Jerome and banning Translations

[LittleLambofJesus]

Everyone here pretty much knows I am a stickler about Translations and most arguements on GT appear to stem more on oral traditions handed down as I am sure not everyone had a Bible to read during the early centuries.

But this simply SHOCKED me, as after the Canon had been finalized, why is it that only Jerome and the RCC had authority to TRANSLATE it? Any thoughts on this and how accurate is Jerome's translation compared to others we now have today? And please just keep this on the early Translations of the Bible for now. Thanks.

http://biblelight.net/banned.htm

............In 1408 the third synod of Oxford, England, banned unauthorized English translations of the Bible and decreed that possession of English translation's had to be approved by diocesan authorities. The Oxford council declared:

"It is dangerous, as St. Jerome declares, to translate the text of Holy Scriptures out of one idiom into another, since it is not easy in translations to preserve exactly the same meaning in all things.

We therefore command and ordain that henceforth no one translate the text of Holy Scripture into English or any other language as a book, booklet, or tract, of this kind lately made in the time of the said John Wyclif or since, or that hereafter may be made, either in part or wholly, either publicly or privately, under pain of excommunication, until such translation shall have been approved and allowed by the Provincial Council. He who shall act otherwise let him be punished as an abettor of heresy and error."...................

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html

...........When you read an English translation of the biblical account of the flood, you will undoubtedly notice many words and verses that seem to suggest that the waters covered all of planet earth.3 However, one should note that today we look at everything from a global perspective, whereas the Bible nearly always refers to local geography. You may not be able to determine this fact from our English translations, so we will look at the original Hebrew, which is the word of God................
​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Here is some interesting tidbits on the earlier Christians translations of the Bible and since I do not know Latin, I would find it difficult to use his translations to compare to the hebrew and greek texts today.

http://www.drbo.org/preface.htm


The Douay-Rheims Bible is a scrupulously faithful translation into English of the Latin Vulgate Bible which St. Jerome (342-420) translated into Latin from the original languages. The Vulgate quickly became the Bible universally used in the Latin Rite (by far the largest rite of the Catholic Church).
St. Jerome, who was one of the four great Western Fathers of the Church, was a man raised up by God to translate the Holy Bible into the common Latin tongue of his day. He knew Latin and Greek perfectly. He was 1500 years closer to the original languages than any scholar today, which would make him a better judge of the exact meaning of any Greek or Hebrew word in the Scriptures. Besides being a towering linguistic genius, he was also a great saint, and he had access to ancient Hebrew and Greek manuscripts of the 2nd and 3rd centuries which have since perished and are no longer available to scholars today. St. Jerome's translation, moreover, was a careful, word-for-word rendering of the original texts into Latin....................

..................Some of the passages in the original Douay-Rheims Bible were needlessly obscure. As an extreme example, Ephesians 6:12 read, "For our wrestling is not against flesh and bloud: but against Princes and Potestats, against the rectors of the world of this dankness, against the spirituals of wickedness in the celestials." The spellings were archaic, and the verses were not set off by new lines for clarity..............

http://www.olivetree.com/cgi-bin/EnglishBible.htm
Greek texts taken from this site

Douay-Rheims) Ephesians 6:12 For our wrestling is not against flesh and blood; but against principalities and powers, against the rulers of the world of this darkness, against the spirits of wickedness in the high places.

[Tex-Rec] Ephesians 6:12 oti <3754> {THAT} ouk <3756> {NOT} estin <2076> (5748) {IS} hmin <2254> {TO US} h <3588> {THE} palh <3823> {WRESTLING} proV <4314> {TOWARD} aima <129> {BLOOD} kai <2532> {AND} sarka <4561> {FLESH,} alla <235> {BUT} proV <4314> {TOWARD} taV <3588> {THE} arcaV <746> {ANCIENTS/ORIGINALS,} proV <4314> {TOWARD} taV <3588> {THE} exousiaV <1849> {AUTHORITIES,} proV <4314> {TOWARD} touV <3588> {THE} kosmokratoraV <2888> {WORLD-HOLDERS} tou <3588> {OF THE} skotouV <4655> {DARKNESS} tou <3588> {OF THE} aiwnoV <165> {AGE} toutou <5127> {THIS,} proV <4314> {TOWARD} ta <3588> {THE} pneumatika <4152> {SPIRITUALS} thV <3588> {OF THE} ponhriaV <4189> {WICKEDNESS} en <1722> {IN} toiV <3588> {THE} epouranioiV <2032> {ON-HEAVENLIES.}

