Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	aaron_n	bear_v	law_n	21	3	4.0745	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A14657	The svmme of a dispvtation betweene Mr. VValker, pastor of St. Iohn Euanglists [sic] in Watling-street London, and a popish priest calling himselfe Mr. Smith, but indeed Norrice assisted by other priests and papists : held in the presence of some worthy knights, with other gentlemen of both religions.	Walker, George, 1581?-1651.; S. N. (Sylvester Norris), 1572-1630.	1624 (1624)	STC 24960.5; ESTC S2955	22,486	46

thus The Priests lippes shall keepe knowledge and they shall seeke the Law at his mouch Did neuer intend to shew thereby that God did make here a promise that so it shall bee for euer but onely to shew that this is the Law and Commandement of God teaching what the Priests and People should doe and ought to doe euen as in the Commaudement Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me The words doe not promise that the Israelites should alwaies acknowledge and worship Iehouah the true God alone for the euent shewed the contrary within 40. payes but shew what they ought to doe but the words are a coms mandement recited not a promise made the wordof the 4. verse shew Therefore our English translation is most perfect of all shewing not onely the sense and meaning of the Law but also how it did binde the Priest and People and how they ought to obey it Thus you see how your example doth make for vs against your selfe Mr. Smith Mr. Smith finding worse successe then hee expected in this example and perceiuing the standers by to be well satisfied with this answer flees presently to another to wit Dan. 4. 27. where in our English Translation the words run thus Breake off thy sins by righteousnes thine iniquities by shewing mercy to the poore Here saith he the word in the Chaldee which is the Originall Perok signifies to Redeeme and so the Greeke and Latine Translations render it but your Translations of purpose contrary to all the ancient receiued Translators and to the nature of the word in the originall do translate it Breake off and that of purpose to oppose the true doctrine of satisfaction merit by good works Therefore your Church is a false Church Mr. Walker Howsoeuer other translations run I am sure our English is in sense most sound Orthodoxe That translation which counsels Nabuchadnezar to redeeme his sins by righteousnesse is as the words doerun senslesse and against all reason For God neuer appointed that mens sinnes should bee redeemed but his will is that they should bee mortified and destroyed and he so hates them that hee cannot leaue them vnpunished but will haue iust vengeance to be executed for them eithervpon the sinner himselfe or on his surety If you vnderstand the words as you seeme to vrge them that Nabuchadnezar a wicked Heathen King should by his own righteousnesse redeeme himselfe from his sins you doe make Daniel a teacher of heresie and blasphemie for it is no lesse then blasphemy to hold that an Idolatrous Pagan may by his owne righteousnesse redeeme himselfe it makes void the promise of Christ the Redeemer But our English translation doth teach excellent truth to wit that a true conuert ought not only to beleeue in Christ and by faith to put on the Robe of Righteousnesse that therin he may appeare righteous before God and comely in his sight but also to breake off his sinfull course of life and neuer to goe on any longer in any knowne sinne as Papists doe in hope of absolution by confession and pennance And therefore I doubt not but the word in the originall will be more agreeable to our translation when wee come to see and examine it if you be pleased to let me see your Hebrew Bible Mr. Smith Loe here in the originall the word is in the Caldee Perok which signifies onely to redeeme 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the Greeke translation renders it and the Latine Redeeme Mr. Walker I thought that wee should finde it thus when we came to the tryall dare you here before these Gentlemen put on such an impudent face as to affirme without feare or shame that this Parak signifies only to redeeme and nothing else Mr. Smith I confesseit signifies also to breake in sunder but neuer to breake off Mr. Walker Yea it signifies all kinde of breaking euen breaking asunder breaking a pieces and breaking off for indeed it is an Hebrew word and the Caldee borrowes it form the Hebrew the first and most proper signification of it is to breake asunder or to breake off and it doth signifie to Redeeme only in a trope by a Metominie of the cause for the effect for men are redeemed out of bondage by hauing their yoke of bondage broken off from their necke and their chaines and fetters broken in sunder and that that breaking is the meanes of their Redemption That it signifies properly to breake off appeares by the common vse of it in the Scriptures as Gen. 27. 40. where Isaac saith to Esau. Thou shalt breake off his yoke from thy necke Exod. 32. 2. where Aaron said to the people Breake off the golden eare-rings which are in the eares of your wiues c. Thus Gentlemen you see what a bold face this man can set vpon a falshood and how hee goeth about to beare downe the truth with great words Sir Edward Harwood Vpon this Sir Edward Harwood stood vp and said that Mr. Smith hath failed much in this proofe seeing the word in the original did beare another sense more proper then that which he vrged for the only true sense And that the proper sense which the English translation did follow being so agreeable to the rule of faith was rather to be embraced M. Smith M. Smith thus confounded had no shift but this That the Hebrew text was by the malice of the Iewes corrupted in many things and that it was written of old without pricks vntill the Iewish Massorites did inuent pricks and vowels by which we doe reade it diuers hundreds of yeeres after Christ And therefore he would not build naturall point on the originall Hebrew words Mr. Walker Now saith Mr. Walker you shew you selse what you are in your owne colours euen one who esteemes no authority or testimony either of God or man further then they serue your owne turne while you immagined that the Hebrew Text was against our translation you did vrge it with great vehemencie as the authority and testimony of God Now when it failes you and contrary to your expectation doth make for vs you vilifie it and reiect it as a thing corrupted by the Iewes and formed according to the minde and pleasure of the Iewish Massorites wherein you shew not onely vanity of mind and inconstancie but also malice and wickednesse ioined with wilfull ignorance For how soeuer Elias Leuita a turnecoate Iew of later times may seeme to affirme such a thing perhaps to please his Patron Aegidius that the Vowels were inuented by the Massorites of Tiberias yet it is the iudgement of all the best learned both Iewish Rabbins and Christians that the pricks vowels and accents were from the beginning And the Massorites were Iewes gathered both out of the East and West of purpose to compare their most auncient and authentick Manuscrips together and when they found them all to agree in Letters and points they made their Massorah and noted how many times such a word was written with

it thus That Church which hath not the word of God truly preached but falsely translated is no true Church Such is the Church of England Ergo. Mr. Walker This is no proofe of that proposition which I denyed and which you did vndertake to proue and therefore you shew your selfe ignorant in disputing and doe commit that fallacy against the rules of Logicke which wee call Ignorationem elenchi Mr. Smith It is a true Syllogisme and proues the maine matter in controuersie to wit that you haue no true Church Mr. Walker But the thing which you were to proue was that the Church which hath not Gods word truly preached and infallibly deliuered in euery point at all times is not a true Church This because you cannot tell how to proue as you did vndertake therefore you flee to another new Argument to which also I doe answer as I did to the former First that the Maior proposition is false For a Church which hath the word of God falsely or erroneously translated in some parts and so not truely preached in euery part may be a true Church Secondly if you meane falsely translated and not truely preached of purpose and wilfully then the Minor is false for though the translation of the Church of England may faile and misse of the true meaning of diuers places as all the best translations especially the vulgar Latine approued by the Romish Church doth yet it is not so erroneously translated of purpose neither doe all the Preachers thereof build certainly on such erronious and false translations but many doe discerne them and preach and teach the true oppositions and the Church alloweth them so to doe when they shew good reasons for their doings from the circumstances of the Text. Mr. Smith But I will shew plainly by diuers Examples that you haue diuers places of Scripture falsly translated in your translation of set purpose and wilfully contrary to the words of the Hebrew Text contrary also to the Greeke and Latine receiued in all ages and Churches heertofore Mr. Walker You threaten largely in wordes which are but winde but indeede you can neuer performe that which you say Let vs see if you bee able to shew any part of our translation wherein one word is falsely translated of purpose I desire no more but to ioyne a Combat with you hand to hand about the Hebrew text and about the truth of our translation and the agreement of it with the Originall Mr. Smith I shall quickly proue what I say and what you require First I haue a plaine example Malachi 2. 