Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

Bib. 1562. 1577.

you do most evidently in your most authentical translations, saying Deut. xxiii. thus: "Thou shalt not hurt thy brother by usury of money, nor by

19.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors]

usury of corn, nor by usury of anything that he may be hurt withal.” What is this to say, but that usury is not here forbidden, unless it hurt the party that borroweth? which is so rooted in most men's hearts, that they think such usury very lawful, and daily offend mortally that way. Where Almighty God in this place of holy scripture hath not a word of hurting, or not hurting, (as may be seen by the Geneva bibles,) but saith simply thus: "Thou shalt not lend to thy brother to usury, usury of money, usury of meat, usury of anything that is put to usury."

Mark the Hebrew and the Greek, and see and be ashamed, that you strain and pervert it, to say for Non fœnerabis fratri tuo, which is word for word in the Greek and Hebrew, "Thou shalt not hurt thy brother by usury." If the Hebrew word in the use of holy scripture do signify, "to hurt by usury," why do you in the very next words following, in the selfsame bibles, translate it thus, "unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury, but not unto thy brother?" Why said you not, "A stranger thou mayest hurt with usury, but not thy brother?" Is it not all one word and phrase, here and before? And if you had so translated it here also, the Jews would have thanked you; who by forcing the Hebrew word, as you do, think it very good to hurt any stranger, that is, any Christian, by any usury, be it never so great.

Fulke. You say well, that in the scripture nothing is to be counted little; and therefore even in these little things we have endeavoured to follow the Hebrew, and have so well followed it, that though you say much, yet you can prove little against us. But concerning this text of usury, whereof you would make us great patrons, it is marvel that you cannot find in your dictionaries, that the verb nashach signifieth "to bite:" at least wise you should have regarded that your vulgar Latin interpreter, Num. xxi., translateth it "to strike," or "hurt," as they were that were hurt or bitten by the fiery serpents. The consent of all Hebricians also is, that neshech, the name of "usury," is derived of "biting" and "hurting :" wherefore the Bishops' bible, meaning to express that all usury is hurtful, according to the etymology of the word, rather than to defend that any usury is lawful other than such as God himself alloweth; and therefore it had been well to have translated also in the next verse, "a stranger mayest thou bite, or hurt with usury;" howsoever the Jews would take it, whose abominable usury,

under pretence of that place, sure I am our translators' purpose was not to defend.

18.

viii. 12.

ἐν αὐτῷ.

Martin. What shall I tell you of other faults, which I would MARTIN, gladly account oversights or ignorances, such as we also desire pardon of? but all are not such, though some be. As, "two thousand" (written Cant. Cantic. at length), "to them that keep the fruit thereof." In the Hebrew, Bib. 1579. and Greek, "two hundred." Again, in the same book, chap. i. 4. "As the fruits of Cedar," in the Hebrew and Greek, "tabernacles." And, "ask a sign either in the depth or in the height above," for, “in Isai. vii. 11. the depth of hell." And, "great works are wrought by him," for, Matt. xiv. 2. "do work in him," as St Paul useth the same word, 2 Cor. iv. 12. eveyouou And, "to make ready an horse," Acts xxiii. 24. in the Greek, "beasts." Bib. 1577. And, "if a man on the Sabbath day receive circumcision, without breaking of the law of Moses," John vii. 23, for, "to the end that iva μnλvoj the law of Moses be not broken." And, "the Son of man must suffer ó vóμos. many things, and be reproved of the elders," Mark viii. 31, for, "be dπodokiμασθῆναι. rejected;" as in the psalm, "the stone which the builders rejected," we say not, "reproving" of the said stone, which is Christ. And VEÓÓUTOS, "a young scholar," in all your translations falsely. And, "Simon 1 Tim. iii. of Chanaan," or "Simon the Cananite," who is called otherwise Zelotes, Mark iii. that is, "zealous," as an interpretation of the Hebrew word Cananæus ; which I marvel you considered not, specially considering that the Hebrew word for "zealous," and the other for a Cananite," begin with.p diverse letters. And, "lest at any time we should let them slip," for, "lest we slip or run by," and so be lost.

66

18.

