Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	judge_n	king_n	ruth_n	1,639	5	10.6479	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A00759	A defence of the liturgie of the Church of England, or, Booke of common prayer In a dialogue betweene Nouatus and Irenæus. By Ambrose Fisher, sometimes of Trinitie Colledge in Cambridge.	Fisher, Ambrose, d. 1617.; Grant, John, fl. 1630.	1630 (1630)	STC 10885; ESTC S122214	157,602	344

you not against the rule of Pythagoras digged in the fire with a sword But now to reuisite your argument First I might denie your Maior and render foure reasons for it First the Epistle written from a Coll. 4 16. Laodicea was read in the Church and yet it was out of the Canon vnlesse you thinke it was some Epistle of Saint Paul which is lost some thing therefore not Canonicall may be read in the Church N. I thinke no Canonicall Epistle could bee lost For it were to derogate too much from Gods prouidence and the faithfulnesse of the Church which should bee the Keepresse of the Volumes of the Couenant I rather suppose that it was some Epistle written from the Laodiceans to Paul to the demands whereof this Epistle to the Colossians did answere And therefore that it might more plainly be vnderstood it was meete that the other of the Laodiceans should bee read in the Church also For such a like thing is probably collected to haue beene done by the b 1. Cor. 7 1. Corinthians I. To sift the ground of your assertion were now vnseasonable But you haue giuen in a faire euidence against your owne Maior as shall hereafter appeare My second reason is this Nine Chapters of the Booke of Iob wherof foure were vttered by c Iob 4. 5. 15. 22. Eliphaz three by d Chap. 8. 18. 25. Bildad two by c Chap. 11. 20. Zophar are read in the Church But these Chapters are not of the Canon seeing no doctrine can be establisht by them forasmuch as Go himselfe disallowed the f Iob 42 7. saying of Iobs three friends wee may therefore in the Church reade some thing which is not of the Canon N. The generall positions of Iobs friends are true howsoeuer they erred in the application of them to Iob himselfe as if hee had beene an hypocrite I. That is but a shift for the maine maxime of all the Dispute is taken from Iob's wiues g Iob 2. 9. speech The summe whereof may thus bee demonstrated He that fals into great miseries is an hypocrite But Iob is so falne He is therefore an hypocrite So then let him not continue in defending his vprightnesse but blesse h Ios 7. 19. God in the acknowledgement of his hypocrisie and so let him die with repentance and patience By this it is plaine that the Maior Proposition was false and not the Assumption onely as you pretend N. I hope you will not exclude these nine Chapters out of the Canon considering they containe an historicall though not a positiue truth For it is true that these men so spake though they erred in their speech I. You haue made a faire distinction whereby you will cut off your owne arguments made against the Apocryphall Bookes as shall bee shewed in due place My third argumēt is this Sundrie Bookes of Traditions were read in the Church of the Iewes and yet were neuer of the Canon Or else how could the names of i 2. Tim. 3. 8. I●●nes Iambres the k Heb. 12. 21. foure of Moses the time of the famine in the dayes of l James 5. 17. Elias the combat of Michael with the m Iude 9. Deuill the prophesie of n Iude 14 15. Enoch haue bin rehearsed as things vulgarly knowne My fourth last reason is this Set Prayer may bee read in the Church and yet is no part of the Canon as was proued in the first o Lib. 1. Chap. 2. conference Besides this your Maior admits of a distinction which is this Whatsoeuer is read in the Church must either bee the Canon of faith or manners To this latter kinde we may referre the Apocryphall Bookes N. This is a rotten deuice They cannot bee the Canon of manners seeing that in the Doctrine of manners they may erre I. This answere shall bee sifted in your Minor But now wee tell you further that things may be read in the Church for the explanation of the Canonicall Scriptures For as you remember you said the Epistle of the Lacdiceans was read for the explanation of Saint Paul's Epistle to the Colossians N. But the Bookes Apocryphall doe rather obscure then explaine the Canon I. The Booke of Wisdome doth open the Storie of Exodus concerning the ten p See Wisdome 16. 17. plagues of Egypt Ecclesiasticus is a Commentarie to the Prouerbs The Sixt of Baruch is a most famous epitome of sundrie things in Moses the Psalmes and the Prophets against Idolatrie The first Booke of Maccabees is a key to the mysteries q Especially to the 8. 11. Chapters thereof of Daniel N. Because you cauill so much at my Maior I will change both it and my whole reason Whatsoeuer is read in the Church ought either to be Canonicall Scripture or agreeable thereunto But the Bookes betweene Malachie and Matthew are neither And therefore may not be read I. As the change of your Maior is to the better so is that of your Minor to the worse whereof wee desire the first part to bee explained the latter to be confirmed N. That these Bookes are not Canonicall it is plaine because they are Apocryphall I. Some Serpent lurketh vnder this grasse why call you them Apocryphall N. First because they containe sundrie errours I. How many errours thinke you there be in the Booke of the Petition to the Parliament defended by T. C N. Wee suppose no errour can bee found therein I. A Booke Apocryphall hath errours But this Booke hath none and therefore is not Apocryphall and is by consequent Canonicall N. It may be Ecclesiasticall and so neither Canonicall nor Apocryphall I. You see then that your reason is infirme These Bookes are not Canonicall because Apocryphall and therefore Apocryphall r Non causa pro causa because they containe errours N. Secondly then they are tearmed Apocryphall because they are capable of errours as being the writings of men I. This is to make them Apocryphall in possibilitie not in act Now euery possibilitie is reducible to some act Tell then what is the actuall cause why they are Apocryphall N. Can a priuation haue an actuall cause I. The cause may be actuall though rather deficient then efficient N. Thirdly then They are deemed Apocryphall because their Authour is not knowne I. No more is the Authour of Ioshua Iudges Ruth Samuel Kings no nor of the Epistle to the Hebrewes in your opinion N. Their Authour is knowne to bee Gods Spirit though we doubt of the Penman I. But how is that knowne N. The Propheticall Church receiued the Bookes as from God and hath deliuered them to vs by Succession Fourthly then these Bookes are Apocryphall because the Iewish Church neuer receiued them For neither were they written in any tongue which the Iewes vnderstood neither doe the Iewes at this day admit of them but as of Interludes I. You haue at the last stumbled vpon the true cause