The Protestant bible .... <sigh>
#1
This one I'm having a very hard time with finding where to find demonstrable proofs of any kind.  I have several different versions of bibles.
But I only now use my 2 Douays translated from the Vulgate (one 1955, the other from the 1970s).

But here's where I have trouble, I know and have heard that the bible was compiled by the early Catholic Church.  St. Jerome did a lot of the work to make the Latin Vulgate possible (as Latin was by then the universal language, I understand, like English is now) around 300 BC as Constantine converted and then all the popes stopped being martyred and the early church could start building and organizing itself and such and this work could actually be carried out (and safely, too, I imagine!).  I may be mangling dates, etc., but I hope I'm saying this correctly enough.  Being new to the faith, it's been a lot to take in .  Anyway, so I guess we had the Latin Vulgate around for several hundred years before Luther, if I've understood all correctly.

But then Luther came along and with other 'conspirators', as it were, started the Protestant revolution (which uses circular arguments, I heard today, so, cute joke!!  Revolution -- circular -- ... lol).

Anyway, the Church compiled the bible and gave it to the world, yet in my Protestant bible that I keep for reference, it says this:

"The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments:  Translated out of the original tongues: and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesty's special command."

What on earth does this even mean???

What it means to a fallen away cousin is that the Protestant bible is _the_ bible and that the Catholics did not write it (sorry, compile it, really), which to me is absurb!

But to me that preface seems to be a lie, even a devious play on words:  "translated out of the original tongues" (really???) and "with the former translations diligently compared and revised" ... huh, didn't the Church already do that for the Latin Vulgate??  And then their English bible published 2 years after our Douay was published in 1509?  How do the Protestants get away with making that assertion in their preface?

If the Protestant bible were one they came up with, why are they nearly word for word, with translation and other slight differences that usually don't affect the meaning, the same (except for the 7 books they took out, of course).

Also, the above preface doesn't take into account the, to my view, sacrilegious slight changes they made (Gen 3:15 anyone??).
[However, those are perfectly understandable errors; they re-wrote or nuanced the bits they didn't like!!]

But, how can the Protestants make that claim in the preface that they "translated out of the original tongues"?  They wouldn't have come up with the same bible, if that were the case.  To me it the preface should read, "a re-wording of the bible compiled back in the Catholic church in 300 BC", maybe, or whatever, but not to imply outright that they did all new work ...  Doesn't make sense ...

Or am I totally wrong??

I'm so new to the faith and I can't find any answers on the net.  Protestants seem to be so much more prevalent on the net, too, which doesn't help.  The Church is out there busy doing tons of invisible work saving souls, feeding/clothing/educating people, etc., etc., and less on the net, where the Prots are on the net and doing lots of visible stuff.  (That's what it means, I guess, not to be God's church and not having a central Divine authority out to mainly be working at the salvation of souls and being 1,000s of denominations going any which way ... ).

Anyway, please, does anyone know where I can find a good book that explains how the Protestants really came up with "their" bible?  And that the Catholic bible is where they got their material from, as it were.  A good, sound apologetics source??

Sorry for long post, but this has been a couple of months of the only struggle I haven't been able to make a dent in at all in the nearly 9 months of my new faith.

Thank you!!




------------------------------------------------------------------------
p.s., as a side note, I just can't believe that I bought a supposedly Catholic bible ("Catholic Edition" of an RSV version which I knew only after seeing the Protestant Gen 3:15 in it that it was actually an 'ecumenical' bible [which more and more seems to me just to mean everything even the kitchen sink, but not Catholic, really].  And it was from the National Shrine of the Divine Mercy!!!  It's really aggravating that since then, I've realized I have to filter everything I read or hear even what is labelled Catholic, to make sure it truly is!  The National Shrine and they have the Protestant Gen 3:15 in it!!  Apostasy-building factor anyone??  I'm returning this bible.  I have my Protestant one but I know what it is and it's there strictly for reference, mostly apologetic reference.  This RSV one feels like a deception, like a wolf in sheep's clothing!  I was horrified when I saw that verse and that it also said Revelation instead of Apocalypse, etc., etc.  Glad I caught that nearly right away, though; who knows what else that bible has that might potentially lead me astray from the faith in any way.  I know so little still.  So sticking only with both my Douay's from now on.  [My 2nd Douay truly came as a gift from God!]
Reply
#2
The best I can do, from memory is as follows:

The Vulgate was compiled for Jerome, who then set into translating the 'actual' original texts of the writings. He commented, being a most detailed and persnickety a scholar, insisting on the writings that were originals. However, being 'persnickety, he often complained that the only thing available to him, were second or third copies of the original, since many of the originals had deteriorated to the point he couldn't use them. These old writings were over 100 years old by the time he saw them.

