this Argument 1. The liuely voice of God contained all articles or instructions concerning faith and manners Ergo so doth the Scripture The reason of the argument is euident for that nothing in respect of substance was spoken by that liuely voice which is not recorded in the Scripture ARG. 2. If the Scripture contained not all things necessarie perfectly then euill were the condition of our Church and of our time which heareth not the liuely voice of anie man speaking by diuine inspiration nor of any prophet or Apostle ARG. 3. The religious and such as be taught of God haue an holy experience of the sufficiencie of the Scriptures and of the fulnesse of it Adde to these arguments these diuine testimonies Deut. 4. Ye shall not ad to the word that I speake c. Reuel 22. If anie shall adde to these things God shall Vers 18. adde vnto him the plagues which are written in this booke Albeit these sayings are to bee vnderstood properly of particular books yet the same reason serues for all books of the canonicall scripture and surely the reason binds more strongly for if we may not ad to particular books how much lesse is it lawfull to adde to the whole Canon Prou. 30. Thou shalt ad nothing to his words This seemes to be vnderstood of the whole Scripture Matth. 28. Teaching to obserue all things which I commanded you Gal. 1. 8. If we or an Angell from heauen shall preach vnto you another Gospel or otherwise then that which we haue preached vnto you
of Babel Gen. 11. 1. 9. The whole earth was of one lauguage and of one speech or * Et verba erant eadem had the same words At the building of Babel began the confusion of languages and from the Hebrue as from the mother of all the rest all other tongues had their first beginning for all other languages are nothing els in a manner but as Dialects to the The Hebrue tongue mother of all the rest Hebrue tongue of which some resemble their mother more then other some be more estranged from her In that confusion of tongues the Hebrue was preserued as the wombe or mother as Hierome speaketh of all the rest this was preserued I say in the family of Heber who was the fourth from Noah and liued that verie time Hebers family kept the Hebrue tongue that the tower of Babel was built and when the confusision of languages began The Hebrue tongue then was so called first of Heber from him it came to his posteritie not to all but to them onely of whom came Abraham and from him continued to the verie last of all the Prophets for Haggai Zacharias Malachie wrote their prophecies in this very language Thus farre of the Hebrue tongue The olde testament was written first in this Hebrue and holy tongue The first writer was Moses the prophets The old testamēt written in Hebrue followed him of whom some wrote before the captiuitie some in the captiuitie some after the captiuitie and they writ all in Hebrue except Daniel and Ezra which wrote some things in the Chaldee tongue And this letteth not but that we may say that all the old testament was written in the Hebrue tongue for that the Chaldee and Hebrue haue no great diuersitie Now to speake of the preseruation of these bookes of the old Testament the bookes of Moses the prophets that is the old Testament written in Hebrue was kept by the admirable prouidence of almighty God vnto this day They were preserued I say in most perillous hard times as in the burning of the citie and of the temple of The admirable prouidence of God in the preseruation of the Bible Ierusalem in the captiuity in that most grieuous persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes for hee raged also against these very books in the great persecutions which were after Christ vnder the Roman Emperours But here it is demanded whether the same very books which were written by Moses the Prophets before the captiuity be come into our hands I answer for this matter diuers men haue thought diuersly For there were that thought that those bookes which Moses the prophets left were lost when the temple and the citie were destroyed with fire and that these which we haue were repaired and written ouer againe by Ezra the Scribe inspired by God called extraordinarily for this purpose Of this iudgment are these a Epist ad Chilonem Basil Irenaeus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus b Lib. de Offic. Isidorus Rabanus Maurus Leontius It may be they were thus minded because of that storie or fable rather which we may reade Esdras 4. 