The Bible Battle

HOME * HEALTH * TOPICAL INDEX * LIBRARY * CHILDREN * BAD STUFF * PROPHECY SLIDESHOWS * TEMCAT'S STUDIES

# BATTLE OF THE BIBLES

H. H. MEYERS

> ## Table of Contents

> ## By way of introduction A terrible Fruad has been perpetrated on Christianity!! You NEED the facts!

> ## Section One - The Protestant Reformation

> ## 1. Pre-Reformation Years

> ## 2. Colet and Erasmus

> ## 3. Tyndale the Brave

> ## 4. Protestantism's Early Struggle to Survive

> ## 5. The Reformation Prospers

> ## 6. The Council of Trent

> ## 7. The Spanish Contender

> ## 8. Battle of the Bibles

> ## 9. Invasion Preparations

> ## 10. The Armada Sails

> ## 11. King James the Protestant

> ## Section Two - "My Words Shall Not Pass Away"

> ## 12. Seeds of Apostasy

> ## 13. Early Christian Missionaries

> ## 14. Dividers of the Faith

> ## 15. Keepers of the Faith

> ## Section Three - War on the King James Bible

> ## 16. Higher Criticism - Enemy of the Reformation

> ## 17. Kindly Light or Searing Flame?

> ## 18. The Schemers

> ## 19. The Fraud Exposed

> ## 20. The Mercersburg Movement

> ## 21. The Bible Societies

> ## 22. A Twentieth-Century Burgon

> ## 23. The Romanising of the Bible Societies

> ## 24. Interconfessional Bibles and Ecumenism

> ## Section Four - The Ecumenical Trap

> ## 25. Unheeded Warnings

> ## 26. Rome's Little Helper

> ## 27. Fruits of Anti Christ This chapter clearly shows the systematic and deliberate corruption of truth in the modern versions!!

> ## 28. Conclusion

> ## Bible Battle Time Line

> ## Trinitarian Bible Society

> ## Inquisitive Christians A History of a cruel cover-up!

> ## By way of introduction

> For well over three centuries, when English-speaking people spoke of the Bible, it was accepted that they were referring to the Authorised of King James I. Its appearance in 1611 was the culmination of a century of diligent toil on the part of the Reformers who were prepared to place their lives at risk in order that the common people might have access to the Word of God. In the process, there emerged the Protestant Reformation which quickly dispelled the spiritual and intellectual gloom of the Dark Ages.

> By the mid-twentieth century, while adjusting to the changing values of the newly arrived atomic era, English-speaking Protestants were subjected to a strange phenomenon. Gradually, they were becoming accustomed to their pastors referring to curious renditions of Bible texts. At first, the version from which they were reading was always identified and used only as an aid to amplifying the sense of their beloved King James Bible.

> After a while, some of the more daring preachers were beginning to show a decided preference for modern versions by using them in place of the King James Version. Young people were told that the archaic language of their old Bible was beyond their comprehension. It was suggested to their parents that Bibles needed to be constantly tuned to modern-day relevance.

> Soon, many preachers ceased to identify the version from which they read. The Bible of the Reformation had been replaced! But replaced with what?

> With a plethora of modern Bibles now being offered by numerous Bible houses, many sincere Christians are in a quandary as to which Bible best projects God's will for man. Then, after having selected a new Bible, it is not long before they are told that a better one has arrived. Confusion, and lack of confidence in changing and sometimes conflicting Scriptures, is the inevitable result.

> The purpose of this book is to simply demonstrate that, fundamentally and historically, there are only two differing Bibles and that their New Testaments issue from two basic streams of manuscripts. One, reflecting God's will for man, has been guarded and handed down to us by the Apostolic Churches; the other, has been polluted by a super power which has used its corrupt Bibles in a relentless effort to achieve global domination through total spiritual and political control.

> When this fact is grasped, the reader will have no difficulty discerning on which side a particular version stands in relation to this long-running Battle of the Bibles.

