Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	great_a	king_n	prince_n	5,911	5	5.4840	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38614	Shibboleth, or, Observations of severall errors in the last translations of the English & French Bibles together with many other received opinions in the Protestant churches, which being weighed in the ballance are found too light / written by John Despagne ... ; and translated into English by Robert Codrington ...; Shibboleth. English	Espagne, Jean d', 1591-1659.; Codrington, Robert, 1601-1665.	1656 (1656)	Wing E3271; ESTC R20162	51,713	172

Father which art in the Heavens But not that he ever said The Father which art in Heaven Wherefore then Do we make him to change his stile in the Prayer which he hath prescribed to us But the English Translation doth change also all the other places in which Jesus Christ doth express the Heavens in the Plurall Number when he speaketh of the Father To the same purpose our Lord did never say the Kingdom of Heaven but alwaies the Kingdom of the Heavens One onely of the Evangelists hath this terme of the Kingdom of the Heavens no less then six and thirty times but the Kingdom of Heaven not once which plainly doth demonstrate seeing the multitude of passages in which the Plurall number is alwaies imployed and never the Singular that there is a mystery or an Emphasis in the one which is not in the other But the English Translation to the contrary doth never say the Kingdom of the Heavens but alwaies the Kingdom of Heaven Amongst all the places of the New Testament where the Original nameth the Heavens there are very few where the English do express the Plurall It is in their translation of the 2 Cor. 5. 1. and Heb. 1. 10. Why ought it not to be or could it not be as well in all the other places which the holy Ghost hath dictated And in Ephes. 1. 10. where the Originall mentioneth the Heavens in the Plurall the English Translation doth onely put it in the Margent and placeth the Singular in the text it self Of Lucifer who is mentioned in the English Translation Esay 14. ver. 12. THe School-Boys know that Lucifer is a Latin word and it is the name of the Star which sheweth its self before the rising of the Sun The Hebrew which signifies this Star is indeed expressed it self by the word Lucifer but it is when we speak in Latine not when it is translated into English To what purpose then is this Lucifer in the English translation The translators in the Margent have inserted the true word of the English tongue which is the Day-Star but in the body of the text they had rather imploy the Name of Lucifer as if it were better English or as if there were some great cause which did oblige them to it It is indeed no other thing but the tracing of an antient Allegory which applyeth to the Devill that which is spoken to the King of Babylon and of the Name of a Star hath made it to be the proper Name of the Prince of evill Spirits and give it him in Latin that is to say Lucifer And because proper Names do retain themselves in whatsoever language they are spoken it was beleived that this ought not to be changed for any other But wherefore do we yet retain the relicks of such notorious folly censured a long time since and disavowed by our selves who is he amongst the vulgar that finding in his Bible this word Lucifer doth not immediatly believe that it is the Name of a great Devill whom common ignorance so calleth It is true that the Divines who have published the last annotations on the English Bible have also condemned those who do so understand the name of Lucifer But so long as that word shall remain in the text the error will continue What need is there to retain a word which is not of the English tongue since the English can express the Hebrew without this Latin word which onely serveth to nourish an antient folly The common people of England have a long time thought that the evill Rich man Luke 16. verse 19 c. was called Dives according to his proper Name And for the greatest part they do to this day believe it for they ordinarily say that Dives is in Hell that Dives spoke with Abraham c. As if Dives had been his Christen-name or at least his Sirname Now this ridiculous opinion was conceived and born at that time when the people had not the Bible but in Latin For because that Dives doth signify a rich man in the Latin tongue when mention was made of Dives the ignorant did imagin that it was the name of a man An interpretation as vain as that which is recited in a modern Satyre of one who maintained that the name of Tobyes Dog was Canis because it is said that Canis followed his Master But it is to be admired how this ignorance hath been fomented even by the Orthodox themselves since the Reformation when they published the Scriptures in the English tongue for in the Contents of the Chapter which they have prefixed to the 16. of Luke we do yet read as if that Chapter did speak of Dives and Lazarus The last translation hath not this word Dives No more ought Lucifer to be any