Bible

[ziapueblo]

Can anyone help me with this statement? Thanks,

You wrote,

“Gradually, as more and more people became literate in their native tongue, the Church began translating the Bible into the vernacular languages.”

The first Bible written in English was by John Wycliffe around 1380. The Catholic church condemned Wycliffe for that and burned his writings. His bones were also supposed to have been dug up and burned and scattered in a river.

The first printed New Testament in English was the Tyndale New Testament. William Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake. I guess it’s needless to say that he wasn’t on good terms with them either.

The problem that the Catholic church had was that a lot of people viewed it as corrupt and when they read the Bible they had the proof in their hands.

The stuff you wrote about the Catholic church and the Bible is just the Catholic party line that you have been taught. You need to take some time off and ask the Lord to show you what’s really going on.

Didn’t Luther translate the Bible into German from Erasmus’ Greek text.

Where was the Catholic church when all this was happening? Busy persecuting the translators.

I think that if it was up to the Catholic church we would still have a Latin Vulgate as the only bible.

 

[ABostonCatholic]

Can anyone help me with this statement? Thanks,

You wrote,

“Gradually, as more and more people became literate in their native tongue, the Church began translating the Bible into the vernacular languages.”

The first Bible written in English was by John Wycliffe around 1380. The Catholic church condemned Wycliffe for that and burned his writings. His bones were also supposed to have been dug up and burned and scattered in a river.

The first printed New Testament in English was the Tyndale New Testament. William Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake. I guess it’s needless to say that he wasn’t on good terms with them either.

The problem that the Catholic church had was that a lot of people viewed it as corrupt and when they read the Bible they had the proof in their hands.

The stuff you wrote about the Catholic church and the Bible is just the Catholic party line that you have been taught. You need to take some time off and ask the Lord to show you what’s really going on.

Didn’t Luther translate the Bible into German from Erasmus’ Greek text.

Where was the Catholic church when all this was happening? Busy persecuting the translators.

I think that if it was up to the Catholic church we would still have a Latin Vulgate as the only bible.

The Church was not opposed to translating the Bible into other languages, but they needed to be approved. If someone who was known to be an opponent to the Church translated the Bible, of course his translation would be suspect.

If the Jehovah’s Witness’ “New World Translation” or the Mormon’s “Joseph Smith Version” were the only English versions available, the Church would condemn reading the Bible in English, and rightly so, because the versions available in English would be full of error.

 

[NMJenny]

Didn’t Luther translate the Bible into German from Erasmus’ Greek text.

Where was the Catholic church when all this was happening? Busy persecuting the translators.

I think that if it was up to the Catholic church we would still have a Latin Vulgate as the only bible.

In about two minutes with the internet, I turned up two editions of the German Bible that were translated before Luther’s (and therefore long before the Reformation). I’ll quote:

"The Gothic Bishop Wulfila or Wölflein (i.e., Little Wolf) in the fourth century translated nearly the whole Bible from the Greek into the Gothic dialect. It is the earliest monument of Teutonic literature, and the basis of comparative Teutonic philology.

During the fourteenth century some unknown scholars prepared a new translation of the whole Bible into the Middle High German dialect. It slavishly follows the Latin Vulgate."

Neither of these was condemned by the Church…

 

[lak611]

The first Bible written in English was by John Wycliffe around 1380. The Catholic church condemned Wycliffe for that and burned his writings. His bones were also supposed to have been dug up and burned and scattered in a river.

The first printed New Testament in English was the Tyndale New Testament. William Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake. I guess it’s needless to say that he wasn’t on good terms with them either.

This is not true. See this link for accurate information.

 

[bpbasilphx]

Didn’t Luther translate the Bible into German from Erasmus’ Greek text.

**Did you know that Luther’s Bible was NOT the first German version?

There was already a Catholic German version.**

 

[rpp]

As a history buff, though admittedly mostly self taught, I am often amused by posts like the OP.

And then I realize people actually believe that stuff and become very sad.

If people used the same lens used by the OP and the OP’s source of information to look at American history, they might argue that Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated both John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln because he was unhappy with the outcome the second war with the British Empire and wanted to free Chinese slaves in California.

 

[HelenRose]

I really am showing my ignorance here. What does OP stand for?

 

[Zooey]

I really am showing my ignorance here. What does OP stand for?

Original Poster.

Can anyone help me with this statement? Thanks,

You wrote,

“Gradually, as more and more people became literate in their native tongue, the Church began translating the Bible into the vernacular languages.”

The first Bible written in English was by John Wycliffe around 1380. The Catholic church condemned Wycliffe for that and burned his writings. His bones were also supposed to have been dug up and burned and scattered in a river.

