X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Rev. M. Rodimer
    Honorary True Christian™
    Forum Member
    • May 2008
    • 13996

    #31
    Re: Theft of Theology!

    Originally posted by The Cantabrian View Post
    There were many advantages to keeping the Bible preserved in Latin. It was the only language that was widely understood in medieval Europe, and as such ensured consistency and certainty. Personally I love Latin masses. They provide a sense of mystery and reverence that exceeds the standard Sunday mass!
    Is that so? I particularly like #6, banning the publication of ANY book not approved by Mother (Nanny?) Church.

    During the period when the Roman Catholic Church was in power, she did everything she could to keep the Bible out of the hands of the common people. It was illegal to translate the Bible into the common languages, even though most people could not read the official Catholic Bible because it was in Latin, a language known only to the highly educated.

    Consider some of the laws Rome made against Bible translation. These began to be made in the 13th century and were in effect through the 19th.

    (1) In the year 1215 Pope Innocent III issued a law commanding “that they shall be seized for trial and penalties, WHO ENGAGE IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE SACRED VOLUMES, or who hold secret conventicles, or who assume the office of preaching without the authority of their superiors; against whom process shall be commenced, without any permission of appeal” (J.P. Callender,
    Illustrations of Popery
    , 1838, p. 387). Innocent “declared that as by the old law, the beast touching the holy mount was to be stoned to death, so simple and uneducated men were not to touch the Bible or venture to preach its doctrines” (Schaff, History of the Christian Church, VI, p. 723).

    (2) The Council of Toulouse (1229) FORBADE THE LAITY TO POSSESS OR READ THE VERNACULAR TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE (Allix, Ecclesiastical History, II, p. 213). This council ordered that the bishops should appoint in each parish “one priest and two or three laics, who should engage upon oath to make a rigorous search after all heretics and their abettors, and for this purpose should visit every house from the garret to the cellar, together with all subterraneous places where they might conceal themselves” (Thomas M’Crie, History of the Reformation in Spain, 1856, p. 82). They also searched for the illegal Bibles.

    (3) The Council of Tarragona (1234) “ORDERED ALL VERNACULAR VERSIONS TO BE BROUGHT TO THE BISHOP TO BE BURNED” (Paris Simms, Bible from the Beginning, p. 1929, 162).

    (4) In 1483 the infamous Inquisitor General Thomas Torquemada began his reign of terror as head of the Spanish Inquisition; King Ferdinand and his queen “PROHIBITED ALL, UNDER THE SEVEREST PAINS, FROM TRANSLATING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE INTO THE VULGAR TONGUES, OR FROM USING IT WHEN TRANSLATED BY OTHERS” (M’Crie, p. 192). For more than three centuries the Bible in the common tongue was a forbidden book in Spain and multitudes of copies perished in the flames, together with those who cherished them.

    (5) In England, too, laws were passed by the Catholic authorities against vernacular Bibles. The Constitutions of Thomas Arundel, issued in 1408 by the Archbishop of Canterbury, made this brash demand: “WE THEREFORE DECREE AND ORDAIN THAT NO MAN SHALL, HEREAFTER, BY HIS OWN AUTHORITY, TRANSLATE ANY TEXT OF THE SCRIPTURE INTO ENGLISH, OR ANY OTHER TONGUE, by way of a book, libel, or treatise, now lately set forth in the time of John Wyckliff, or since, or hereafter to be set forth, in part of in whole, privily or apertly, upon pain of greater excommunication, until the said translation be allowed by the ordinary of the place, or, if the case so require, by the council provincial” (John Eadie, The English Bible, vol. 1, 1876, p. 89). Consider Arundel’s estimation of the man who gave the English speaking people their first Bible: “This pestilential and most wretched John Wycliffe of damnable memory, a child of the old devil, and himself a child or pupil of Anti-Christ, who while he lived, walking in the vanity of his mind … crowned his wickedness by translating the Scriptures into the mother tongue” (Fountain, John Wycliffe, p. 45).

