the book be to him that readeth of the nature that an image is to him that gazeth who would not plead for them both alike to be used or rejected But what if an other would come and say that words or speaches are in the nature of trumpets or bells and therefore in the nature of ceremonies and so by consequent as the silver trumpets golden bells in the Law were ceremonies ended by Christ so speaking or preaching of the word is likeweise ceremonial men now must be all taught by the spirit Hath not this as good a colour against the audible voice as the other against the visible writing For as the sound of the voice affecteth the eare and understanding of the hearer so the sight of the letter affecteth the eye understanding of the reader and as far dooth a book differ from an image in this respect as a man from a bell A bell when it soundeth in the eare yeeldeth no distinct articulate voice for the edifying of the hearer but a man when he speaketh is vnderstood of the hearers his reanable voice dooth edify so an image when it is looked vpō affoardeth a man no edification no not if it were an image sent frō heaven unlesse it had a voice withall but a book when it is read informeth the mind and feedeth not the eye onely as dooth a picture An image picture hath a mouth speaks not no spirit or breath of life is in thē but the book of God is theopneustos inspired of God his spirit life is in it it is not a dumb teacher but speaketh testifyeth the mind of God and by that which is there written the spirit speaketh to the Churches Wherfore a mayn difference is to be put between livelesse pictures Gods lively oracles in his book so in all writings And if M. S. continue in this mind that a book and an image are both of a nature I could with he would set out no more books but images in their sted so should lesse harm come unto mens soules then now dooth by reading his hereticall writings But if books and writings be in nature of ceremonies reading as he sayth ceremonial wherof he giveth this reason for as the beast in the sacrifices of the old testament was ceremonial so was the killing of the beast ceremoniall how is it that he sayd before of reading that it is a lawful ecclesiastical action dooth not the lying tongue vary incōtinently For shall we have legall ceremonies the shadow of things to come whose body is in Christ to be used as lawful ecclesiasticall actions may we not then have pictures images of cherubims c. for ecclesiastical use as we have the holy scriptures which by M. S. religion are in the nature of images ceremonies In another place he sayth As musicall instruments and playing vpon them was typicall because it was artificial so reading of a book was typicall also because it is meerartificial So then the playing on the organs and the reading of the scriptures are both of a nature both types and ceremonies so abolished How near these reasons groūds do reach to Iudaism Familism I leave unto the wise to judge and future things wil shew more for as yet the wandring starrs have not run al their course Of the Original scriptures AFter his censure of books in general to be of the nature of images M. Sm. cometh to fight against the use of Gods scriptures in his worship beginning even with the Originals the Hebrue and Greek as they were written by the prophets Apostles Wherin he is fallen into a higher degree of error or of frawd then when we had controversie with him for then his plea was no translation for it is apocrypha but onely the canonical scriptures are to used in the church in tyme of Gods worship Now he wil out with canonical scripture also for the reading of it he thinketh was a ceremonie ended by Christ thus see we fulfilled the saying of the Prophet they proceed from evil to worse And first to prove them ceremonies he layeth these grounds The holy Originals sayth he signifie and represent to our eyes heavēly things therfore the book of the law is called the similitude of an heavenly thing Heb. 9. 19 23. Holy scriptures or writings began with Moses Exo. 24 4. and 31. 18. Ioh. 1. 17. 2 Cor. 3 7. Before Moses holy men prophesied out of their harts and received and kept the truth of doctrine by tradition from hand to hand 2 Pet. 2 5. Jude ver 14 15. Deut. 31 24. When Moses had written the law he caused it to be put by the ark in the most holy place as a witnesse against the people Deut. 31 26. therefore the Apostle caleth it the handwriting in ordinances which was contrary to us which Christ nayled to his crosse Col. 2 14 Eph. 2 15. Hence it followeth that the holy Originals the Hebrue scripture of the old testament are ceremonies 2 Cor. 3 3 7 Num. 5 23. 24. by necessarie consequent The book or tables of stone typed unto the Jewes their hard hart void of the true understāding of the law 2 Cor 3 3. Hebr. 8. 10. Ezek. 36 26 27. 