Bible Translation

We hope you enjoy your visit!
You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.
Join our community!
Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harasment, and crude or sexually-explicit language.
If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
…
7

Which translation(s) do you tend to use and WHY ? (choose as many as you like).
Jerusalem	2 (9.1%)
New Jerusalem	3 (13.6%)
RSV	1 (4.5%)
NRSV	3 (13.6%)
Douai	5 (22.7%)
King James	0 (0%)
Good News	2 (9.1%)
NIV	2 (9.1%)
New Living Translation	0 (0%)
Other	4 (18.2%)
Total Votes: 22

Bible Translation
Topic Started: Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 12:31 (1,336 Views)
Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 12:31 Post #1
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	All, Nelly asked: Quote: What about the Programme last night about the Bible, very antiCatholic anti Rome anti Latin... did any one see it the guy who presented it does have Chrisophobia I`ve seen him on other programmes nelly Nelly, I saw the programme. I thought it was slow bordering on boring but there was sufficient information to keep me watching. I noted the presenters bias but thoufght he was doing his best to be impartial. It was interesting that many of the experts interviewed could be seen to struggle to be impartial but still their feelings came through. Yet more interesting was to see their conclusions conflict with their own bias to the consternation of the presenter. The best example being the chap who was pro-reform but lamented the cultural destruction of the Reformation so much that he concluded he wished it had not happened. Since the church forbade translation of the Bible into English it is hardly surprising it does not come out of this well. The church in that time was badly in need of a reformation. Since it proved incapable of reform from within it took reform without to bring about what was necessary. Likewise Bible translation into English. Actually I thought the programme was anti-establishment more than anti-catholic. The term used throughout was "the authorities" and it was clear that this was the King together with the Church and often more the King than otherwise. Gerry
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 14:53 Post #2
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 01:31 PM Since the church forbade translation of the Bible into English it is hardly surprising it does not come out of this well. The church in that time was badly in need of a reformation. Since it proved incapable of reform from within it took reform without to bring about what was necessary. Likewise Bible translation into English. It's that Big Bad Church of the past again.... The one the Holy Ghost forgot. :rolleyes: Clare.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:09 Post #3
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	Clare, No, The Holy Ghost sent reformers. Gerry
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:09 Post #4
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:09 PM Clare, No, The Holy Ghost sent reformers. Gerry Name some. Clare.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:21 Post #5
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	Wycliffe, Catherine of Sienna, Tyndale, Luther, Teresa of Avilla, John of the Cross,
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:25 Post #6
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:21 PM Wycliffe, Catherine of Sienna, Tyndale, Luther, Teresa of Avilla, John of the Cross, It's rather insulting to the Catholic saints that you mention, to lump them in with a lot of heretics, Gerry. And it's bordering on blasphemy to attribute those heretics' betrayal of the Church to the Holy Ghost as well, IMHO. Now, might I suggest that the Holy Ghost sent.... erm, let me see.... Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre?.... Just off the top of my head! I believe he will be canonised one day. It's more likely than Luther et al, anyhow! How do you like that idea? Clare.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


nelly k	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:26 Post #7
Posts: 549 Group: Members Member #43 Joined: November 1, 2006	Gerry I did Fall asleep , I think that doing things by force ie teaching the Practices of Faith, can lead to revolt, fortunatly our Church does not do that anymore, well that is my thoughts, but maybe things did go to far,and I have a lot of respect for those who have worked somewhat quietly and tiresly to maintain the Practice of Latin Mass, and all that goes with it , there has been a loss with regards some devotions and practices, So I think our Popes current comments with regards Latin Mass is correct, sadly I think there can be a lack of respect on all sides. Catholic I thought means universal? and that then leads me to think that there can be variations in form of worship... consider all the different Rites the provision of Mass in different Languges,my worry is that this may lead to divisions. The Commentator did a piece on Christian funded schools in England, some one with money is Financing these school, though they are primarily state Comprehensive, he despratly tried to bring a fair degree of negativity to these schools, seen him on the news as well , guest speaker, I think he is anti Faith. nelly



Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:44 Post #8
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	Clare Apr 10 2007, 03:25 PM Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:21 PM Wycliffe, Catherine of Sienna, Tyndale, Luther, Teresa of Avilla, John of the Cross, It's rather insulting to the Catholic saints that you mention, to lump them in with a lot of heretics, Gerry. And it's bordering on blasphemy to attribute those heretics' betrayal of the Church to the Holy Ghost as well, IMHO. Now, might I suggest that the Holy Ghost sent.... erm, let me see.... Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre?.... Just off the top of my head! I believe he will be canonised one day. It's more likely than Luther et al, anyhow! How do you like that idea? Clare. Clare, Not much, but comfortably conceed the point. Some paralels between Luther and said Archbishop can be seen. Gerry
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:45 Post #9
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	Nelly, I had to work hard at not falling asleep. It wasn't easy. Gerry
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:50 Post #10
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:44 PM Clare, Not much, but comfortably conceed the point. Some paralels between Luther and said Archbishop can be seen. Gerry There are more parallels between Archbishop Lefebvre and St Athanasius, though! He got into bother too! The Church has vindicated St Athanasius's actions. The Church has not vindicated Luther's. The Church has yet to vindicate Lefebvre's, but he only died 16 years ago. Not a long time in the Church's life! Clare.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 15:51 Post #11
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:45 PM Nelly, I had to work hard at not falling asleep. It wasn't easy. Gerry I didn't watch it. What channel was it on? Was it "The History Channel" like that other programme? If so, I couldn't have seen it! Only got terrestrial tv! Clare.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


Gerard	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 16:51 Post #12
Posts: 3,118 Group: Members Member #12 Joined: September 26, 2006	Clare It was C4 I only have terrestrial also. Gerry
	"The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998).


PJD	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 18:25 Post #13
Posts: 2,423 Group: Members Member #11 Joined: September 26, 2006	I did watch it throughout. It was a sort of history lesson. Did put the Church in a bad light regarding its refusal to have the Bible published in English. But basically it was a sort of history lesson. I didn�t like the emphasis on the �burnings� � they were awful reminders of man�s inhumanity to man. But if they had extended that scenario then perhaps the programme would have got elsewhere than in history. But they wouldn�t would they? Especially what I am now putting forward would have to come out: That the people who lived (I mean the majority) in those days were uneducated, used to violence, most could not read or write, and most lived in ignorance of any theological knowledge, lived in comparatively hideous and dirty hovels, and had a very hard life, dying quite young. Except for the rich that is. Had the bible been translated in English, most would not have been able to read it, those that could would have no idea how to interpret it, and all sorts of funny ideas, fundamentalist conceptions etc. would have occurred without guidance by the clergy. And were the clergy that up to it � I doubt it unless they were quite rich, had plenty of time to study, and then they would only have lectured at Universities etc. No this was not an era when having the Bible in England would have been the most appropriate time in history. That�s my defence of the Church � its prudence. Prudence not, of course, applying to giving money for indulgences � that�s just the normal �money� situation. That would be the other side of the argument. But they certainly would not have had me on there putting it forward. And remember this, they were the times when the English invented hanging, drawing and quartering. How bad can you get at torture? How uncivilised can you become (apart from being beheaded on video that is)? PJD



Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 18:37 Post #14
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Delighted to find this book online! Where We Got The Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church by Rt Rev Henry G Graham.
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


Clare	Tuesday, 10. April 2007, 18:45 Post #15
Wacko Schismatic Traditionalist Woman Posts: 3,093 Group: Members Member #70 Joined: March 27, 2007	Gerard Apr 10 2007, 04:21 PM Wycliffe, ... Tyndale, ... Why Wycliff was Condemned Quote: BUT here we are likely to be met with an objection by those who have not a very profound or accurate knowledge of the history of this question. 'Why, then,' they will say, 'why, if the Catholic Church approved of the Bible being read in the tongue of the people, why did she condemn Wycliff, one of her own priests, for translating it into English, and forbid her people to read his version of the sacred Scriptures?' I answer, because John Wycliff 's version of the Bible was not a correct version, and because he was using it as a means of corrupting the people's faith and of teaching them false doctrine; and it seems to me at least that that was a perfectly good reason for condemning it. For, please observe, that whilst the Church approves of the people reading the Scriptures in their own language, she also claims the right to see that they really have a true version of the Scriptures to read, and not a mutilated or false or imperfect or heretical version. Tyndale's Condemnation Vindicated by Posterity Quote: (iii) Unable therefore to proceed with the work in his own land because of ecclesiastical prohibition, Tyndale goes abroad, and after much wandering about settles at Worms, where in 1525 the Bible was printed and thence smuggled in considerable quantities into England. At once, as was to be expected, it was denounced by the Bishop of London, and I do not deny (nor can I see any reason to deplore) the fact that copies of it were burned ceremonially at St Paul's Cross. But why? Because it was a false and erroneous and anti-Catholic version of the Holy Scriptures. It was full of Lutheran heresies. Tyndale had fallen under the influence of the German Reformer, who by this time had revolted from Rome. From Rt Rev Henry Graham's "Where We Got the Bible".
	S.A.G. My attempt at a blog.


1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Catholic Discussion · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
…
7