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	begin_v	set_v	14	3	5.1753	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13160	A challenge concerning the Romish Church, her doctrine & practises, published first against Rob. Parsons, and now againe reuiewed, enlarged, and fortified, and directed to him, to Frier Garnet, to the archpriest Blackevvell and all their adhærents, by Matth. Sutcliffe. Thereunto also is annexed an answere vnto certeine vaine, and friuolous exceptions, taken to his former challenge, and to a certeine worthlesse pamphlet lately set out by some poore disciple of Antichrist, and entituled, A detection of diuers notable vntrueths, contradictions, corruptions, and falsifications gathered out of M. Sutcliffes new challenge, &c.	Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629.; Sutcliffe, Matthew, 1550?-1629. Briefe replie to a certaine odious and slanderous libel.	1602 (1602)	STC 23454; ESTC S117867	337,059	440

great ostentation Now to proue this to be true Baronius is not ashamed to test a greater lye affirming that Gregorius Thaumaturgus did remoue not a house but a mountaine Which if he cold doe it were to be wished that he would remoue the 7. hils of Rome together with the Pope and this lying cardinall and place them at the foote of mount Tabor for whence Baronius beleeueth that our Ladyes house did flye ouer the Seaes into Dalmatia first and then into Italie falsification 36 Of Augustus he saith Ibidem 97 that he made lawes against such as liued single and yet honored those that kept themselues continually true virgins which containeth a notorious contradiction be●…de that it is absurd to proue vowes of virginity frō heathen emperous very preiudicial to the Romish church that he alloweth not fictum caelibatum nor any but those that indéede are true virgins of which he shall find very few among his fellow cardinals and not many among priestes monkes friers nunnes falsification 37 Where Pilate as Iohn chap. 19. saith wrote the title ouer the crosse in Hebrew Ibidem Pag. 103. Greeke and Latine letters and as Luke testifieth chap. 23. in Hebrew Latin and Greeke Baronius supposeth that the order is changed and that the Latin inscription ought to be first But this is nothing but to contradict the euangelistes and to respect neither the apostles nor their writings so the Church of Rome may winne any preheminence aboue other churches He alledgeth I confesse the testimony of pope Nicholas in epist ad Michaelem But it is a poynt of blasphemy to beléeue that Nicholas knew those matters better and did report them more truely then the euangelists Beside that it may well be doubted whether Nicholas wrote that epistle to Michael or some other in his name that without all truth and modesty aduanceth the priuiledges of the Romish Sée falsification 38 Where Luke doth expresly set downe that Iohn Baptiste began to preach Pag. 113. when Annas and Caiphas were highe preistes Baronius saith that only Caiphas was high preist in the soccession of Aaron And that he is forced to hold for feare least hée should ouerthrowe the monarchy of the Church of Rome Annas he saith was chéefe priest as head of his ranke and one of the principall heads of the Sanedrin But if he were not high préest why should he be named before Cayphas or why should Luke so call him if he might not be high preist as contrary to law he must vnderstand that at this time neither the law of Moyses nor the order of succession was rightly obserued falsification 39 Talking of Saint Iohn Baptist he saith hee dwelt in the wildernesse Ibidem p. 114. and keept in a denne called Sapsas And that our Sauiour Christ did visit him oftentimes in this denne And this he proueth by the testimony of Sophronius and one Iohn a monke to whome Saint Iohn appeared as he beléeueth in this hole and told him all this story matters fabulous and ridiculous For who will grant that Saint Iohn Baptist whose soule was with God kéept in this denne it is as like that he dwelt there being dead as being aliue yet this is also a Romish tradition but whether Locustes that S. Iohn Baptist did eate were liuing creatures or no as yet Baronius hath not found out any certaine tradition Isidorus of Pelusium holdeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the gospell signified the tops of herbes and plantes falsification 40 Pag. 110 he saith that S. Iohn Baptist did lay the foundation of monasticall life and that all Catholikes confesse it to be so A lye notorious as appeareth by my answere to Bellarmines treatise de monachis Furthermore this his assertion may be conuinced first for that Iohn Baptist neither made vow nor liued after any certaine rule nor forswore mariage Secondly for that this manner of life was but for a time for after a while he left his habitation in the desert of Iudaea and came to Iorden and into cities Thirdly Iohn was ordained to be a forerunner of Christ and is commended as a singular prophet but monkes and friers are rather the forerunners staf●…ers of Antichrist then of Christ Neither is there any mention of them in scriptures but in generall termes Apocalyps 9. where we reade of locustes issuing out of the bottomelesse pit and such like places Prophets certes they are not vnlesse we giue the name of prophets to false teachers Fourthly if Iohn séeme in his manner of life to haue giuen any example to Eremites yet that serueth other monks and friers nothing that liue in most frequent cities and are in continuall action Finally albeit Chrysostome and Hierome say somewhat of Iohn Baptist as if he first had shewed an example of solitary life yet neither doth that serue to prooue that he was a precedent to other monkes nor doe other fathers or catholike authors affirme that he laid the first foundation of monasticall life I hope Rob. Parsons will not say that Iohn Baptist was like his father Ignatius Loyola that madde maranicall Spaniard and swaggring compagnion the first author founder and foundation of the hispaniolized Iesuites falsification 41 Pag. 117. he saith Christ was baptized the sixt of Ianuary and this he would prooue by the testimony of a letter of Eusebius ad Marinum whose fragments are in the edition of Christopher after the history of Euagrius as he writeth But séeing the holy scriptures haue concealed the exa●t day he sheweth not himselfe wise curiously to dispute of this point Beside that he should doe vs a fauour to shew who this Christopher was that set out Eusebius otherwise his followers will beléeue that he tooke Christopher for Christopherson Finally there is no credit to be giuen to such vaine fragments set out vnder the names of auncient writers In the historie of Eusebius we read not that he had any thing to do with this counterfeit Marinus so that this tradition séemeth to be built vpon a rotten foundation falsification 42 Gregorius Turonensis telleth how leprosie is cured by washing in water where our Sauiour Christ was baptized and Baronius beléeued he said true But yet was this Gregorie no good witnesse in this case writing nothing but by hearesay We are taught by holy scriptures that baptisme was ordained a sacrament of remission of sins and not that Iordane was made a medicine to purge lepres falsification 43 Pag. 119. he supposeth that he hath soundly confuted those that say that it was not said to Peter tu es Petra sed tu es Petrus but either must he lye or must he charge the Euangelist Matthew with vntruth which is a point blasphemous He saith also that such as translate the word Cephas and say it doth signifie a head are not to be reprehended But if he had had either head or braine hauing taken vpon him to relate histories and things done in auncient time he would haue omitted all curious disputations for the