2 Cor. 3 14 15. The ynk wherwith the letters were written signified the spirit of God 2 Cor. 3 3 Heb. 8 10. with Exod. 31 18. The letters written or characters ingraven signifieth the work of the spirit who alone doth write the law in our harts by proportion also Deut. 9 10. with Heb. 8 10. Reading the words of the law out of the book signifieth the vttering of the word of God out of the hart by proportion See also 2 Cor. 3. 2. 3. 6. 1 Cor. 12 7. The writings of the old testament being ceremonial are therefore abolished by Christ onely so far forth as they are ceremonial Col. 2. 14. 20. Gal. 4. 9. The thing signifyed by the book viz the law of God the new testament remayneth 2 Cor. 3. 11. 7. Heb. 8. 6. 7. 13. Here first may be observed how M. Sm. professing to treat of the originall scriptures in which both old and new testament both law and gospel are written unto vs taketh one part onely to weet the law or old testament and from it will conclude against the whole body of the scriptures and this fallacie he often useth in his writings But if all he here sayth were graunted that the writings of Moses were abolished by Christ Yet will it not therevpon follow that the writings of the other Prophets and of the Apostles also are typicall ceremoniall and abolished Nay rather the contrary would follow thus that as circumcision and the passeover c. were figurative shadowes ended by Christ no more to be used but baptisme and the Lords supper instituted by Christ in sted of the former are continually to be
us with synn for using our English Bibles in the worship of God he thought that the teachers should bring the originals the Hebrew and Greek and out of them translate by voice His principal reason against our translated scripture was this No Apocrypha writing but onely the Canonical scriptures are to be used in the Church in time of Gods worship Every written translation is an Apocrypha writing is not canonical scripture Therfore every written translation is unlawful in the Church in time of Gods worship Why he counted every translation apocrypha and what he meant therby appeareth by these words of his a written translation sayth he or interpretation is as wel as much an human writing as an homilie or prayer written read The like impietie he hath also printed in his book saying A translation being the work of a mens wit learning is as much and as truly an humane writing as the Apocrypha so commonly called writings are and seeing it hath not the allowance of holy men inspired but is of an hidden authoritie it may be iustly called Apocrypha c. And therfore not to be brought into the worship of God to be read That this point of the translation was the onely difference as it is known to al that then heard his publik protestatiō so his words in writing shew it Translations written sayth he are not refreyned in the case of scandal for we desired that they might be refreined for our sakes that we might keep communion it would not be yeilded So if we would have layd aside our translated Bibles communion they say should have been kept with us Now for the true differences on our part at that time and stil they are thus We agree with M. Smyth herein that Onely canonical scripture is to be used in Gods worship that no apocryphal writing is to be used in Gods worship But we disagree deney that every written translation is an Apocryphal writing affirming that the Scriptures in English and other languages rightly translated out of the Originals are Canonical so to be read in the Church in the worship of God After much time spent about this controversie he manifested other differences touching the ministerie and treasurie and soon after published this book of Differences wherin having his latter thoughts as he thought better then his former he retracted a former book of Principles c and al other his writings so farr forth as they were overthwarted by this his last book He also acknowledged the ancient brethren of the separation as he calleth us are to be honoured that they have reduced the Church to the true primitive and Apostolik constitution which consisteth in these three things 1 The true matter which are Saincts onely 2 The true forme which is the uniting of them togither in the covenant 3 The true propertie which is a communion in al the holy things and the power of our Lord Iesus Christ for the mainteyning of that communion To this blessed work of the Lord wherin those ancient brethren have laboured I know not sayth he what may more be added I think rather there can nothing be added And was he now setled in his course nothing lesse for the strange womans pathes are moveable they cannot be known Soon after this God stroke him with blindnes that he could no longer find the door of the Church out of which he was gone by schisme and which he had assaulted with error Our entring in by the covenant of God with Abraham to the