Written and Complied
by
Keith Hunt
The following studies are taken from the book called "Our
Authorized Bible Vindicated" by the late Benjamin G. Wilkinson,
Ph.D. Written 1930.
I will add additional notes in brackets as I see the need i.e.
(......... - Keith hunt) All CAPITAL words are mine, for
emphasis.
QUOTE:
EARLY CORRUPTION OF BIBLE MSS (manuscripts - Keith Hunt)
The last of the apostles to pass away was John. He death is
usually placed about 100 A.D........
While John lived, heresy could make no SERIOUS HEADWAY. He
had hardly passed away, however, before perverse teachers
infested the Christian Church (actually that infestation had been
taking place much early, as the epistles of Paul and Peter, and
even John himself, testify - Keith Hunt).....
These years were times which saw the New Testament (NT
hereafter - Keith Hunt) books corrupted in abundance.
Eusebius is witness to this fact. He also relates that the
corrupted manuscripts were so prevalent that agreement between
copies was hopeless; and that those who were corrupting the
Scriptures, claimed they were correcting them (Eusebius, Eccles.
History, book 5., chap. 28).
When the waring sects had been consolidated under the iron
hand of Constantine, this heretical potentate adopted the Bible
which combined the contradictory versions into one, and so
blended the various corruptions with the bulk of pure teachings
as to give sanction to the great apostasy now seated on the
throne of power.
Beginning shortly after the death of the apostle John, FOUR
names stand out in PROMINENCE whose TEACHINGS contributed both to
the victorious heresy and to the FINAL issuing of manuscripts of
a corrupt NT. These names are:
1. JUSTIN MARTYR
2. TATIAN
3. CLEMENT of Alexandria
4. ORIGEN
The year in which the apostle John died, 100 A.D., is given
as the date in which Justin Martyr was born Justin, originally a
pagan and of pagan parentage, afterwards embraced
Christianity.....Even as a Christian teacher he continued to wear
the robes of a pagan philosopher.
In the teachings of Justin Martyr, we BEGIN to see how MUDDY
the stream of pure Christian doctrine was running.....It was in
Tatian, Justin Martyr's pupil, that these regrettable doctrines
were carried to ALARMING lengths, and by HIS HAND committed
to WRITING. After the death of Justin Martyr in Rome, Tatian
returned to Palestine and embraced the Gnostic heresy (a few
authors of recent date, late 1990s and early 2000 have written in
depth on the influence of Gnosticism in the Christian church -
Keith Hunt)......
We now come to Tatian pupil known as CLEMENT of Alexandria,
200 A.D. (J. Hamlyn Hill, "The Diatessaron of Tatian," p. 9). He
went MUCH further than Tatian in that he founded a SCHOOL at
Alexandria which instituted propaganda along these heretical
lines. Clement EXPRESSLY tells us that he would not hand down
Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, BUT RATHER CLOTHES WITH
PRECEPTS OF PAGAN PHILOSOPHY.
ALL the writings of the OUTSTANDING HERETICAL teachers were
possessed by Clement, and he FREELY QUOTES from their CORRUPTED
MSS, as if they were the PURE WORDS of Scripture (Dean Burgon,
"The Revision Revised"., p. 336).
When we come to ORIGEN, we speak the name of him who did the
MOST of ALL to create and give DIRECTION to the forces of
APOSTASY down through the centuries. It was he who MIGHTILY
INFLUENCES Jerome, the editor of the Latin Bible known as
the VUGATE.
EUSEBIUS WORSHIPPED at the altar of ORIGEN'S teachings. He
claims to have collected 800 of Origen's six-column Bible, the
HEXAPLA, in his Biblical labors. Assisted by Pamphilus, he
restored and preserved Origen's library. Origen's corrupted MSS,
of the Scriptures were well arranged and balanced with subtlety.
The last one hundred year have seen MUCH of the so-called
scholarship of European and English Christianity DOMINATED by the
SUBTLE and POWERFUL influences of ORIGEN (remember Wilkinson
wrote this in 1930...we have had another 70 plus years of subtle
and powerful influence by so-called "scholars" of the NT - Keith
Hunt).
ORIGEN had so SURROUNDED himself to the furore of turning
ALL Bible events into ALLEGORIES that he himself, says, "The
Scriptures are of LITTLE USE to those who UNDERSTAND them as they
are WRITTEN (MaClintock and Strong, Art. "Origen.").
In order to estimate Origen rightly, we must remember that
as a pupil of Clement, he learned the teachings of the GNOSTIC
heresy and LIKE his master, LIGHTLY ESTEEMED the HISTORICAL basis
of the Bible. As Schaff says, "His PREDILECTION
for PLATO (the pagan philosopher) led him into MANY grand and
fascinating ERRORS" (Dr. Schaff, Church History, Vol. 2, p. 791).
He made himself acquainted with the various HERESIES and
STUDIED UNDER the heathen Ammonius Saccas, founder of
Neo=Platonism.
He taught that the SOUL EXISTED FROM ETERNITY BEFORE it
inhabited the body, and that AFTER death, it MIGRATED to a HIGHER
or LOWER form of life, according to the deeds done in the body;
and FINALLY ALL would RETURN to the state of PURE INTELLIGENCE,
only to BEGIN AGAIN the SAME CYCLES as before.
He BELIEVED that the DEVILS would be SAVED, and that the
STARS AND PLANETS had SOULS, and were, like men, on TRIAL to
learn PERFECTION. In fact, he turned the WHOLE LAW and GOSPELS
into an ALLEGORY.......
