Radio Replies First Volume - Protestants and the Bible

Celledoor.com ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

[GonzoII]

Protestants and the Bible

559. In any case you have to admit that Protestants have more love for Scripture than Catholics. We owe the rediscovery of the Bible chiefly to the early Protestants.

I deny absolutely that Protestants love Scripture more than Catholics. Nor was the Bible ever re-discovered. Through all the centuries it had been carefully transcribed and preserved in Catholic monasteries, and was there already for Luther and others to broadcast.

560. To whom am I indebted for my English Bible?

You are indebted to many collaborators. Between 1525 and 1536 William Tindale translated into English various Greek and Latin copies of the Bible which had been made by Catholic monks, copies which could be traced back to the original Scriptures. Cromwell was not satisfied with Tindale's translation, so commissioned Miles Coverdale to make a new one. Coverdale used and perfected to some extent Tindale's version, and published the "Great Bible" in 1539. Not satisfied with this, a committee of Anglican Bishops revised it, and in 1568 published what is known as the "Bishops' Bible." This was also faulty, and King James 1st of England ordered a new revision. Taking as their basis the Bishops' Bible, a committee oi 47 revisers whose names are not known produced what is known as the "Authorized Version" in 1611. In 1881 a new revised version was published, correcting some 5,000 mistakes in the Authorized Version. Further revision of this "Revised Version" is being demanded.

Thus you owe your English Bible to many unknown revisers, the Bishops of 1568, Miles Coverdale 1539, Tindale 1525, Monastic copyists through the ages, and thence to the originals.

561. Have Catholics a true copy of the Bible as used by Protestants?

Protestants have not a true copy. Their copy contains many mistranslations and omits complete Books. The Catholic Church provides a substantially true copy or version in English for her own subjects.

562. You speak of mistranslations. Do you accuse the Protestant translators of grossly infamous conduct in tampering with the text?

I do. Dixon, in his Introduction to Scripture says, "That the early Protestant translations were full of gross errors no unprejudiced Protestant will now deny, and that these errors were willful, Ward, in his Errata, satisfactorily proves." Bishop Ellicott, in his book, "Considerations on the Revision of the English Version," says that the translation "yields erroneous doctrinal inferences not to be drawn from the original." Blunt, in his "Key to the Knowledge and Use of the Bible," says, "The characters of the translators were not such as to command the respect of men." Robert Gell, chaplain to Archbishop Abbott, one of the revising committee, wrote of the discussions, "Truth was often outvoted. Dogmatic interests were in some cases allowed to bias the translation. The Calvinism of one party, the prelatic views of another, were both represented at the expense of accuracy."

563. What books are omitted from the Protestant Version?

Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the two Books of Machabees, and the various sections of other Books.

564. Is not the Douay Version a poorer rendering into English than the Protestant Version, apart from its Romish viewpoint?

The Douay Version has not a "Romish" viewpoint in the sense of having been deliberately accommodated to Catholic teaching. It is a substantially true Version which, because true, necessarily indicates the Catholic Church as the true Church. For that is the truth of Scripture. From a literary point of view, it is a less beautiful translation than that of the Authorized Version. But why? Merely because it is a more exact translation. When a foreign language, classical or modern, is translated into English, the more one clings to the text, the less purely literary beauty one attains in the new language. To obtain a more beautiful rendering one must translate more freely, thus more or less forfeiting the exact sense of the original. But in the matter of God's Word, we want, not so much literary beauty, but just what God intended. And for that, the Douay Version far surpasses the Authorized Version, despite its rather awkward literary structure at times.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
http://www.celledoor.com/cpdv-ebe/

[lucias_clay]

You realize that the protestants were engaged in precisely the same thing you accuse the Church of ?

Burning Bibles,
Hanging, Beheading, Torturing, Burning of corpses all because of the Christian faith of their victims,
Destroying libraries and books because they were “superstitious”

You realize that even the translators of the KJV ( Authorized Edition ) in 1611 declared that Wycliffe was not the first to translate into English. That they also used the large number of vernacular translations the Church produced as the basis of their justification of their own translation and that this was published in the KJV ?