W-H ) Ephesians 6:12 oti ouk estin hmin h palh proV aima kai sarka alla proV taV arcaV proV taV exousiaV proV touV kosmokratoraV tou skotouV toutou proV ta pneumatika thV ponhriaV en toiV epouranioiV

Byz./Maj.) Ephesians 6:12 oti ouk estin hmin h palh proV aima kai sarka alla proV taV arcaV proV taV exousiaV proV touV kosmokratoraV tou skotouV tou aiwnoV toutou proV ta pneumatika thV ponhriaV en toiV epouranioiV

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

St. Jerome, who was one of the four great Western Fathers of the Church, was a man raised up by God to translate the Holy Bible into the common Latin tongue of his day.

So here we have a man raised up by God to translate the Bible into Latin. How much of the world back then even knew how to read Latin?

So why could not Tyndale and the likes of Robert Young and Rotherham be men raised up by God to also Translate the Bible? When was the last time Christian Bible Scholars even strived to produce a pure Faithful translation of the Hebrew OT and Greek NT?

http://www.williamtyndale.com/0crimesofwilliamtyndale.htm

http://wesley.nnu.edu/biblical_studies/tyndale/

http://www.greatsite.com/facsimile-reproductions/matthew-1549.html

 

[MamaZ]

I don't have an answer for you.. I will have to read up about this.. I do not know much about Jerome or even who he is...

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I don't have an answer for you.. I will have to read up about this.. I do not know much about Jerome or even who he is...

I put a link to this thread on the TAW board to see what the Orthodox say about it. They go mainly by the Greek not Latin I believe. Hopefully they may respond.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=7226822

Reve 9:11 and they are having on them a king, the messenger of the abyss, name to him to-Hebrew, Abaddon/abaddwn <3>, and in the Greecian name he is having Destroyer/From-Looser/apo-lluwn <623>.

Luke 21:28 Beginning yet to-be-becoming/ginesqai <1096> (5738) these-things/toutwn <5130>, up-bend!, and lift up! the heads of ye, thru-that is nearing the loosing/apo-lutrwsiV <629> of ye [Daniel 12/Reve 19,20]

 

[Tonks]

Everyone here pretty much knows I am a stickler about Translations and most arguements on GT appear to stem more on oral traditions handed down as I am sure not everyone had a Bible to read during the early centuries.

Well, if you were really a stickler about translations etc you'd be pushing to use the LXX or a direct translation from the LXX. Jews during Christ's time (and Christ himself) used the Septuagint as their translation...not the smattering of hebrew documents which pass for authenticity these days.

 

[Tonks]

So here we have a man raised up by God to translate the Bible into Latin. How much of the world back then even knew how to read Latin?

Latin was the lingua franca of the Western empire when Jerome translated the Scriptures. I'm sure you've read your history to know why 1) reading comprehension was low back in the 400s, 500s whatever and 2) the length of time it took and expense required to create a copy of the Bible. It is not as if the poor folks simply had a small pocket version.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Well, if you were really a stickler about translations etc you'd be pushing to use the LXX or a direct translation from the LXX. Jews during Christ's time (and Christ himself) used the Septuagint as their translation...not the smattering of hebrew documents which pass for authenticity these days.

And why would I trust a translation done or used by Jews?

Ezekiel 7:1 And there is a word of YHWH unto me, saying, `And thou, Son of Man/0120 'adam, Thus sayeth 'Adonay Y@hovih to the Ground of Yisra'el:
2 An End, come hath, the End on the Four Corners/03671 kanaph of the Land

Reve 20:8 and he shall be coming out to deceive the nations, the in the four corners of the land, the Gog and Magog, to be mobilizing them into the battle of which the Number of them as the Sand of the Sea.

 

[winsome]

So here we have a man raised up by God to translate the Bible into Latin. How much of the world back then even knew how to read Latin?

I could be wrong here, but I think that at the beginning of the 5th century in the Roman Empire in the West, Latin was the common tongue just as Greek was more universal in the East.

A more relevant question is how many people knew how to read?