    (6) Pope Leo X (1513-1521), who railed against Luther’s efforts to follow the biblical precept of faith alone and Scripture alone, called the fifth Lateran Council (1513-1517), which charged that no books should be printed except those approved by the Roman Catholic Church. “THEREFORE FOREVER THEREAFTER NO ONE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PRINT ANY BOOK OR WRITING WITHOUT A PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, TO BE TESTIFIED BY MANUAL SUBSCRIPTION, BY THE PAPAL VICAR AND MASTER OF THE SACRED PALACE IN ROME, and in other cities and dioceses by the Inquisition, and the bishop or an expert appointed by him. FOR NEGLECT OF THIS THE PUNISHMENT WAS EXCOMMUNICATION, THE LOSS OF THE EDITION, WHICH WAS TO BE BURNED, a fine of 100 ducats to the fabric of St. Peters, and suspension from business for a year” (Henry Lea, The Inquisition of the Middle Ages).

    (7) These restrictions were repeated by the Council of Trent in 1546, which placed translations of the Bible, such as the German, Spanish, and English, on its list of prohibited books and forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

    Following is a quote from Trent: “…IT SHALL NOT BE LAWFUL FOR ANYONE TO PRINT OR TO HAVE PRINTED ANY BOOKS WHATSOEVER DEALING WITH SACRED DOCTRINAL MATTERS WITHOUT THE NAME OF THE AUTHOR, OR IN THE FUTURE TO SELL THEM, OR EVEN TO HAVE THEM IN POSSESSION, UNLESS THEY HAVE FIRST BEEN EXAMINED AND APPROVED BY THE ORDINARY, UNDER PENALTY OF ANATHEMA AND FINE prescribed by the last Council of the Lateran” (Fourth session, April 8, 1546, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, Translated by H.J. Schroeder, pp. 17-19).
    Bible boring? Nonsense!
    Try Bible in a Year with Brother V, or join Shirlee and the kids as they discuss Real Bible Stories!
    You can't be a Christian if you don't know God's Word!

    Comment

    • Pastor Isaac Peters
      Senior Pastor
      Ex-liberal; converted to True Christianity™
      Always Biblically correct
      True Christian™
      • Sep 2006
      • 10639

      #32
      Re: Theft of Theology!

      Originally posted by The Cantabrian View Post
      My point exactly. How far should we interpret such passages? Does the selective breeding discussed in Genesis mean that we should be cloning animals today? And, if so, should we allow it for human beings and so-called "stem-cell research"?
      The Bible does not spell out the answers, so we need holy and wise men to provide leadership.
      How closely did you read that chapter? I'm guessing not very closely, since you seem to have missed the point entirely. On whether we need someone to interpret the Bible for us, I'll grant that you need someone to interpret it for you.

      With respect, I think your other questions will just lead to us going around in circles, so I don't think I need to answer them. It all comes down to the above point in any case: scripture alone is insufficient. Texts written in ancient languages thousands of years ago cannot be compared with a modern day instruction manual. That is precisely why the Lord Jesus established his church, and appointed St Peter as the first pope.
      But you've admitted that you don't know whether you're right or the Mormons are right. Elsewhere, you've admitted that you consider the Vatican to have misstated its own teachings and have taken it upon yourself to e-mail them what you consider to be the correct interpretation.

      It appears that you have no standard at all for what to believe, other than whatever strikes your fancy. I think you'd be more intellectually honest if you renounced your allegiance to the Roman institution and started your own church, the Church of Brianity, where at least you can be honest about making it up as you go along.
      This church is dedicated to preaching True Christianity™ and the King James Bible exactly as they are, with no alterations to make them more politically correct for modern liberals. If you think that we've misquoted or twisted Scripture or quoted any verse out of context, please explain in detail how we've done so. Otherwise, if what you read on this site offends you, then you're offended by Almighty God and His Word, not by us.

      Questions to ask liberal "Christians"Things that the Bible doesn't sayTolerance

      sigpic

      Comment

      Working...