You are no doubt aware that many of the folks in Foxes portrayed as “a humble preacher” killed for his faith was in leauge with folks who had sworn, and were led by preachers and self proclaimed prophets to destroy all castles, monestaries, all Lords and were taxing and raising their own armies right before they “humble preachers” were attacked by the existing rulers.

I know you do not realize it and you will not believe me. But someday look up a non protestant source of history.

[lucias_clay]

They remained in printings of the KJV until the 1820s when the Bible societies removed them. Though they may have had prefaces objecting to them.

There was one or two single runs of the KJV about 8 years after 1611 without but then they were right back in there.

Yes it is sad they lost authority for protestants since Christ and the Apostles all used them as scripture in the scripture of the New Testament.

Protestants ironically accept post Christian Jewish Tradition over Church Tradition even though the same Jewish tradition denied the Saviour himself.

[GonzoII]

For those interested: The Third Millennium Bible comprises all the books contained in the A.D. 1611 Authorized Version including the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Apocrypha (Deuterocanonical Books), placed in the same order as in the original. All are carefully updated and presented in modern, easy-to-read format, making it truly A Bible for all of Christendom

[bobjam]

Look, I know some Protestants did some pretty awful things to Catholics, anyone who resembled a Catholic (like Archbishop Laud), and even each other. There’s no excuse for it.

[MarkBsnr]

***“You won’t find the english versions predating the reformation because when Henry VIII ordered the looting and burning of the churches and monasteries they were destroyed.”

You won’t find them because the people who produced them were killed by the Roman Church for it.***

Name just one person killed by any Catholic Church for producing an English language bible. One will do.

The first English language Scripture that we know of was done by a great Doctor of the Church - the Venerable Bede whose translations are now lost. His Gospel of John was translated into Old English just before 735.

[MarkBsnr]

***Yes it is sad they lost authority for protestants since Christ and the Apostles all used them as scripture in the scripture of the New Testament.***

I had a conservative (and Irish) Church of Christ preacher bark in my face that if the KJV was good enough for Jesus, it was good enough for me.

I agreed with him on the spot.

[bobjam]

“Name just one person killed by any Catholic Church for producing an English language bible. One will do.”

William Tyndale. He was the first person to produce an English langauge Bible translated directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. He did this work in Worms and brought the Bibles to England. For this Cardinal Wolsey condemned him as a heretic and demanded his arrest. He was betrayed in Germnay, tried and suffered martyrdom at the stake.

[MarkBsnr]

***“Name just one person killed by any Catholic Church for producing an English language bible. One will do.”

William Tyndale. He was the first person to produce an English langauge Bible translated directly from Hebrew and Greek texts. He did this work in Worms and brought the Bibles to England. For this Cardinal Wolsey condemned him as a heretic and demanded his arrest. He was betrayed in Germnay, tried and suffered martyrdom at the stake.***

Applause. Let us now examine the good burgher Tyndale’s fate. He wrote a bad translation even though a Catholic priest, and against Church orders. He published it. And ran. Now, who had him arrested and executed? King Henry VIII. After he overthrew the Church in England. No Catholic apologist, he.

For extra bonus points, why don’t you tell us why the anti Catholic Henry had Tyndale executed in Belgium?

[bobjam]

Actually, Henry VIII was very devoted to Catholic doctrines. Check out the Six Articles.

A couple of more: John Hus. John Rogers.

The first English language Bible allowed by the Catholic Church was the Rheims Bible (1582), which was translated directly from the Vulgate. The work of Tyndale, Rogers, Erasmus, etc had been translated directly from Greek and Hebrew manuscripts (the original languages of the Bible).

[Marysecretary]

AMEN.

[Marysecretary]

Amen again.

[Marysecretary]

Thank you!

