Selected quad for the lemma: earth_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A04693
|
An apolgye made by George Ioye to satisfye (if it maye be) w. Tindale to pourge & defende himself ageinst many sclaunderouse lyes fayned vpon [hi]m in Tindals vncharitable a[n]d vnsober pystle so well worthye to be prefixed for the reader to induce him into the vnderstanding of hys new Testame[n]t diligently corrected & printed in the yeare of oure lorde. M.CCCCC. and xxxiiii. in Nouember.
|
Joye, George, d. 1553.
|
1535
(1535)
|
STC 14820; ESTC S120468
|
39,729
|
106
|
the faithful were in heueÌ„ there shulde be no resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies whiche incoÌ„uenience to avoide he laith them down to slepe out of heueÌ„ as do the Anabaptists tyl domes daye but here I meruell that Tin is so scleÌ„derly lerned in the forme of arguyng that he se not howe his antecedeÌ„ce may be true coÌ„sequeÌ„ce false ¶ Thana baptistys opinioÌ„ off the soulis departed seyng that the coÌ„trary of his coÌ„sequeÌ„ce is necessary that is to weit there shal be the resurreccioÌ„ of the flesshe 1. corinthio 15 Paule thus prouing it If Christ be preached to haue rysen how happeneth that some of you saie thee is no resurreccioÌ„ Tyndals argumeÌ„t is proued false As who shuld thê° argew Christe our head is rysen wherfore yt must nedes folowe that his bodye which is his chirche shall ryse ageyn For wherfore shuld the beyng in heuen of the soulis of Peter Paule of all saintê let the resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies more then the being in heuen of Christis soule those iij. dayes did let his resurreccioÌ„ Tin wil saye They be al redy in ioye aÌ„d therfore there nedeth no resurreccioÌ„ And I saye so was christis spirit yet he rose agayn And I denye T. argumeÌ„t For were they in neuer so greate ioye yet must their bodies ryse agayn or els he wil make christe a lyer his doctryne false Mat. 5 Heuen erthe shal soner passe away then one iote of god dis worde shal passe vnfulfilled The verite hath sayd it aÌ„d wryteÌ„ it coÌ„cluding that our bodies shal ryse agein wherfore ther caÌ„ no coÌ„dicionall anÌ„cedeÌ„ce of T. nor yet of any angel in heueÌ„ make this ê¯clusioÌ„ false But let vs exameÌ„ the text se the Saduceis opinion vnto the whyche Christe answereth so directly and so confuteth yt vtterly The Saduceis as wryteth that aunciauÌ„t historiograph Iosephus beinge himself a iew in his .xviij. boke the .ij. ca. sayd that the soule of maÌ„ was mortal and dyed with the bodie The Saduceis opinion acto 23 aÌ„d Paule coÌ„firming the same to be their opinion addeth that thei said ther were nether spirits nor angels ¶ Paule declareth the saduceis opinion so that to saye there is nether spirit spirit properly is the soule departed nor aungel is as miche to saye as the soule is mortall no lyfe to be aftir this and the Saduceis in denying the lyfe aftir this denied by the same denye but onely those two that is bothe spirit and angell for if they had denyed by that worde Resurrectio the generall Resurrection to in that place so had thei denied thre distiÌ„cte thingis but Paule addyng Pharisei auteÌ„ vtraque coÌ„fitentur but the pharises graunt them bothe two declareth manifestly that thei denyed but onely two thingis that is to saye bothe spirit angell for aftir this present life tyl domes daye there is no lyfe of eny creature but of these two creatures spirits aungels And if by this worde Resurrectio Paule had vnderstoÌ„deÌ„ as T. doth the resurrection of the flesshe he wolde not haue sayd the pharyses grauÌ„t them bothe but all thre For this worde vtraque as euery latyne maÌ„ knoweth is spokeÌ„ but of two thingis only but as for this my mynde I leaue it vnto the iugemeÌ„t of the lerned And nowe shall I proue yt by christis owne answer that the Saduceis in those places of Math. Mark Luke denied that there is any lyfe aftir this mat 22 mar 12 luc 20. aÌ„d so nether to be spirit nor angel whiche is as miche to saye as towching the soule it to be mortall For yf it shuld lyue aftir the departing thei thought to haue had takeÌ„ christe in this trappe with their questioÌ„ of those .vij. brethreÌ„ that they now being all a lyue aftir their dethe shuld haue al seueÌ„ togither that one wyfe at once for thei sayd that al these .vij. had hir here But christe answerde them directly accordyng to their opinion aÌ„d not aftir Tin opinion of this worde resurrectio telling them that thei erred being ignoraÌ„t of the