> In pursuit of this goal the author has divided this work into four sections. Each deals with a particular time period and each is a topic largely complete in itself.

> It is the author's fervent wish that the reader's faith in God's revelation of His will for man will be established or confirmed, and that any doubts or reservations as to which version most faithfully transmits that revelation will be irreversibly dispelled.

> H. H. Meyers November 1993.

> ## Section One

> ## Chapters One to Eleven

> ## The Protestant Reformation

> "In the sixteenth century, the Reformation, presenting an open Bible to the people, had sought admission to all the countries of Europe. Some nations welcomed it with gladness, as a messenger of Heaven. In other lands the papacy succeeded to a great extent in preventing its entrance".

> "The war against the Bible, carried forward for so many centuries in France, culminated in the scenes of the Revolution. That terrible out breaking was but the legitimate result of Rome's suppression of the Scriptures. It represented the most striking illustration which the world has ever witnessed of the working out of papal policy" (E.G. White, "The Great Controversy", p 265).

> ## Chapter One

> ## Pre-Reformation Years

> When the people of England went to church in the early sixteenth century, they did so with a sense of obligation tinged with awe and even fear, for attendance at Mass in the parish church was seen as a ritual essential to the preservation of body and soul.

> In those days their priests were seldom heard reading from the Bible; it was written in Latin. What they did hear and understand were the prayers for an Italian prince of the Medici nobility who was known to them as Pope Clement. The pope was virtually the indisputable ruler of Europe in temporal as well as spiritual matters. Believing him to be a successor of the apostle Peter, and, therefore custodian of the heavenly keys, the English were not only inclined to render him spiritual allegiance, but were bound by ecclesiastical and civil laws to pay taxes for his support.

> One of the annual taxes levied on every household was cunningly designed to reinforce the dogma of apostolic succession. It was called, "Peter's Pence". When first introduced it was a mere "penny per hearth", but like other schemes for collecting tax, it soon demonstrated its propensity to increase as well as to proliferate.

> The pope's tax agents were considered as set apart and above the mundane affairs of life. They were not subject to civil laws, but if the occasion demanded it, they were tried before an ecclesiastical court. They carried impressive titles such as Archbishop, Archdeacon and Parish Priest.

> To assist the pope's men in their holy endeavours, lay men and women were appointed as church wardens. Besides being responsible for the upkeep and care of the church and its surrounds, they were expected to keep Peter's Pennies rolling in. They also had to collect other of the numerous taxes among which were levies consisting of tithes, mortuary dues and probate fees. (See D.H. Pill, "The English Reformation", pp 22, 25)

> And then there were the Mendicant Friars who literally swarmed over the countryside like a plague, begging and sometimes demanding food, lodging and money.

> For the pious faithful, the church had much to offer, but it was nearly all collectable in a future life. If this was insufficient inducement for the faithless, there was the ever present spectre of an intermediate stay in purgatory and even everlasting hellfire. But for those who openly questioned the credibility of the system, their passage to hell was given a decided impetus with the designation of the term, "heretic". In the year 1519, seven "heretics" from Coventry and Birmingham were burned and consigned to hell.

> It seems that these unfortunate victims of ecclesiastical judgment imbibed Lollard-like beliefs. The Lollards had arrived at "wicked" and "dangerous" conclusions as a result of reading Wycliffe's English translation of the Bible. They no longer believed such Roman Catholic dogmas as transubstantiation and infant baptism.

> John Wycliffe was born in Yorkshire in 1324. Like many ambitious young men of his era, he had pursued theological studies at Oxford with a view to following a political career. This may seem strange to us today. However, back then the church had a monopoly on education. It was what came to be known as Rome's scholastic system. The language of Rome was Latin. Therefore, as Rome controlled the colleges and universities, the learned men of Europe spoke and wrote in Latin. Such men were regarded by the pope as subjects of his ecclesiastical empire. Under this strange system, civil servants could become bishops and bishops could become highly-placed civil servants. There were men ordained as priests who had never seen, let alone read the Bible!