faithful and their seed hath been as a brazen wal whereagainst he hath runn himself to his utter ruine if God in mercie raise him not up And now as a man benummed in mynd he cryeth out against us contrary to his former fayth and confession Loe we protest against them sayth he to bee a false Church falsly constituted in the baptising of infants and their own unbaptised estate And agayn We protest against them that seeing their constitution is false therfore there is no one ordinance of the Lord true among them Thus wine sheweth it self in M. Smyth to be a mocker strong drink to be raging whiles he having drunk the wine of violence proclaymeth open warr against Gods everlasting covenant The defense of which grace being already in the hands of two worthy soldiers of Christ Mr Clifton whom he hath printed against and Mr Robinson whom he next threatneth I leave vnto them not doubting but God their strength will teach their hands to fight and their fingers to battel in so good a cause against this enemie But because he still vrgeth his former quarrels of the scriptures and Ministerie I purpose with Gods grace to set against him in these desiring the Lord my Rock to gird me with strength and to make my way entyre Touching the first namely the vse of translated scriptures in the worship of God M. Smyth thus summeth vp the difference in the forefront of his book 1. We hold saith he that the worship of the new testament properly so called is spirituall proceeding originally from the hart and that reading out of a book though a lawful ecclesiasticall action is no part of spiritual worship but rather the invention of the man of syn it being substituted for a part of spiritual worship 2. We hold that seing prophesying is a part of spirituall worship therefore in time of prophesying it is vnlawfull to have the book as a help before the eye 3. We hold that seing singing a Psalm is a part of spirituall worship therefore it is vnlawful to have the book before the ey in time of singing a Psalm Here first let the reader observe that the mayn and true difference which was between M. Smyth and us about the translation is not mentioned but is brought in after as by the way in hādling these matters and other points never controverted between vs are made heads of the differences In which doing M. Smyth hath graced the very portch of his building with imposture and frawd 2. In saying of himself and his brethrē We hold c. he giveth the reader to vnderstand vnlesse he meant to delude him that they whom he dealeth against hold the cōtrary wheras he neither dooth nor is able to produce any proof hereof against us neyther I dare say can he tel what we hold of these points Thus secondeth he his fraud with injurie and maketh these two as Iachin Boaz the pillars for to bewtifie the temple of his book Now because his whol battel against the translated Scriptures is cheefly out of this bulwark of spiritual worship wherin he hath intrenched himself and flyeth therto at al assayes when other shifts fayle him I wil begin with it as himself also dooth and come to Translations anon OF WORSHIP Wheras the word Worship is diversly used somtime more largely somtime more straightly by reason wherof
himselfe calleth and esteemeth prophesie to be worship in the proper sense he is taken in the snare which he set for the righteous and if any be idolaters for such things himself is one and principall Or how ever it be for that all men may see how he hath sought to abuse vs by his aequivocation to shrowd himself in a conceited fansie Yet one thing more I will observe touching the sacraments which M. Sm. speaketh not of in this place but elswhere in that book sayth thus The publishing of the covenant of grace and the putting to of the seales is onely one concrete action or part of worship for the publishing of the covenant giveth being to the seales otherweise breaking bread and baptising are but putting of seales to a blank Here first I note by the way how M. S. acknowledgeth the Lords supper and baptisme to be seales of the covenant of grace as in another place also he calleth them yet now being put to his shifts for defense of his anabaptisme he is driven thus to say I deney that baptisme is the seal of the covenant of the new testament Thus the windie clowd carieth himself to and fro and rather then he will forgoe his error he wil contradict that which before he had well written though it may be also confirmed by the testimony of the holy ghost who calleth cir cumcision the figure of our baptisme a seale of the righteousnes of faith Rom. 4 11. But to the point in hand if the publishing of the covenant and the putting to of the seal as baptising with water breaking giving taking eating of bread c. be one concrete that is one joynt action or part of worship as I grant it is taking worship generally why is not the reading and expounding or preaching of the word also one conjoyned action and part of worship especially seing they were joyned together in Israel as Nehem. 