The vje. principal argument into the same firste and principal conclusioun is this: No sufficient cause hast thou forto seie and holde that Holi Scripture groundith eny of the gouernauncis, trouthis, and vertues bifore seid in the firste conclusioun saue this, that in Holi Scripture mensioun is maad that thei ben treuthis; but this is not sufficient cause forto ther bi thus seie and holde. Wherfore noon sufficient cause hast thou forto seie and holde that Holi Scripture groundith eny of the gouernauncis, trouthis, and vertues spoken of in the firste principal conclusion.
The ije. premisse of this vje. argument may be proued thus: If thilk now seid cause were sufficient forto so holde, thanne, sithen Holi Scripture makith mensioun Mt. xvie. capitulum. of treuthis longing to natural philsophi and approueth hem there weel to be treuthis, it wolde folewe that Holi Scripture groundith treuthis of na|tural philsophie; which no wijs man wole graunte: wherfore the ije. premysse of this vje. argument is trewe. Schal y seie for this that Crist rehercith Math. xvje. capitulum., how that whanne heuen is rody in the euentid a cleer dai schal be the morewe, and whanne in the morntide heuene schineth heuyli in thilk dai schal be tempest, that in Holi Scripture this treuthe of natural philsophie now rehercid bi Crist or the leernyng and kunnyng ther of is groundid in tho wordis of Crist and is groundid in the Gospel? Alle men witen nay. Forwhi the kunnyng ther of was had eer Crist there and thanne tho wordis spake, and no thing is bifore his owne ground, and the kunnyng of thilk mater is largir in his ground which is natural philsophi than is many hool chapitris to gidere ligging in Matheu. And ȝit bi lijk skile it schulde be holde and seid that the now rehercid pointis of natural philsophie were groundid there, if eny oon point of the seid moral philsophie were groundid in Holi Scripture; wherfore sithen thilk