more especially in the text it self Of Mary Magdalen who falsly is said to be a Woman of a bad life The injuries which Divines for the most part a● her in their Sermons and their Books And especially the English Bible in the Argument of the seventh Chapter of St. Luke THe injury which the Roman Church doth to another Mary who was the Sister of Lazarus hath been sufficiently confuted by the Orthodox Ignorance hath caused to believe that this Mary and another who was of Magdala and the Sinner mentioned in the 7th of Saint Luke were but one and the same person confounding these three in one now we have truly and already vindicated one of the three who is Mary of Bethany who was the Sister of Lazarus but we do still defame her of Magdala as if this Magdalen were the Sinner of whom Saint Luke speaketh There is nothing more common in the mouth of the vulgar then the wicked life of Magdalen The Preachers willing to comfort Souls afflicted with the horror of their sins do represent unto them this Woman as one of the most unchast and most dissolute that ever was to whom nevertheless GOD hath been mercifull On the same prejudice which is but imaginary the reason is builded wherefore the Son of God being raised from the dead did appear first to Mary Magdalen before he appeared to any other for it is alleged it was because she had more need of comfort having been a greater finner than others The common places the Indexes even that of Marl●rat himself and other Books which serve for an Address to Students do give them betimes this impression which alwaies afterwards they retain He who hath wrote the Practise of Piety of whom I shall speak more hereafter doth rank this Magdalen with the most enormous sinners yea with Manasse himself one of the most wicked that ever was And yet more to atuhorize this error it is inserted into the Bible it self For the Contents of the 7th Chapter of Saint Luke in the English translation doth tell us that the Woman whose sins were in a greater number then the sins of others the Woman who untill then had led a wicked life and full

great miracle was wrought It was seated in Galile the less in a champian place it was round on the ridge thereof it was equall on all sides fourteen furlongs in height according to the levell I do therefore willingly yeild to the vulgar opinion provided it be said to be an opinion onely and not a certainty This transfiguration is recited four times in the new Testament to wit by three Evangelists and by the Apostle Saint Peter who with his eyes did behold it But none of them hath given us the Name of that Mountain Their silence in this particular should also shut up our mouths concerning this No doubt it was not without a speciall cause that the Holy Ghost abstained from naming that place seeing other places are named which seem to be less considerable Nevertheless if we say that it was Mount Thabor we ought not to pronounce it as an assured truth as ordinarily it is done even in Sermons and in our Books also of devotion For they who say so do speak it as if it were most true and not to be doubted without thinking that it is an uncertain fore-judgement Of the Son of God whom the English Bible saith is mentioned by Nebuchadnezar Dan. 3. 5. IN this translation Nebuchadnezzar speaketh that of the four men whom he saw in the fornace one of them resembled the Son of GOD This would make us to believe that Nebuchadnezzar did understand the mystery of the Trinity which nevertheless was obscure in the old Testament When we do say the Son of GOD it is presently understood that wee do speak of him who is the onely Son of the Father But there is no appearance that this Heathen Prince did speak in this sense The Prophets themselves when they touched on this point have never expressed the name of the Son of GOD but in a figure as in the persons of David and of Solomon or of the entire Body of Israel Mat. 3. 15. Nay Daniel from whom Nebuchadnezzar received all that he did know concerning the true GOD did never in express terms name the Son of GOD Nay speaking of him he reciteth that he saw him like unto the Son of man Dan. 7. The French Bible doth otherwise render the words of Nebuchadnezzar The fourth saith it is like unto a Son of GOD to a man divine excellent extraordinary So spoke the Pagans themselves when they would represent a man of rare qualities whether of Body or of Mind So the best Interpreters have observed And so this place ought to be translated Between these two the Son of GOD and a Son of GOD there is an infinite distance Of the Name of Children which was given to the three Companions of Daniel IN our vulgar tongues the Name of Child when it is understood without any correlative is taken for one of a very tender age It is commonly said that the three Children were cast into the Furnace And the Song which is attributed to them is called the Song of the three Children But certainly they were not Children then when they chose rather to be cast into the flame than to adore the Image Before that time they were reputed amongst the wise men of Babylon and they should have dyed amongst those who could not interpret the dream of Nebuchadnezar And before they were cast into the Furnace they managed all the great affairs of the Province of Babylon of which they were Governours And were they yet but Children The History also which recites the Martyrdom from whence they were miraculously delivered doth make mention of them as of men of age and not as of Children Daniel 3. ver. 12. 