The first printed New Testament in English was the Tyndale New Testament. William Tyndale was strangled and burned at the stake. I guess it’s needless to say that he wasn’t on good terms with them either.

The problem that the Catholic church had was that a lot of people viewed it as corrupt and when they read the Bible they had the proof in their hands.

The stuff you wrote about the Catholic church and the Bible is just the Catholic party line that you have been taught. You need to take some time off and ask the Lord to show you what’s really going on.

Didn’t Luther translate the Bible into German from Erasmus’ Greek text.

Where was the Catholic church when all this was happening? Busy persecuting the translators.

I think that if it was up to the Catholic church we would still have a Latin Vulgate as the only bible.

ZP, ye dinnae know whereof ye speak, laddie.
None of :yawn: what you are trying to sell here is anything new; it the :yawn: same old, same old, myths, lies, & evasions.

I leave some things to others, but will address a couple of points:

1. 
   *]Tyndale was NOT killed by the Catholic Church, nor indeed by Catholics; his death was engineered by agents of that “Sterling Protestant” King Henry VIII.
   *]The Latin Vulgate, which I own & read, was a terrific translation, & a great blessing to all who could read, since, when it was translated, anyone who could read at all, learned to read Latin. (First, at the least; more often, it was the only language that the literate read).
   *]The Bible was never forbidden. Carppy translations (the mediaeval equivalent of the JW "bible) were indeed forbidden, since they were…well. A:hypno: pile of 3 day old carp.
   *]Luther published a Bible, of sorts. It was far from the first in German (or any other language). He had plenty to choose from, but he refused to use any Scriptures that he hadn’t personally tampered with. (“Because Dr Luther will have it so!!”)
   *]Without the Catholic Church, nobody would have any translations of the Bible. It was the Catholics who gave the world the Holy Scriptures. (Kinda puts a hole in the ol’ “keep the Bible away from the people” stuff when you find that out).
   *]And from here: wesley.nnu.edu/Biblical_Studies/wycliffe/Mat.txt I give you a wee sample of Wycliffe’s :nope: “Bible for the people”. If you can read it, you are a better man than I am, Gunga Din:
   

   CAP 2
   1 Therfor whanne Jhesus was borun in Bethleem of Juda, in the daies of king Eroude, lo! astromyenes camen fro the eest to Jerusalem,
   2 and seiden, Where is he, that is borun king of Jewis? for we han seyn his sterre in the eest, and we comen to worschipe him.
   3 But king Eroude herde, and was trublid, and al Jerusalem with hym.
   4 And he gaderide to gidre alle the prynces of prestis, and scribis of the puple, and enqueride of hem, where Crist shulde be borun.
   5 And thei seiden to hym, In Bethleem of Juda; for so it is writun bi a profete,
   6 And thou, Bethleem, the lond of Juda, art not the leest among the prynces of Juda; for of thee a duyk schal go out, that schal gouerne my puple of Israel.
   7 Thanne Eroude clepide pryueli the astromyens, and lernyde bisili of hem the tyme of the sterre that apperide to hem.
   8 And he sente hem in to Bethleem, and seide, Go ye, and axe ye bisili of the child, and whanne yee han foundun, telle ye it to me, that Y also come, and worschipe hym.
   9 And whanne thei hadden herd the kyng, thei wenten forth. And lo! the sterre, that thei siyen in the eest, wente bifore hem, til it cam, and stood aboue, where the child was.
   10 And thei siyen the sterre, and ioyeden with a ful greet ioye.
   11 And thei entriden in to the hous, and founden the child with Marie, his modir; and thei felden doun, and worschipiden him. And whanne thei hadden openyd her tresouris, thei offryden to hym yiftis, gold, encense, and myrre.
   12 And whanne thei hadden take an aunswere in sleep, that thei schulden not turne ayen to Eroude, thei turneden ayen bi anothir weie in to her cuntrey.
   13 And whanne thei weren goon, lo! the aungel of the Lord apperide to Joseph in sleep, and seide, Rise vp, and take the child and his modir, and fle in to Egipt, and be thou there, til that I seie to thee; for it is to come, that Eroude seke the child, to destrie hym.
   14 And Joseph roos, and took the child and his modir bi nyyt, and wente in to Egipt,
   15 and he was there to the deeth of Eroude; that it schulde be fulfillid, that was seid of the Lord bi the profete, seiynge, Fro Egipt Y haue clepid my sone.
   16 Thanne Eroude seynge that he was disseyued of the astromyens, was ful wrooth; and he sente, and slowe alle the children, that weren in Bethleem, and in alle the coostis therof, fro two yeer age and with inne, aftir the tyme that he had enquerid of the astromyens.
   17 Thanne `it was fulfillid, that was seid bi Jeremye, the profete,
   18 seiynge, A vois was herd an hiy, wepynge and moche weilyng, Rachel biwepynge hir sones, and she wolde not be coumfortid, for thei ben noyt.
   19 But whanne Eroude was deed, loo! the aungel of the Lord apperide to Joseph in sleep in Egipt,
   20 and seide, Ryse vp, and take the child and his modir, and go in to the lond of Israel; for thei that souyten the lijf of the chijld ben deed.
   21 Joseph roos, and took the child and his modir, and cam in to the loond of Israel.
   22 And he herde that Archilaus regnede in Judee for Eroude, his fadir, and dredde to go thidir. And he was warned in sleep, and wente in to the parties of Galilee;
   23 and cam, and dwelte in a citee, that ys clepid Nazareth, that it shulde be fulfillid, that was