ORIGENISM flooded THE CATHOLIC CHURCH THROUGH JEROME, the
father of Latin Christianity. "I LOVE.....the name of ORIGEN,"
says the most distinguished theologian of the Roman Catholic
Church since 1850, "I will NOT LISTEN to the notion that so great
a soul was lost" (Dr. Newman, Apologia pro vita, Chapter 7, p.
282).
"It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that
the WORST CORRUPTIONS to which the NT has ever been subject,
ORIGINATED WITHIN a HUNDRED years after it was composed; that
Irenaeus (A.D. 150), and the African Fathers, and the WHOLE
Western, with a PORTION of the Syrian Church, USED far
INFERIOR manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, or Erasmus, or
Stephens, THIRTEEN centuries later, when MOULDING the Textus
Receptus" (Scrivner, Introduction to N. T. Criticism, 3rd
Edition, p. 511).
The basis was laid to oppose a mutilated Bible to the true
one. HOW these CORRUPTIONS found their way DOWN the CENTURIES and
REAPPEAR in our REVISED and MODERN Bibles, the FOLLOWING pages
will tell.
END OF QUOTE
.......................
Compiled 2003
The New Testament Translation - A History #2The Roman Catholic Church forms its NT BibleFROM THE BOOK "OUR AUTHORIZED BIBLE VINDICATED" by Benjamin
Wilkinson.
All CAPITAL letter words are mine, for emphasis (Keith Hunt).
QUOTE:
THE BIBLE ADOPTED BY CONSTANTINE......
Constantine became emperor of Rome in 312 A.D. A little
later he embraced the Christian faith for himself and for his
empire. As this so-called first Christian emperor took the reigns
of the civil and religious world to bring about the amalgamation
of PAGANISM and CHRISTIANITY, he found THREE TYPES of MSS, or
Bibles, vying for supremacy: the TEXTUS RECEPTUS or
Constantinopolitan, the PALESTINIAN or Eusebio-Origen, and the
EGYPTIAN or Hesychius (N. B. Swete, Introduction to the Old
Testament in Greek, pp. 76-86)......
The DEFENDERS of the Textus Receptus were of the HUMBLE
CLASS who earnestly sought to follow the early church......The
Eusebio-Origen text.....It might be called the ADAPTATION of the
Word of God to GNOSTICISM.
As the emperor Constantine embraced Christianity, it became
necessary for him to CHOOSE which of these Bibles he would
SANCTION. Quite naturally he preferred the one edited by Eusebius
and written by Origen, the outstanding intellectual figure that
had combined Christianity with Gnosticism in his philosophy, even
as Constantine himself was the political genius that was seeking
to unite Christianity with pagan Rome. Constantine regarded
himself as the director and guardian of this anomalous world
church, and as such he was responsible for selecting the Bible
for the great Christian centers......The philosophy of Origen was
well suited to serve Constantine's religio-political theocracy.
Eusebius was a great ADMIRER of Origen and a deep student of
his PHILOSOPHY. He had just EDITED the FIFTH column of the
HEXAPLA which was Origen's Bible. Constantine chose THIS, and
asked Eusebius to prepare FIFTY copies for him. Dr. Ira M. Price
refers to the transaction as follows:
"Eusebius of Caesarea (260-340), the first church historian,
assisted by Pamphilus or vice versa, issued with all its critical
marks the fifth column of the Hexapla, with alternative readings
from the other columns, for use in Palestine. The Emperor
Constantine gave orders that fifty copies of this edition should
be prepared for use in the churches" (Dr. Ira M. Price, The
Ancestry of our English Bible, p. 70).
Thus we see that Constantine CHOSE the HEXAPLA Bible of
Origen, one of the Eusebio-Origen type. This Bible, chosen by
Constantine, was thereby given PRESTIGE and INFLUENCE over the
over Bibles, wherever Constantine authority was recognized.
While the Hexapla was the work of Origen, Dr. Price makes it
plain that Eusebius and Pamphilus EDITED the work.
The VATICANUS MS (codex B) and the SINAITICUS MS (codex
Aleph) BELONG to the Eusebius-Origen type, and many authorities
believe that they were actually two of the fifty copies prepared
for Constantine by Eusebius. Dr. Robertson singles out these
two MSS as POSSIBLY two of the FIFTY Constantine Bibles. He says:
"Constantine himself ordered fifty Greek Bibles from
Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, for the churches of Constantinople.
It is quite POSSIBLE that Aleph and B are two of these fifty"
(A.T. Robertson, Introduction to Textual Criticism of NT., p.
80).
Both these MSS were written in Greek, each containing the
whole bible, WE THINK, though parts are MISSING in them NOW. The
Vatican MS is in the Papal Museum at Rome; the Sinaitic MS, is in
the Soviet Museum at Moscow, Russia (this is of course when
Wilkinson wrote his book in 1930 - Keith Hunt).
Dr. Gregory, a recent scholar in the field of MANUSCRIPTS,
also thinks of them in connection with the fifty. We quote from
him:
"This Manuscript (Vaticanus) is SUPPOSED, as we have seen,
to have come from the same place as the Sinaitic Manuscript. I
have said that these two show CONNECTIONS with each other, and
that they would suit very well as a PAIR of the FIFTY manuscripts
written at Caesarea for Constantine the Great" (Dr. Gregory, the
Canon and Text of the NT., p. 345).
