Linguistic DNA - Concept Modelling Demonstrator

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	new_a	old_a	testament_n	6,607	5	8.4174	4	true

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

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 Minister of the French CHURCH And translated into English By Robert Codrington Mr of Arts London Printed in the yeare 1656 THE PREFACE REader I am one of the least but of those who are peaceable and faithfull in Israel And amongst those I am not the first who have undertaken to lay open those defects to which the most learned are subject Where is that Moses who still doth not stammer although God himself hath talked to him It is true the Defects which I have here noted are not so fatall in their consequences as that of Shibboleth was unto the Ephraimites Howsoever we should indeavour to correct our selves unto the truth and to speak as uprightly and as properly as we can Amongst a multitude of passages and places which deserve a review I have onely taken a small number and have ranked them by no other order but by that onely of my memory and according to that measure which it hath presented them unto me A work more compleat and exact doth pertain to the great Masters of knowledge unto whom I do commend the care thereof Nevertheless If time or rest or life if sight or light and which is more if the light of GOD doth not fail me I hope I shall not be altogether unprofitable Divers Treatises heretofore published by this Author POpular Errors in Generall points which concern the knowlege of Religion referred to their causes and comprehended in severall observations The use of the Lords Prayer maintained against the Objections of the Innovators of these times New Observations on the Creed New Observations on the Decalogue The eating of the Body of Christ considered in its principles SERMONS An Abridgement of the Sermon Preached on the 12. of Sept. 1648. Vpon the Treaty which was then to begin betwixt the late King and the Parliament A Funerall Sermon of the Author upon the Death of his wife A Funerall Sermon on the Death of Philip Earl of Penbrokâ— An Advertisement on the Breaking and distributing of the Bread in the Sacrament of the Supper omitted in many Orthodox Churches An Abridgement of two Sermons which preceded the Ordination of a Pastor in the French Church at Canterbury Considerations on the Eclips of the Sun March 29. the yeer 1652. The Charity of the Parliament of England to the French Church gathered in the Chapell at Somerset House The greatest part of the works above mentioned have been already translated into English by divers learned men SHIBBOLETH OR The Reformation of several places in the Translations of the French and of the English Bible Of a generall Fault in the English Translation at the beginning of the Lords Prayer and a great number of other places in the New Testament INstead of saying Our Father which art in the Heavens the English do express it Our Father which art in Heaven There are â—ew who can be perswaded but they express this Prayer in the same terms as our Saviour did dictate it Nevertheless the mistake is very visible If it proceeded onely from custom and vulgar use I should not here make mention of it But it is authorized by the publick Translation reviewed and oftentimes re-imprinted For all the Translations of Math. 6. and Luke the 11. do with one voyce pronounce Who art in Heaven I shall not here study at all to give an Answer to those who immediatly will reply Is it not all one If we say that GOD is in Heaven or in the Heavens A man experienced in the Scriptures will never speak it The difference is very great betwixt Heaven in the Singular and Heavens in the Plural Number And although in some matters the Singular be indifferently pronounced as the Plurall as in Math. 16. and 19. and Math. 18. and 18. yet this difference is not universall On the contrary It is of great importance to discern when the Scripture speaks of the Heavens and when it speaks of Heaven Of which I will not treat at this present It shall suffice to speak that the word Heavens in the Plurall doth far more express the extent of the power of GOD whom in that Prayer we do implore And also that Terme doth imply that he hath all the Heavens at his service to assist us Not onely the Angels who are in the highest Heaven but the Sun and the Stars also which are in another Heaven and besides them the Rain and the Air which is also called Heaven In the same Prayer The Heaven in which the Angels do perform the Will of God is distinguished by the Singular number from the Heavens in the Plurall which our Father doth fill with his presence and â—is power But why should I alleage Reasons to maintain a truth which cannot be deâ—yed He that is no extraordinary Grecian may understand well enough that are the terms in the Originall to which the Translation ought to answer Is it Our Father which art in Heaven