   CAP 4
   1 Thanne Jhesus was led of a spirit in to desert, to be temptid of the feend.
   2 And whanne he hadde fastid fourti daies and fourti nyytis, aftirward he hungride.
   3 And the tempter cam nyy, and seide to hym, If thou art Goddis sone, seie that thes stoones be maad looues.
   4 Which answeride, and seide to hym, It is writun, Not oonli in breed luyeth man, but in ech word that cometh of Goddis mouth.
   5 Thanne the feend took hym in to the hooli citee, and settide hym on the pynacle of the temple,
   6 and seide to hym, If thou art Goddis sone, sende thee adoun; for it is writun, That to hise aungels he comaundide of thee, and thei schulen take thee in hondis, lest perauenture thou hirte thi foot at a stoon.
   7 Eftsoone Jhesus seide to hym, It is writun, Thou shalt not tempte thi Lord God.
   8 Eftsoone the feend took hym in to a ful hiy hil, and schewide to hym alle the rewmes of the world, and the ioye of hem;
   9 and seide to hym, Alle these `Y schal yyue to thee, if thou falle doun and worschipe me.
   10 Thanne Jhesus seide to hym, Goo, Sathanas; for it is writun, Thou schalt worschipe thi Lord God, and to hym aloone thou shalt serue.
   11 Thanne the feend lafte hym; and lo! aungels camen nyy, and serueden to hym.
   12 But whanne Jhesus hadde herd that Joon was takun, he wente in to Galilee.
   13 And he lefte the citee of Nazareth, and cam, and dwelte in the citee of Cafarnaum, biside the see, in the coostis of Zabulon and Neptalym,
   14 that it shulde be fulfillid, that was seid by Ysaie, the profete, seiynge,
   15 The lond of Sabulon and the lond of Neptalym, the weie of the see ouer Jordan, of Galilee of hethen men,
   16 the puple that walkide in derknessis saye greet liyt, and while men satten in the cuntre of shadewe of deth, liyt aroos to hem.
   17 Fro that tyme Jhesus bigan to preche, and seie, Do ye penaunce, for the kyngdom of heuenes schal come niy.
   18 And Jhesus walkide bisidis the see of Galilee, and saye twei britheren, Symount, that is clepid Petre, and Andrewe, his brothir, castynge nettis in to the see; for thei weren fischeris.
   19 And he seide to hem, Come ye aftir me, and Y shal make you to be maad fisscheris of men.
   20 And anoon thei leften the nettis, and sueden hym.
   21 And he yede forth fro that place, and saie tweyne othere britheren, James of Zebede, and Joon, his brother, in a schip with Zebede, her fadir, amendynge her nettis, and he clepide hem.
   22 And anoon thei leften the nettis and the fadir, and sueden hym.
   23 And Jhesus yede aboute al Galilee, techynge in the synagogis of hem, and prechynge the gospel of the kyngdom, and heelynge euery languor and eche sekenesse among the puple.
   24 And his fame wente in to al Sirie; and thei brouyten to hym alle that weren at male ese, and that weren take with dyuerse languores and turmentis, and hem that hadden feendis, and lunatike men, and men in palesy, and he heelide hem.
   25 And ther sueden hym myche puple of Galile, and of Decapoli, and of Jerusalem, and of Judee, and of biyende Jordan.

 

[SyCarl]

http://wesley.nnu.edu/Biblical_Studies/wycliffe/Mat.txt

I give you a wee sample of Wycliffe’s :nope: “Bible for the people”. If you can read it, you are a better man than I am, Gunga Din:

I can read it, but what you do have to remember is that English was a different language back then. If you look at the 1611 King James Bible, or any contemporary with it, you will find it difficult to read because of differences in alphabet an spelling.