 

[winsome]

If you look here on the New Advent site you will find there have been many translations into many different languages http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15367a.htm

I suspect the banning of some translations was due to several factors:

1. They were bad translations

2. They were protestant translations (much the same as (1) really)

3. in the 16th/17th centuries it was all mixed up with the clashes between Protestants & Catholics and the politics of the time.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I could be wrong here, but I think that at the beginning of the 5th century in the Roman Empire in the West, Latin was the common tongue just as Greek was more universal in the East.

A more relevant question is how many people knew how to read?

True. How would the Jews know when to flee from Judea/Jerusalem unless someone read them Daniel, the Olivet Discourse and Revelation.

Matthew 24:15 `Whenever then ye may be seeing the abomination of the desolating/erhmwsewV <2050>, the being declared thru Daniel the prophet, having-stood in a place, holy (the one-reading/anaginwskwn <314> (5723) let him be minding/understanding) [Mark 13:14]

Revelation 22:10 And he is saying to me "no thou should be sealing the Words of the Prophecy of the Scroll, this. That the Time Is-near/egguV <1451> [Revelation 1:3]

 

[winsome]

Another point is that After the fall of Rome, Europe entered what are called the "dark ages", 500 years when civilisation collapsed. Europe became de-christianised and had to be re-christianised by the likes of the Bendictine monks from the Soth and the Celtic monks from the North. Learning was basically kept alive in the monasteries.

It was called the dark ages because we know so little about it. There were few written records (mostly near the end by the likes of the Venerable Bede in Jarrow,NE England). A lot of technology was lost, for example the making of pottery, so that they reverted to making wooden bowls, and making wooden houses (instead of stone). The wood rotted away and left little archaeological evidence. I don't suppose anyone could read then apart from the monks and church officials. Scholarship would have been at a low level.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Another point is that After the fall of Rome, Europe entered what are called the "dark ages", 500 years when civilisation collapsed. Europe became de-christianised and had to be re-christianised by the likes of the Bendictine monks from the Soth and the Celtic monks from the North. Learning was basically kept alive in the monasteries.

It was called the dark ages because we know so little about it. There were few written records
.

Hi. If not for Josephus and the Book of Revelation, the Jews would know little about the Destruction of their Temple and Priesthood and that dark "AGE".

JESUS came unto His own and they received Him not, and thus suffered the ultimate penalty.

Anyone ever read Josephus's accout of it and it is uncanny how accurately his accounts follow both the OT and NC prophecies concerning that Vengeance. Pretty interersting.

John 11:48 "If-ever we may be be letting Him thus, all shall be believing in Him.
And shall be coming the Romans and they shall be taking away/arousin <142> (5692) of Us and the Place and the Nation

Reve 6:6 And I hear as a-sound in midst of the four living-ones, saying: "choinex of grain of Denarius and three choinex of barleys of Denariu and the oil and the wine no you should be injuring".
http://www.davieapostolicchurch.com/studies/destuct/

................The day on which Titus encompassed Jerusalem [Judea], was the feast of the Passover. At this season multitudes came up from all the surrounding country, and from distant parts, to keep the festival and the city was at this time crowded with Jewish strangers,...........
.......The Temple now presented little more than a heap of ruins...........

 

[NewMan99]

But this simply SHOCKED me, as after the Canon had been finalized,....

First ask yourself the question WHO "finalized" the Canon of Scripture in the late fourth century.

...why is it that only Jerome and the RCC had authority to TRANSLATE it?

So let me see if I understand you here...are you saying that the same people who discerned and finalized the Canon of Scripture did not have the authority to translate it...and to regulate who *within the Church itself* was permitted to translate versions that were intended to be as accurate as possible?

Any thoughts on this and how accurate is Jerome's translation compared to others we now have today? And please just keep this on the early Translations of the Bible for now. Thanks.

Of course Jerome's translation is in Latin, therefore you are asking if his Latin translation is more accurate in Latin than our English translations are in English. It's kinda like comparing apples to oranges.

I believe the vast majority of Biblical scholars - across the board - agree that Jerome was a genius and that his translations were pretty good.