The following quotation is given as EVIDENCE that the
Sinaitic MS was the work of Origen:
It (Sinaitic MS) seems to have been at one time at Caesarea;
one of the correctors (probably of seventh century) adds the note
at the end of Esdras (Ezra): "This Codex was compared with a very
ancient exemplar which had been corrected by the hand of the holy
martyr Pamphilus (d. 309); which exemplar contained at the end,
the subscription in his own hand: 'Taken and corrected according
to the Hexapla of Origen: Antonius compared it: I, Pamphilus,
corrected it' "......The text of Aleph bears a very close
resemblance to that of B (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. 4, p. 86).
TWO OUTSTANDING scholars, Burgon and Miller, thus express
their belief that in the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus MSS, we have
TWO of the Bibles prepared by Eusebius for the Emperor:
"Constantine applied to Eusebius for fifty handsome copies,
among which it is NOT IMPROBABLE that the MSS B and Aleph were to
be actually found. But even if this is NOT SO, the Emperor would
not have selected Eusebius for the order, if that Bishop had
not been in the HABIT of providing copies: and Eusebius in fact
carried on the work which he had commenced under his friend
Pamphilus, and in which the latter must have followed the path
pursued by Origen. Again, Jerome is KNOWN to have RESORTED to
this quarter" (Burgon and Miller, The Traditional Text, p. 163).
Both ADMIRERS and FOES of the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus MSS
ADMIT and CONTEND that these TWO Codices are REMARKABLY SIMILAR.
They are so near together as to compel one to believe that they
were of common origin. Dr. Philip Schaff says:
"The Roman editors contend of course, for the primacy of the
Vatican against the Sinaitic MS, but admit that they are not far
apart" (Dr. Philip Schaff, Companion to the Greek Testament., p.
115, N.1.)
Eusebius, the author of the Vatincanus, was a great admirer
of Origen as noted above, TRANSMITTED HIS VIEWS, and PRESERVED
and EDITED his works. Whether or not the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus
were ACTUALLY two of the FIFTY Bibles furnished by Eusebius for
Constantine, at least they BELONG to the SAME FAMILY as the
Hexapla, the Eusebio-Origen type. So CLOSE were the relations of
Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome, that Dr. Scrivener says:
"The readings approved by Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome
should closely agree" (Dr. Scrivener, Introduction to the
Criticism of the NT., Vol. 1, p. 270).
It is evident that the so-called Christian Emperor gave to
the Papacy his indorsement of the Eusebius-Origen Bible. It was
from this type of MS that Jerome translated the Latin VULGATE
which became the authorized Catholic Bible for all time (it
may not be today, but it was in 1930 when Wilkinson wrote this -
Keith Hunt).
The Latin VULGATE, the Sinaiticus, the Vaticanus, the
Hexapla, Jerome, Eusebius, and Origen, are TERMS for IDEAS that
are INSEPARABLE in the minds of those who know. The type of Bible
SELECTED by Constantine has held the dominating influence at all
times in the history of the Catholic Church. This Bible was
DIFFERENT from the Bible of the WALDENSES, and, as a result of
this difference, the Waldenses were the OBJECT of HATRED and
CRUEL PERSECUTION, as we shall now show. In studying this
history, we shall see HOW it was POSSIBLE for the pure
manuscripts, not only to LIVE, but actually to GAIN the
ASCENDANCY in face of POWERFUL OPPOSITION.
END QUOTE from Wilkinson's book (1930)
...........................
The New Testament Translation - A History #3Greek transaltions from Judea to the West and to Constaninople Compiled with some added comments
From the book "Our Authorized Bible Vindicated" by Benjamin
Wilkinson, PhD. Written 1930.
All CAPITAL letters are mine, for emphasis (Keith Hunt)
QUOTE:
A CHANNEL OF COMMUNICATION FROM THE CHURCHES IN JUDEA.......
Attentive observers have repeatedly been astonished at the
unusual phenomenon in the meteoric history of the Bible adopted
by Constantine. Written in Greek, it was disseminated at a time
when Bibles were scarce......We should naturally think that it
would therefore continue LONG. Such was NOT the case......
One would naturally suppose that the Bible which had
received the promotion of Constantine, especially when
disseminated by the emperor, who was the FIRST to show
FAVOR to the religion of Jesus, would RAPIDLY have spread
EVERYWHERE in those days when imperial favor meant everything.
The TRUTH is, the OPPOSITE was the outcome. It flourished for a
SHORT space......We turn with amazement to discover the
REASON for this phenomenon.
This chapter (and the next few, as I will divide it all -
Keith Hunt) will show that the Textus Receptus was the Bible in
possession and use in the Greek Empire, in the countries of
SYRIAN Christianity, in Northern ITALY, in Southern FRANCE, and
in the BRITISH ISLES, in the SECOND century. This was a FULL
century and MORE before the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus saw the
light of day (Burgon, Revision Revised, p. 27).
When the apostles of the Roman Catholic Church entered these
countries in LATER centuries they found the people using the
Textus Receptus; and it was not WITHOUT DIFFICULTY and a STRUGGLE
that they were able to DISPLACE it and to SUBSTITUTE their Latin
VULGATE. This chapter will likewise show that the Textus
Receptus belongs to the type of these EARLY apostolic MSS that
were BROUGHT FROM JUDEA, and its claim to PRIORITY over the
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus will be ESTABLISHED.
EARLY GREEK CHRISTIANITY - WHICH BIBLE?