21 22 23 24 25 26 27. Of the first words of the French Bible IN the Originall the first words of the Book of Genesis are couched in this order In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth The Scripture begins with the same word of beginning so do all the Translations which I have seen the French onely excepted which saith God created in the beginning c. It may be said that I stand here upon too nice a punctilio For what ●oth it import if we read it God created in the beginning Or In the beginning GOD created It is true It is the same sense indeed nevertheless besides the generall reason which doth oblige us to follow the order of the originall words as neer as the propriety of our vulgar languages will permit there is a more particular consideration on this place Saint John doth in the same manner begin his Gospel In the beginning was the word c. The first Syllables of the Evangelist do represent those which are first in the Bible And that this was his design is evident by that which followeth For immediatly afterwards he doth mention that word by which all things were made and doth make use of those terms which do manifestly reflect on the words of Moses when he describeth the Creation of the world And as this term in the beginning is the first in Moses and in the Scripture so it is first of all expressed by this Evangelist This Concurrence which is so considerable doth not so plainly appear when we read it God created in the beginning I 〈◊〉 most clear when we hear Moses who saith In the beginning GOD created And the Evangelist who saith In the beginning was the word The Tabernacles of the Israelites being in the Wilderness ill represented in the pictures inserted in the Bible THese Tabernacles were Cabbins made of the branches of certain trees Such were the lodgings of the Hebrews after their departure out of Egypt untill they entred into the Land of Canaan In memory whereof they were enjoyned to celebrate every year a Feast of seven days during which they lodged in Tabernacies made of the branches of divers trees Le. 23. N●h. 8. But the Painters do make them of materials very different For representing the Israelites on the foot of Mount Sinai or in some other place of the Wilderness they do lodge them in tents which according to the painting were made of Linnen or of the skins of Beasts So that the Figure doth not answer either to the matter or to the form of those tabernacles of which we speak now in the pictures of many of our Bibles we may see pourtrayed the Camp of Israel and a certain number of Pavilions such as at this day are used when our Armies lye in the field but they do in no wise resemble the tents of the Israelites Such a portraict doth disguise the History and the Jews have a cause to taxe us for it of ignorance Of the Name of Beelzebub which is imposea on the Prince of the Devils IT is known that the Jews gave him this Name which is the Name of an Idol And the Pharises when they blasphemed the Son of GOD did call him after that Name But when Christ did answer them concerning Beelzebb he did not say as they that Beelzebub

Crowns or Garlands But it dot not say that the Bulls were crowned with them It is true enough that the Pagans were accustomed so to adorn those Creatures which were the Victims in their sacrifices by putting chaple●s of flowers on their heads or round about their horns But that could not be practised in every season of the year And as for the Garlands which are mentioned in this place the History expresseth not that the Priest in that nature did make use of them It may be that he would have crowned with them Paul and Bar●abas as the Pagans so did honour their false Gods in their Images And although that these Garlands were brought to crown the Bulls yet the Greek Text saith not that they were already crowned but onely that the Priest brought with him Crowns and Garlands So speaks the Syriack translation and so the Interpreter of the Syriack Tremellius and so also doth the English Bible The French have followed the Latine translation of Beza who in this particular hath not word for word expressed the Originall This Note will not appear fr●volous but to those onely who not that there is not one jo●e in the Scripture which is not considerable Of one word which the French adde to the end of the Lords Prayer WE say thine is the Kingdom c. In ages of ages so we speak in pronouncing that Prayer So we read in our Books wherein it is written and even in the French Catechism it self But the Originall Text Mat. 6. 