> When Wycliffe was only twenty-four he witnessed a terrible calamity. The people of England were struck down by a plague known as the, "Black Death". Coming from Asia and through Europe, it left a trail of death and misery which effectively halved both Europe and England's populations.

> To the youthful Wycliffe

> "This visitation of the Almighty sounded like the trumpet of the judgment-day... Alarmed at the thoughts of eternity, the young man... passed days and nights in his cell groaning and sighing, and calling on God to show him the path he ought to follow" (D'Aubigne's "History of the Reformation", Book XVII chapter VII).

> Turning to the Scriptures (for by this time, Wycliffe was an accomplished Latin scholar), he found solace and inspiration, and he developed a determination to make them his rule and guide in life. He longed to see the Bible not only re-established as the authority of the church, but to make it available in the language of the people.

> Soon he was writing and preaching condemnation of the excesses of his church, and in particular the pope's lately assumed sovereignty over the English crown. As a result, Wycliffe won the patronage of King Edward III who appointed him as one of his chaplains. Thus, when Wycliffe inevitably drew upon himself the wrath of the papacy, he was able to enjoy the King's protection.

> Little by little Wycliffe's priorities were changing. Caring less about the temporal kingdom, he devoted more time to Christ's Eternal Kingdom. As he studied the Bible, he came to expose the absurdities which he perceived to be part of the Roman Catholic ritual. He longed to replace in the minds of his people the mysteries of the Mass and Transubstantiation with the "mystery of Godliness".

> As Wycliffe's reputation in the universities increased, he was able to inculcate in the minds of his students the authority of God's Word as opposed to the assumed authority of the Catholic Church and its priests.

> His obvious sincerity and love of the gospel soon imbued his students with a desire to take the Bible and tell from it the story of Christ's way of salvation which does not depend on works. There was much poverty and ignorance in those days and people were still suffering from the devastating effects of the Black Death. To those of whom Christ said: "Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 5:3), the gospel of love contrasted pleasantly with the cajoling and threats of the pretentious, pleasure-loving friars. As in the days of Christ, the common people received Wycliffe's unpretentious priests gladly. The scholasticism of Rome with its penchant for allegorising away the Scriptures began to be replaced with faith in Jesus Christ as the one and only Saviour and Mediator between man and God (1 Timothy 2:5, 6).

> Wycliffe's intense interest in expounding the Scriptures eventually led him to take the prestigious degree of Doctor of Divinity. He now felt competent to undertake the ambitious and unheard of task of making the Bible available to all by translating it into English. Being highly skilled in Latin, he set about translating the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bible. He worked on the New Testament for over ten years, completing it in 1380. At once an enthusiastic bank of copyists set about the task of hand-copying hundreds of Bibles which were soon eagerly received by the lower and upper-class alike.

> This was too much for the authoritarian Church of Rome. The last thing the papacy wanted was to have the people being led by the Holy Spirit to an understanding of Bible truths. Successive attempts to stifle Wycliffe and his work were thwarted by those who had seen the light of reform. But the great strain on the pioneer Reformer gradually took its toll. At the age of sixty, Dr. John Wycliffe succumbed to a stroke. He was not to know that future events would confer on him the illustrious title: "The Morning Star of the Reformation". Mercifully, he did not witness the terrible persecutions to which his countrymen would be subjected, nor the intense anger of Rome which would seek to expiate its wrath by committing the sacrilege of digging up his bones for public burning thirty years after his death!

> As the missionary work of the Lollards continued expanding after Wycliffe's death, it seemed that the reform of the Catholic Church in England was imminent. But sinister CounterReformation forces were at work. What the church could not do by persuasion, it would seek to carry out by using the powers of the state. In 1390 a motion was made in the Upper House of Parliament to have all copies of Wycliffe's Bible seized.

