TO THE READER.
Bibles set forth by the Diuines of Louan: and the holy Councel of Trent willeth that the vulgar Latin text be in such pointes throughly mended, and so to be most authentical. Such faultes are these, In fide, for infine: Præscientiam, for, præsentiam: Suscipiens, for, Suspiciens: and such like very rare. Which are euident corruptions made by the copistes, or growen by the similitude of words. These being taken away, which are no part of those corruptions and differences before talked of, we translate that text which is most sincere, and in our opinion and as we haue proued, incorrupt. The Aduersaries contrarie, translate that text, which them selues confesse both by their writings and doings, to be corrupt in a number of places, and more corrupt then our vulgar Latin, as is before declared.
And if we would here stand to recite the places in the Greek which Beza pronounceth to be corrupted, we should make the Reader to wonder, how they can either so plead otherwise for the Greek text, as though there were no other truth of the new Testament but that: or how they translate only that (to deface, as they thinke, the old vulgar Latin) which themselues so shamfully disgrace, more then the vulgar Latin, inuenting corruptions where none are, nor can be, in such vniuersal consent of al both Greek and Latin copies. For example, Mat. 10. The first Simon, who is called Peter. I thinke (saith Beza) this word πρῶτος, first, hath been added to the text of some that would establish Peters Primacie. Againe Luc. 22. The Chalice, that is shed for you. It is most likely (s aith he) that these wordes being sometime but a marginal note, came by corruption out of the margēt into the text. Againe Act. 7. Figures which they made, to adore them. It may be suspect (saith he) that these wordes, as many other, haue crept by corruption into the text out of the margent. And 1 Cor. 15. He thinketh the Apostle said not νῖκος, victorie, as it is in al Greek copies, but νεικος, contention. And Act. 13. he calleth it a manifest errour, that in the Greek it is, 400 yeares, for, 300. And Act. 7. v. 16. he rekneth vp a whole catalogue of corruptions: namely Marc. 12. v. 42. ἐστιν κοδράντης, which is a farthing: and αὕτη ἐστὶν ἔρημος Act. 8. vers. 26. This is desert. And Act. 7. v. 16 the name of Abraham, and such like. Al which he thinketh to haue been added or altered into the Greek text by corruption.
But among other places, he laboureth excedingly to proue a great corruption Act. 7. v. 14. where it is said (according to the Septuaginta, that is, the Greek text of the old Testament) that Iacob went downe into Aegypt with 75. soules. And Luc. 3. v. 36. he thinketh these wordes τοῦ Καϊνάν, which was of Cainan, to be so false, that he leaueth them cleane out in both his editions of the new Testament: saying, that he is bold so to doe, by the authoritie of Moyses. Whereby he wil signifie, that it is not in the Hebrew text of Moyses or of the old Testament, and therfore it is false in the Greek of the new Testament. Which consequence of theirs (for it is common among them and concerneth al Scriptures) if it were true, al places of the Greek text of the new Testament, cited out of the old according to the Septuaginta, and not according to the Hebrew (which they know are very many) should be false, and so by tying themselues only to the Hebrew in the old Testament, they are forced to forsake the Greek of the new: or if they wil mainteine the Greek of the new, they must forsake sometime the Hebrew in the old. But this argument shal be forced against them elswhere.
By this litle, the Reader may see what gay patrones they are of the Greek text, and how litle cause they haue in their owne iudgements to translate it, or vant of it, as in derogation of the vulgar Latin translation, & how easily we might answer them in a word why we translate, not the Greek: forsooth because it is so infinitely corrupted. But the truth is, we do by no meanes grant it so corrupted as they say, though in comparison we know it lesse sincere and incorrupt then the vulgar Latin, and for that cause and others before alleaged we preferre the said Latin, and haue translated it.
If yet there remaine one thing which perhaps they wil say, when they can not answer our reasons aforesaid; that we preferre the vulgar Latin before the Greeke text, because the Greek maketh more against vs: we protest that as for other causes we preferre the Latin, so in this respect of making for vs or against vs, we allow the Greek as much as the Latin, yea in sundrie places more then the Latin, being assured that they haue not one, and that we haue many aduantages in the Greek more then in the Latin, as by the Annotations of this new Testament shal euidently appeare: namely in al such places where they dare not translate the Greek, because it is for vs and against them. As when they translate, δικαιώματα, ordinances, and not, iustifications, and that of purpose
as