 

[Thing]

“Gradually, as more and more people became literate in their native tongue, the Church began translating the Bible into the vernacular languages.”

Not just about literacy:
Maybe I’m wrong, but was’nt latin the vernacular language of the known world for quite a while. French, Spanish and Italian are corrupt forms of Latin which gradually came into use.
Its not like the Bible was in Latin to trick anyone.

 

[jimmy]

The first Engglish translations of the scriptures were done by Bede in the seventh or eighth century, long before wycliff.

 

[SyCarl]

The first Engglish translations of the scriptures were done by Bede in the seventh or eighth century, long before wycliff.

Yes, but while he translated much, I don’t think he completed the whole thing.

 

[jimmy]

Yes, but while he translated much, I don’t think he completed the whole thing.

That is irrelevant. The arguement is that we Catholics didn’t want the scriptures in the hands of the common man. The fact is that many of the books of the bible were in English as early as the seventh or eighth century. So the arguement is false. Further, there were complete translations in English before wycliff. I believe about 50 or 60 years before him there was a complete translation. I can’t recall who made it. But the fact is that Wycliff was not the first.

 

[VociMike]

Not just about literacy:
Maybe I’m wrong, but was’nt latin the vernacular language of the known world for quite a while. French, Spanish and Italian are corrupt forms of Latin which gradually came into use.
Its not like the Bible was in Latin to trick anyone.

In addition, if you were one of the few people who could read, then you could probably read Latin. I doubt there existed at the time many people who could read but who could only read their vernacular.

 

[ABostonCatholic]

In addition, if you were one of the few people who could read, then you could probably read Latin. I doubt there existed at the time many people who could read but who could only read their vernacular.

Another point I rarely see considered is that since, especially among the poor, fewer people traveled far distances, many languages were much more localized. The would all be classified into language families, but they are still different languages. Even if Scripture were to be translated solely for the liturgy, doing so for every language would be nearly impossible.

This is still the case in many places today:

The Languages of the Philippines

My wife speaks Tagalog, but she has some friends who speak Cebuano. But she is not able to talk with them in these languages; they’re too different.

 

[SyCarl]

That is irrelevant. The arguement is that we Catholics didn’t want the scriptures in the hands of the common man. The fact is that many of the books of the bible were in English as early as the seventh or eighth century. So the arguement is false. Further, there were complete translations in English before wycliff. I believe about 50 or 60 years before him there was a complete translation. I can’t recall who made it. But the fact is that Wycliff was not the first.

I am not denying that large parts of the Bible were translated prior to Wyclif. The translation associated with him however was the first complete translation.

From a Catholic apologetic site:

The Bible In English (before printing)

Various parts of the Bible were translated into Saxon, the language of England at that time, by:

c. 670 Caedmon, a monk
c. 709 Aldhelm, Bishop of Sherborne
c. 735 Venerable Bede, a monk of Jarrow
c. 849-901 King Alfred
c. 955-1020 Aelfric, Archbishop of Canterbury
c. 1020-15thC. English, as we know it today, was developed during this time, and translations appeared in the language of the time.
c. 1382 John Wycliffe produced the first complete translation of the entire Bible in English

scborromeo.org/truth/b4.htm

From the Encyclopedia Brittanica:

Main article: John Wycliffe
English theologian, philosopher, church reformer, and promoter of the first complete translation of the Bible into English.

britannica.com/eb/topic-650168/John-Wycliffe

By stating this I am not implying that the Catholic Church tried to restrict access to the Scriptures in general. I guess I am just a stickler for accuracy. Even with repsect to Wyclif, my understanding is that the Church’s main problem was the notes that accompanied the translation, not the translation itself or that it was made.

 

[JTBT]

“Sterling Protestant” King Henry VIII.

don’t you mean “Fidei Defensor” (Defender of the Faith)King Henry VIII, the title that was given to him by Pope Leo for writing against Luther?

 

[Thing]

don’t you mean “Fidei Defensor” (Defender of the Faith)King Henry VIII, the title that was given to him by Pope Leo for writing against Luther?

The Act in Absolute Restraint of Annates outlawed all annates to Rome,
and also ordered that if cathedrals refused the King’s nomination for bishop,
they would be liable to punishment by praemunire.
Finally in 1534 the Act of Supremacy made Henry “supreme head in earth of the Church of England”
and disregarded any “usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign authority [or] prescription”.