> But the Duke of Lancaster indignantly exclaimed, "Are we then the very dregs of humanity, that we cannot possess the laws of our religion in our own language?" (ibid Chapter VIII).

> Rome does not give in easily. By the dawn of the fifteenth century, the Primate of the Catholic Church, Archbishop Arundel, connived with the new King, Henry IV for papal support in return for the outlawing of the Lollards. In no time, a pious priest who refused adoration of the cross, became the first of a long list of English martyrs. William Sowtree was his name. He was burnt alive at Smithfield in 1401.

> The famous French chronicler of the Reformation, H.J. Merle D'Aubigne, D.D., gives us an inkling of the hatred exhibited by the papacy against the Bible:

> "Encouraged by this act of faith - this auto da fe - the clergy drew up articles known as the `Constitution of Arundel', which forbade the reading of the Bible, and styled the pope, 'Not a mere man, but a true God "' (ibid Chapter IX).

> But even as Wycliffe's ashes were cast into the River Swift at Lutterworth, to flow eventually into the bosom of the restless sea, so his seeds of reform were to reach out far from the shores of England, eventually to rock Roman Catholicism to its very foundations.

> But the time was not yet. God's divine programme was yet to be revealed. Vital to the success of His plan was the restoration of His Word in unadulterated form. Wycliffe's Bible, a bold translation of Rome's Latin Vulgate, was in effect an English version of Jerome's fourth-century Bible. This was a different Bible from that used by people like the Waldenses and Albigenses who had received and guarded their scriptures from apostolic times. As Rome hunted down these faithful Christians, she destroyed their Bibles, a knowledge of which was virtually forgotten by the time of Wycliffe.

> Then there were the Bibles of the Eastern Churches that had early found their way from Antioch into Persia, Armenia, India and even China. But during the long period of the Dark Ages they, along with Greek and Eastern literature, had been sealed off from the West by Rome's occupation of the strategic gateway to Asia at Constantinople. With Rome's universal use of the Latin language, knowledge of the Greek and Hebrew languages had largely been lost. But in accordance with God's plan a change was to come, and it struck like an "eastwind" as the Turks invaded Constantinople. The hordes of Mahomet advanced westward driving before them all who sought refuge. Within five years, Athens had fallen.

> Among the refugees were numerous of the intellectual classes who fled to Italy, many of whom were Hebrew and Greek scholars. With them they brought their literature. It was as if darkened Italy had suddenly received a great burst of light and under its glare, Roman Catholicism was doomed to suffer. The church, and religion generally, came under question as Catholic priests and scholars turned to the study of Hebrew and Greek in order to devour the newly-obtained classical literature. Along with this literature came the Byzantine Scriptures and Greek manuscripts from which they were derived.

> Now the scholars of the Western World began to realise the extent to which they had been deprived of culture and learning occasioned by the stultifying scholastic system of the ecclesia.

> Shortly prior to the Turkish-driven flight of learning, there occurred an epoch-making event in the small German town of Mainz. There the process of printing was discovered in 1440 by Johannes Gutenberg. The subsequent growth of printing techniques paralleled the growth of the Renaissance, thus providing a vehicle for the spread of that learning. It was no coincidence then that the new learning rapidly forged ahead in Germany. D'Aubigne draws a very interesting comparison of the effects which the ancient literature had on Italy and Germany:

> "What had produced in Italian minds a minute and barren refinement of the understanding, pervaded the whole being of the Germans, warmed their hearts and prepared them for a brighter light... In the one country the foundations of the Church were undermined; in the other they were re-established on their true basis" (D'Aubigne's "History of the Reformation", Book 1, Chapter VII).

