Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A04693
|
An apolgye made by George Ioye to satisfye (if it maye be) w. Tindale to pourge & defende himself ageinst many sclaunderouse lyes fayned vpon [hi]m in Tindals vncharitable a[n]d vnsober pystle so well worthye to be prefixed for the reader to induce him into the vnderstanding of hys new Testame[n]t diligently corrected & printed in the yeare of oure lorde. M.CCCCC. and xxxiiii. in Nouember.
|
Joye, George, d. 1553.
|
1535
(1535)
|
STC 14820; ESTC S120468
|
39,729
|
106
|
the faithful were in heueÌ„ there shulde be no resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies whiche incoÌ„uenience to avoide he laith them down to slepe out of heueÌ„ as do the Anabaptists tyl domes daye but here I meruell that Tin is so scleÌ„derly lerned in the forme of arguyng that he se not howe his antecedeÌ„ce may be true coÌ„sequeÌ„ce false ¶ Thana baptistys opinioÌ„ off the soulis departed seyng that the coÌ„trary of his coÌ„sequeÌ„ce is necessary that is to weit there shal be the resurreccioÌ„ of the flesshe 1. corinthio 15 Paule thus prouing it If Christ be preached to haue rysen how happeneth that some of you saie thee is no resurreccioÌ„ Tyndals argumeÌ„t is proued false As who shuld thê° argew Christe our head is rysen wherfore yt must nedes folowe that his bodye which is his chirche shall ryse ageyn For wherfore shuld the beyng in heuen of the soulis of Peter Paule of all saintê let the resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies more then the being in heuen of Christis soule those iij. dayes did let his resurreccioÌ„ Tin wil saye They be al redy in ioye aÌ„d therfore there nedeth no resurreccioÌ„ And I saye so was christis spirit yet he rose agayn And I denye T. argumeÌ„t For were they in neuer so greate ioye yet must their bodies ryse agayn or els he wil make christe a lyer his doctryne false Mat. 5 Heuen erthe shal soner passe away then one iote of god dis worde shal passe vnfulfilled The verite hath sayd it aÌ„d wryteÌ„ it coÌ„cluding that our bodies shal ryse agein wherfore ther caÌ„ no coÌ„dicionall anÌ„cedeÌ„ce of T. nor yet of any angel in heueÌ„ make this ê¯clusioÌ„ false But let vs exameÌ„ the text se the Saduceis opinion vnto the whyche Christe answereth so directly and so confuteth yt vtterly The Saduceis as wryteth that aunciauÌ„t historiograph Iosephus beinge himself a iew in his .xviij. boke the .ij. ca. sayd that the soule of maÌ„ was mortal and dyed with the bodie The Saduceis opinion acto 23 aÌ„d Paule coÌ„firming the same to be their opinion addeth that thei said ther were nether spirits nor angels ¶ Paule declareth the saduceis opinion so that to saye there is nether spirit spirit properly is the soule departed nor aungel is as miche to saye as the soule is mortall no lyfe to be aftir this and the Saduceis in denying the lyfe aftir this denied by the same denye but onely those two that is bothe spirit and angell for if they had denyed by that worde Resurrectio the generall Resurrection to in that place so had thei denied thre distiÌ„cte thingis but Paule addyng Pharisei auteÌ„ vtraque coÌ„fitentur but the pharises graunt them bothe two declareth manifestly that thei denyed but onely two thingis that is to saye bothe spirit angell for aftir this present life tyl domes daye there is no lyfe of eny creature but of these two creatures spirits aungels And if by this worde Resurrectio Paule had vnderstoÌ„deÌ„ as T. doth the resurrection of the flesshe he wolde not haue sayd the pharyses grauÌ„t them bothe but all thre For this worde vtraque as euery latyne maÌ„ knoweth is spokeÌ„ but of two thingis only but as for this my mynde I leaue it vnto the iugemeÌ„t of the lerned And nowe shall I proue yt by christis owne answer that the Saduceis in those places of Math. Mark Luke denied that there is any lyfe aftir this mat 22 mar 12 luc 20. aÌ„d so nether to be spirit nor angel whiche is as miche to saye as towching the soule it to be mortall For yf it shuld lyue aftir the departing thei thought to haue had takeÌ„ christe in this trappe with their questioÌ„ of those .vij. brethreÌ„ that they now being all a lyue aftir their dethe shuld haue al seueÌ„ togither that one wyfe at once for thei sayd that al these .vij. had hir here But christe answerde them directly accordyng to their opinion aÌ„d not aftir Tin opinion of this worde resurrectio telling them that thei erred being ignoraÌ„t of the scriptures aÌ„d also of the power of god whiche powr christe declareth