Posted on 10/27/2013 5:25:55 AM PDT by NYer
Now back to the question "Why was the state established church at the time so intent on keeping the Bible inaccessible to the masses that they actually burned people at the stake for actually having it translated and printed into the vernacular language?"
I know I haven't.
And I have no intention to.
Please note that part of your response “the state established church at the time” is rather ambiguous as for exact time frame. Before the invention of the printing press, there was no inexpensive way to print Bibles, in any language, all Bibles and Books had to be hand copied.
Please provide an examples of you statement: “they actually burned people at the stake for actually having it translated and printed into the vernacular language.” And, who were “they?
I have not studied who was “burned at the stake” for what offense, thus you will be educating me. And I am not being sarcastic, but want to know.
Let’s see some citations that the Church burned people at the stake for having the Bible translated and accessible. You may have one example with Tyndale. If it’s not widespread, they burned a lot of people in England back then. Even then, that may be the Government, King who would have authority to do that and not the Church.
Believe me, if we had 100s of churches in the day, we might all be bowing to Mecca nowadays.
It amazes me that Catholics go to such lengths to discredit the fullness of scripture to justify following the RCC. Rather telling if you ask me.
What’s rather telling is that you did not answer any of the questions but offer a broadbrushed criticism. That tells us a lot.
“Where does the Bible provide a list of Canonical Books of the Old Testament”
Shouldn’t be difficult to answer buddy. Tells us a lot about the Protestant religion.
So what was the real reason William Tyndale was condemned? Was translating the Bible into English illegal? The answer is no. The law that was passed in 1408 was in reaction to another infamous translator, John Wycliff. Wycliff had produced a translation of the Bible that was corrupt and full of heresy. It was not an accurate rendering of sacred Scripture.
Both the Church and the secular authorities condemned it and did their best to prevent it from being used to teach false doctrine and morals. Because of the scandal it caused, the Synod of Oxford passed a law in 1408 that prevented any unauthorized translation of the Bible into English and also forbade the reading of such unauthorized translations.
It is a fact usually ignored by Protestant historians that many English versions of Scripture existed before Wycliff, and these were authorized and perfectly legal (see Where We Got the Bible by Henry Graham, chapter 11, “Vernacular Scriptures Before Wycliff”). Also legal would be any future authorized translations. And certainly reading these translations was not only legal but encouraged. All this law did was prevent any private individual from publishing his own translation of Scripture without the approval of the Church.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?id=4749
It wasn’t even illegal to translate the Bible into English so it’s revisionist history.
Who is Christ in you?
What? Which church leaders? Following Biblical teaching leads to establishment of a body of believers who consistently practice what it teaches. Those who have obtained the scripture and seek to follow it do NOT establish religious organizations like the catholic church, anglican church or mormonism, etc.
It has been demonstrably proven that those acquiring the scripture in lieu of someone's biased teaching leads to establishment of New Testament-style churches with elders, deacons and an organization that does not lead to a superior hierarchy in the church like many organized religions have. Also, each congregation is autonomous and understands that concept (no central authority).
What arrogance on the part of the author! Pure and unadulterated misinformation.
Believe me, if we had 100s of churches in the day, we might all be bowing to Mecca nowadays.
This has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
Shouldn’t be difficult to answer buddy. Tells us a lot about the Protestant religion.
Should we not then be able to apply that same logic to the Catholic Church?
Where is your information from? Reformation.com? No citations, no backup.
Oh please. Not everything is a “protestant”/”anti-Catholic” conspiracy.
Ping for later
Yes, John Calvin had Michael Servetus burned to death because among some of his faults he opposed infant baptism. It’s ironic that so many Baptist have embraced John Calvin.
Calvin had a very cruel heart.
When will men stop elevating religion above Christ??
Maybe you are unfamiliar with a piece of history known as the Inquisition.
All the questions in both parts have clear answers
Anyone that ignorant of the facts of basic Church history shouldn’t be roping as an expert on the history of the Bible. You could start by reading Foxe’s Book of Martyrs.
Instead of deflecting inspection by pointing fingers at others, deal with the questions at hand.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.