First of all, the Textus Receptus was the Bible of EARLY
EASTERN Christianity. Later it was adopted as the OFFICIAL text
of the Greek CATHOLIC Church......in fact that the Received Text
had authority enough to become, either in itself or by its
translation, the Bible of the great SYRIAN Church; of the
WALDENSIAN Church of Northern Italy; of the GALIC Church in
Southern France; and of the CELTIC Church in Scotland and
Ireland; as well as the OFFICIAL Bible of the GREEK CATHOLIC
Church.
ALL these churches, some earlier, some later, were in
opposition to the Church of Rome and at a TIME when the Received
Text and these Bibles of the Constantine type were RIVALS.
They, as REPRESENTED in their DESCENDANTS, are RIVALS to
this day (70 plus years later, from when Wilkinson wrote, his
statement still hold very true - Keith Hunt).
The Church of Rome built on the Eusebio-Origen type of the
Bible; these others built on the Received Text. Therefore,
because they, themselves, believed that the Received Text was the
TRUE apostolic Bible, and further, because the Church of Rome
arrogated to itself the POWER to CHOOSE a Bible which bore the
marks of SYSTEMATIC DEPRAVATION, we have the TESTIMONY of these
FIVE Churches to the authenticity and the apostolicity of the
Received Text.
The following quotation from Dr. HORT is to PROVE that the
Received Text was the Greek New Testament of the EAST. Note that
Dr. Hort always calls it the Constantinopolitan or Antioch text:
"It is no wonder that the TRADITIONAL Constantinopolitan
text, whether FORMALLY official or not, WAS the Antiochian text
of the FOURTH century. It was equally natural that the text
recognized at Constantinople should eventually become in
PRACTICE the STANDARD New Testament of the EAST" (Hort's
Introduction, p. 143. See also Burgon Revision Revised, p. 134).
EARLY SYRIAN CHRISTIANITY - WHICH BIBLE?
It was at ANTIOCH, capital of Syria, that the BELIEVERS were
FIRST called Christian. And as time rolled on, the
Syrian-speaking Christians could be numbered by the THOUSANDS. It
is GENERALLY admitted, that the Bible was TRANSLATED from the
ORIGINAL languages INTO Syrian about 150 A.D (Burgon, Revision
Revised, p. 27. Note.).
One authority tells us that, -
"The PESHITTO in our days is found in use amongst the
Nestorians, who have ALWAYS kept it, by the Monophysites on the
plains of Syria, the Christians of St. Thomas in Malabar, and by
the Maronites, on the mountain terraces of Lebanon" (Burgon and
Miller, The Traditional Text, p. 128). (Remember, Wilkinson was
writing in 1930 - Keith Hunt).
Having presented the fact, that the Bible of EARLY Greek
Christianity and EARLY Syrian Christianity was NOT of the
Eusebius-Origen or Vaticanus type, but the Received Text, we
shall NOW SHOW that the EARLY Bible of Northern ITALY, of
Southern FRANCE, and of GREAT BRITAIN, was ALSO the Received
Text.
The type of Christianity which FIRST was favored, then
raised to LEADERSHIP by Constantine, was that of ROMAN PAPACY.
But this was NOT the type of Christianity that FIRST penetrated
SYRIA, Northern ITALY, Southern FRANCE, and GREAT BRITAIN
(Dr. T.V. Moore, The Culdee Church, Chapter 3 and 4).
The ANCIENT RECORDS of the FIRST believers in Christ in
THOSE parts, DISCLOSE a Christianity which is NOT Roman but
APOSTOLIC. These lands were FIRST penetrated by MISSIONARIES, NOT
from Rome but from PALESTINE and ASIA MINOR. And the Greek NT,
the Received Text they brought with them, or its translation,
was of the type from which the Protestant Bibles, as the King
James in English, and the Lutheran in German, were translated. We
shall presently see that it DIFFERED GREATLY from the
Eusebius-Origen Greek NT.
EARLY ENGLAND - WHICH BIBLE?
Onward then pushed those heroic bands of evangelists to
England, to Southern France, and Northern Italy. The
Mediterranean was like the TRUNK of a TREE, with BRANCHES RUNNING
out to these parts, the roots of the tree being in JUDEA or ASIA
MINOR, from whence the sap flowed WESTWARD to fertilize the
distant lands......
The first believers of ancient BRITAIN nobly held their
ground when the PAGAN Anglo-Saxons descended on the land like a
flood. DEAN STANLEY holds it against AUGUSTINE, the missionary
sent by the Pope in 596 A.D. to convert England, that he
treated with CONTEMPT the early Christian Britons (Dean Stanley,
Historic Memorials of Canterbury, pp. 33, 34. Quoted in Cathcart,
Ancient British and Irish Churches, p. 12).
Yes, more, he CONNIVED with the Anglo-Saxons in their
frightful EXTERMINATION of that pious people. And after
Augustine's death, when those same pagan Anglo-Saxons so
TERRIFIED the PAPAL leaders in England that they fled back to
Rome, it was the British Christians in SCOTLAND who occupied the
forsaken fields.
It is evident from this that BRITISH Christianity did NOT
come from Rome. Furthermore, Dr. Adam Clarke (his Bible
Commentary is somewhat famous - Keith Hunt) claims that the
EXAMINATION of Irish CUSTOMS, REVEAL that they have elements
which were IMPORTED into Ireland FROM Asia Minor by EARLY
Christians (Dr. Clarke, Commentaries. Comments on Matt. 1: 18).