8. 8. They read in the book of the law of God distinctly and gave the sense c. If the Preists and Levits then whose office was to teach Iaakob Gods judgements and Israel his law did thus teach with reading and if it be true that th'Apostle sayth Moses of old time hath in every citie them that preach him he being read in the synagogues every Sabbath and if Christ himself first read the text of scripture and after that preached from it have wee not as good ground to say that reading and preaching is one joynt action and part of worship as preaching and baptising But it was Satans policie to disgrace the reading of Gods book and seek to thrust it quite out of the worship of God that men mought prophesie as now they use to speak out of their harts and honour that as Gods proper worship and so the serpents word if it were mixed with the Lords mought the more easily be unespied the scriptures being absent But God hath joyned his word together with his spirit that his people should not be deceived by such as walk in the spirit and ly falsly Singing of Psalmes M. Sm. wil have to be the third part of worship because praying and singing Psalms are put together sayth he in the same sense that is as parts of worship 1 Cor. 14. 15 17. Iam. 5. 13. Act. 16. 25. And prophesying and psalmes are coupled together for the same purpose 1 Cor. 14. 26. Here agayne M. S. omitteth the needful distinction of Psalmes and singing of them For some Psalmes are written in the Bible as canonical scripture given to the Church for to be read expounded and sung which M. S. himself granteth even of the translation saying It may be read in the Church and sung in tunes And this singing is with harmonie of voices An other kind of Psalm there is which one man vttereth in the Church and others hear him of which sort the Apostle speaketh 1 Cor. 14. 26. when ye come togither as every one of you hath a Psalm or hath doctrine or hath a tongue or hath a revelation or hath interpretation let all things be done to edifying This kind is far inferiour to the other as being uttered by men subject to err as wel in singing as in teaching and it is to be tried by the psalms in scripture and other authentik books This was an extraordinary gift as strange tongues and the like Yet M. S. loving to handle things confusedly that his error might lesse appeare speaketh here of singing Psalms as of one sort and nature Again that he might make all serve his own fansie he describeth singing of Psalms to be the shewing of our thanksgiving to God by the manifestation of the spirit Philip. 4. 6. 1 Cor. 14 15 17. Wheras we find in the scripture many Psalms directly penned for doctrine and instruction to the Church as othersome are for thanksgiving to God yea matter of all sorts historie of things past prophesie of things to come rebuke threatning comfort lamentation and what not is mixed in songs of the scripture and why such Psalms might not by the spirit be suggested to Christians in Pauls time as wel as thanksgivings I know not any reason at all So that his reasons of prayer song mentioned togither are insufficient to prove them both of one nature properly as before is noted of prophesie rather we are to distinguish praying singing prophesying as three severall gifts and works of the spirit and all of them Gods worship and service in the Church according to their severall kinds and nature But it seemeth strange vnto me that M. Sm. should now both allow of the scriptures to be sung in tunes in the Church and also make the singing by gift of the spirit a part of Gods proper worship in the new testament and yet he his disciples to use neither of these in their assemblies If it be an ordinary part of worship why perform they it not but quarrel with vs who accounting it an extraordinary gift now ceased do content our selves with joint harmonious singing of the Psalmes of holy scripture to the instruction and comfort of our harts and praise of our God Separating our selves as the holy Ghost willeth vs from such as dote about questions and strife of words whereof cōmeth envie contention and many other euils OF THE SCRIPTVRES HAving ended the point of worship with the nature parts of it it remayneth now to see how this thing is applied by M. S. against reading of the scriptures And first in the generall touching all manner writings he sayth that books or writings are in the nature of pictures or images and therfore in the nature of ceremonies and so by consequēt reading in a book is ceremonial If M. Sm. can prove books images to be both of a nature both alike ceremonies he may be a Proctour for the Pope who hath brought images into the Church for laie mens books And if