St. Jerome knew Greek **very** well. In fact, he was one of the finest Greek and Hebrew scholars to ever live. Furthermore, let us not forget that St. Jerome, while born a Westerner (and barely a Westerner, since he was not a Roman but an Illyrian from Dalmatia), spent most of his life in the East. There, he was not only active in Constantinople itself (as well as in Antioch and Palestine), but was also a VERY close friend and associate with St. Gregory Nazianzus --with whom he lived for 3 YEARS. And, St. Gregory, don't forget, was the best friend of St. Basil the Great, the older brother of St. Gregory of Nyssa. So, this is the kind of company that St. Jerome kept.

Now...I ask...in spending all this time with St. Gregory Nazianzus (to say nothing of his time spent in the monasteries of Syria and Palestine), what language do you suppose St. Jerome was speaking?

Koinic Greek, was it not? ...The SAME language the New Testament is written in, right?


So he was very well equipped to not only translate the words themselves but to do so in a way that conveyed their meaning.

............In 1408 the third synod of Oxford, England, banned unauthorized English translations of the Bible and decreed that possession of English translation's had to be approved by diocesan authorities. The Oxford council declared:

"It is dangerous, as St. Jerome declares, to translate the text of Holy Scriptures out of one idiom into another, since it is not easy in translations to preserve exactly the same meaning in all things.

We therefore command and ordain that henceforth no one translate the text of Holy Scripture into English or any other language as a book, booklet, or tract, of this kind lately made in the time of the said John Wyclif or since, or that hereafter may be made, either in part or wholly, either publicly or privately, under pain of excommunication, until such translation shall have been approved and allowed by the Provincial Council. He who shall act otherwise let him be punished as an abettor of heresy and error."...................
​

A few things need to be said here. Who is this addressed to? It is addressed SOLELY to people who were under the authority of the Catholic Church. It was addressed to Catholics. The Orthodox had already gone their own way (or...we went our own way depending on who you ask)...so the only Christian body left on earth besides the Orthodox was the Catholic body.

So why it is you would be shocked that an organization would exercise authority over its own members I don't quite understand. After all, if the Southern Baptist Convention wanted to come out with their own Bible translation - just for the sake of argument - with their seal of approval on it (perhaps in an effort to let their members know that their translation is reliable and in accord with the SBC understanding of Scripture)...then you would naturally assume that they (the SBC) would be the ones deciding who among them would do the actual translating. What is wrong with that?

Another point here is that the REASON why the Church promugated the above decree is that the Church already had a number of Bibles translated in various vernacular languages...and a few men, like Wycliffe, were POORLY translating the Sacred Text...sometimes translating the words in a way that supported some of their own heterodox theologies...and then THESE same Churchmen were promoting their (erroneous) translations among the flock as if it was an authentically good and approved translation.

Have you ever read parts of the translation put out by the JWs? It is terrible. And it helps to promote their heresies IF an unsuspecting person were to read it without knowing any better.

Should the Catholic Church permit a Catholic member to promote a translation with as many errors as the JW Bible? Of course not.

So the Church, back in 1408, was NOT saying that the Bible should not be translated into English (or any other language)...what it was saying was that before it could be promoted to the CATHOLIC laypeople the Church needed to make sure it really was a good translation that did not lead Catholics astray.

Jesus told to Apostles to guard and tend the sheep, did He not? The Church exercising its authority in the matter of officially approving or disapproving the translations made by Catholics and for Catholics is nothing less than guarding and tending those members within its flock.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I was hoping to get some Orthodox views here but maybe they are just not interested. Ah well............Peace

Reve 6:6 And I hear as a-sound in midst of the four living-ones, saying: "choinex of grain of Denarius and three choinex of barleys of Denarius and the oil and the wine no you should be injuring".

Reve 18:13 and cinnamon, and ginger, and incenses, and attar, and frankincense, and wine, and oil.......

 

[Tonks]

And why would I trust a translation done or used by Jews?

Well, it was good enough for Christ and the Apostles. I would assume, then that you also reject the authority of the (fictional) council of Jamnia to set the canon of the Old Testament.

 

[NewMan99]

LLOJ,

This is posted in your siggy:

http://biblelight.net/Bible-Clement-XI.htm
1229 Council of Valencia " We prohibit also the permitting of the laity, to have the books of the Old and New Testament, unless any one should wish to have a psalter or breviary for divine service"

"We therefore command and ordain that henceforth no one translate the text of Holy Scripture into English"

Of course the notion that the "Council of Valencia" stated this in 1229 - while supposedly placing the Bible on the Index of Forbidden Books - is an idea published in Lorraine Boettner's notoriously slanderous book, Roman Catholicism...a favorite "resource" of many anti-Catholics.