scriptures aÌ„d also of the power of god whiche powr christe declareth to consist in the pÌ„seruing the dead a lyue for because out of god the father aÌ„d christe the sone being that vere lyfe all lyfe floweth ye that into the dead id 5.12 1. ioaÌ„ 5 whiche power to coÌ„firme into the confutacioÌ„ of their opinion their own coÌ„fusion he alleged these scriptures exodi .iij. But first he tolde them of the present state of the soulis departed saynge that in the tother lyfe aftir this they nether marye nor ar maried but thei ar as the aungels of god in heueÌ„ Tindal In his expositioÌ„ of S. Ihon Pystle And yet saith Tindal this doctryne was not then in the worlde what is done with the soulis departed the scripture make no mencioÌ„ but it is a secrete saith he layd vp in gods tresury Ioye It is verely a depe secrete to him that is ignoraÌ„t so many playne scriptures whiche I shall here aftir brynge in prouyng their state in heuen Here is also to be noted that christe in describing their present state saith in the present tence Thei mary not nor ar maryed but ar lyke auÌ„gels ye egall vnto auÌ„gels the sonnes of god saith Luke cap. xx But yet yf Tindal wyll saye that the present tence is here takeÌ„ for the future playe boo pepe withe the tencis as he englissheth resuscitaÌ„tur shal ryse agen not are reuiued or resuscited yet must I aske hym whether that the childreÌ„ of that lyfe worthy that worlde as Luke calleth them be not now more lyke aungels then they shal be aftir the resurreccion of their bodies mar 12 luc 20. me thinketh that in thys poynt that they nether marye nor are maryed auÌ„gels aÌ„d the spirits be now bothe a lyke aÌ„d the chyldreÌ„ of the lyfe or the worlde where now the blessed lyue with Christe are now more lyke auÌ„gels then they shal be aftir the resurrectioÌ„ of their bodyes for now they ar substances incorporal immortal intellectuall and so be auÌ„gels but then they shal be bodely substances hauyng very flesshe and bones which the aungels neuer had nor neuer shall haue The text is declared But nowe let vs heare the scryptures wherwith christe coÌ„futeth their opinion ê“ueth the same thynge that the saduceis denyed The text is her expended Crist coÌ„sidering what thing thei denied sayd vnto them De resurrectione vero mortuoruÌ„ noÌ„ legistis qd vobis dictuÌ„ est a deo qui ait Ego sum deê° AbrahaÌ„ c That is to saye As coÌ„cernyng the lyfe of them that be dead haue ye not red what is tolde you of god saying I am the God of AbrahaÌ„ the god of Isaac and the god of Iacob God is not the God of the deade but of the lyuinge By this argumeÌ„t god is the god
englysshe thrusteth not out god but putteth hiÌ„ in for them to know him in englisshe which vnderstande not the latyn If Tin traÌ„slate theis wordis paradisuÌ„ voluptatis calliÌ„g them a gardeÌ„ in EdeÌ„ a nother come aftir hiÌ„ englisshyng the same a pleasauÌ„t paradise this maÌ„ thrusteth not clene out paradise Nether where he traÌ„slateth And Iacob blessed Pharao aÌ„d a nother traÌ„slateth the same sayng And Iacob thaÌ„ked Pharao yt folowthe not that therfore this maÌ„ thrusteth out clene this worde Benedixit no more then he thrusteth out Paulis soule that traÌ„slateth this place of paule GenÌ„ xlvij Thes. ij we desyerd not onely to geue vnto you the gospel of god but also our owne lyues or our owne selues for which Tin sayth our own soulis Tindal Now by the same auctorite aÌ„d with as good reason shall another come and saye of the rest of the text they that are in the sepulchres shal heare his voyce that the sence is the soules of them that are in the sepulchres shall heare his voyce and so put in his dyligent correccion and mocke oute the text that it shal not make for the resurreccion of the flesshe which thynge also George Ioyes correccion doth manifestlye affirme I wolde know of Tinda Ioye whether wheÌ„ a mannis bodye is dead layd in graue yt be his dead bodye or hys soule that hereth cristis voyce I am suer T. is not so farre besydis his comon sencis as to saye the dead bodye hereth cristis voyce ergo yt is the soule that hereth yt aÌ„d then why dothe T. despyse my sence or rather the trw sence of the scripture calling it a mocking out of the text aÌ„d a false glose I am suer Tin will not vnderstand the textê of Peter that the gospell is preched to the dead bodyes in graue but rather to the soulis departed Albeit I se in hys new correccion how shamefully and of what corrupt mynde god knowth he hathe peruerted thys text wyth thys note