to consist in the pÌ„seruing the dead a lyue for because out of god the father aÌ„d christe the sone being that vere lyfe all lyfe floweth ye that into the dead id 5.12 1. ioaÌ„ 5 whiche power to coÌ„firme into the confutacioÌ„ of their opinion their own coÌ„fusion he alleged these scriptures exodi .iij. But first he tolde them of the present state of the soulis departed saynge that in the tother lyfe aftir this they nether marye nor ar maried but thei ar as the aungels of god in heueÌ„ Tindal In his expositioÌ„ of S. Ihon Pystle And yet saith Tindal this doctryne was not then in the worlde what is done with the soulis departed the scripture make no mencioÌ„ but it is a secrete saith he layd vp in gods tresury Ioye It is verely a depe secrete to him that is ignoraÌ„t so many playne scriptures whiche I shall here aftir brynge in prouyng their state in heuen Here is also to be noted that christe in describing their present state saith in the present tence Thei mary not nor ar maryed but ar lyke auÌ„gels ye egall vnto auÌ„gels the sonnes of god saith Luke cap. xx But yet yf Tindal wyll saye that the present tence is here takeÌ„ for the future playe boo pepe withe the tencis as he englissheth resuscitaÌ„tur shal ryse agen not are reuiued or resuscited yet must I aske hym whether that the childreÌ„ of that lyfe worthy that worlde as Luke calleth them be not now more lyke aungels then they shal be aftir the resurreccion of their bodies mar 12 luc 20. me thinketh that in thys poynt that they nether marye nor are maryed auÌ„gels aÌ„d the spirits be now bothe a lyke aÌ„d the chyldreÌ„ of the lyfe or the worlde where now the blessed lyue with Christe are now more lyke auÌ„gels then they shal be aftir the resurrectioÌ„ of their bodyes for now they ar substances incorporal immortal intellectuall and so be auÌ„gels but then they shal be bodely substances hauyng very flesshe and bones which the aungels neuer had nor neuer shall haue The text is declared But nowe let vs heare the scryptures wherwith christe coÌ„futeth their opinion ê“ueth the same thynge that the saduceis denyed The text is her expended Crist coÌ„sidering what thing thei denied sayd vnto them De resurrectione vero mortuoruÌ„ noÌ„ legistis qd vobis dictuÌ„ est a deo qui ait Ego sum deê° AbrahaÌ„ c That is to saye As coÌ„cernyng the lyfe of them that be dead haue ye not red what is tolde you of god saying I am the God of AbrahaÌ„ the god of Isaac and the god of Iacob God is not the God of the deade but of the lyuinge By this argumeÌ„t god is the god
of the lyuing not of the dead God is the god of AbrahaÌ„ Isaac Iacob ergo AbrahaÌ„ Isaac aÌ„d Iacob are a lyue christe coÌ„cludeth planely nothing els but that there is a lyfe aftir this whereyn the soulis departed lyue whiche coÌ„clusioÌ„ sith it is directly made ageynst the Saduces opinion it must nedis folow that thei denyed in this place that thinge whiche christe proued for christe was not so vncircuÌ„specte to proue one thing they denying another orels they myght haue well obiected saying Syr what is this answere to our questioÌ„ we aske the whose wyfe shall she be at the general resurreccion of their bodyes and thou answerest vs nothyng els nor prouest vs any thing els with this scripture but that there is a lyf after this wheryn the soulis departed nowe lyue so to be both spirits angels for that thei be lyke auÌ„gels If the Saduces here had denyed cheifely principally by that worde Resurrectio the generall resurreccioÌ„ criste wolde haue proued it theÌ„ by scriptures as well as he here proued them the lyfe of spirits separated froÌ„ their bodyes christe reÌ„dering the cause of his argumeÌ„t to coÌ„firme the same to declare the powr of god in so pÌ„seruing the dead a lyue saith Omnes emÌ„ illi viuuÌ„t all meÌ„ lyue in him or by hym luc 20. Also it is to be noted diligeÌ„tly how that saynt Marke for the inducyng of that autorite of Moses setteth before the thing that yt proueth in these wordis saying mar 12 CeteruÌ„ de mortuis ê™ resuscitant noÌ„ legistis in libro Mosi c. that is to saye But as touching the dead that thei ar resuscited or they ar all redy alyue he saith not that they shal be alyue or shall ryse agayne as T. in hys diligeÌ„t last correccioÌ„ turneth the presenteÌ„ce into the future aÌ„d the verbe passiue into a neuter to stablissh his errour thus corrupting the text And lyke wyse he plaith with the verbe in Luke in Marke he englissheth the verbe of the pretertence resurrexerint for the future So fayne wolde he