No It is Who art in the Heavens Wherefore then do we not speak it so Wherefore do we not translate the word as they are in the Original Text Is it because the Ianguage of this Island doth want a word to express the Heavens in the Plurall The contrary is sufficiently known as by experience it is evident Is it because the changing of one word to which the people have a long time been accustomed would appear either strange or difficult We ought to regard more the truth of God then the custom of men And it will not be so uneasy in a new Translation to change a supposition in the singular number into a truth in the Plurall Nevertheless it is here requisite that I meet with and prevent a subterfuge which may be used For it may be objected The Evangelists themselves repeating the passages of the old Testament in which the Heavens are named in the Plurall have translated in Heaven in the singular number As may appear in the 7th of the Acts and the 46. verse in comparing it with the 66. of Esay 1. To which I answer That we are not Evangelists of such a rank as they were and that our Translations proceed not as theirs did from the Dictates of the infallible Spirit And when we render the new Testament into any other language we ought to express the very terms of the Evangelists and the Apostles And likewise when we translate the old Testament we should represent the very terms thereof It is remarkeable that in all the New Testament the Son of God did never say Your Father which is in Heaven or My Father which is in Heaven But alwaies which is in the Heavens In the Heavens in the Plurall The Evangelists do recite a great number of the passages in which he hath said Our Father or my

Christ who is but onely One But Christ hath been represented both by figures of divers kinds as by the Cloud and by the Sea 1 Corinth 10. and by many figures of the same kind as by two Rocks and a great way distant from one another Exod. 17. 6. Numb. 20. 28. c. Is it because the fruit of this Tree had a singular vertue to preserve the life of Man It doth not from hence follow that there should be but one plant onely which should bear this fruit On the contrary As of all the Trees that were in the Garden this here was most necessary for man so it is to be believed that the liberality of GOD which is ordinarily abundant in things which are most necessary and which do wast away by use had given him more than onely one tree of that kind Moreover as the Tree of life was indued with singular properties so had it the vertue also as well as other plants to multiply it self But without affirming that there were many Individuals of it I onely say that the contrary opinion hath no such certainty in it that it may be received for an undoubted truth Of the Nature of the Viper marked in the table at the end of the New Testament in some Editions in French THis Index speaking of this kind of Serpent doth affirm that the young ones do eat their own mother to come out of her Belly by force It is an old opinion indeed but at this Day contradicted Two modern writers both of this Isle and both very learned amongst many other subjects in which they are of a contrary opinion have treated on this question One of them my intimate friend and a most reverend man is so amorous of antiquity that he undertakes to maintain all the Paradoxes which this opinion hath produced and although that ocular experience doth shew us that Vipers are born without giving a Death unto their mother yet he is pleased to make answers to it But without engaging my self in this difference I will onely speak one word on that which is in the Index which I have mentioned It is dangerous either in Interpretations or Annotations on the Bible to lay down that for a certain truth which is disputable especially when there is experience to the contrary Secondly To what purpose or in what regard was it spoken that the Pharises and the Sadduces whom the Scripture calls a Generation of Vipers had in their birth killed their mothers Thirdly if I were to expound such places I should search out the sense in a propriety which is constant and particular to the Viper onely amongst all the kinds of Serpents All other Serpents do proceed from their Mothers having neither their form as yet nor any faculty to stir or to move themselves For the Creature is shut up in an egge which the mother hath produced and will ask â—ome respite of time before it be â—atched But the Vipers are already in life and all formed when they come out of the Belly of their Mother When the Scripture therefore doth give this Epithete of a Generation of Vipers to certain Men It is to express that from their Birth they have already actually hurted or that their malice was already compleatly formed Of those who in the unfolding of a Text do believe that they must alwaies divide it into parts THere are some Auditors who beleive the Sermon to be without method if in the beginning thereof the Text be not divided into parts But these people are not good Logicians for there are points indivisible and which will admit of no separation As in the Tabernacle there weâ—â— moveables which were not to be taken down or which were made aâ— of one piece so there are Texts whicâ— do not suffer to be divided Divers Preachers striving to use it where it cannot be admitted have fallen into irregularities not to be perceived indeed by the common people but sounding ill in their ears who know the Laws of a true method and of that also which is popular to which it is permitted to be less exact than if the Auditors had been altogether composed of learned men Of the divers Interpretations on the twelfth Chapter of the Revelations verse the first ALthough the Interpretations which are above recited do contain nothing in them but what is pious nevertheless they seem to me to draw vvide from the mark This place represents a woman environed vvith the Sun having the Moon under her feet and a Crovvn of tvvelve Stars upon her Head This Woman is the Church or rather the Church of Israel which hath brought forth Christ unto us But what means this Sun that invirons her this Moon which is at her feet and what is the signification of these tvvelve stars Here instead of expositions an Allegory that is propheticall is interpreted by Allegories that are Arbitrary That which is most received is this The Church they say is cloathed with Celestial Glory as with the Sun She treads under her feet the inconstancy of all humane things signified by the Moon who perpetually doth change But this is not to interpret but vvithout proof to allegorize For on the contrary in the Scripture which ought to be interpreted by its self the Moon is considered as an Emblem of firmness and perpetuity As in the 9 Psalm It is promised that the throne of David shall be as the Sun and that it shall alwaies be established as the Moon Some modern writers and those very learned ones do believe that this Moon doth signify the service of the Ceremoniall Law for the greatest number of the Festivall dayes had their time vvere marked according to the course of the Moon And that in this sense it is that the Church seeth the Moon under her feet that is the Ceremoniall Law abolished And these Authors do affirm Because the Moon doth rule by Night and that the service of Idols is a work of Darkness that the Church doth tread under her foot the Moon that is to say the service of Idols But I am possessed with amazement that wise men should give us such Allegories which have no solid foundation and may be easily overthrown To speak no more this place of the Revelations doth interpret it self by another from whence it is extracted The portraict of this woman environed with the Sun is in part the Copy of that table which is to be seen in the 37 Chap. of Gen. The Sun the Moon and the eleven Stars did shew themselves to Joseph in a dream The Son was Jacob as he himself did interpret it The Moon was Leah who by the twelve Patriarchs had the place of a Mother The Stars were the Brothers of Joseph Now this place in the Revelations doth represent the Originall of Christ who according to the Flesh was descended from this Family which was composed of this Sun this Moon and these Stars If then these twelve Stars were the tvvelve Patriarchs as it is most

were written in every side is that of which we are ignorant And the like for the second table we know not where the first page ended and where the other did begin I have been willing to give this advertisement to those who before did not think of it But it may be demanded wherefore hath not the sacred History marked this distinction to instruct us which were the last words of the foregoing page or vvhich vvere the first of thaâ— which followed It may be it was to hinder those who would have counterfeited the tables of the Lavv for it vvas not permitted to make any like unto them And these tables were shut up in an Ark that they might not be exposed to the vievv of men And so not knovving vvhat vvords finished the first page neither of one table nor the other it is impossible to make a certain and an assured Representation of them Of the Songs which without any proof are attributed to the Blessed Virgin to Zachary and to Simeon Luke Chap. 1. and 2. I May adde to this the song of the Angels vvho it is said did sing these vvords Glory be unto God c. vvhen they published the Nativity of our Saviour This is a common opinion follovved also by the English Bible in the Argument of the second Chapter of Saint Luke But that vvhich may be spoken of it hath been touched by others vvhich is the reason that I abstain to proceed any further on it Nevertheless the same Judgement may be made of this title vvhich is given to these three other parcels of Scripture which are called Songs As the Song of the Virgin the Song of Zachary and the Song of Simeon So speak the Commâ—n Places so the Commentators and so Calvin himself as to the Song of the Virgin The Evangelist doth tell us that these vvords to which the Name of a Song is given were pronounced but not that they were sung either by the Virgin or by Zachary or Simeon nor that they vvere so much as conceived or brought forth in the form of a Song or measured by the Rules of Poetry It vvill not serve to affirm that their stile is Poeticall and that certain passages in some of the Psalms and other Hymns of the old Testament are inchaced in them for some verses of a Song inserted into a discourse do not make the vvhole dicourse to be an entire Song Much less may vve conclude that it vvas sung by pronouncing Hovvsoever it vvas there is nothing of any certainty in it to make the vulgar opinion to pass for an undoubted truth In all the New Testament there are but tvvo Songs so named in express termes And both those are in the Revelations onely and onely in a Vision Rev. 5. ver 9. 10. and Revel. 15. ver. 3. 4. I do not say that those excellent words of the Virgin of Zachary and of Simeon may not in our vulgar tongues be put into the form of Songs and sung in our publick Congregations It is of great edification But it is not convenient to believe for certain that they vvere Songs in the Originall Wherefore do vve not say as vvell that the vvords of Elizabeth dictated by the Holy Ghost are a Song also Luke 1 Of a very harsh expression in the English Bible Jerem. 20. ver. 7. And other Translations on the same place in the Latine and the French Bible IN this place the Translation makes Jeremy addressing himself to GOD to speak in these vvords Thou hast deceived me O Lord and I have been deceived It is true that the Translation of S. Jerom hath the same expression if not a vvorse Thou hast saith it seduced me and I have been seduced That of Tremelius hath it pellexisti me And the French Translation tumas attrait To which the English doth answer in the Margent But in the text it saith Thou hast deceived me A word full of horror Now saving the reverence which is due unto knowing and learned men none of these expressions doth please me The Question is if the vvord in the Hebrevv doth signify nothing else but to deceive or to attract The Translators were not ignorant that it doth signify also to perswade to induce or to give an Inclination which words may bear a good sence Wherefore then in this place do not we imploy them in the room of others whose signification is so sinister Wherefore do we put a Blasphemy into the mouth of the Prophet vvhen his language might othervvise be interpreted In such a circumstance the most favourable Exposition is also to be most received Of two Interpretations of one word which is in the 34. Chap. of Job ver. 36. And which is the most convenient IN this place the French Bible makes Elihu as addressing his speech to God to speak in this manner My Father let Job be proved So the Latin Bible And that also oâ— Junius reads it The English Bible hath not these words My Father but in the Margent onely For within the text it saith My desire is that Job be proved This Diversity doth arise from this that the Hebrew word vvhich begins this verse may be taken in both senses It signifies my desire It signifies also my Father Now of these two significations which ought wee to choose For it is not so indifferent that a man may think to take that which he pleaseth It is and hath a long time been marked that the faithfull of the old Testament when they did speak unto GOD did never call him their Father There is onely one Prayer in which he was called by that Name Esay 63. 64. For the rest Amongst so many Prayers so many thanksgivings and Confessions amongst so many Psalms and so many Dialogues betwixt GOD and the most holy men of that time None of them did ever say unto him Father or Our Father how great so ever was their privacy with him It is true that speaking of God amongst themselves they acknowledged that GOD was as favourable to them as a Father to his Children GOD did call himself their Father when he did speak unto them but when they spoke unto GOD they did never call him by that Name The liberty to cry Abba Father vvas reserved to the faithfull in the new Testament Gal. 4. ver. 1 c. according to the promise Jerem. 3. ver. 4. and 19. We ought not then so easily to put this word into the mouth of Elihu There is yet another Reason which ought to restrain us from making Elihu to speak in these vvords My Father For it is of a far greater signification then when vve do call him Our Father in generality It is known that in all the Scripture there vvas never any but Jesus Christ onely who speaking unto God did say My Father It is the Prerogative of the onely Son begotten of the Father It is true that David Psal. 89. ver. 7. doth recite the priviledge vvhich he haâ—h received of GOD to be such

Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Text snippets containing the quad