7. where your translators read the words thus The Priests lippes should keepe knowledge and they should seeke the Law at his mouth First this translation is false because it is contrary to the Hebrew text wherein the words are Iishmeru they shall keepe and Iebakshu they shall seek and not they should keepe nor they should seeke Also it is contrary to the Greeke wherein the words are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to the Latine translation of St. Hierome which is Custodient and requirent Secondly it teacheth heresie and false doctrine namely that Gods Priests they who sit in Moses Chayre may erre contrary to the words of Christ who commands his Disciples to heare all such as sit in Moses Chayre because they shall not erre but their lips shall preserue knowledge Thirdly it is thus corrupted of purpose to gainsay the infallibility of the Pastors of the Church who doe succeed in the Chayre of the Apostles and to blinde the peoples eyes that they may not see the certainty and infallibility of iudgement in the Priests and Pastors who sit in Moses Chaire how they are bound to seek the Law at their mouth but may follow any vpstart teachers which separate from the Catholicke Church Thus you see Gentlemen all how plainely I haue proued that the Church of England hath of purpose corrupted the Scriptures and therefore is no true Church Mr. Walker Indeed if that which you say were true you did speake something to the purpose but great words and protestations cannot make truth to be falshood nor falshood truth as for the Example which you cite out of our English translation Mal. 2. 7. I deny it to be contrary to the Hebrew text yea I will easily proue both from the Hebrew words which you haue here shewed in the Hebrew Interlinear Bible and also from the whole scope and all circumstances of the place that the English is the best translation more perfect then either the Greek or Latine First though the Hebrew words Iishmeru Iebakshu be of the Futuretense yet this doth not proue that they should be translated so in our tongue because you cannot but know if you haue any skill in the Hebrew tongue that the future tense in Hebrewe sometime simply and sometime by meanes of Vau conuersiue signifies time either perfectly or imperfectly past somtimes it stands for the Optatiue Potentiall and Subiunctiue moode therefore our translation is not differēt nor irregular from the Hebrewe which is the originall Secondly it was neuer the purpose of Gods spirit in that place or by these words to teach that the Lawe should alwayes bee taught truly and infallibly by the Priests and Pastors who succeede Moses or the Apostles locally in the Church by a continued succession for that is a falshood contrary to the experience of all ages this very place confutes it most euidently For the Priests vnto whome the Prophet here speaks in these places were Leuites and succeeded Aaron in the Priesthood and yet they were departed out of the way they caused many to fall in the law by their corrupt glosse and their abuse of the Couenant of Leui. As it appeares in the next words immediately following yea some of them had sacrificed to Idolls as Iosephus shewes in his History of those times and therfore the Lord threatens to corrupt their seed by cutting off the male progeny and to cast the dung of their Sacrifice in their faces so that the Priesthood of Phineas should by a sister married into the Tribe of Iudath to one of Dauids line fall to Christ who desended of her and hee should take it away to himselfe for euer as is intimated in the 3. verse of the same Chapter So then it is no heresie but Gods holy truth that Priests succeeding in the place and office of Aaron and Moses may erre and haue erred Moset his Chaire in which the Scribes and Pharisies did sit was the seat wherein they were wont to read the Law of Moses and the expositions of the Prophets to the people and therfore what they there did teach was true and Christ commanded his Disciples to obey it But in their owne glosses and traditions they erred damnably made void Gods Law and their Doctrine our Sauiour called soure leauen and warned his Disciples to beware of it Thirdly they who translate the words

such pricks in the Scripture how many verses words yet letters were in the Law and which was the middle verse word and letter so that by their Massorah if it hab beene kept perfect a man might finde out if there were but one word letter or prick altered or taken away out of all the old Testament All the differences which were found between the Bibles of the Easterne and Westerne Iewes are recorded and kept to this day the one set down vnder the names of the Sonnes of Ashur the other vnder the names of the Sonnes of Nephtali and they are such as do not alter the sense at all as may bee seene in all our great Rabbinicall Bibles The end therefore of the Massarites meeting and of their worke was not to inuent vowels and prickes but onely to note how they did finde the Scriptures pricked and vowelled from the daies of old and to set downe rules from the knowledge thereof and for the preseruing them without alteration or corruption to all posterities Thus much I haue learned out of the Rabbins though my skill bee but small in their Language and though I haue had no time to spend in the study of them but such as I haue stollen from my other necessary studies of Diuinity which properly concerne my Calling And if you know not this to be true I am sure you are but a weak Hebrutian and slenderly read in Hebrew Rabbins Mr. Smith All the Rabbins are of opinion that the pricks of the Bible were inuented by the Massarites and vndoubtedly that opinion is the truth Mr. Walker I pray you