(The truth of early Christianity reaching the British nation
is documented in many historical records, and was admitted to by
the Roman Church at different early synods. It has also been
recorded by the well known so-called "Venerable BEDE" in his
famous work called "A History of the English Church and People" -
a copy of which I have in my library. A book that is still in
print and most Bible Book Stores should be able to obtain it for
you. A fascinating book indeed, and it plainly and clearly
verifies what Wilkinson has just brought forth, as to the early
Christianity in Britain and its fight against the Roman
Catholic Papacy, for a number of hundreds of years, before the
Papacy was victorious.
She truly has made all nations drunk with the wine of her
fornication as the book of Revelation tells us.
Another eye opening book by Wilkinson is called "Truth
Triumphant - the Church in the Wilderness" and it brings out
historical records of how the true church spread further than
most have ever imagines and how it survived the Roman Apostasy
for hundreds of years. It is published by TEACH Services, Inc.
Route 1, Box 182, Brushton, NY 12916.
Yet another eye opening book is "The Celtic Church in
Britain" by Leslie Hardinge. It is also published by the
above...TEACH Services - Keith Hunt).
Since Italy, France, and Great Britain were once
provinces of the Roman Empire, the first translations of the
Bible by the early Christians in those parts were made into
Latin. The early Latin translations were VERY DEAR to the hearts
of these primitive churches, and as Rome did not send any
missionaries towards the WEST before 250 A.D., the EARLY Latin
Bibles were WELL established BEFORE these churches came into
CONFLICT with Rome. Not only were such translations in existence
LONG BEFORE the Vugate was adopted by the Papacy, and well
established, but the people for CENTURIES REFUSED to SUPPLANT
their OLD Latin Bibles by the Vulgate.
"The old Latin versions were used LONGEST by the WESTERN
Christians who would NOT bow to the authority of Rome - e.g. the
Donatists; the Irish in Ireland, Britain, and the Continent; the
Albigenses, etc." (Jacobus, Catholic and Protestant Bibles
Compared, p. 200, Note 15).
END OF QUOTE
Ah, the fascinating story of early Christianity in Britain
we shall continue in, as Paul Harvey used to say, "Now you know
the rest of the story" - in the next chapter. Wilkinson only
very briefly expounds this truth. He and others have done
it in much greater detail, in other books, a couple I have
mentioned above.
..........................
Compiled 2003
The New Testament Translation - A History #4When Britain received the Gospel and the Latin/Greek MSS Compiled with some added comments
FROM THE BOOK "OUR AUTHORIZED BIBLE VINDICATED" by B. Wilkinson
PhD.
Written 1930.
All CAPITAL letters are mine, for emphasis (Keith Hunt)
Continuing from where we let off in the last chapter:
QUOTE
God in His wisdom had invested these Latin versions by His
Providence with a CHARM that OUTWEIGHED the learned artificiality
of Jerome's VULGATE. This is WHY they persisted through the
CENTURIES. A characteristic OFTEN overlooked in considering
VERSIONS, and one that cannot be too greatly EMPHASIZED, needs to
be pointed out in COMPARING the Latin Bibles of the WALDENSES, of
the GAULS, and of the CELTS with the LATER Vulgate. To bring
before you the UNUSUAL CHARM of those Latin Bibles, I quote from
the FORUM of June, 1887:
"The OLD Italic version into the rude Low Latin of the
SECOND century HELD ITS OWN as long as Latin continued to be the
language of the PEOPLE. The critical version of JEROME NEVER
DISPLACED it, and only REPLACED it when the Latin CEASED to
be a LIVING language, and BECAME the language of the LEARNED.
The GOTHIC version of ULFILAS, in the same way, held its own
until the tongue in which it was written ceased to exist.
LUTHER'S Bible was the FIRST genuine BEGINNING OF MODERN
German literature. In Germany, as in England, MANY critical
translations have been made, but they have FALLEN STILLBORN from
the press. The reason of these facts seems to be this: that the
languages into which these version were made, were almost
perfectly adapted to express the broad, generic simplicity of the
original text. Microscopic accuracy of phrase and classical
nicety of expression may be very well for the student in his
CLOSET, but they do not represent the HUMAN and DIVINE SIMPLICITY
of the Scriptures to the MASS of those for whom the Scriptures
were written.
To render that, the translator NEEDS not ONLY a SIMPLICITY
of MIND, RARELY FOUND in companies of LEARNED CRITICS, but also a
LANGUAGE possessing in some LARGE measure that BROAD, SIMPLE, and
GENERIC character which we have seen to BELONG to the HEBREW and
to the GREEK of the New Testament.
It was partly BECAUSE of the LOW Latin of the SECOND
century, and the GOTHIC of Ulfilas, and the rude, STRONG German
of Luther had that character in a REMARKABLE degree, that they
were CAPABLE of rendering the Scriptures with a FAITHFULNESS
which GUARANTEED their PERMANENCE" (Fulton in the Forum, June,
1887).
For NINE hundred years, we are told, the FIRST Latin
translations HELD their own AFTER the Vulgate appeared (Jacobus,
Catholic and Protestant Bibles, p. 4).
The Vulgate was born about 380 A.D. Nine hundred years later
brings us to about 1280 A.D. This accords well with the FACT that
at the FAMOUS Council of TOULOUSE, 1229 A.D., the Pope gave
ORDERS for the MOST TERRIBLE crusade to be waged AGAINST the
SIMPLE Christians of Southern FRANCE and Northern ITALY, who
would NOT bow to his power.