None the less, he did his work splendidly and I was told he used Latin, because it was the language of scholars and its meanings were set and more  immutable than Greek or even Aramaic, which were still in common use and therefore, evolving in meanings.

The KJV is the Masonic Bible. It is enshrined in every Masonic Temple and it is and has been used, to lure people away from Catholicism, to the fast and easy forms of Protestantism. Just read your bible and God will enlighten you...Hmm. why have a Church then? I suppose the why is exemplified in the total lack of organization in the Protestant Churches. When everyone is taught that they know the bible, because they read it and they know what is written, why bother with a church, unless you need some social gathering every week.

Sorry, I'm off track a bit, but if you look up pictures of the KJV's original text, there are Masonic gods (Pann for one) all over the opening page. A lot of battles were started over this book and a lot of Catholics died at the hands of Cromwell (just for one of the worst) because of it, I suppose.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
  
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

All War is Deception
Gen. Sun

You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.
C.S. Lewis

Political Correctness is Fascism pretending to be manners.
George Carlin

“In a time of deceit…truth is a revolutionary act”
George Orwell
Reply
#3
(05-13-2022, 06:33 PM)Parthalan937 Wrote: "The Holy Bible, containing the Old and New Testaments:  Translated out of the original tongues: and with the former translations diligently compared and revised, by his Majesty's special command."

What on earth does this even mean???

What it means is that it was translated from Greek and Hebrew manuscripts (not the originals, since those weren't around anymore) rather than from the Vulgate, as the Douay was. The 'former translations' include the Tyndale and Coverdale Bibles, neither of which were approved by the Church, and the Douay.
[-] The following 2 users Like Paul's post:
  • jovan66102, karl
Reply
#4
Once again, I will post this from the Catechism of Pope St Pius X:

32 Q. What should a Christian do who has been given a Bible by a Protestant or by an agent of the Protestants?
A. A Christian to whom a Bible has been offered by a Protestant or an agent of the Protestants should reject it with disgust, because it is forbidden by the Church. If it was accepted by inadvertence, it must be burnt as soon as possible or handed in to the Parish Priest.


33 Q. Why does the Church forbid Protestant Bibles?
A. The Church forbids Protestant Bibles because, either they have been altered and contain errors, or not having her approbation and footnotes explaining the obscure meanings, they may be harmful to the Faith. It is for that same reason that the Church even forbids translations of the Holy Scriptures already approved by her which have been reprinted without the footnotes approved by her.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 2 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • Genesius, TroubledGuest
Reply
#5
I will admit to having 2 Protestant Bibles... neither of which I ever open...

An RSV Bible I got as a 10 year old at my childhood Congregational church... and a KJV Bible Mrs Rover gave to me via my oldest son on my first Fathers Day. I never open them, but I do appreciate their roles in bringing me to Christ and ultimately His Church, years later.
[-] The following 1 user Likes oldrover's post:
  • Anon777
Reply
#6
Same. My family has several family heirloom bibles. I still have my KJV, which I NEVER dare read. Thing is:

1: I have only 2 Catholic bibles the newer one...not very good footnotes. (implicating the idea that Blessed Mary, ever Virgin had multiple kids. etc)

2: I have reluctance burning anything bearing the image or name of Christ. His name is so blasphemed and profaned that I even keep Mass leaflets from years ago. I just hate seeing His name and face disgraced. I PROMISE you Jovan that I NEVER touch that book...but it was what ultimately lead me back to Christ...so it has served me 'well' even if it is obsolete and obscene. Some of the Protestant bibles

3. Some are not mine my parents, mainly dad's.
"If we do not supply the chains, who will chain the supplies?"

Karl Marx I PROMISE it will work this time Vol 3


"Mein Fuhrer, I can walk!"

A German...possibly
[-] The following 1 user Likes Anon777's post:
  • oldrover
Reply
#7
"by His Majesty's special command" sounds like its the king james bible. When Catholicism was outlawed in England, king james commissioned an english translation of the bible for official use by the anglican church. Thats why its sometimes called the "authorized" king james bible. So "his majesty" is king james, and "special command" is his request for a unique protestant bible. So when it says translated from the original tongues that means they had translators translating hebrew and greek manuscripts into english, thereby tossing out the vulgata middle man. The douay rheims was translated to english from the vulgata rather than the original tongues, however the vulgata itself is translated from the original tongues. But it used the septuagint for the old testament, that being a greek manuscript for the old testament. The king james, and consequently all protestant english bibles, use the masoretic text for the old testament, which is in hebrew. But the masoretes were a sect of rabbinical jews (that means, post-temple destruction jews) who revised the old testament themselves. This means that jews who rejected Christ revised the old testament to be less christological.
In the evening of life, we will be judged by love alone.
-Saint John of the Cross
[-] The following 1 user Likes crosslife's post:
  • karl
Reply
#8
One thing that gets forgotten (especially by prots! LOL!) is that the manuscripts that St Jerome worked from were much closer to the originals and thus less corrupt than the manuscripts the heretics used for their translation.
Jovan-Marya of the Immaculate Conception Weismiller, T.O.Carm.

Vive le Christ-roi! Vive le roi, Louis XX!
Deum timete, regem honorificate.
Kansan by birth! Albertan by choice! Jayhawk by the Grace of God!
“Qui me amat, amet et canem meum. (Who loves me will love my dog.)” 
St Bernard of Clairvaux

My Blog 'Musings of an Old Curmudgeon'
FishEaters Group on MeWe
[-] The following 3 users Like jovan66102's post:
  • Anon777, karl, Zedta
Reply
#9
(05-15-2022, 12:21 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: One thing that gets forgotten (especially by prots! LOL!) is that the manuscripts that St Jerome worked from were much closer to the originals and thus less corrupt than the manuscripts the heretics used for their translation.
"By their fruits you will know them"...someone said that and if you look at the 'fruits' of the Protestant Revolution, you see confusion of belief as literally thousands of churches have evolved out from this book, each claiming to be Holy Spirit Inspired. The Holy Spirit is not the Spirit of confusion. It is of order and truth. Both these traits are lost in Protestantism.
One should have an open mind; open enough that things get in, but not so open that everything falls out
Art Bell
  
I don't need a good memory, because I always tell the truth.
Jessie Ventura

Its no wonder truth is stranger than fiction.
Fiction has to make sense
Mark Twain

All War is Deception
Gen. Sun

You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body.
C.S. Lewis

Political Correctness is Fascism pretending to be manners.
George Carlin

“In a time of deceit…truth is a revolutionary act”
George Orwell
[-] The following 1 user Likes Zedta's post:
  • oldrover
Reply
#10
(05-13-2022, 06:33 PM)Parthalan937 Wrote: p.s., as a side note, I just can't believe that I bought a supposedly Catholic bible ("Catholic Edition" of an RSV version which I knew only after seeing the Protestant Gen 3:15 in it that it was actually an 'ecumenical' bible [which more and more seems to me just to mean everything even the kitchen sink, but not Catholic, really].  And it was from the National Shrine of the Divine Mercy!!!  It's really aggravating that since then, I've realized I have to filter everything I read or hear even what is labelled Catholic, to make sure it truly is!  The National Shrine and they have the Protestant Gen 3:15 in it!!  Apostasy-building factor anyone??  I'm returning this bible.  I have my Protestant one but I know what it is and it's there strictly for reference, mostly apologetic reference.  This RSV one feels like a deception, like a wolf in sheep's clothing!  I was horrified when I saw that verse and that it also said Revelation instead of Apocalypse, etc., etc.  Glad I caught that nearly right away, though; who knows what else that bible has that might potentially lead me astray from the faith in any way.  I know so little still.  So sticking only with both my Douay's from now on.  [My 2nd Douay truly came as a gift from God!]

The NAB and I think the RSV too, both claimed to be Catholic bibles, translate Luke 1:28 as "hail, highly favored" rather than "hail, full of grace." The Douay-Rheims is the only translation I will use.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)