14. But that booke is Apocryphall and reiected not onely of our Church but also of the Church of Rome The point may be thus refuted If Ezra had written ouer these bookes againe then assuredly it is most like that he would haue written them not in the Hebrue but in the Chaldee tongue or in a mixt language of Hebrue and Chaldee together for that Ezra did write two bookes in that mixt maner euen those two bookes of Esdras Secondly Nehem 8. Ezra is said to haue brought forth and to haue read not his owne bookes or bookes which he had written but the bookes of the law of Moses Thirdly it is not like but some godly man or Prophet or some other was left which in that time of the fire preserued these sacred books or kept some copie of them the rather for that thē out of al doubt Ezechiel Daniel the prophets liued 4. The very name which Daniel giues to the Chaldee monarchie calling it the golden empire doth argue that this did not so rage against the sacred books of God for if this monarchy had laide such violent hands on Gods books assuredly the holy Ghost would not haue giuen it a name of such excellency Therefore that assertion is false and the contrary is true to wit that the books of Moses the old Prophets were preserued from daunger when the Temple and the City were consumed with fire as also in the captiuity and so be reserued by diuine prouidence and so deliuered by Gods owne hand at last into our possessions Neither yet do we gaine-say what the godly haue recorded that is that Ezra after the captiuity did reuise the books of Moses and the Prophets digested them into one volume and set them downe in this certaine order Thus farre of this question Now it resteth after the premisses that we prooue the Hebrue edition of the old Testament to be only authenticall That edition which was written in the first language that euer was and first in the primarie language and hath beene preserued in that tongue purely fully euen vnto our times I say that edition of the old Testament is authenticall But such is the Hebrue edition Ergo. The aduersaries cannot deny but that it was written in the first language and mother tongue and also that it was first written in it and they cannot deny but that it was preserued in some purity euen vnto this day but they will not graunt or allow it this excellency of sincerity and purity which we auouch Bellarmine hath obserued out of all the old Testament 5. places only whereby hee would prooue that the Hebrue fountaine hath lost some part of this puritie The first place is Esay 9. 6. And he Vajikra Schemo Pele shall call his name to wit the Lord Wonderfull But the vulgar Latine readeth and he shal be called which reading Caluin approoueth And therefore by Caluins confession heere the Hebrue fountaine it selfe is not cleere I answere first the sense is the same whether ye reade shall call or shall be called Secondly the letters are the same in both words in the Hebrue shall call and shall be called the Vajikra points being diuers do not make the body of the word to be of diuers significations Thirdly the Hebrue Doctors as Uatablus say often that with the Hebrues a verbe personal of the third person is taken for an impersonall as heere shall call for shal be called Fourthly Tremelius and Iunius retaine the Hebrue reading and say thus and he doth cal his name c. The second place is Ier. 23. 6. And this his name wherewith he shal cal him the Lord our righteousnes But the vulgar Vezeh Schemo asher jikreo Iehouah Tsidkenu Latin edition saith that they shall cal him the Lord our righteousnesse and
very same iudgment Wherefore it is vncertaine whether Mathew first wrote in Hebrew Syriack or Greeke yet is it more probable that he did first write in Greeke both for that this tongue was not vnknowne to the Iewes and other Apostles first wrote in it not onely to Iewes and Gentiles indifferently but also particularly to the very Iewes * As Saint Iames and Saint Peter 1. Epist Mathew in Hebrue In Catolog in Paul Well howsoeuer it is the Greeke edition which we haue in the Church at this day is authenticall for that it was both written and approoued while the Apostles were yet liuing For as touching the Hebrue edition if there were any I doubt now it can no where be found And as for this Hebrue copie which is in many hands it is not the true copy As concerning the Epistle to the Hebrues Ierom sayth that first it was written in Hebrue next turned into Greek either by Barnabas or Luke or Clement but it is vncertaine and it is more like to be true that this Epistle also was first written in Greeke Howsoeuer it be this Greeke edition of this Epistle which we haue at this day is authenticall Now the New Testament written in Greek by the Apostles and Euangelists hath beene so preserued by the admirable prouidence of God euen in the middest of persecutions and heresies vnto this age and in all former ages so freed and kept by godly and Orthodoxall writers from the corruption of Heretiques the Lord God I say hath so prouided that it is come into our hands