name one Rabbin of note who is of that opinion and I will name you ten of the contrary I haue ten or twelue of the best Rabbin Comentaries vpon the Law of Moses which I will shew to you and if you can finde any of them to be of that opinion I will yeeld vnto you in this point Nay more then that I will shew out of the Scriptures written by Moses that the originall Scriptures of Moses his Law which were kept in the Tabernacle by the Priests were written not single without pricks as common coppies were but double both with letters and pricks so that none could doubt of the right reading of them Mr. Smith It is easily said but impossible to be proued if you can shew me any such thing out of the Scriptures you shall do more then any euer yet could doe Mr. Walker Looke Deut. 17. 18. and there it is plainly testified that there was a booke of the Law appointed to be kept before the Priests Leuites in the Sanctuary out of which the King was commanded to write him a double written Copie of the Law that is a copie written both with letters and pricks and so most easie to be read and vnderstood for the Hebrew word there vsed is Mishneth which signifies Double and so you see here in your interliniall Bible Pagani doth translate it Duplum legis that is the Law written in the double forme both with letters and pricks Another Priest Mr. Smith being confounded with this proofe could answer nothing therfore another Priest who did sit by to assist him answered for him that the Hebrew word Mishneth doth not signifie the originall Scriptures but the exposition of the Rabbins vpon the text of Scripture Mr. Walker It is true that the Rabbins call their Expositions somtimes by this name as for example Rabbi Moses Maymonides call his Summe of the Talmid Mishueth Torah But you must know that in Moses his dayes when he wrote this Booke of Deuteronomy there were no Rabbinical Commentaries nor for a thousand yeares after only the Law it selfe was kept before the Priests and the King was commanded to write it onely into a Booke There Mishueth cannot here signifie any thing but the Text of the Law written in double forme which double forme of writing was easie to bee read and vnderstood and was an exposition in respect of the single writing without prickes Whereupon this word Mishueth came to signifie an Exposition or Commentary which doth largely expresse the meaning of the Law which is more short and obscure and the Iewes do call by this name the Book of Deuteronomy because it is an Exposition of the Lawes written more obscurely in the other bookes And their Expositions of the Law set down in their Talmud they also call Mishueth and Mishuai●th Priest The word Mishueth doth not signifie properly the Scripture but the doubled Law for the Scripture is called Mickra in the Hebrew tongue Mr. Walker The Law is the first Scripture which was written and therefore the word Mishuith by your own confession signisying the Law doubled is written in double forme signifies the Scripture written both with letters and pricks and so you contradict your selfe in your speech Whereas you alledge another name by which the Hebrewes call the Scripture to wit Mickra and from them would inferre that the Scripture is neuer called Mishueth by them I answer that your reason is ridiculous for one name of the Scripture doth not take away the rest but it hath diuers names in all languages we in English call it the Scripture and the Bible and the Booke of God and Gods word So in Hebrew the Scripture is called by diuers names sometimes Torah that is the Law because it is the rule of Life sometimes Chethab The Scripture or writing because it is written Sometimes Mickra because it is read of all Gods people And as it is written full and plaine in letters and pricks it is called Mishueh The Priest hauing nothing to reply to this answer but holding his peace Some of the Gentlemen desired that these disputations about the Hebrew text which they could not vnderstand might cease and that Mr. Smith would dispute in plaine English by way of Syllogismes To which motion both parties agreed And so Mr. Smith proceeded to another Argument which was written downe first and then answered Mr. Smith That Church which may erre for a time in a fundamentall point necessary to saluation is no true Church Yours is such Mr. VValker I deny your proposition for a true Church may so erre for a time Mr. Smith That Church which may erre for a time in a fundamentall point necessary to saluation hath no certainty for that time yours is such Ergo it is no true Church Mr. Walker Your Argument is Sophisticall and faultie diuers wayes First it doth not proue the proposition which I denyed and so it is a fallacy which we call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ignorationem Elanchi Secondly it is no true Syllogisme because it hath foure tearmes For the premisses tend to proue that our Church hath no certaintie and you conclude otherwise to wit that it is no true Church Thirdly the proposition is false for actuall erring in one point doth not take away certainty in all the rest much lesse possibilitie of erring for a time Mr. Smith I proue it