> Near the close of the fifteenth century, a luminary named John Reuchlin appeared on the German horizon. By the youthful age of twenty, he was teaching philosophy, Greek and Latin at Basle. His later interest in the study of Hebrew resulted in his being the first to publish in Germany a Hebrew grammar and dictionary. His deep interest in things spiritual led him to study Hebrew with a view to converting the numerous Israelites to the gospel of Christ. As a result, he brought out a Hebrew Old Testament free from the appalling corruptions then prevailing. In so doing, he did not hesitate to depart in places from the corruptions of the Latin Vulgate (ibid).

> Such "blasphemy" inevitably brought this daring man into disfavour with the Romish establishment, drawing the particular ire of the Dominicans, which honourable order of priests Pope Gregory IX in 1233 had entrusted with conducting the papal Inquisitions. But their evil designs on Reuchlin were thwarted by Pope Leo X. With such lack of papal support, the Dominicans had good reason for alarm; they were witnessing the preparatory phase of the great Protestant Reformation!

> The first of the two Great Witnesses on which Protestantism was to be built had been set in place. The next would be the New Testament.

> ## Chapter Two

> ## Colet and Erasmus

> Desiderius Erasmus of Holland was twelve years Reuchlin's junior. He was born in 1467 of parents who had neglected the formality of wedlock; yet this did not deter them from naming their son, "Gerard", meaning in Dutch, "The Beloved".

> The young Gerard early showed all the classic signs of genius. His fascination and aptitude for learning languages were soon put to practical use. He sought out the Greek equivalent of his name and promptly renamed himself "Erasmus". To this he prefixed the Latin equivalent "Desiderius"; hence a name was coined which would within his lifetime, attract to itself a lustre rarely duplicated in any one generation. Acclaimed as "the great genius of the age", he was destined to do for the New Testament what Reuchlin had done for the Old.

> Although unlike his younger contemporary, Martin Luther who was born in 1483, it would not be to the credit of the Reformers to designate Erasmus as such. Yet his life and work were indispensable to the development of the Reformation.

> As was the custom of his time, Erasmus received a monastic education, but this experience only served to alert him to the folly of the prevailing scholasticism and the malpractices of the church. He was to spend much of his early career sharpening his wit and literary skills in satirising the vices practised by the clerics.

> In so doing, he was only confirming the developing antisacerdotal tendency of the age, a condition which the church blamed upon the revival of learning brought about by classical scholars whom it was pleased to brand as "humanists". In many cases this was true, especially as we have noted of the Italian scholars.

> But in England and Germany the scholarship of the theologians had been tempered by the now widespread teachings of Wycliffe and his followers, a circumstance not readily available to the Italians by virtue of their proximity to Rome. Then there was an almost constant stream of rottenness issuing forth from the Holy See, the effects of which conditioned the minds of thinking Italians to embrace a humanistic philosophy. Perhaps it was the divine hand of Providence that prevented Erasmus's monastic training from confirming him in such a course through his meeting with John Colet.

> John Colet, son of a London Lord Mayor, was naturally of a religious temperament. Having spent some time as a student at Oxford, he went to Rome to further his ecclesiastical education. There he was imbued with the spirit of the revival of learning. But the scandalous stories he there heard about the comparatively recent behaviour of Pope Alexander VI and Caesar Borgia, impressed him with the urgent need for ecclesiastical reform.

> Returning to Oxford, Colet lectured on the works of the church and its system of religion, condemning its preoccupation with power, money and pleasure, and denouncing the loose morals of the clergy. As for the popes, he spoke of them as "wickedly distilling poison to the destruction of the Church" (Seebohm, "The Era of the Protestant Revolution", p 77).

> In evidence of his sincerity as an honest Catholic committed to reforming his church, Colet cried:

> "Oh Jesu Christ, wash for us not our feet only, but also our hands and our head! Otherwise our disordered Church cannot be far from death". (ibid p 78)

> It was into such an environment that Erasmus arrived when he accepted the invitation of an English nobleman to attend Oxford in order to further his knowledge of Greek. There he came to know Colet. Both were just thirty years of age.

