“False. Richard Rolle’s Psalter, Yorkshire, c. 1340. West Midlands Psalter, c. 1350. Translations were being made.”
Psalters. NOT entire Bibles. Wycliffe did the entire Bible.
“Nope. Wycliffe died in his bed after a stroke. Tyndale was never in trouble over his translation itself.”
Wycliffe was hated by the Catholic Church. Ever read about what they did to his bones? And Tyndale & his translation were also hated, and lived in hiding until Tyndale was betrayed to his death.
“Again, false:”
Again, true. I’m talking about BIBLES, not psalters. Every BIBLE translated in English vernacular from Wycliffe to Tyndale is Wycliffe’s translation (and his followers). NO OTHER translation of the Bible into the vernacular has been found.
“I guess you call things you utterly fail to refute silliness.”
No, I say it is foolishness to claim that Wycliffe’s opponents falsely accused him of translating the Bible. I say it is foolishness to think that the Lo0llards didn’t know who translated the scriptures they kept at risk of death. And it is foolishness to believe a Catholic apologist, 500 years after the fact, suddenly realized what no one on either side had realized for 500 years - that Wycliffe’s translation was REALLY made by a true but unknown Catholic, and Wycliffe stole it.
“Actually the idea that parts of scripture were translated by unknown Catholics is shared by every reputable historian who has ever lived.”
True. PARTS! But we were discussing entire Bibles, and NO ONE did that into English (whatever form it existed as) until Wycliffe, and no one else until Tyndale. No one did the entire New Testament, except Wycliffe & his followers, until Tyndale.
“Are you accusing me of lying?”
I’m accusing you of making blatantly false statements. More made no attempt to hide what he did. Catholic apologists have tried to hide what “saint” More did, and to do so they have LIED.
More wrote 9 volumes about his opposition to Tyndale, and More was not a subtle writer. He pursued Bible believing Christians and had them tortured and burned for disagreeing with the Catholic Church. More was an evil man who wanted to keep scripture out of the hands of commoners - a policy the Catholic Church followed for hundreds of years.
You wrote:
“Psalters. NOT entire Bibles. Wycliffe did the entire Bible.”
Some historians affirm that, others do not. In nay case Wycliffe produced a translation of a large chunk of the Bible. It is debatable whether any single person could translate all of scripture in just a few short years in the 13th century. It is most likely that several people worked on what is now called “Wyclife’s Bible”.
“Wycliffe was hated by the Catholic Church.”
Nope. Quite frankly most Catholics never knew who he was - then or now. His heresies - which were numerous - were hated. People who are hated by almost every living human being around them do not die in their sleep in their beds.
“Ever read about what they did to his bones?”
Absolutely. Great idea too. It should probably happen more often. Please note, however, that your question there undermines your previous claim. He died in about 1386. His bones were not finally dug up until about 1427. If he was hated by almost everyone around him - the Catholic Church - then why did it take 50 years to do that?
“And Tyndale & his translation were also hated, and lived in hiding until Tyndale was betrayed to his death.”
Tyndale lived in hiding before he began his translation. He was a heretic after all.
“Again, true. I’m talking about BIBLES, not psalters.”
Psalms are part of the Bible and you can’t prove Wycliffe translated all of the Bible either.
“Every BIBLE translated in English vernacular from Wycliffe to Tyndale is Wycliffe’s translation (and his followers).”
Do you have any proof that Wycliffe even translated all of scripture himself? Was he aided by anyone? Do you have any evidence he used no other translations?
“NO OTHER translation of the Bible into the vernacular has been found.”
Oh, so that means none existed and that “Wycliffe’s Bible” was absolutely solely his product? Nope, sorry, there’s no logic there.
“No, I say it is foolishness to claim that Wycliffe’s opponents falsely accused him of translating the Bible.”
No, it would be foolishness to say that someone who lived hundreds of years ago - and was a scholar fluent in Greek and Latin - knew nothing about where his Bible came from.
“I say it is foolishness to think that the Lo0llards didn’t know who translated the scriptures they kept at risk of death.”
There was no risk of death. No Lollard was at risk of death for possessing a book, any book. I have already shown that in previous threads. You seem to be making things up out of thin air.
“And it is foolishness to believe a Catholic apologist, 500 years after the fact, suddenly realized what no one on either side had realized for 500 years - that Wycliffe’s translation was REALLY made by a true but unknown Catholic, and Wycliffe stole it.”
Are you making up something else out of thin air? More and others knew of Bibles in the vernacular THEN. I am not making up anything. Gasquet is not making up anything either.
“True. PARTS! But we were discussing entire Bibles, and NO ONE did that into English (whatever form it existed as) until Wycliffe, and no one else until Tyndale.”
As you claim, but cannot prove. We have no copies of the whole Bible. That doesn’t mean one was not made.
“No one did the entire New Testament, except Wycliffe & his followers, until Tyndale.”
There several problems there: 1) Wycliffe never wrote in English in his entire life. He wrote in Middle English, a language which only came into its own in about 1300. Since we know gospels existed in England in the vernacular since at least the 8th century, it is entirely possible someone prepared an entire New Testament in Middle English before Wycliffe. Remember, the claim for Wycliffe is that he produced the whole Bible in ME, not just the NT in ME.
“I’m accusing you of making blatantly false statements.”
And yet you seem utterly unable to show that they are false.
“More made no attempt to hide what he did.”
He didn’t do anything wrong so why would you expect him to hide anything?
“Catholic apologists have tried to hide what “saint” More did, and to do so they have LIED.”
Please document your claim there. Or will you fail at that as well?
“More wrote 9 volumes about his opposition to Tyndale, and More was not a subtle writer.”
And how many posts have you posted? And are you subtle?
“He pursued Bible believing Christians and had them tortured and burned for disagreeing with the Catholic Church.”
Nope. First, heretics do not believe in the Bible. Second, if he pursued them, he did so for their heresy. Third, no could be tortured and burned for merely disagreeing with the Church.
“More was an evil man who wanted to keep scripture out of the hands of commoners - a policy the Catholic Church followed for hundreds of years.”
No such policy ever existed. And that’s exactly why you fail to ever document it. You will fail to document it now as well. Is it evil to slander a saint and Christ’s Church and then fail - again - to even remotely document those false claims? Is that evil?