13. where the terms are expressed which conclude that admirable Prayer hath not twice this word Ages It is so word for word Thine is the Kingdom the Power and the Glory in ages Amen This word Ages is there expressed but once instead whereof we redouble it nay with the addition of a particle which represents a change of the Case in the Grammars of the Greeks and Latins This Amplification brought into common use proceeds from this that there being other places of the new Testament in which these words we read To him be glory in ages of ages they have been taken as if they were the very same which are in the end of the Lords Prayer which notwithstanding hath not this doubling of the word ages This Phrase in ages of ages is of the stile of the Hebrews representing a Superlative who would be called Eternity it self the longest Duration which can be imagined This expression is not found but in the Revelat. Chap. 1. ver. 6. and Chap. 5. ver. 13. 14. If any shall reply as it is true enough that these words in ages in the Lords Prayer do signifie as much as in ages of ages I answer wherefore then in reciting the Lords Prayer do we not content our selves with the terms which are there The excuse is not sufficient that we adde nothing to the sense For when we make profession to transcribe or to translate we ought to retain the words of the Originall as far as our vulgar tongues are able to represent them without thrusting in any amplificatio● at all I forbear to speak that there is a secret reason for which this phrase in ages of ages hath been reserved for the last Book of the Scripture How the word ages which is in the Originall of the Lords Prayer is translated in the French and English Bibles BEhold here clean contrary to that which I have touched on in the precedent observation for in neither of the one or the other of these two Bibles hath this Prayer so much as once this word ages but in the steed thereof they both say For ever or alwaies Now although the terms are equivalent if it be said in ages or if it be said For ever nevertheless the word ages in the stile of the Scripture do include distinctions of great importance which this Periphrasis doth not contain and which I have not the leisure to illustrate in this place The English Translation is excusable in this because the language hath not a word which properly doth express that which we call ages But since this word is become French and doth better answer to that which is in the Originall Greek it ought to be retained in the French Translation of the Lords Prayer as well as we have retained it in the other places in which it is employed in the same sense and in the same matter Revel. 1. 6. and 5. 13. Of the sacrifice of Isaac ill represented in many pictures and particularly in the front of the English Bible ISaac is here painted on his knees before an Altar and Abraham behind him holding a knife in his hand which is lifted up to give the blow But this picture is false and doth bely the holy History For before that Abraham did advance his arm nay before he had the knife in his hand to strike Isaac Isaac was not before the Altar but on the Altar it self The particulars of the action are recited to us in this order That Abraham did build an Altar and ranged wood upon it that he bound Isaac and put him on the wood and afterwards that he took the knife into his hand to cut his throat Gen. 22. 9. 10. Isaac was then on the Altar not at the foot of the Altar when Abraham did lift up his hand with the knife to strike him It is a great mistake to frame a portraict which contradicts the History Howsoever I shall note this by the way This posture in which Isaac is represented having Abraham behind him and holding a sword in his hand doth cause many to beleive that it was to cut off his head and it is also the common opinion that in this sacrifice Abraham would have taken away the life of his Son by taking off his head But this prejudging although antient and very generall is not soassured as it is imagined to be and at least it ought not to be held for a certain truth The Text saith that Abraham took the knife to cut the throat of his Son now this word is not restrained to that which we call beheading And moreover we ought to consider that Abraham had order to offer his Son as a Holocaust In which kind of sacrifice the victim was not beheaded untill after it were dead For first of all the bloud was let forth either at the throat or at the breast untill the sacrifice was dead after that it was cut in pieces the head was severed from the Body and the other parts the one from the other This was the method of the Holocaust confirmed in Leviticus 1 11. 12. Of the Catachism of the French Churches THis Catechism is no more perf●ct than any other of the writings of Men I am not the first that hath so judged It is defective in many points It is prolix and exuberant in questions in certain matters where it ought to be more succinct On the contrary it is too brief there where it ought more to enlarge it self It sometimes dispatcheth