> But there the similarity ended, for Colet was a spiritual and religious reformer. He was seeking to lead the minds of his pupils away from the scholastic system and back to the Bible as the Christian's authority. On the other hand, Erasmus was motivated by a thirst for a knowledge of Greek in order that he might better appreciate the classics and the new learning. But now as he listened to Colet drawing his students to the Bible and the gospel story, he was shown for the first time that salvation is a personal experience, found only in Jesus Christ - not a ritualistic system of salvation as devised by man and dispensed by the church.

> Erasmus was fascinated by Colet's expositions of Scripture and his historical method of interpretation. Gradually, he came to appreciate what Colet was trying to achieve and when invited by Colet to join him in his mission Erasmus declined, saying that he must first go to Italy to master Greek and then, "when I feel I have the needful firmness and strength, I will join you " (ibid p 80).

> The course of history is studded with epoch-making decisions; decisions which were made on the spur of the moment, or which were the outcome of deliberation. But here was a decision which, although unforseen by these two scholars, was to alter the whole course of civilisation, the results of which we all enjoy to this day.

> In the event, Erasmus was not able to proceed directly to Italy. On the first stage of his intended journey, he was robbed of his money by a customs-house officer at Dover. In France, he was unsuccessful in raising money to continue on to Italy. In those times, many famous scholars were dependant on the generosity of their benefactors and Erasmus was no exception. It seems that he spent the next few years wandering around France and Holland. His biographer gives us an inkling of his life during this period of frustration:

> "If it were possible, it would perhaps be hardly worth while, to trace all the wanderings of Erasmus during the next half-dozen years. It may suffice to say that he lived principally in Paris, Orleans, and in the Low Countries, and spent his time in studying Greek, running away from the plague, dreaming of Italy, and begging hard from his patrons to supply him with the means of going there" (Drummond, "Erasmus", Vol.1, p 92).

> Typifying his problems and ambitions at this time, is this extract from a letter written from Paris (circa 1500) to one of his patrons, James Battus:

> "In autumn I shall, if possible, visit Italy and take my doctor's degree; see you, in whom I hope, that I am provided with means. I have been giving my whole mind to the study of Greek, and as soon as I get money I shall buy, first, Greek books, and then clothes. Farewell my dear Battus, and do not forget your friend Erasmus. Once my health is mended I shall neglect nothing" (ibid pp 95,96).

> In spite of financial and health problems, it is quite evident that Erasmus had never lost sight of his goal to produce a Greek edition of the New Testament. As part of his preparation for this work, Drummond tells us that he sought out and collated manuscripts wherever he had the opportunity. While yet in Paris, "As early as the year 1505, he had appeared as a critic of the Greek text, not however in his own name, but as editor of the Annotations of Laurentius Valla" (ibid p 307).

> Such study and work had gained a recognition in England, for upon visiting there early in 1506, he was made Bachelor of Divinity by Cambridge University. There his old friends rallied around him and within six months he was able to set out on his second and successful attempt to visit Italy.

> After a laborious trip across the Alps (for the saddle was the means of transport then), Erasmus arrived in Turin, Northern Italy. There he remained for several weeks, during which time the prestigious University conferred on him the degree of Doctor of Divinity. Next, he visited Florence and Bologna. While in Bologna, Erasmus became friendly with a "public Professor of Greek" engaged by the Bologna University. This friendship with Paul Bombasius was later to prove invaluable to Erasmus while translating his New Testament. By that time, Bombasius had been made secretary to Cardinal Pucci, who gladly assisted Erasmus by providing him with readings from the Codex Vaticanus.

> His visit to Rome in 1507 appears to have been relatively short, yet he was able to make the acquaintance of Cardinal de Medici who was so sympathetic with Erasmus's ambitions for a Greek New Testament that later, when he became Pope Leo X, Erasmus dedicated it to him.