[Ruy Dias de Bivar]

***I had a conservative (and Irish) Church of Christ preacher bark in my face that if the KJV was good enough for Jesus, it was good enough for me.****

That’s because the Church of Christ believes all the early church fathers were “campbellites”. ;-D

And the Cooneyites say they were theirs.
And the baptists claim they were origionally Baptists.And so on and so on.

[MarkBsnr]

***Actually, Henry VIII was very devoted to Catholic doctrines. Check out the Six Articles.***

Some of the doctrines. The point is that the Tyndale incident was three years after Henry took over the English Church. He had no love for the Pope and did not follow his orders. Tyndale was not executed by the Pope or on his orders; he was not even executed regarding the bible that he published.

Jan Hus was not executed for publishing an English language Bible. He was executed for publishing the inflammatory and heretical “De sex erroribus” (which he posted on the wall of the Bethlehem Chapel in Prague), and “De ecclesiâ”. He went before the Council of Constance and was convicted of spreading heretical doctrine.

John Rogers was not executed for publishing an English language Bible. He was executed for treason against the Crown and for heresy against the Church (the nature of the Church and the Sacraments).

***The first English language Bible allowed by the Catholic Church was the Rheims Bible (1582), which was translated directly from the Vulgate.***

Mostly, that is correct.

***The work of Tyndale, Rogers, Erasmus, etc had been translated directly from Greek and Hebrew manuscripts (the original languages of the Bible).***

There is a whole lot of information as to where these guys got their information. I’ll try to address it when I have more time.
The first English language Bible allowed

[MarkBsnr]

******I had a conservative (and Irish) Church of Christ preacher bark in my face that if the KJV was good enough for Jesus, it was good enough for me.****

That’s because the Church of Christ believes all the early church fathers were “campbellites”. ;-D

And the Cooneyites say they were theirs.
And the baptists claim they were origionally Baptists.And so on and so on.***

Largely correct. I believe it was another CofC preacher in Texas that informed me (while on the subject of Spanish speaking in the US), that if English was good enough for Jesus it was good enough for us.

Two preachers in the CofC, same justification for two different points.

The CofC is an interesting phenomenon. The notable Sidney Rigdon, a chief writer of doctrines along with Campbell fils, went over to the Mormons and became the chief theologian for Joseph Smith.

[bobjam]

So it was perfectly acceptable to execute people for disagreeing with Catholic doctrines?

[MarkBsnr]

***So it was perfectly acceptable to execute people for disagreeing with Catholic doctrines?***

Realistically speaking, the Church did not put people to death. Upon conviction of heresy against the Christian God, the person was turned over to the civil authorities to handle them as the civil law was written.

I believe that the Second Helvetic Confession in Chapter 30 says: Therefore, let him draw this sword of God against all malefactors, seditious persons, thieves, murderers, oppressors, blasphemers, perjured persons, and all those whom God has commanded him to punish and even to execute. Let him suppress stubborn heretics (who are truly heretics), who do not cease to blaspheme the majesty of God and to trouble, and even to destroy the Church of God.

Here is a difference between the Catholics’ treatment of heretics and certain Protestants’.

[Mr Rogers]

“Yes it is sad they lost authority for protestants since Christ and the Apostles all used them as scripture in the scripture of the New Testament.”

No, Jesus and the Apostles did NOT quote from the Apocrypha.

[trisham]

bump

[lucias_clay]

You know I grew up hearing that myself and even telling it to other people believing it to be the truth.

It may surprise you that even the venerable King James Bible itself as originally published included cross references between the apocrypha and the new testament. This was something known to the translators of the King James Version but somewhere along the way that was removed and now we find many sincere people claiming it was never used. There remains in my Cambridge edition of the KJV a single cross reference between Hebrews and 2 Maccabees, though the bound volume I have does not include the apocrypha.

For one example of Paul relating a teaching directly from the apocrypha compare Romans 1:18-24 with Wisdom of Solomon 13:1-10. You can find both texts available online.

In fact Christ teaches directly from Wisdom of Solomon as related in Matthew. You will find references to the apocryphal works, in the same way as they refer to other scripture,

Peace to you.