him But eyther he must look for enthusiasmes or revelations from heaven vvhich some Anabaptists have dreamed of or els he faleth to profanenes or desperation And it is not M. Sm. distinction of worship properly so called that here vvil comfort the troubled sovvl for he must doe al especially his ecclesiastical religious actions of fayth and not his proper vvorship onely Yea the serpent wil build more on this rotten foundation and assault him also that hath skil in the tongues and trouble him saying though thou hast knowledge of Hebrue and Greek yet hovv canst thou tel vvhither this that thou readest be the pure vvord of God There be many Ievvish fables and humane traditions that have been vvritten in Hebrue and in Greek also and vvhither God spake or vvrote these things as novv thou readest them thou knovvest not and therfore canst not of faith make this book a ground of thy religion and vvorship And if thou vvilt credit M. Smyth loe he telleth thee that as Antichrist hath polluted al Gods ordinances so hath he violated the original scriptures Do not thou therfore build thy fayth upon the scriptures any longer but beleev that which M. Smyth and his like shal prophesie out of their harts for so he sayth holy men prophesied before Moses time and indeed so some prophesyed in Ezekiels time though they vvere blamed for it books are in the nature of pictures and images and therfore ceremonies and reading a book is ceremonial and reading Prophesies in the time of the law was a type of prophesying and reading the words of the law out of the book signified the lettering of the words of God out of the hart and Christ fulfilled the law of reading and shut the book in the synagogue to signifie that the ceremonie of book-worship or ministerie of the letter was now exspired and finished and now the worship of the new testament must proceed originally from the hart and spirit Wherfore lay aside the scriptures and hear what men shal prophesy out of their harts orif that like thee not exspect thou revelations and visions from heaven Thus M. Sm. as a snare on Mispah a net spred upon Tabor hath layd in his book such a groundwork against the script as fitteth the Divils purpose to intāgle mens sovvls although to deceive the birds withall he hath strewed some wheat at the mouth of the pit as that translations may be made the ground of our faith an instrument to trie doctrine by c. so breathing out of one mouth both hot and cold A translation made verbatim from the originals is absurd by reason of the difference of the dialects therfore unlawful seing it edifieth not 1 Cor. 14. 26. a translation paraphrastical or a paraphrast if it be lawful in time of worship to be read then why not a written sermon These are but blocks to make the blind stumble Gods word may be set over into English for the most part word for word without absurditie and where our language wilnot bear the strict proprietie of the original phrases we are warranted by the Apostles allegations of scriptures in an other tongue to use such words as the language wil affoard to expresse the other withall Though tongues differ one from another in proprietie of speeches yet God hath sanctified them all for instruments to convey his word and law unto us and this in writing as well as in speaking Dan. 2. 4. c. Act. 1. 4. 8. 9. 11. 15. 23. Rev. 1. 11. 19. Written sermons are the works of men Gods book set over into English though with some diversitie of phrase is Gods book and word stil for as hath been shewed it is not the letter or sound but the thing signified meant by them which properly is Gods word and which we are so to reverence But M. Sm. having granted that the translation may be read in the Church made a ground of our faith c. and now asking why a written sermon is not also lawful in Gods worship eyther alloweth humane writings to be read in the Church as wel as Gods writings translated which is a notable error or els he cavilleth against the truth contrary to his cōscience And in his reasoning dealeth like a false coyner who because the gold of the common wealth is not so fine perhaps as the gold of Ophir or Vphaz sayth to the merchant if such course metal may be taken for mony then why not brasse or copper A paraphrast commentarie or exposition upon a chapter which conteyneth more of the contents of the originals and the holy Ghosts meaning is vnlawful to be read in time of worship therefore a translation of a chapter which conteyneth lesse is unlawful also to be read in time of worship First by Mr. Sm. grownd layd in the beginning a paraphrase comment or any humane writing may be used in the administration of Christs kingdome in like sorte as the scriptures which is erroneous Secondly he addeth more to his error in teaching here that a cōmentary hath more of the contents of the holy Ghosts meaning then the text it self in English or othertrāslatiōs His cōclusiō therfore bringeth forth vanitie and his belly hath prepared deceit No cōmentary in the world made by an ordinarie man conteyneth the meaning of God so as the text it self in a faithful translation of the book or chapter dooth Thirdly Mr. Sm. confesseth that the matter of the translation agreable to the originals is inspired but not the writing or character If the thing written be inspired of God then is it canonical scripture 2. Tim. 3. 