> Erasmus's visit to Italy must have lived up to his expectations. There he had not only taken the opportunity to examine rare and valuable manuscripts but he had engaged the minds of scholars who had helped settle in his mind the line of manuscripts which he should use in his planned forthcoming Greek translation of the New Testament. Now he would return to England as a Doctor of Divinity with an invitation from none other than King Henry VIII.

> With such illustrious credentials, and back now among his friends of Oxonian days, it is not surprising that he was appointed Greek Professor at Cambridge, a position which he was to hold from 1510 to 1514. And now Erasmus was to find among his English pupils a student of Greek who was destined to leave an indelible mark on English literature and society. He was William Tyndale.

> The Pupils of Erasmus were fully aware of his desire to produce a Greek New Testament which scholars of all nations could use to translate into their own language. There can be little doubt that Tyndale there gained a desire to give the English People a Bible of their own. But it would not be a translation of the Roman Catholic Vulgate as was the Bible of Wycliffe, for Erasmus had shown him that the Latin Vulgate swarmed with errors" (D'Aubigne's "History of the Reformation", Book 1, Chap. VIII).

> It was during the month of April, 1515, that Erasmus was to receive word from a friend in Basle that a famous German printer by the name of Froben wanted to print his New Testament. Here was wonderful news for Erasmus. By this time, his many dissertations on the state of the church had spread his fame abroad.

> Now Erasmus could fulfil his pledge to Colet in a way that could not be compared to his previous writings. With his proposed New Testament, he would not only realise Colet's ambition to draw men away from the prevailing scholastic theology, but he would, "place before them, in all the freshness of the original" a new translation of the "living picture of Christ and His Apostles contained in the New Testament" ("The Era of the Protestant Revolution", p 92).

> It should be realised that, at this time, the Latin New Testament in use by the church was substantially that of Jerome's late fourth century translation. Along with the Old Testament and the Apocrypha, it constituted the Bible shortly to be re-affirmed and authorised by the Council of Trent (15451563). Drummond's comments are instructive:

> "To the monks and theologians of that day it was the Bible as much as if no originals had existed, or as if Hebrew Prophets and Galilean Apostles had written in Latin" ("Erasmus", p 309).

> Drummond continues:

> "No one had been sufficiently enterprising or sufficiently zealous in the cause of religious progress to edit or to print the Christian Scriptures in the original tongue. The truth is that those who were interested in religion cared very little for learning; while most of those who were interested in learning cared not at all for religion" (ibid).

> This is where Erasmus differed greatly from the learned humanists of his day. He cared for the literature of the "new learning" but he had (thanks to Colet) great respect for God's Word. It is a gross insult, based on questionable motives, for his modern day critics and enemies to discredit him as a humanist, a term devised by Rome to denigrate those scholars who threatened her religious system with the "new learning" and which today is used to designate an irreligious class of people.

> After proceeding to Basle, Erasmus busily engaged himself in finishing off his translation of the New Testament, which consisted of two columns containing the Latin and Greek side by side, as well as his own annotations.

> The great day came, when on the first of March, 1516, Erasmus had the satisfaction of seeing his long-cherished ambition climaxed with the publishing of his New Testament. The work carried a Dedication to Pope Leo X, an indication that Erasmus ever remained a loyal Roman Catholic, in spite of the fact that he had been so critical of the conduct of the clergy and of much of its dogma. Interestingly, it seems that the pope was quite appreciative of the compliment, at first that is, for it was not long before the church was branding Erasmus as a "second Lucian".'

> In his preface, Erasmus reveals his desires, which by no stretch of the imagination could be equated with those of a humanist:

> "I wish that even the weakest woman should read the Gospels - should read the Epistle of Paul; and I wish that they were translated into all languages, so that they might be read and understood not only by Scots and Irishmen, but also by Turks and Saracens" ("The Era of the Protestant Revolution", p 92).

> ' "Furious monks loaded him with abuse from the pulpits: "they called him a second Lucian - a fox that had laid waste the Lord's vineyard" (D'Aubigne's "History of the Reformation", Book 1, Chapter VIII).

