March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?Roman Catholic
Part 5
How We Got Our English Bible:
Rome’s Response
March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?Roman Catholic
Part 5
How We Got Our English Bible:
Rome’s Response
March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?Roman Catholic
Part 5
How We Got Our English Bible:
Rome’s Response
March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?Roman Catholic
Part 5
How We Got Our English Bible:
Rome’s Response
March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?Roman Catholic
Part 5
How We Got Our English Bible:
Rome’s Response
March 26, 2024
In the providence of God, a man invented a movable type printing press. Before that, it may take 10 months to write out a Bible by hand. The Roman Catholic Church had been burning Bibles and books all along, but with this new invention, reprinting them could happen quickly. This fueled the Great Reformation. The second significant event, the first being Gutenberg’s invention, to bring about the Reformation starting in 1517, was the fall of Constantinople in 1453 AD to the Sultan Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire. It stood for 1,000 years and was built by Constantine the Great (the first Vicar of Christ and “Christian Emperor).
You may recall that after Constantine the Great’s death, eventually the church was divided between the east (Constantinople) and the west (Rome). This began the Renaissance period, where Greek thought, art, philosophy, science, and Biblical manuscripts came west and had a significant influence on Western culture.
Biblical development
Jerome wrote the first Catholic Latin Vulgate in AD 405. It was updated often. The 8th century is the earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Latin Vulgate Bible. Then in AD 1592, Pope Clement VIII issued the so-called Clementine Vulgate, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church. But the original language of scripture was Hebrew and Greek, not Latin.
A comparative Latin and Greek Bible was made by Erasmus in 1516. (See below for more comments regarding Erasmus and the Renaissance.) According to the video authors, this opened a whole new understanding of the Bible. Erasmus believed that Latin was acceptable, but Greek is much better. By comparison with the Greek text, the Latin text was corrupt according to Erasmus. He changed the Latin text based on the Greek text. He greatly offended Rome because he was critical of the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church and the Catholic Bible. For example, the Catholic Latin Vulgate said ‘expect you do penance, you shall perish’ while the Greek text said, ‘expect you repent, you shall perish’. There is a big difference between the two. Penance requires a Catholic priest and some absolution. Repentance is much different and does not require a Catholic priest or absolution. True repentance must include a change of mind and heart, while penance demands neither. Erasmus changed the idea of penance altogether. Rome (The Roman Catholic Church) was greatly offended.
Another corruption in the Latin dealt with Mary. Luke 1, in the Catholic Latin Vulgate, states that the angel said to Mary that she was full of grace. In other words, she was a reservoir full of God’s grace. Therefore, she could be a source of God’s grace to others. Erasmus said this was all wrong. He said that all it means is that Mary found God’s grace, like others had done. In the New Testament, it states that Jesus is full of grace and not Mary. All this laid the groundwork for the reformation.
Erasmus also confronted the immorality of the Roman Catholic Church and encouraged all men and women to read the Word of God. The Roman Catholic organization hated that idea. All these things laid the groundwork for the Great Reformation beginning in 1517.
God came to our rescue amid continued persecution by the Roman Catholic Church.
God raised men to put the Word of God into the hands of the ordinary person and wrest control out of the hands of the priesthood of the Roman Catholic organization. The following are a few heroes of the faith. (The Great Reformation under Martin Luther does not begin until 1517. But as you will read, God’s work started much earlier to set the stage for what would happen in 1517.)
John Wycliff, AD 1330-1384, was the first to translate the New Testament Bible into Middle English from the Old Latin Bible. By 1382, the entire Bible was translated into Middle English. He was posthumously condemned by none other than the Roman Catholic Church. He died in 1384. In 1415, his bones were exhumed. He was tried and found to be a heretic by the Roman Catholic leadership. His body (what was left of it after 21 years in the ground) was publicly burned, and the ashes thrown into the Severn / Swift River. Wycliff was called ‘the morning star of the reformation.’ Wycliff feared God and not man. His followers were called Lollards (babblers), and Catholics, for the most part, despised all of them. Remember that at this time in history, Bibles and other documents were handwritten.
Immediately, the Roman Catholic Church began to water down the Bible Wycliff drafted so that it read like the Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate. During this time, it was illegal (and a capital offense) to translate the Bible outside of the Roman Catholic Church. And as you know, the Roman Catholic Church outlawed possession of the Bible for around 1000 years. It is hard to imagine any of the apostles forbidding the translation or dissemination of the Word of God. It is even harder to imagine the apostles of Jesus Christ murdering those individuals who did translate the Word of God into the language of the common man and woman. Do you not find it remarkable that religious people can be so blinded to the truth?