16. then not apocryphal nor an humane work as a commentarie then conteyneth it more of the contents of the originals then any mans exposition As for his exception of the writing or character it is but vanitie for the Apostles had the matter of their writings by inspiration frō God as for the writing or character that was not inspired but Gods word was written in such characters words phrases as the hethen Greeks philosophers and Poets had used long before Lev. 22. 22. Mal. 1. 8. 13. 14. Mat. 22. 37. Rō 12. 1. 2. Ps. 119. 45. 103. 1. God wil be served with the best we have But ther is no one translation the best we hav seing the Lord may in time of worship minister better to him that administreth if he understand the originals if he understand not the originals he hath it not at all for it is an other mans work and therefore no one translation written may be read in time of worship M. Sm. is like one of them that hunteth the sowles of Gods people setting reasons as hayes to intangle No one translation sayth he is the best we have seing the Lord may in time of worship minister a better as good a reason against reading the translated
to mistake so smal a matter in copying out any thing as experience teacheth Thus Mr. Sm. is slipt aside from translations to quarrel with the original scriptures and correct them where though I would not folow his wanderings I observ breefly these things 1. He restreyneth the holy Ghost from using the seventies errors bearing with mens weaknes because he needeth them not why doth he not also restreyne God from suffering divorce many wives to one man in Israel seing he needed not thus to have done then more then now Shal man limit the holy Ghost to doe no more then he needeth 2. He mismatcheth Gods passing by the syn of hethens idolatrie Act. 17. 30. with Gods permission of divorce and polygamie in his law and putting in Cainan in Luk. 3. The first was horrible syn in al that did it though God overlooked it upon their repentance the latter not so but tolerable and Lukes naming of Cainan holy 3 He injurieth Luke intimating as if he put errors from a translation into the original indeed he had so done if from the Lxx. he had put it into Moses Hebrue which was farr from him But he onely sets it downe out of a common known received record into the genealogie which he wrote which al would allow of by which they would trie Lukes writing where the leaving of it out mought have caused much strife And if God so bare with the Iewes hardnes of old what mouth can blame him for bearing with the weaknes both of Iewes and Gentiles here Nay rather his mercy is to be magnified for writing his word so as the weak mought not stumble or fal away the froward mought not cavil For had the Apostles written in Hebrue the Grekes of liklihood many Iewes could not have vnderstood and if they should have ordinarily left the common translatiō not onely the Gentiles mought have made doubt but the Iewes would have taken occasion to speak evil For they reverenced the labours of the 70 greatly and would suffer no other translatiō God therefore who turneth al things to his glorie turned this his indulgence to the praise of his grace 4 Mr. Sm. hazardeth the credit of the original scriptures and of al mens faith in saying Antichrist hath violated them as he hath polluted al Gods ordinances It is not good they say to bely the Divil Antichrist hath evil ynough upon him though he be not charged with violating the originals which this accuser wil not easily prove No doubt but copiers and writers might fail and did mistake and some thinking to mend the new testament by the old or Luke by Matthew might make it worse which by true copies may be amended So faults are in translations through ignorance or oversight But this point if it were true helpeth translatiōs and hurteth them not For if the originals be violated and yet are not for the faults to be rejected so translations may be violated the errors in the part are no cause to reject the whole 5 He presumeth to put Cainan out because it is not in some ancient copies these some I take it wil prove but one which Beza mentioneth and if the credit of it wil countervayl al others in Cainan it must do the like also in a great part of the genealogie beside varying al the names from Ioseph up to David according to Matthewes narration which is to overthrow Lukes purpose quite For he deduceth Christ from Nathan his father in the flesh and not from the brother Solomon his father but in the kingdom as Matthew dooth But to change pente five into pantes all Act. 7 14. without warrant of any Greek copie at al is too much boldnes cannot be be born out by kurio kairo where many copies are for a ground If men that perceive not the counsel of God in penning his word shal presumptuously change it according to their owne conceipt we shal have nothing left sound or uncorrupt Rather if men be ignorant let them lay their hand on their mouth Lastly sayth he fully to answer the obiection whatsoever is good in the LXX translation was taken out of the new testament and ancient fathers of the Greek church For it is manifest by histories that the LXX translation is lost and this that goeth under the name of the LXX is a patcherie made out of ancient writings therfore the holy Ghost doth not aim at the LXX translation at al as is imported in the obiection This is not fully but foolishly to answer for though the LXX trans were now lost yet was it not lost in the Apostles dayes nay ther was no other but that known in the world to reason because we have it not now therfore they then aimed not at it at al is without reason or colour of truth Neyther doth M. Smyth manifest by histories that the Seventies translation is now lost rather the translations of Aquila Symmachus Theodotio others that synce the Apostles time set over the bible in Greek these al are lost save some peeces of them and that which we have is for the body of it the Seventies though much corrupted with words and sentences of the other And this Hieroms translation of the prophets from the Septuagint and his commentarie citing the divers versions of Aquila Symmachus c. sheweth and the best Greek bibles now extant that have varias lectiones do confirm the same Neyther if al were granted which he would is the objection fully answered for the Apostles cite the scriptures in Greek which the prophets wrote in Hebrue eyther therfore they aymed at the Septuagint or translated it themselves Whereupon it followeth that the Hebrue text set over into Greek is the scripture of God stil and speech of the holy ghost Or if M. Smyths divinitie had then been known the unbeleeving Iewes mought have alleged that Paul proved not his doctrine by canonical scripture but by apocryphal writings that were equally humane with the Rabbines commentaries in respect of the matter and in respect of the letter language worse There were Greeks and Graecians Hellenes and Hellenistai Rom. 1. 16. Act. 6. 1. The Greeks were so by progenie and blood the Graecians or Hellenists were Iewes by progenie borne in Grecia Therfore Paul calleth himself an Hebrue of the Hebrues Phil. 3 5. These Graecians had forgotten their language and spake Greek onely and in their synagogues had the Greek translation read unto them and the Apostles coming into their synagogues approved that act and so it followeth that reading translations is lawful in worship The distinction of Greeks and Grecians is vain sayth M. Sm. as appeareth by these places compared Act. 21. 39. 18. 2. 24. with Act. 6. 1. Phil. 3. 5. For Paul was born at Tarsus in Cilicia and Aquila at Pontus and Apollos at Alexandria and yet are al called Jewes not Hellenists or Graecians And Act.
Moses and it should continue after the end of the world for moralities indure for ever but books and so reading of books shal perish Men should kisse the lips of him that answereth upright words but our adversary answereth with a froward mouth He sayth the law was commanded to be read but once in seven year these words but once are not of the law but of his own false comment There was a special charge to read the book then in the eares of al togither not intending to read it but then For every sabbath was to be sanctified and al things are sanctified by the word and prayer and Israel knew this wel and therfore from old tyme read the word in the synagogues every sabbath and our Lord Christ accompanied thē in this holy work so that he is more then Sadducean blind which sayth it was commanded to be doon but once in seven year No better is the next plea that because writing reading began with Moses was not frō the beginning of the world therfore the law of reading is not perpetual neither bindeth us now a Familist or Atheist may likewise say baptisme or the Lords supper in the particular outward act is not to cōtinue til the worlds end because it was not from the beginning but began with Christ. A practise commanded of God at what time soever is to continue til by him it be repeled which reading the scriptures never was but repeted and augmented by the Apostles writings Like vanitie is in the reason following books and reading of books shal perish when the world is at an end therefore now whiles the world continueth we are not bound to read Gods book Mought he not have made these reasons against preaching the word and other ordinances of God as wel as against reading seeing these shal cease also at the end of the world But a seduced hart hath deceived this man that he cannot deliver his sowl nor say Js there not a lye in my right hand Secondly sayth he it is moral in the equity that is that al meanes must be used to attayn the knowledge of the truth wherof reading is a principal and yet hence it followeth not that reading is eyther part or meanes of spiritual worship For books are things meerly artificial as are pictures and images Gen. 4. 