wrest the wordê froÌ„ their natyue sence to serue for hys errour haue ye not red in exodo what Moses saith c so that he induceth the autorite to ê“ue that they ar a lyue nothing lesse then to proue the resurreccion of the flesshe I wouÌ„der wherfore T. flitteth froÌ„ the text in these places Here maye euery maÌ„ se that thê worde Resurrectio in this place as in dyuerse other places of scripture is takeÌ„ for the lyfe aftir this wheryn the soules now lyue tyl the resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies as testifyeth IoaÌ„ Resurrectio hath two significations apo 20 And Tin not knowyng this significacioÌ„ or not willing to se it is gretely to blame to write so belye sclauÌ„der me sayng That for because I thus geuing the worde in his place his very signification I do denye the resurreccion of the slesshe which I neuer doubted of but beleue it as coÌ„staÌ„tly as he I haue pÌ„ached taught it so interpÌ„ted it where it so signifyeth coÌ„fesse it openly as euery man maye se that read my workis as Tindals own coÌ„scieÌ„ce testifyeth the same For thoughe this place proueth not directly the resurreccioÌ„ of the bodies yet are there many places moo that proue it clerely as doth all the .xv. chapter of the first Pystle to the Corin. where I englisshe it Resurreccion in the article of our Credo but in Iohn aÌ„d in the .xj. cap. to the Hebrwes where the worde signifyeth the lyfe of the spirits departed there I englissh it as the very worde signifyeth to put the reder out of doubt to make it clere lest he be seduced erre with Tind beleuyng that the soulis slepe out of heueÌ„ when sleape in scripture is properly aÌ„d onely vnderstandeÌ„ of the bodye which shal be awaked and ryse ageyne A rekeninge is gyueÌ„ of my traÌ„slatioÌ„ For I did traÌ„slate thys worde Resurrectio in to the lyfe aftir thys in certayne placis for these two causes principally For two causes is this worde Resurrectio so traÌ„slated First because the latyn worde besidê that it signifieth in other places the Resurreccion of the bodye yet in these it signifieth the lyfe of the spirits or soulê departed as christis answere vnto the Saduceis aÌ„d Iohn declare mat 22 apo 10 SecoÌ„daryly because that agenst the Anabaptistis false opinioÌ„ agenst their errour whom Erasmus reproueth in hys exposicioÌ„ of the Credo which saye the resurreccioÌ„ of the soules to be this that is to weet when thei shal be called out of their preuey lurking places in whiche they had ben hyd froÌ„ the tyme of their departyng vnto the resurreccion of their bodies because I saye that agenste these erroneouse opinions these places thus truely traÌ„slated make so myche aÌ„d so planely that at thys worde Resurrectio the lyfe of the spiritê aftir this their false opinion falleth is vtterly condempned The confutacion of Tindals opinion Here it is 〈◊〉 to the grunde of our cause Surgo to ryse Maneo to abyde or endure And if Tin wolde loke beter vpon his booke folow not so miche his owne witte he shulde fynde that the hebrew worde which comonly is traÌ„slated into this vbe Surgo the same some tyme saynt Ierome translated into Maneo as in Isaye VerbuÌ„ dnÌ„i manet in eternuÌ„ The worde of the Lorde endureth for euer some tyme into theise vbis sto or coÌ„sto as Isaye xlvj And some tyme into theis vbis Pono coÌ„stituo excito facio stare in vita vel seruo in vita as in exo cap. ix of Pharao Et ê“fecto ideo posui te vl excitauite seruaui te in vita vel feci te stare superstiteÌ„ te volui esse plagis meis vt ostendaÌ„ in te fortitudineÌ„ meaÌ„ c. that is to saye Doutlesse or verely for this cause yet haue I set and coÌ„stitute the or stered the vp pÌ„serued the alyue to receyue my plages to declare my strength vpoÌ„ the aÌ„d to shewe that my name myght be knowne thorowte all the worlde of the which verbe there cometh Surrectio so Resurrectio whose rote original sith it hath these so many dyuerse significacioÌ„s it must nedis folow that the nowne diriuyed oute therof haue as many so to signifye that permaneÌ„t verye lyfe or the preseruing of them styll a lyue which significacioÌ„ agreeth in all these placis of these thre euaÌ„gelistis for thei all tel one the same storye Resurrectio hath mo significations then one If T. will englisshe thys verbe Resurgo euery where to ryse agayne in bodye so shal he traÌ„slate it falsely corruppe the text bringe the reder into no small errour as once did one preacher in a sermoÌ„ expownyng this verse of the first psalm Ideo noÌ„ resurgeÌ„t impij in iudicio c. englysshing yt thus