That the dead ar the ignorant of god i. pet 3 4 i. pe 4. wheÌ„ there the dead quyke be taken as they stoÌ„de in the credo the deade euen for the departed out of this worlde aÌ„d the quyk for them that lyue there in whych article that criste shal iuge them bothe as it is setforth for the playn peple so is it playnly spoken as the letter sowneth and not in a mistik allegory worthy any sich a false glose iÌ„ the mergeÌ„t T. shuld haue loked beter on the circuÌ„stance of the texte not haue englisshed vt iudicarent quideÌ„ scdm hoiÌ„es carne that thei shuld be coÌ„dempned of meÌ„ in the flesshe For by thys peruertyng of the text meÌ„ may se that T. hath forgoten his graÌ„mer or els god knowth of what mynde he wold haue here mortuis not to signifye the departed oute of this worlde aÌ„d iudicareÌ„tur signifye that they shuld be condeÌ„pned scdm hoiÌ„es of meÌ„ whiche senteÌ„ce he traÌ„slated at first truely aÌ„d now corrected it de meliore in peius as euery lerned ye and vnlerned may se T. sayth I take away the texte froÌ„ him in this one worde resurrectio but he in this place I dare saye can ê“ue it to his face that he corrupteth the text by his false translating it taketh awaye the trwe vnderstoÌ„ding therof froÌ„ as many as rede yt beleue his translacioÌ„ Nether dothe he that saythe the soulis of the dead shal here cristis voyce denye the resurreccion of the flesshe for they maye aÌ„d do bothe stande well togither Criste had al power geuen him in heueÌ„ erthe aftir his dethe aÌ„d resurreccioÌ„ that eueÌ„ the power to preserue the dead alyue in their soulê which power of god he tolde the Saduceis they knew not yet by his godhed he did daily execute yt he had powr also to iuge althoughe he be the sonne of maÌ„ whiche powr then geueÌ„ him is not idle and voyd til domes daye but is dayly executed in the particlare iugemeÌ„t of euery soule departed yf T. graunteth any particlare iugemeÌ„t at al but wil saye the soulis sleape aÌ„d then is not this the trwe sence of Iohn in this place that the soulis of the bodyes resting sleaping in graue shall here cristis voice come forthe into that very lyfe which they now lyue and crist proued it vnto the Saduces Iohn I saye beyng so plentuouse in telling one thing so ofte so many ways sayd the same thing twise be fore once thus verely verely I saye vnto you whoso here my worde beleue him that sent me hath lyfe euerlastyng shalnot come into condeÌ„pnacioÌ„ but is passed ouer froÌ„ dethe to lyfe And aftir warde he expressith yt playnely to be verifyed euen of the dead the tyme of his iugemeÌ„t in his manhed then staÌ„ding vpoÌ„ or beyng present saynge verely verely I say vnto you The tyme shal come and eueÌ„ now yt is Ioan 5 wheÌ„ eueÌ„ the dead shal here the voice of the sone of god who so here yt shal lyue which powr of the sone to be receyued of the father and in that to be egal with him declared he resumeth the same sentence yet agen the thirde tyme sayng Meruel not at this thyng for the tyme shall come in which al that ar in graues shal here his voyce they that haue done good shal come forthe into that verye lyfe they that haue done yll into that myserable or daÌ„pnable lyfe For where he sayd before the dead shal here his voice now he sayth for the same all that ar in graues shall here his voyce aÌ„d where he sayd in the first same senteÌ„ce ar passed frome dethe to lyfe haue euerlasting life in the seconde sentence he sayth shal lyue and in the thirde last of all he saythe shal come forth in to that very and perfit lyfe where he sayd before condempnacioÌ„ here at last he calleth the same the lyfe of condeÌ„pnacion or dampnable lyfe as yt is the comoÌ„ phrase of scripture to saye spiritus sanctificationis pro spiritu sancto sanctitas veritatis pro vera sanctitate with many siche lyke Also yt is to be noted that there is none of theuangelistis nor apostles so plentuouse in expowning himselfe with so many wordis so ofte repeting one thing as is Iohn vsyng thys particle Et in englyssh as myche to saye as And expositiue that is to expowne the sentence or worde before as when he saythe who so come to me shall not hongre and whoso beleue in me shall neuer thirst there thys particle and expowneth what yt is to come to Crist that is to saye to beleue in Criste And when he saythe Io. vi Io. xj I am the resurreccion and lyfe there thys worde and expowneth what resurreccion sygnifyeth euen very lyfe aÌ„d so the senteÌ„ce folowyng declareth yt Io. iij. And agen where he saith except