22. Here again the enemie is caught in the snare of his own tongue for if reading Gods law be a principal mean to attayn the knowledge of the truth now as it was in Israel Deut. 31. 12. and so moral perpetual then his former cavils against the objection may be cast as dung upon his own face Then do we wel to read Gods word in our church for that end and M. Sm. hath doon wickedly for it to blame us and charge us with idolatrie To hide this his shame he runs into his old borough that it is no part or meanes of spirituall worship but out of this he hath been often hunted before and wee are sure that observing it according to Gods wil we worship serv God in spirit and truth as wel in this as in other like ordinances of the gospel His matching of books with Tubal-cains craft Gen. 4. 22. images sheweth how his idol error hath shut his eyes that he cannot see his hart that he cannot understand For in holy scriptures wherof we speak the mynd of God is made known unto us and his spirit is in them so as when we read in the book of Moses we read that which is spoken to us of God as the Evangelists in playn words teach us whereas in handicrafts we see or enjoy but the fruit of mans wit and skil and an image without life is the teacher of lyes Such impious comparisons seem rather to come from Tubal-cains forge then from any possessed with the spirit of God Reading the law was performed in the Synagogue and not tyed to the temple an argument that reading is not ceremonial but moral for no part of ceremonial worship was performed from the tabernacle or temple This objection with the reason I think was never so made of any but by M. Smyth himself It is true that reading was not tyed to the temple it is true also though this argument thus framed hardly proveth it that reading is not ceremonial The last branch is untrue for some ceremonies or figurative services were performed out of the temple His answers to this obiection are for the most part true being wel understood but in part false when by the way he denyeth reading the law to be a moral action wherof he giveth no reason at al and the thing is handled before Luk 4. 16. Christ stood up to read and redd his text and then preached out of it Now his actions are our instructions and therefore we are to read words out of a book in time of preaching or prophesying This objection M. Smyth hath falsified it was never thus pressed by us for translations whereof now we treat but thus Luke reporteth that Christ read where it was written The spirit of the Lord is upon me c. This text Luke setteth down in Greek which Esaias wrote in Hebrue whereupon it followeth that the scripture translated into an other language is the same scripture stil for the substance of it though the letter and language differ and is not an apocryphal humane vvriting and so an idol in Gods vvorship as Mr. Smyth blasphemed Els Luke and the new testament cannot be defended against Ievves that should cavil hovv humane apocryphal vvritings are cited for divine and canonical Thvs serveth it to prove the reading of translated scriptures by necessary consequence and that vve are not bound to bring the book of the law and prophets in Hebrue when we vvould read to the people and so interpret or read mentally out of it as M. Smyth then dreamed though since he is fallen to forbid the Original Hebrue also in Gods vvorship as vve have heard before But M. S. finding as seemeth this objection too heavie for him hath sought to change it as he could best make ansvver vvhich is thus First in that it was doon in the synagogue by Christ which was neither Priest nor Levite it is an argument that it was no proper part of the worship of the old Testament but of that nature as was the exercise performed by Christ and the doctors in the temple so that reading most properly is searching the scripture which is not worship Christ as his custome was sayth the scripture went into the synagogue on the Sabbath day and stood up to read and after speaking from the scripture which he had read al bare him witnesse and wōdred at the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth He sate dayly teaching in the temple and in the synagogues among the people But al this reading and teaching vvas no