You, my friend, are the victim of some very poor scholarship on Boettner's part:

1. The first formation of the Index was in the mid 1500s. That is more than 300 years beyond Boettner's date of 1229.

2. There NEVER was a "Council of Valencia" - not a local one, nor a regional one, and certainly not an ecumencial one.

3. Valencia was - at the time - totally in control by the Muslims. Do you think they would permit a Christian council in their territory? I don't. The "Council of Valencia" never happened. Ever. It is a myth.

If Boettner is off on so many details as simple as dates and geography, doesn't it make you wonder how off he is on other things too?

In the interest of truth, perhaps you should consider removing it from your siggy.

God's Peace,

NewMan

 

[Tonks]

Eh, I posted the exact same thing about 3-4 pages ago. The only response I got was a complaint that I was referring to Boettner as a she rather than a he.

[eta] wrong thread...not surprising since all of these look the same. at any rate:

The Index Librorum Prohibitorum wasn't published until 1557. She's off by a couple of hundred years. Secondly, there was no such thing as the "Council of Valencia" particularly as Spain was under Moorish control during the 1200s. Reputable scholars (even Protestant! *shock*) including Schaff dismiss the notion. The Index is freely available on a wide variety of websites of many denominations...you might want to check what is and is not listed.

The first real "list" which contained "prohibited works" (works not condemned by the Councils) was around 500AD - Notitia librorum apocryphorum qui non recipiuntur and was a list of books that several sects tried to get included in the Scripture Canon - namely the "Acts of Thomas, Philip, Peter etc.

With respect to the Bible you're probably thinking of Vatican I where the council indicated that books translated into the vernacular for the use of study have to be approved (which is no different than the Church approving translations today) and it noted that Bibles published by non-Catholics were perfectly acceptable for scholarly work and textual criticism. You'll want to search for "Officiorum"

 

[NewMan99]

Of course that was in a different thread...but I figured it bore repeating here since TRUTH MATTERS...and I am sure that LLOJ is likewise concerned about truth. Boettner is the one who should be faulted the most here. But now that LLOJ has been informed, the burden shifts to him to remove the false assertion.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

In 1408 the third synod of Oxford, England, banned unauthorized English translations of the Bible and decreed that possession of English translation's had to be approved by diocesan authorities. The Oxford council declared:

"It is dangerous, as St. Jerome declares, to translate the text of Holy Scriptures out of one idiom into another, since it is not easy in translations to preserve exactly the same meaning in all things.

We therefore command and ordain that henceforth no one translate the text of Holy Scripture into English or any other language as a book, booklet, or tract, of this kind lately made in the time of the said John Wyclif or since, or that hereafter may be made, either in part or wholly, either publicly or privately, under pain of excommunication, until such translation shall have been approved and allowed by the Provincial Council. He who shall act otherwise let him be punished as an abettor of heresy and error."...................
​

A few things need to be said here. Who is this addressed to? It is addressed SOLELY to people who were under the authority of the Catholic Church. It was addressed to Catholics. The Orthodox had already gone their own way (or...we went our own way depending on who you ask)...so the only Christian body left on earth besides the Orthodox was the Catholic body.

Hi. They are just CHRISTIANS in my view. So perhaps the Orthodox Christians saw Faultiness in the Catholic Christians translations and one reason they split?

Why do Orthodox and Catholics both need their OWN TRANSLATIONS if they are One Body and how do they differ? That is one question I would like to see answered.

And as more accurate translations came out later by other CHRISTIAN Saints, they may have found both the Orthodox and Catholic's Christian translations as faulty?

Is there actaully one Truthfull Faultless translation out there, and if so, where is it? Thoughts?

Acts 23:14 Who-any toward coming to the Chief-priests and to the Elders say "to-anathema/anaqemati <331> we anathemtize/aneqematisamen <332> (5656) ourselves of no yet nothing to taste till of which we may be killing the Paul.

Reve 22:3 and every anathema/katanaqema <2652> not shall be still. And the throne of the God/YHWH and of the Lamb-kin/Word in Her shall be, and His bond-servants shall be offering divine-service to Him.