> It is not stated to which Lucian they are referring, but as we shall see in Section 2, the text which Erasmus used in his translation of the New Testament was virtually the one certified by Lucian of Antioch which formed the basis of the Waldensian and Greek Bibles. These were known as the Traditional Text and became the progenitors of the later-named Received Text.

> The demand for Erasmus's New Testament was such that another printing was needed within three years. His second edition appeared early in 1519 and like all responsible authors, he took the opportunity to make corrections. This edition which had a greatly improved Latin Text carried a "papal Brief'... which spoke in the highest terms both of the scholarship and orthodoxy of the work. Yet:

> "But one thing was clear to the commonest understanding: he had departed from the Vulgate translation, and had substituted comparatively pure Latin for its intolerable barbarisms" (Drummond "Erasmus", Vol. 1, pp 313-314).

> With such a departure from the church's Vulgate, it is not surprising that his work was soon vigorously attacked, and the more so as the editions multiplied. His fifth edition appeared just one year prior to his death in 1536. These charges not only persist to this day but they have taken on a more vindictive nature by those who wish to uphold Rome's Bible.

> One common charge is that Erasmus was too hasty in his translation which suffered from a paucity of manuscripts. Drummond answers this charge:

> "As to the charge that Erasmus had been guilty of carelessness and dishonesty in not consulting more than one manuscript, it was simply absurd. He had, in fact, consulted many in England, in Brabant, and at Basle, and at different times had had in his hands a greater number than Valla2 (ibid p 331).

> 2

> "Laurentius Valla, the only humanist of distinction born in Rome ... He combined classical with theological erudition and attained an influence almost equal to that enjoyed by Erasmus several generations later" (Schaff - "History of the Christian Church", p 595).

> To the above defence, we could add the experience Erasmus had gained while wandering around Europe and Italy, both in examination of manuscripts and in his discussions with learned classical scholars. Later critics on this score have been more generous, claiming that Erasmus had only five manuscripts to consult in Basle. But it seems that even this is an understatement, for Drummond says:

> "Erasmus himself, however, seems to say that he used at least nine manuscripts, as he says in the Apologia prefixed to his first edition" (ibid p 311).

> But what does it really matter? If Erasmus had researched his project thoroughly, and then selected one manuscript, it would be the one which he considered representative of the purest text. Nolan, in his definitive work, "Inquiry", adds his weight to such a conclusion. He says:

> "The two great families of Greek Bibles are well illustrated in the work of the outstanding scholar, Erasmus. Before he gave to the Reformation the New Testament in Greek, he divided all Greek manuscripts into two classes: those which agreed with the Received Text and those which agreed with the Vaticanus Manuscript" ("Inquiry", p 413).

> In connection with this statement, it is here appropriate to observe that the manuscripts of the Received Text Line are also known as the Traditional or Majority Texts, simply because they were traditionally regarded as the purest and were overwhelmingly in the majority. Says Wilkinson:

> "So vast is this majority that even the enemies of the Received Text admit that nineteen-twentieths and some ninety-nine one-hundredths of all Greek MSS are of this class, while one hundred percent of the Hebrew MSS are for the Received Text" ("Our Authorised Bible Vindicated", p 13).

> It is highly significant that two of the world's most prominent Christian scholars of the day, had no problems with Erasmus's New Testament. We refer to Doctors Martin Luther and William Tyndale. Instantly they recognised his work as an instrument by which they could give to their peoples the unadulterated gospel in their own language. The reforms planted by Wycliffe, which had lingered, struggling to survive in the climate of a defective Bible, were now to burst forth in the full power and beauty of the Protestant Reformation. The world would never be the same again.

> Bible Battle TOC

TOP OF PAGE HOME TOC * SEARCH * BOOKSTORE MY BIBLE SCHOOL * GARDEN OF INSPIRATION TEMCAT'S LYNX