Fulke. The first in Can. viii. is doubtless the printer's FULKE, fault, who did read in the written copy one cipher too much. That the second, Can. i. 5, was the printer's fault, which did read "fruits" for "tents," it is plain by the note upon the word Kedar, which is this: "Kedar was Ishmael's son, of whom came the Arabians, that dwelt in tents." In the third place, Esai. vii. there lacketh this word "beneath," or toward the pit, downward; for shealah is here opposite to lemayelah, “above," or "upward:" which omission I know not hyph whether it is to be imputed to the negligence of the printer, or of the translators; but notwithstanding the sense is all one. In the fourth text also, there is no difference for the meaning; and some are of opinion, that évepyeîv may be taken passively, as dokeiv, Beza in Marc. vi. 14; other translations turn it actively. In the fifth text, Acts xxiii. if for an "horse" they had said "horses," it had been no fault; for it is not like they rode upon asses or camels. The word

MARTIN,
19.

Ann. 1562.
Matt. xxii.

Mark v.

Matt. xxv.

signifieth "beasts," that are possessed, and of possession
they be called KTη; but here it is certain beasts meet
for carriage of men are signified. In the sixth, John vii.
23, I think the translators were deceived, supposing that
ἵνα
iva un might be translated, "so that the law of Moses be not
broken," as perhaps it may; but hereof I will not determine:
commonly iva signifieth "to the end;" yet is there no un-
godly sense contained in this translation. The seventh,
Mar. viii. 31, is but a knot in a rush; for "reproved" in
that place signifieth nothing but "refused," or "rejected.”
Your vulgar Latin saith, reprobari, which is plainly
reproved;" and 1 Peter ii. "The stone which the builders
reproved," reprobaverunt, “refused." By "reproved" they
do not mean "reprehended" or "rebuked," but "utterly
refused and not accepted." The eighth, neophytus, "a young
scholar," as I have shewed before, is better Englished than a
neophyte, which is neither Greek, Latin, nor English. The
ninth is corrected in two translations, and the Geneva bible
telleth you, that for "Cananite" you may read "zealous ;”
so that we are not beholding to you for this correction, as it
seemeth you would have us. Touching the tenth text, Heb.
ii., both those translations that say, "lest at any time we
should let them slip," have this note in the margin, by which
they declare they mean even as you would have them say:
"lest, like vessels full of chaps, we leak, and run out on every
part;" for vessels that do run out, do let go or let slip that
liquor that is put into them.

Martin And as for the first bible, which was done in haste, and not yet corrected, but is printed still afresh, that saith, "With Herod's servants," as though that were the only sense; that calleth Matt. xxiv. idiotas, "laymen ;” KIßwтòv, "a ship ;" Oópußov, "wondering;" σßévvorai, are gone out :" éžovoíav, “his substance ;" and, " to know the excellent love of the knowledge of Christ," for, "the love of Christ that excelleth knowledge ;" and, "of men that turn away the truth," for, "that shun the truth and turn away from it;" and, "mount Sina is Agar in Arabia," for, "Agar is mount Sina," &c.

Eph. iii.

Tit. i.

FULKE,

19.

Fulke. "The first bible" was not that you meant, but not much differing from it; neither was it "done in haste," but with as good consideration as God gave for that time; neither was it printed these twenty-two years, for ought I know, which

66

you say "is printed still afresh." In that bible "Herod's
servants," put for the Herodians, was lack of knowledge of
what sect the Herodians should be. Idiotas, "laymen," is
no more fault than of "the vulgar sort," which you say. "The
ship," for "the ark," is a small fault, seeing that ark into
which Noah entered was a ship, or instead of a ship. "The
wondering," for "the tumult," is a popular term; for so
they call a great noise made by a multitude. The lamps
are gone out," or "are quenched," I know not what great
difference may be in it. "His substance," éžovoíav, I know
not where you mean, except it be Mark xiii. where Erasmus
noteth that he hath read in some copy ovoíav, "substance,"
which seemeth to agree aptly with the place. In the text,
Eph. iii. the true translation is as we have corrected it in the
later editions; yet the words may bear that other interpre-
tation also. In Titus the first, the participle is of the mean
voice, and therefore may signify actively or passively.
Gal. the transposition, Sina before Agar, seemeth to be the
fault of the printer, rather than of the translator.

In

20.

Martin. Let these and the like be small negligences or ignorances, MARTIN, such as you will pardon us also, if you find the like. Neither do we greatly mislike that you leave these words, urim and thummim, and chemarim, and ziims, and iims, untranslated, because it is not easy to Deut. xxxiii. 2 Kings xxiii. express them in English: and we would have liked as well in certain Jer. 1. other words which you have translated, "images," "images," and still Hamanim. "images," being as hard to express the true signification of them as Gillulim. the former. And we hope you will the rather bear with the late Catholic translation of the English Testament, that leaveth also certain words untranslated, not only because they cannot be expressed, but also for reverence and religion, as St Augustine saith, and greater majesty of the same.

Isai. xvii.

Jer. 1.

Miphletseth.
Rom. xv.

Fulke. Some indeed are small faults, some none at all. FULKE, That you mislike us not for not translating a few words 20. whose signification is unknown, or else they cannot be aptly expressed in the English tongue, it is of no equity towards us; but that you might, under that shadow, creep away with so huge a multitude of words, which may as well be translated as any in the bible, and that in the New Testament, which is scarce the sixth part of the whole bible. The words which we have translated" images," are out of question terms

MARTIN, 21.

Bib. 1579.
Demosth.

2 Chron.

xxxvi. 6.

c. 32.

160.

Queen.

Bibl. 1562.
2 Kings xv.
16.

signifying" images," and of your translator they be called either imagines, simulacra, sculptilia, idola, &c. Our English tongue, being not so fruitful of words, we call them sometimes "idols," sometimes "images;" which, when we speak of worshipped images, can be none other but such as you call "idols." To obscure such a multitude of words, and so much matter by them, as you do, St Augustine will not warrant you; who speaketh only of two or three words usually received in the Latin church in his time, not of such a number as you have counterfeited.

Martin. Of one thing we can by no means excuse you, but it must savour vanity, or novelty, or both. As when you affect new strange words, which the people are not acquainted withal, but it is rather Hebrew to them than English; μάλα σεμνῶς ὀνομάζοντες, as Demosthenes speaketh, uttering with great countenance and majesty. "Against him came up Nabuchadnezzar, king of Babel," 2 Par. xxxvi. 6., for "Nabuchodonosor, king of Babylon;" "Saneherib," for "Sennacherib;" Fol. 172. 173. « Michaiah's prophecy," for "Michæa's;" "Jehoshaphat's prayer," for Epistle to the "Josaphat's;" "Uzza slain," for "Oza;" "when Zerubbabel went about to build the temple," for "Zorobabel;" "remember what the Lord did to Miriam," for "Marie," Deut. xxxiv.: and in your first translation, "Elisa," for "Eliseus;" "Pekahia" and "Pekah,” for "Phaceia" and "Phacee;" "Uziahu," for "Ozias;" "Thiglath-peleser," for "Teglath-phalasar;” “Ahaziahu," for “Ochozias;" "Peka, the son of Remaliahu," for "Phacee, the son of Romelia." And why say you not as well "Shelomoh," for "Salomon ;" and "Coresh," for "Cyrus,” and so alter every word from the known sound and pronunciation thereof? Is this to teach the people, when you speak Hebrew rather than English? Were it a goodly hearing (think you) to say for "Jesus," "Jeshuah;" and for "Marie," his mother, "Miriam ;" and for "Messias," "Messiach;" and "John," "Jachannan ;" and such like monstrous novelties? which you might as well do, and the people would understand you as well, as when your preachers say, "Nabucadnezer, king of Babel."

Calfil.

FULKE,

21.

Fulke. Seeing the most of the proper names of the Old Testament were unknown to the people before the scripture was read in English, it was best to utter them according to the truth of their pronunciation in Hebrew, rather than after the common corruption which they had received in the Greek and Latin tongues. But as for those names which were known unto the people out of the New Testament, as Jesus, John, Mary, &c., it had been folly to have taught men

« PoprzedniaDalej »