CRUEL, RELENTLESS, DIVESTING, this war was waged, DESTROYING
Bibles, books, and EVERY VESTIGE of documents to tell the STORY
of the Waldenses and Albigenses. Since then, some authorities,
speak of the Waldenses as having as their Bible, the Vulgate. We
regret to dispute these claims. But when we consider that the
Waldenses were, so to speak, in their MOUNTAIN fastnesses, on an
island in the MIDST of a sea of NATIONS using the Vulgate;
without doubt they KNEW and POSSESSED the Vulgate; but the
ITALIC, the EARLIER Latin, was their OWN Bible, the one for which
they LIVED and SUFFERED and DIED. Moreover, to the east was
CONSTANTINOPLE, the CENTER of GREEK Catholicism, whose Bible was
the Received Text; while a little farther EAST, was the noble
SYRIAN Church which also had the Received Text. In touch with
these, NORTHERN Italy could easily verify her text.
It is VERY EVIDENT that the Latin Bibles of EARLY BRITISH
Christianity not only was NOT the Latin Bible of the Papacy, that
is, the Vulgate, but it was at SUCH VARIANCE with the Vulgate as
to engender STRIFE. The following quotation from Dr. Von
Dobschutz will VERIFY these TWO FACTS.
"When Pope Gregory found some Anglo-Saxon youths at the
slave market of Rome and perceived that in the North there was
still a pagan nation to be baptized, he sent one of his monks to
England, and this monk, who was Saint Augustine, took with
him the Bible and introduced it to the Anglo-Saxons, and one of
his followers brought with him from Rome pictures showing the
Biblical history, and decorated walls of the church in the
monastery of Wearmouth. We do not enter here into the DIFFICULT
question of the NEWLY founded Anglo-Saxon church and the OLD
Iro-Scottish church. DIFFERENCES IN BIBLE TEXT HAD SOMETHING TO
DO with the PITIFUL STRUGGLES which AROSE between THE CHURCHES
and ENDED in the DEVASTATION of the OLDER one" (Van Dobschutz,
The Influence of the Bible on Civilization, pp. 61, 62).
FAMOUS in history among ALL centers of Bible knowledge and
Bible Christianity was IONA, on the little island of HY, off the
Northwest coast of SCOTLAND. Its MOST historic figure was
COLUMBA. Upon this island rock, God breathed out His Holy Spirit
and from THIS center, to the tribes of Northern EUROPE. When Rome
AWOKE to the necessity of sending out missionaries to EXTEND her
POWER, she found GREAT BRITAIN and Northern EUROPE, ALREADY
PROFESSING Christianity whose ORIGIN could be TRACED BACK through
IONA to ASIA MINOR.
About 600 A.D. Rome sent missionaries to England and to
Germany, to BRING these simple Bible Christians UNDER HER domain,
as much as to SUBDUE the pagans.
D'Aubigne has furnished us THIS PICTURE of IONA and her
missions:
"D'Aubigne says that COLUMBA esteemed the cross of Christ
HIGHER than royal blood which flowed in his veins, and that
PRECIOUS MANUSCRIPTS WERE BROUGHT to IONA, where a theological
school was FOUNDED and the WORD was STUDIED. Erelong a missionary
spirit breathed over this ocean rock, so justly named 'the light
of the Western world.' BRITISH missionaries CARRIED the LIGHT of
the GOSPEL to the NETHERLANDS, FRANCE, SWITZERLAND, GERMANY, yea,
even into ITALY, and DID MORE for the CONVERSION of CENTRAL
EUROPE than the half-enslaved Roman Church" (J. N. Andrews and L.
R. Conardi, History of the Sabbath, pp. 581, 582).
END QUOTE
Ah, yes indeed, all this truth of early Christianity in the
British Isles (England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland) is
documented in many recorded histories of those people.
Christianity had reached Britain not many years after the
founding of the NT apostolic church in 30 A.D. on the day of
Pentecost. The facts of this are all out there preserved
and recorded in the ancient writings of the four nations that
make up the land of Britain. I have a number of books in my
library relating all these histories in detail.
It is fascinating and thrilling in many way to read those
histories. The conflict between the Roman Catholic Church,
arriving around 600 A.D. in the land of Britain, and the old
British (or what some call the Culdee Church) Church is well
documented (by Bede and others). The old British Culdee Church is
NOT to be confused with the Church of England, or Anglican
Church......which came on the scene centuries later. There is a
world of difference between the Church of England and the old
ancient British or Culdee Church, that Rome faced when she
arrived with her perverted doctrines and corrupted Bible.
The old ancient British Church would not bow to Rome, either
in doctrine or in what Bible version, translation to use.
We know from recorded history that in Britain the Culdee
Church observed the 7th day Sabbath, and observed the death of
Christ as taught to them they claimed by the apostle John
himself. They were so much different from the Christianity of
Rome that Augustine the missionary sent by the Pope, called them
"Jewish heretics."
It would take Rome about 600 years before it finally stamped
out the ancient British Church from Scotland and Wales. England
fell prey at an earlier date as the Anglo-Saxons were converted
to Roman Christianity (as they, the Anglo-Saxons arrived in
Britain at about the same time Roman Christianity did). Keith
Hunt.
.................................
Compiled 2003
The New Testament Translation - A History #5The Bible of France, Northern Italy, and the Waldenses Compiled with added comments
FROM THE BOOK "OUR AUTHORIZED BIBLE VINDICATED" by Benjamin
Wilkinson, PhD. Written 1930.
