Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	faith_n	scripture_n	write_v	2,971	5	5.8263	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A42784	The rector of Bury's reply to the minister at Oswestry's answer; in a second letter to his friend	Gipps, Thomas, d. 1709.	1699 (1699)	Wing G779B; ESTC R213346	14,296	22

found to say he durst not damn it because Multi virorum Ecclesiasticorum Martyrum ista dixerunt Sic oculos sic ille manus sic or a unriddle me this Phyllida solus habeto That all Ancient versions of Scripture and the Fathers are useful to find the true Reading of Scripture will easily be granted if you call to Mind what account we all make of the Polyglot Bibles and Primitive Writers That a Version of less Credit in general may in some particulars be truer than even the LXX or the Hebrew seems to be the Opinion of Mr. Mede B. 5. p. 1095 1096. He observ'd that in both the Chronology of Gen. 11. 26 32. ch 12. 4. compar'd with Lu. 7. 4. was mistaken and Corrected it by the Samaritan Pentateuch Now though for my own part I believe the Hebrew and LXX are not here faulty for Reasons not proper to be adduc'd in this place yet this shews what that good Man's Sentiments were in the Case Of the same mind is the Learned Dupin 'T is not absolutely necessary saith he that we should always follow the Samaritan Pentateuch which he asserts to be an Original and Authentick nor are we always oblig'd to follow the Hebrew Text. Compleat Hist of the O. and N. Testam Part 1. p. 168. But Mr. O. is angry that as the Papists send us to the Fathers for the sense of Scripture so the Rector carries us to them for the Scripture it self Bless me thought I when I read this whither will vain Glory and thirst after Victory drive a Man and into what Absurdities betray him This 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is very fatal Because forsooth we ought not without fear or wit depend on the Fathers only for the sense of Scripture neither are we beholden to them for the Scripture it self Whence I beseech you had we the Scripture but from our Predecessors in the Faith The Holy Fathers Principally whose Writings are so many everlasting Monuments upon Record of their Divine Authority from whom we know what Books were and what were not written by Inspiration Whence did we derive this knowledge but from them It was not brought us by an Angel from Heaven We have it not by Inspiration or from an inspir'd Prophet It dropt not out of the Clouds neither were we born with an innate Idea or Notion of the Divine Scriptures which are and which are not such If the examples already produced do not prove Corruptions in the Hebrew Text I am sure as zealous sticklers for the Hebrew verity as Mr. O. can be Mede b. 4. p. 961 990 b. 3. 707 708. 709. b. 5. 1094. have confessed it I send you then to the Margin for more In one of these places our Author Writes to A. B. Vsher thus I durst shew no such Conceits as these but to so great an Antiquary to whom the possibility of Corruption by Writing is so well known or rather the impossibility to the contrary How can it be prov'd that the Church of the Jews had a greater Privilege than we especially since Prophesy ceased among them The Masorethical method was devised since Christ and applied to one Copy only the best written by Hillel Supposing this yet other Copies might in some things be righter than Hill●'s He argues else where the Hebrew is most liable to Corruption the Letters differing so very little are easily mistaken one for another There is no security against Corruption unless the Transcribers were inspir'd But whether for these Nineteen Hundred Years past any one Copier has been inspir'd who he was and which is the Copy Ib. p. 961. and where to be seen tell me eris mihi magnus Apollo If any Corruption 't is pleaded had crept into the Text the Pen Men of the N. T. would have Corrected it And what if they did But we had rather follow the Masorites saith Mr. M. He afterwards observes several such Emendations which you may examine at leisure Is it not then equally probable that St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans restor'd the 13 14 15 16 17 and 18. Verses to the 14th Psalm But we dote on the Masorites and had rather stoop to the Rabbins than to the Apostle St. Justin understood the Hebrew so I argu'd from his being a Native of Flavia Apol. 2. in init a City in Palestine This Squadron Mr. O. meddles not with It keeps the Field still as I might say peacebly But saith he the Martyr has mistaken the Etymology of Israel For it is deriv'd from Sarah Ish not Is signifies vir and therefore he will not allow Justin to have been skill'd in Hebrew A. 1. Criticks take a great deal of Liberty in Etymologies they are like Hereticks in Religion often broaching new Conceits which though not always exactly true are not to be ascrib'd unto their Ignorance but singularity and a certain Delight they take ludere Campo Philologiae and to start Paradoxes in that kind of Learning suiting their Etymologies to the Argument before them The Martyr doubtless had his Eye upon Gen. 32. 24. where the Person that Wrestled with Jacob is call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vir from whence he fancy'd Israel was deriv'd For the Eternal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here appearing in the shape of a Man and being therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gave unto Jacob his own Name as I shall shew a name suitable to his own Nature and Typical of it Justin's Criticism therefore is not contemptible nor is he to be thought a dunce in the Hebrew on this score But you 'll ask perhaps why then did not Justin write Ish And how comes it to pass that we write it not Ishrael but Israel A. 2. As for Justin you must note the Greeks have no such Letter as sh which therefore they always turn into a simple s as may be seen in the LXX and Greek Testament Ex. Gr. Shimeon in the Hebrew Gen. 29. 33. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the LXX and in Lu. 2. 25. and Shem Gen. 5. 33. is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the LXX and in Lu. 3. 36. So that we need not wonder Justin Martyr Writes Is for vir tho' the Hebrew writes it Ish And as for us in English we very frequently turn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into Sin as if there were no difference between the two Letters We Write Simeon Isaiah Samuel Absolom Ahasuerus and others with a Sin in stead of the Shin from whence I infer that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was Originally but one Letter tho' afterwards made two and destinguish'd by a point on the right Shoulder of Shin and on the left of Sin Buxtorf thinks that Shin was the only Ancient Letter of the Hebrew Alphabet Sin being brought into the Room of Samech haply after Justin's time If so then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the same Letter in Israel and in Ish Note again that the Ephraimites Jud. 12. 6. could not pronounce