Wycliff wanted the common man and woman to be able to read the Word of God in a language they could understand. The Roman Catholic organization was adamantly opposed to this. Their Bible was in Latin, and their mass was in Latin, but the English-speaking person didn’t speak or understand Latin. That is precisely what the Roman Catholic Church wanted. They wanted their followers to be dependent on them and their teaching. His followers, called Lollards, were trained to go out and preach the Word of God despite the risks from the Roman Catholic organization.
At this time, England was Roman Catholic, and many were put to death and burned at the stake along with their Wycliff Bible. Wycliff believed in the supreme authority of the Bible and not the Pope. He rejected the abuses and wealth of the Roman Catholic Church and the priests. He despised the selling of indulgences and praying to saints.
He also rejected the odious Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation. To reject this doctrine cost Christians their life. The Catholics believe that the consecrated wafer is God and must be bowed down to. Decades after his death, Rome cursed him for bringing forth the Bible in English. Rome said he was the devil. They cursed him and anathematized him, a formal process of excommunication and cursing to hell. If the Roman Catholic Church organization calls you a saint, then most likely hell is your home. But if the Roman Catholic Church deems you a heretic and condemns you to hell, then rejoice, for heaven is waiting for you.
John Hus (1369 to 1415) also set the stage for the Great Reformation to come. Hus, a devout Roman Catholic, was also condemned by the Roman Catholic Church for his constant rebukes of the abuses of the Roman Catholic organization. He called out the Roman Catholic priests for such sins as financial abuses, sexual immorality, and drunkenness. He was a follower of Christ, and in 1415, he was burned at the stake. God promised Hus that in one hundred years, He would raise a man whom the church could not silence. Hus, a Catholic, died believing in some of the most contested Roman Catholic doctrines such as transubstantiation, purgatory, and the intercession of Mary.
Johannes Gutenberg (1398-1468), in the timing of God, invented the movable type printing press by the 1450s. During this time, he, as a faithful Catholic, printed about 200 very large Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles. His new invention was soon copied or stolen. Soon enough, the printing presses were in many different cities. By the 1500s, millions of Catholic Latin Vulgate Bibles were printed.
Desiderius Erasmus was born in 1466 and lived until 1536. His father made a living by copying documents, and Erasmus followed in his footsteps. When his parents died, he inherited a fortune that the Roman Catholic Church took or stole from him. In the Catholic Monasteries, he read much and copied much. He was a fifth column in the Roman Catholic Church. By day, he was a priest working in many of the libraries of the church, but at night, he wrote tracts against the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church. (Page 66 of Daniel’s book). Erasmus despised the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. He finally ended up in England. He was a well-known and highly regarded scholar. Many sought his advice. He saw the corruptions put into the Bible by the Roman Church and eventually published an authentic Greek and Latin Bible, as you read earlier in this article. This was a text that real Christians had always used and believed in. With God’s help, the Pope unwittingly allowed this version to be printed, and it was distributed all over Europe. It was called “The Received Text.”
Erasmus and the Renaissance. Ottoman Turks conquered Constantinople in 1453. Christians fled west (considerable impetus to the Renaissance in Europe. Renaissance is a French word meaning rebirth.) and brought Greek manuscripts with them. Greek art, culture, thought, wisdom and learning went west. Desiderius Erasmus was a pupil of a teacher who had fled from the east with the fall of Constantinople. The Catholic, Erasmus, was a reformer and critical of the abuses of the Roman Catholic Church, but never left the Roman Catholic Church. He taught Greek at the University. Erasmus gave the world, in AD 1516, the first edition of the Greek text of the New Testament along with a new Latin translation, which improved the Latin Vulgate.
Martin Luther (1483-1546), from Germany, was another Catholic monk. He became disillusioned by the many abuses and great wickedness of the Roman Catholic Church organization and its leadership. He published his ninety-five theses against the Roman Catholic Church on October 31, 1517, and posted them on the Wittenberg Church door. The Great Reformation moved forward with great urgency and success. It was a revolution. But what about the English-speaking people?
Martin Luther, equipped with this new Greek text from Erasmus, produced a German New Testament in 1522. History says that “Erasmus laid the egg, and Martin Luther hatched it”.