most pure and perfect Thus then I reason That edition of the New Testament which was written in the best language and first and originally written in it to wit the Greeke I say the same must be accepted as authenticall of all men But such is the Greeke edition of the New Testament Ergo. The aduersaries except onely against the purity of this edition For albeit some of them the latter and the better learned as Bellarmine doe not say that the Greeke edition of the New Testament is altogether corrupt as some of them haue blasphemed yet they say it is not so pure that they can graunt it to be authenticall because in some places it is corrupt Bellarmine brings forth seuen places whereby he indeuours to prooue this assertion that the Greek edition is corupt and therefore cannot be authenticall The first place is 1. Cor. 15. 47. The first man is of the earth earthly the second man is the Lord from heauē But in the vulgar 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Latine edition it is the second is from heauen heauenly this reading is approued therfore the Greek edition is corrupt and not authenticall I answer first albeit we read as the Greeke is yet the sense is good and orthodoxall and the same with that which is of the vulgar reading differing in word only and not in matter Secondly the Arabick and Syriack translation so read the place Thirdly the Fathers Chrysostome and Theophylact so reade Fourthly Epiphanius citing * Haereseon 22. 2 all the places which Marcion corrupted yet remembers not this place But saith he Tertullian saith that Marcion * Tert. lib. 5. contra Mar. hath corrupted this place I answer that Tertullian in that booke and place reads these words in the very same manner as we do The Lord from heauen The second place is 1. Cor. 7. 33. He that is maried careth for the things of the world how he may please his wife The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. wife and the Virgin are distinctly set downe So reads the Greek But the Vulgar thus He that is ioined to a wife careth for the things of the world how he may please his wife and he is diuided but the woman that is vnmaried and the Virgin bethinketh of the things which please the Lord both in body and spirit Wherefore the Greek edition is here corrupted and so can not be authenticall I answere First that the sense which is by the Greek is not only sound but also more fitting in this place then that which is by the Vulgar translation Secondly the Syriack translation so reads these words Thirdly Theophylact the Greek Scholies and Basil so read the words But he sayth that Ierom * Lib. 1. contra Iouinan auoucheth it that this Greek reading is not Apostolicall I answer the same Ierom in another place * Contra Heluidium Eustochium reads these words as we doe wherefore seeing he changeth his mind he is not fit to iudge for this scripture The third place is Ro. 12. 11. seruing the time But the old Latin is seruing the Lord Ergo. I answer First albeit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye read so the place yet the sense is good and sounde Secondly the reading varies in manie Greeke copies as witnesseth Origens Interpreter who reads the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hee noteth it that in many bookes he founde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the time the same saith Ambrose who reades 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seruing the time yet saith he in some bookes wee find 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord. Thirdly the Syriack Chrysostome Theophylact and Basil read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Lord which reading wee best like For which cause our Beza translates the word Domino the Lord. The fourth place is Ioh. 8. where in the beginning of that Chap. many Greek copies want the storie of the adulterous woman which the cōmon translation in Latin hath the Church approues it as canonicall I answere First that our Greeke books which we haue and hold for authenticall haue this historie also and our Church receiues it Secondly yet we denie not that this hath beene gainsaid by some and the Syriacke translation hath it not The fift place is Mark. 16. where in many Greeke copies that whole chapter is wanting which notwithstanding the Latine edition retaineth Ergo. I answer first that all our Greeke bookes which we account authenticall haue also this chapter and our churches receiue the same as canonicall Secondly Ierome some-where moues some doubttouching it but to no purpose The sixt place is 1. Ioh. 5. 7. where the seuenth verse which containes a worthie testimonie of the Trinitie in manie Greeke copies is missing but in the vulgar it is retained Ergo. I answer first our Greeke bookes which we hold for authenticall haue this verse and our Church receiues it Secondly we denie not but some haue gainesaid it The seuenth place is Matth. 13. For thine is the kingdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. power and glorie Amen But this place is not in the vulgar translation Ergo. L. Valla answereth this place is not added to the Greeke but detracted from the Latine and I pray you what hereticall or vnsound matter hath this place Thus we see then the aduersaries cannot proue by these places that the Greeke edition of the new Testament is corrupted and so not
authenticall Wherefore it resteth that the Hebrue edition of the old Testament and the Greek of the new Testament is only authentical CHAP. XX. Of the Translations of the old Testament NOw it resteth that we speake of the Translations of the old and new Testament And first of the translations of the old Testament The old Testament was first written in Hebrue and afterwards translated into diuers languages specially the Chaldee and Greeke First concerning the Chaldiacke translation next of the Greeke and for the Chaldiack we be to consider first what manner of translation it is Secondly by whom this was done Thirdly what authoritie this hath For the first the Chaldiacke translation is rather a Paraphrase then a translation word for word The Rabbins call this Authors of the Chaldee paraphrase paraphrase the Targum For the second point by whom this Paraphrase was set forth Rabbi Aquila translated the * Fiue bookes of Moses Pentateuch and this they call Onkelos the rest of the bookes of the old testament were translated partly by Rabbi Ionathan partly by Rabbi Ioseph * blind Caecus they liued not long before Christ or about Christs time For the third point The Chaldee paraphrase with the Ancients was euer of great note and authoritie specially that part of the Pentateuch for as for the rest of this Paraphrase one * Praefat. in Biblia complu tensia Ximenius a Cardinall auoucheth it to be full of Iewish fables and of the vaine conceits of the Thalmudists And thus farre briefly of the Chaldee paraphrase Now touching the Greeke translation of the old testament there were diuers translations of it into the Greeke tongue Some number nine translations Of these the first and principall is that of the Septuagint which those 72. Ancients did at the appointment of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus for whereas * Lib. stromat Clemens Alexandrinus writeth that the Scripture was translated long before into Greeke and that Plato had read the same it is not like to be true for neither Plato nor anie of Pythagoras sect euer saw the sacred Scriptures To speake then of the interpretation of the seuentie interpreters and to bind our selues to certaine questions sixe in number the first may be this whether there was euer any Greeke translation set forth by the 72. interpreters Secondly if there were anie when it was done Thirdly of what bookes Fourthly how this was done Fiftly what authoritie this translation is of Sixtly whether this be the true translation of the 72. Interpreters which we haue at this day For the first question the answer is easie for there is no doubt but that there was a Greeke translation by the 72. interpreters for that all antiquitie accords to this This is testified by a Lib. de mensuris ponderib Epiphanius b De praeparat euangel Eusebius c In dialog cum Tryphone Iustin Martyr with many others And as for the second question the answer also to it is easie for all men doe agree that this translation was done in the raigne and at the appointment of Ptolomaeus Philadelphus this write and auouch these men Ioseph Philo d In Synopsi Athanasius Epiphanius Tertullian e In historia sua de hacipsare Aristaeus and manie others And for the third question what bookes were translated by them the answer is not so easie for some thinke they translated but the fiue bookes of Moses only Of this mind is f In proâ—â—io antiq Ioseph and Ierome seemes to incline this way Others say they translated all the Scripture and this is likest to be true For first it is not like that king Ptolomie could haue contented himselfe with the Pentateuch only Secondly the Apostles of Christ vsed the Greeke translation in citing testimonies out of the prophets but in the Apostles time there was none other translation but that of the Septuagints Thirdly there had beene no matter of admiration in that this worke was done with such expedition if the Pentateuch onely had beene translated and finished in the space of 72. dayes for they say his translation was miraculous Fourthly Chrysostome and Theodoret among the Fathers are of this iudgement Wherefore it is best we hold this as most probable that all the old Testament was translated by them And as for the fift question what authoritie this translation had Hereunto men answer diuersly For some ascribe too much to it as * In lib. de mensuris ponderib Epiphanius who saith they were not interpreters only but in a manner Prophets Augustine is too much in the commendation of it he saith It was done by a speciall dispensation of God and thinks it to be set forth by diuine inspiration Others ascribe not so much to it * In praefat in Pentateuchon Ierome saith against Epiphanius they were no prophets And often in his Commentaries he taxeth it not onely as corrupted but as verie faultie in it selfe which thing he would neuer haue don if he had thought this worke had beene done by diuine inspiration What authoritie soeuer this translation is of assuredly it can haue no more then what may by good right be giuen to an interpretation for we may not auouch it to be giueÌ„ by the inspiration of God nor make it of equall authoritie with the Scripture As touching the sixt question some thinke that the old translation of the Septuagint is as yet extant but to Old translation of the 70. be so corrupt that it is no wisdome to correct either the Hebrue or Latine copies by it Bellarmine is of this mind Others affirme that the ancient translation of the 72. interpreters is lost and that this which wee haue is mixt and verie corrupt This also they proue by an induction of certaine places corrupted First the Greeke Bible numbers from the creation of the world vnto the floud 2242. yeares as we may see which Augustine Eusebius and Nicephorus in his chronologie but the Hebrue veritie saith the number of yeares be 1656. therefore the Greeke number exceedes the Hebrue in yeares 586. Secondly from the floud to Ahraham the 72. interpreters reckon of yeares 1082. but according to the Hebrue text of Gods word there be no more yeares but 292. so the Greeke exceedes the Hebrue veritie 790. yeares Thirdly in the Greeke copie Adam is said to haue liued 230. yeares and in some bookes 330. when he begat Sheth but the Hebrue Bible saith Adam begat Sheth when he was 130. yeares old Fourthly according to the Greeke copie Methusalem liued fourteene yeares after the floud which is verie ridiculous for where liued he or how was he kept from the waters In the arke That cannot be for but eight soules onely entred into the Arke among whom Methusalem is not reckoned The Hebrew bible speakes farre otherwise of Methusalems Methusalems life and death yeares and age for by it we gather that he died that verie yeare the deluge came on the
whole earth to wit the yeare of the world 1656. Fiftly in Ionas the Greek copy denounceth destructiō to the Niniuits after the third day As yet three dayes Niniuie shall be destroyed but in the Hebrue text we reade Yet fortie dayes and Chap. 3. 4. Niniuie shall be destroyed By these places wee see there is great difference betweene the Greekes and the Hebrues in their numbring but all agree that they Hebrue numbers are true De ciuitate Dei lib. 18. Augustine fames I know not what mysterie in this diuersitie of numbers to defend the authoritie of the 72. Interpreters which notwithstanding hee could not maintaine in the place concerning Methusalem Ierome deales more plainely and faithfully saying that the Septuagint haue erred in their numbers By these before cited places and many such like corrupted wee conclude that this Greeke translation which is nowe extant is not that which the 72. ancient Iewes wrote or if it be the same that it is so corrupted as we may reckon it to be of very small authoritie Thus farre of the Greeke edition of the 72. interpreters now we are to consider of other Greeke translations which were written after that the Gospell was published farre and neere among the Gentiles And there be eight seuerall translations numbred The first was Aquilas written in Adrian the Emperours time as testifieth Epiphanius This Aquila was first a Pagan and after turned Christian and was baptized after this being admonished Aquila Synopensis and his apostasie for his studies in iudiciall astrologie and at last cast out of the Church for his obstinacie he fell away to the Iewish religion and conuersing with the Iewes hee learned the Hebrue tongue and then and there translated the old Testament out of the Hebrue into Greeke but with a peruerse and froward mind as saith Theodoret purposely intending to obscure the doctrine of Christ and to colour his apostasie After this translation of Aquila followed Theodotions in the raigne of Commodus the Emperour as Epiphanius also writeth This man was of Pontus and of the sect of Marcion the heretike after a time renouncing his sect and abiuring all Christian religion he fell to Iudaisme and hauing learned the Hebrue tongue he translated in like manner the old Testament into Greeke but with a malicious heart and vnfaithfully as Theodoret speaketh intending the confutation of his owne sect After this translation of Theodotion followed that of Symmachus in the raigne of Seuerus Augustus This man Symmachus trāslation was a Samaritane by birth and countrie and for that hee could not attaine some superioritie hee desired in his owne countrie he fell in like manner into Iudaisme and was circumcised the second time how this was done Epiphanius noteth it out of 1. Cor. 7. 18. to wit by gathering his vncircumcision after his first circumcision that so there might be matter for a second circumcision This man translated the old Testament out of Hebrue into Greeke but vnfaithfully as Theodoret saith intending most the confutation of the Samaritans of whom he had his first beginning After this translation of Symmachus there were two others whose names bee not knowne The one was found in Iericho laid vp in great vessels for the preseruation of it in the raigne of Caracalla the Emperour The other was found at the North-Nicopolis in the time of Alexander the Emperour the sonne of Mammaeas This Apud Nicopolia Aquilonarem because there were three of that name is testified by Epiphanius Theodoret and others After all these followed Origen who liued in the yeare of Christ 261. in the daies of Valerian Galienus the Emperours Origen laboured exceedingly in the conference of such translations as he found extant before his time for he gathered into one volume foure translations to wit first Aquilas secondly Symmachus thirdly the Septuagint fourthly Theodotions and set them down in foure distinct columnes and this was Origens Tetrapla This doue hee added to these foure columnes Origens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 two more of the Hebrue text the one set downe in Hebrue the other in Greeke characters and this was Origens Hexapla Lastly to the six former columnes he annexed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the two editions before noted to bee of vnknowne Authors and this was called Origens Octapla a worke of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 great labour and excellencie the losse whereof hath beene no doubt no smal domage to the Church of God Origen in these his works had his marginal starres to obserue what he liked his long strokes to put out what he disliked his little labels for addition and his second labels for a second addition according to the varietie and diuersitie of his copies A certaine godly man complaining for the losse of these works said Well we may deplore the losse of these works but restore the same we cannot After Origen there was one Lucianus translation about Lucianus Diocletians time This man was a minister of the Church of Antioch and a martyr A copie of this edition as I haue read was found written with this martyrs owne hand and kept in a marble chest at Nicomedia Hierome also writeth that in his time there were Greeke copies which were called by Lucians name Finally after Lucians translation followed another edition set forth by one Hesychius which corrected the interpretation of the Septuagints and gaue it to the Hesychius Churches of Egypt And thus farre of the eight Greeke translations which were after Christ all which be lost howbeit the Papists sell for good Canonicall Scripture certaine remnants as they say of Theodotions translation Dan. 13. and 14. chap. a fragment which that foule heretik Apostata left in their safe keeping For as concerning this Greeke edition of the old Testament which is now extant howsoeuer it comes to vs we haue none pure but mixt and corrupted as we haue before obserued And thus farre of the translations of the old Testament first the Chaldee Paraphrase next the sundrie Greeke copies of all ages CHAP. XXI Of the Syriacke translation of the new Testament NOw let vs come vnto the translatiō of the new Testament The new Testament being first written in Greeke was translated into the Syriacke tongue which in the dayes of Christ and his Apostles was the proper and naturall language of the Iewes by reason of their long captiuity in Babylon and for that the Assyrians were so transported to the possession of Iurie It is vncertaine who was the Author of this translation as also at what time it was done Tremelius thinks it most like to be true that this was done in the primitiue Church in the very beginning that by the Apostles themselues or their Disciples He prooues also the reuerend antiquity thereof First by the elegancy of the tongue Secondly by the defects losse of certaine books and places of the N. Testament which Syriack translation anncient are to be found in