All CAPITAL letters are mine, for emphasis (Keith Hunt)
QUOTE
EARLY FRANCE - WHICH BIBLE?
In Southern France, when in 177 A.D. the Gallic Christians
were frightfully massacred by the heathen, a record of their
suffering was drawn up by the survivors and sent, NOT to the Pope
of Rome, but to their brethren in ASIA MINOR (See Cathcart,
Ancient British and Irish Churches, p. 16).
Milman claims that the French received their Christianity
from ASIA Minor.
These apostolic Christians in Southern France were
undoubtedly those who gave effective help in carrying the Gospel
to Great Britain (Idem. p. 17). As we have seen above there was a
LONG and BITTER struggle between the Bible of the British
Christians and the Bible which was brought later to England by
the missionaries of Rome. And as there were really only TWO
Bibles, - the official version of Rome, and the Received text,
we may safely conclude that the Gallic (or French) Bible, as well
as the Celtic (or British), were the Received Text. NEANDER
claims, as follows, that the first Christianity in England came
NOT from Rome, but from Asia Minor, probably through France:
"But the peculiarity of the later British church is evidence
against its origin from Rome; for in many ritual matters it
departed from the usage of the Romish church, and agreed MUCH
MORE nearly with the churches of Asia Minor. It WITHSTOOD, for a
LONG TIME, the authority of the Romish Papacy. This circumstance
would seem to indicate, that the Britons had received their
Christianity, either immediately, or through Gaul, from Asia
Minor, - a thing QUITE POSSIBLE and EASY, by means of the
COMMERCIAL intercourse. The later Anglo-Saxons, who opposed the
spirit of ecclesiastical independence among the Britons, and
endeavored to establish the church supremacy of Rome, were
uniformly inclined to trace back the church establishment to
a Roman origin; from which effort many FALSE legends as well as
this might have arisen" (Neander, History of the Christian
Religion and Church, Vol. 1, pp. 85, 86).
(The so-called "Venerable Bede" in his book on Christianity in
England, brings out all the historical detail that the British
received the Gospel centuries before the Roman Catholic
church set foot on British land (about 600 A.D.), and there was
indeed a struggle between the "British church" and that of the
"Roman church" for many centuries - Keith Hunt)
THE WALDENSES IN NORTHERN ITALY - WHICH BIBLE?
That the messengers of God who carried MSS from the churches
of Judea to the churches of Northern Italy and on, brought to the
FORERUNNERS of the Waldenses a Bible DIFFERENT from the Bible of
Roman Catholicism, I quote the following:
"The method which Allix has pursued, in his History of the
Churches of Piedmont, is to show that in the ecclesiastical
history of the century, from the fourth century, which
he considers a period early enough for the enquirer after
apostolical purity of doctrine, there are CLEAR proofs that
doctrines, UNLIKE those which the Romish Church holds,
and conformable to the belief of the Waldensian and Reformed
churches, were MAINTAINED by theologians of the NORTH of Italy,
down to the period, when the Waldenses first came into notice.
Consequently the opinions of the Waldenses were NOT NEW to Europe
in the eleventh or twelfth centuries, and there is nothing
IMPROBABLE in the tradition, that the Subalpine Church PRESERVED
in its INTEGRITY in an UNINTERRUPTED course from the FIRST
preaching of the Gospel in the valleys" (Gilly, Waldensian
Researches, pp. 118, 119).
There are MANY EARLY historians who AGREE with this view
(Comba, the Waldenses of Italy, p. 188).
It is inspiring to bring to life again the OUTSTANDING
history of an AUTHORITY on this point. I mean LEGER. This noble
scholar of Waldensian blood was the apostle of his people in the
terrible massacres of 1655, and labored intelligently to PRESERVE
their ANCIENT RECORDS. His book, the "General History of the
Evangelical Churches of the Piedmontese Valleys," published in
French in 1669, and called "scarce" in 1825, is the PRIZED object
of scholarly searchers. It is my good fortune to have that very
book before me. LEGER, when he calls Olivetan's French Bible of
1537 "entire and pure," says:
"I say 'pure' because all the ancient exemplars, which
formerly were found among the Papists, were FULL of
FALSIFICATIONS, which caused BEZA to say in his book on
Illustrious Men, in the chapter on the Vaudois, that one must
confess it was by the means of the Vaudois of the Valleys that
France today has the Bible in her own language. This
godly man, Olivetan, in the preface of his Bible, recognizes with
thanks to God, that SINCE THE TIME of the APOSTLES, or THEIR
immediate successors, the TORCH of the gospel has been lit among
the Vaudois (or the dwellers in the Valleys of the Alps, two
terms which mean the same), and has NEVER been extinguished"
(Leger, General History of the Vaudois Churches, p. 165).
The Waldenses of Northern Italy were foremost among the
PRIMITIVE Christians of Europe in their RESISTANCE to the
Papacy......They rejected the MYSTERIOUS doctrines, the
HIERARCHAL priesthood and worldly titles of Rome, while they
clung to the SIMPLICITY of the Bible......
In the FOURTH century, HELVIDIUS, a GREAT scholar of
Northern Italy, ACCUSED Jerome, whom the Pope had empowered to
form a Bible in Latin for Catholicism, with USING CORRUPT Greek
MSS (Post-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 6. p. 338 - Christian Lit.
Edition)......
And so learned and so powerful in WRITING and TEACHING was
Jovinian, the pupil of Helvidius, that it demanded THREE of
Rome's most FAMOUS fathers - Augustine, Jerome, and Ambose - to
UNITE in OPPOSING Jovinians' influence......