Henry was married to Ann in Westminster Abbey in January 1533.
Anne gave birth to a daughter, Princess Elizabeth, three months after the marriage.
The Pope responded to the marriage by excommunicating both Henry and Cranmer from the Roman Catholic Church.

Consequently in the same year the Act of First Fruits and Tenths transferred the taxes
on ecclesiastical income from the Pope to the Crown. The Peter’s Pence Act outlawed
the annual payment by landowners of one penny to the Pope. This Act also reiterated that England had
“no superior under God, but only your Grace” and that Henry’s “imperial crown” had been diminished by
“the unreasonable and uncharitable usurpations and exactions” of the Pope.[31]

In case any of this should be resisted Parliament passed the Treasons Act 1534 which made it high treason
punishable by death to deny Royal Supremacy.
Finally in 1536 Parliament passed the Act against the Pope’s Authority which removed the last part of
authority still legal; this was Rome’s power in England to decide disputes concerning Scripture.

All this was complete by 1536.

Tyndale was a catholic priest who translated the bible without authorization,
after he tried to seek, apparently, and was refused, help to do so.

In 1535 Tyndale was arrested, jailed in the castle of Vilvoorde outside Brussels for more than a year,
tried for heresy and treason and then strangled and burnt at the stake.

Tyndale was tried and killed in 1536…

Whatever Henry VIII was when he ordered Tyndales arrest, he was not catholic.
Tyndale by that time was probably as much a catholic as Henry then was.

And let that be a lesson to you about the diverse disasters that befalls poor souls who
forget what and who they are and of the misery they drag behind them for countless
numbers of their own countrymen down through the centurys!!

 

[JTBT]

The Act in Absolute Restraint of Annates outlawed all annates to Rome,
and also ordered that if cathedrals refused the King’s nomination for bishop,
they would be liable to punishment by praemunire.
Finally in 1534 the Act of Supremacy made Henry “supreme head in earth of the Church of England”
and disregarded any “usage, custom, foreign laws, foreign authority [or] prescription”.

Henry was married to Ann in Westminster Abbey in January 1533.
Anne gave birth to a daughter, Princess Elizabeth, three months after the marriage.
The Pope responded to the marriage by excommunicating both Henry and Cranmer from the Roman Catholic Church.

Consequently in the same year the Act of First Fruits and Tenths transferred the taxes
on ecclesiastical income from the Pope to the Crown. The Peter’s Pence Act outlawed
the annual payment by landowners of one penny to the Pope. This Act also reiterated that England had
“no superior under God, but only your Grace” and that Henry’s “imperial crown” had been diminished by
“the unreasonable and uncharitable usurpations and exactions” of the Pope.[31]

In case any of this should be resisted Parliament passed the Treasons Act 1534 which made it high treason
punishable by death to deny Royal Supremacy.
Finally in 1536 Parliament passed the Act against the Pope’s Authority which removed the last part of
authority still legal; this was Rome’s power in England to decide disputes concerning Scripture.

All this was complete by 1536.

Tyndale was a catholic priest who translated the bible without authorization,
after he tried to seek, apparently, and was refused, help to do so.

In 1535 Tyndale was arrested, jailed in the castle of Vilvoorde outside Brussels for more than a year,
tried for heresy and treason and then strangled and burnt at the stake.

Tyndale was tried and killed in 1536…

Whatever Henry VIII was when he ordered Tyndales arrest, he was not catholic.
Tyndale by that time was probably as much a catholic as Henry then was.

And let that be a lesson to you about the diverse disasters that befalls poor souls who
forget what and who they are and of the misery they drag behind them for countless
numbers of their own countrymen down through the centurys!!

what Henry VIII wanted was an anullment from Catherine of Aragon so he could legally marry Ann, and had the Pope at the time not been the prisoner of King Charles in spain (Catherine’s cousin) he probably would have gotten it. Henry VIII could have cared less about the corruption that was all though the Catholic Chruch, so what ever he was he was not a reformer like Luther.

 

[Thing]

what Henry VIII wanted was an anullment from Catherine of Aragon so he could legally marry Ann, and had the Pope at the time not been the prisoner of King Charles in spain (Catherine’s cousin) he probably would have gotten it. Henry VIII could have cared less about the corruption that was all though the Catholic Chruch, so what ever he was he was not a reformer like Luther.

Henry received a dispensation from the Pope to allow him to marry his dead brothers wife, Catherine, in the first place.
They were married.
Their marriage was declaired valid with that dispensation.
It is unlikely that the Pope would afterwards contradict himself and declare the same marriage invalid.

Henry viii was excommunicated from the Catholic Church before he arranged Tyndales fate.
He was no longer Catholic.
Which was your point.