Secondly they object, that aswell new men as old,1 of no small authority, have both doubted of this book, & of the author thereof, & also have contemned it, as full of fables, & unworthy to be reckoned canonical. Let those that so think give me the same liberty, I desire them, which they usurp tho them selves, and think it lawful. For if the book of the Apocalypse •hould therefore seem worthy to be contemned, for that some notable men, both old & new, have doubted of the authority •herof: Why may it not recover his authority again, if I •hew that the best doctors of the church both old & new, have •ad a right good opinion of this book? And here to the intent […] would dissemble nothing at all, I am not ignorant that doctor Martin Luther, a man right notably learned,2 in his first edition of the new Testament in dutch, with a sharp preface set before, hath sticked this book as it were with a dagger. Howe •e it good & well learned men were offended with him for this •is judgement, which in the same found lack both of wit & modesty. The same man therefore weighing all things more uprightly & diligently, what time he corrected his dutch Bible. &c. My worshipful master seemeth also not to have set very much by his book, & to have ascribed it not to John the Apostle, but to John whom they called a divine. But herein there is no doubt but that he followed plainly Erasmus of Rotterdam, who is his annotations upon the new Testament. In all the Greek copies, •aith he, that I have seen, the title was not of John the Apostle, •ut of John the divine. Erasmus addeth that amongest the Greeks & certain old writers, men doubted of this author, which thing he declareth by the testimonies of Eusebius, ⟨p. 4⟩and Hierom, of whose opinion shall be spoken straightways. But the exemplar or Spanish copy which is set forth after the faith of the most ancient and approved Greeks, exhibiteth to us such a title of this book. [Greek or Hebrew]: That is the Apocalypse of the holy Apostle and Evangelist S. John Divine. For the ancient writers say, how S. John the Apostle and Evangelist, for his excellent writing of the Son of God, was commonly called, Divine. Whereof it followeth, tha• this title doeth attribute and not take from S. John this book. Certes Aretas was also, a Greek Author, an• bishop of Caesarea:
Secondly they obiect, that aswel new men as olde,1 of no smal authoritie, haue both doubted of this boke, & of the authour therof, & also haue contemned it, as full of fables, & vnworthy to be rekened canonical. Let those that so thinke geue me thesame libertie, I desire them, which they vsurpe tho thē selues, and thinke it lawful. For if the boke of the Apocalipse •hould therfore seme worthy to be contemned, for that some notable men, both old & new, haue doubted of the authoritie •herof: Why may it not recouer his authoritie againe, if I •hew that ye best doctours of the church both old & new, haue •ad a right good opinion of this boke? And here to thintent 〈…〉 wold dissemble nothing at al, I am not ignorant yt doctor Martin Luther, a man right notably learned,2 in his first edi•ion of the new Testament in dutch, with a sharp preface set •efore, hath sticked this boke as it wer with a dagger. Howe •e it good & wel learned mē were offended with him for this •is iudgement, which in ye same found lack both of wit & mo•estie. The same mā therfor waying al things more vpright•y & diligēly, what time he corrected his dutch Bible. &c. My •orshipful maister semeth also not to haue set very much by his boke, & to haue ascribed it not to Iohn ye Apostle, but to Iohn whō thei called a diuine. But herein there is no doubt but yt he folowed plainly Erasmus of Roterdā, who is his annotations vpon the new Testamēt. In al the Greke copies, •aith he, that I haue sene, the title was not of Iohn thapostle, •ut of Iohn the diuine. Erasmus addeth that amongest the Grekes & certen old wryters, men doubted of this authour, whiche thing he declareth by the testimonies of Eusebius, ⟨p. 4⟩and Hierom, of whose opinion shalbe spoken streightways. But the exempler or Spanishe coppie whiche is set foorth after the faith of the moste auncient and approued Grekes, exhibiteth to vs suche a title of ths boke. : That is the Apocalipse of the holy Apostle and Euangelist S. Iohn Diuine. For the auncient writers say, how S. Iohn the Apostle and Euangeliste, for his excellent wryting of the sonne of God, was commonly called, Diuine. Wherof it followeth, tha this title doeth attribute and not take from S. Iohn this booke. Certes Aretas was also, a Greke Aucthour, an byshop of Cesaria:
- 1How men of late days have doubted of thauthoritie of this book.How men of late days haue doubted of thauthoritie of this boke.
- 2D. Luther