Dr. DeSanctis, many years a Catholic official at Rome, some
time official Censor of the Inquisition and later a convert to
Protestantism, thus reports the conversation of a Waldensian
scholar as he points out to others the ruins of Palatine Hill,
Rome:
" 'See,' said the Waldensian, 'a beautiful monument of
ecclesiastical antiquity. These rough materials are the ruins of
the two great Palatine libraries, one Greek and the other Latin,
where the precious manuscripts of our ancestors were, collected,
and which Pope Gregory 1, called the Great, cause to be burned' "
(Gilly, Waldensian Researches, p. 80)........
ANCIENT DOCUMENTS OF THE WALDENSES
There are modern writers who attempt to FIX the BEGINNING of
the Waldenses from PETER WALDO, who began his work about 1175.
This is a MISTAKE! The HISTORICAL name of this people as properly
derived from the VALLEYS where they lived, is VAUDOIS. Their
ENEMIES, however, ever sought to DATE their ORIGIN from
WALDO.....Nevertheless the HISTORY of the Waldenses, or Vaudois,
BEGINS CENTURIES BEFORE the days of Waldo.
There remains to us in the ancient Waldensian language, "The
Noble Lesson" (La Nobla Leycon), written about 1100 A.D., which
assigns the FIRST opposition of the Waldenses to the Church of
Rome to the days of CONSTANTINE the Great, when Sylvester was
Pope. This may be gathered from the following extract:
"All the Popes which have been from Sylvester to the
present" (que tuit li papa, que foron de Silvestre en tro en
aquest) (Gilly, Excursions to the Piedmont, Appendix 2, p. 10).
Thus when Christianity, emerging from the long persecutions
of pagan Rome, was raised to IMPERIAL POWER by the Emperor
Constantine, the ITALIC Church in Northern Italy - later the
Waldenses - is seen standing in OPPOSITION to papal Rome. Their
BIBLE was of the FAMILY of the renowned ITALA. It was the
translation into LATIN which represents the Received Text, Its
very name "Itala" is derived from the Italic district, the
regions of the VAUDOIS. Of the PURITY and RELIABILITY of this
version, Augustine, speaking of DIFFERENT LATIN Bibles (about 400
A.D.) says:
"Now among TRANSLATIONS themselves the ITALIAN (ITALA) is to
be PREFERRED to the others, for it KEEPS CLOSER to the words
without prejudice to CLEARNESS and EXPRESSION (Nicene and
Post-Nicene Fathers - Vol. 2, p. 542 - Christian Lit. Ed.)
The OLD Waldensian LITURGY which they used in their SERVICES
down through the centuries CONTAINED "texts of Scripture of the
ancient Version called the Italick" (Allix, Churches of Piedmont
- 1669 - p. 37).
The REFORMERS HELD that the Waldensian Church was FORMED
about 120 A.D., from which date on, they passed down from father
to son the teachings they received from the apostles (Idem, p.
177).
The Latin Bible, the Italic, was translated from the Greek
NOT LATER than 157 A.D. (Scrivener's Introduction, Vol. 1, p.
43).
We are indebted to BEZA, the RENOWNED associate of CALVIN,
for the statement that the Italic Church dates from 120 A.D.
From the illustrious group of scholars which gathered around
Beza, 1590 A.D., we may understand how the Received Text was the
BOND of UNION between great historic churches.
As the sixteenth century is closing, we see in the beautiful
Swiss city of Geneva, Beza, an outstanding champion of
Protestantism, the scholar Cyril Lucar, later to become the head
of the Greek Catholic Church, and Diodati, also a foremost
scholar. As Beza ASTONISHES and CONFOUNDS the world by RESTORING
MSS of the Greek NT from which the King James is translated,
Diodati takes the same and translates into Italian a NEW and
famous edition, adopted and circulated by the Waldenses
(McClintock and Strong, Encycl. Art, "Waldenses")......
At the SAME TIME, ANOTHER group of scholars, BITTERLY
HOSTILE to the first group, were gathering at Rheims, France.
There the JESUITS, assisted by Rome and backed by all the power
of SPAIN, brought FORTH an ENGLISH translation of the VULGATE. In
its preface they expressly declared that the Vulgate had been
translated in 1300 into Italian and in 1400 into French. "the
sooner to shake out of the deceived people's hands, the false
heretical translations of a sect called Waldenses." This proves
that Waldensian Versions existed in 1300 and 1400. It was the
Vugate, Rome's corrupt Scriptures against the Received Text - the
NT of the apostles, of the Waldenses, and of the Reformers.
That Rome in EARLY days CORRUPTED the MSS.....Allix, the
renowned scholar, testifies. He reports the following as Italic
articles of faith: "They receive only, saith he, what is written
in the Old and New Testament. They say, that the Popes of Rome,
and other priests, have DEPRAVED the Scriptures by their
DOCTRINES and GLOSSES" (Allix, Churches of Piedmont, pp. 288, 2).
It is RECOGNIZED that the Italia was translated from the
Received Text (Syrian, Hort calls it); that the Vugate is Itala
with the readings of the Received Text REMOVED (Kenyon, Our Bible
and the Ancient Manuscripts, pp. 169, 170).
END QUOTE
More to come on the Waldenses Bible and the work of Beza, Calvin,
Olivetan, Dadoed, Luther, and the Reformation NT Bible.
................................................
Compiled 2003
|
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment