A15061:409
An answer to a certain book, writtenAn answere to a certeine booke, written
An answer to a certain book, written by Master William Rainolds student of divinity in the English college at Rhemes, and entitled, A refutation of sundry reprehensions, cavils, etc. by William Whitaker ...An answere to a certeine booke, written by Maister William Rainolds student of diuinitie in the English colledge at Rhemes, and entituled, A refutation of sundrie reprehensions, cauils, etc. by William Whitaker ...
Printed at London : For Thomas Chard, 1585
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Their chiefest reason of greatest show and likelihood against the Hebrew text is the malice and impiety of the Jews, who being enemies of Christian religion may therefore be thought to have in many places corrupted their bibles of purpose to disgrace and discredit the Gospel of Christ. But as this is proved most untrue, so being granted for true, it can be no reason against the Greek testament, which ever since the writing and first publishing thereof remained in the custody ⟨p. 326⟩and handling of most godly fathers, Churches and Countries, who had as great skill and care to preserve it from corruption, as had the latins to keep their translations pure and sincere. Then what reason can you bring, or what colour of reason can you pretend in the new testament to cleave only to the latin, and to reject the Greek? The latin, you say, is purer, then the Greek. So have your fellows of Rhemes indeed told us, and this they make their principal ground, whereupon they have been bold to follow the latin, and not the Greek, in translating the new testament. But what advantage soever you think to make of this, or any other such reason, true it is, and by trial so shall be found, and hath heretofore by diverse sufficiently been proved, that the latin translation of the new testament is more generally & notoriously corrupted, then you shall ever be able to avouch of the Greek original text. That Beza writeth against Erasmus in commendation & defence of the latin translation, it is evident, he meaneth not wholly to excuse it from corruption in all places, but only in certain, which Erasmus found fault ⟨p. 327⟩withal. For otherwise Beza showeth the vulgar translation to be full of corruptions, as if you read his annotations, you may perceive. Wherefore this testimony of Beza served your Rhemists to little purpose, but that they have a sleight to make such things as are spoken, in some respect, seem to be uttered without exception, as in this place and many others may be seen.
Their chiefest reason of greatest shew and likelyhood against the Hebrew text is the malice and impietie of the Iewes, whoe being enimies of Christian religion may therefore be thought to haue in many places corrupted their bibles of purpose to disgrace and discredite the Gospell of Christ. But as this is prooued moste vntrue, so being graunted for true, it can be no reason against the Greeke testament, which euer since the writing and first publishing thereof remained in the custodie