William Tyndale (1494-1536) was burned at the stake by the Roman Catholic Church for translating the Bible into English. Erasmus taught him Greek. Rome was hostile to the idea of producing an English-language Bible, so he moved to Germany to do the work. Luther was a strong supporter of Tyndale and provided him with a place to work. In 1525, he published the first English New Testament. Tyndale was a master of seven languages. Most of us can barely handle English!
With difficulty and under the threat of death, he made his way back to England from Germany to distribute these new Bibles. Rome was not happy. Two men betrayed him to the Roman Catholic hierarchy. The first was Thomas More, and the other was Henry Phillips. (In the year 2000, on October 31, Pope John Paul II made the traitor, Thomas More, “the patron saint of statesmen and politicians.” Why that date? The Catholic religion celebrates this date to honor the dead, while others celebrate Halloween. No surprise that the Pope would commemorate a murderer and traitor.
Sir Thomas More was an advisor to Tyndale under King George. More was a faithful servant of the pope but was put to death as a traitor. Many believe it was More who orchestrated the murder of Tyndale. Before Tyndale died in the flames, he supposedly cried out that God would open the eyes of the king of England.
Six months later, the king ordered a new translation of the Bible, and Tyndale’s work was used. An answer to his prayer, as some believe. For the first time in English history, an English Bible was produced. That Bible taught the common man or woman in England to read English and read the Bible. (For a little perspective, that was about 500 years ago).
Coverdale revised Tyndale’s Bible in 1535, a year following Tyndale’s murder. This man also worked on The Great Bible of 1539 and the Geneva Bible of 1560. The Word of God was like a fire moving across the nations. It needed to be translated into other languages. Rome (Roman Catholic Church) was in a panic and needed to stop this assault on their authority and supremacy. When ordinary men and women could read the Word of God for themselves and see for themselves all the lies of the Roman Catholic Church, vast numbers left the Roman Catholic Church forever. It was the head wound to the authority of the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. However, not all head wounds are fatal. Rome was weakened, yet it survived.
John Rogers first published the Matthew’s Bible of 1537 under the name of Thomas Matthews. This Bible combined the New Testament of William Tyndale and as much of the Old Testament as Tyndale had been able to translate before the Roman Catholic Church murdered him.
The Great Bible (large) in 1539 was authorized by King Henry VIII of England. As mentioned, Myles Coverdale, working under the commission of Thomas Cromwell, Secretary to King Henry and Vicar General, produced it.
Queen Mary, 1516 to 1558, then ascended to the throne. She became known as ‘bloody Mary’, a devout and rabid Catholic. Like any good Roman Catholic, she ordered the burning of all copies of the English Bible. She even burned those who read the Bible and its translators, Thomas Cranmer, among others. It is said that Mary burned 288 persons, from the rich to the poor. Around 800 English Protestant scholars left England and went to Geneva.
The Geneva Bible was first printed in about 1560, which was known as the Bible of the Reformation. An English congregation in Geneva financed it. Queen Elizabeth of England granted permission for its first printing in England. It was the first English Bible translated entirely from the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Commentary was part of its printing and distribution. It was the first Bible to have numbered verses. In its eighty-four years of publication, some 140 editions were printed. King James outlawed its printing after the new King James Bible was completed in 1611. The Geneva Bible was used by Shakespeare, Oliver Cromwell, John Knox, and John Donne and others. It was taken to America on the Mayflower ship.
The King James Version of the Bible was published in 1611. Much of Tyndale’s Bible was used in the KJV of 1611. In 1547, King Henry died and his nine-year-old son, Edward 6th, took the throne. He was a reformer. The Roman Catholic Church hated him. At 11 years old, the king called the pope antichrist, eradicated statutes and stained glass, and he allowed the clergy to marry. Six years later, he died in 1553. He put Lady Jane Grey in charge as Queen, who was killed in about nine days.
The Geneva Bible was used until the 1611 KJV Bible was produced, which is considered the best-selling book of all time. After King James died and his son Charles I became king, he outlawed the Geneva Bible. Was that because of its footnotes and commentaries? Charles was no friend of the Protestants.
The translators of the KJV Bible took such care that no other translation work has ever matched it. Some 40 to 50 scholars worked on this translation for about 7 years. The checks and balances were unmatched in prior years and even today. And for over 300 years, the KJV of the Bible has been the standard. Christians today often use other translations, but for many Christians, the KJV has no equal. That includes me.
God was on the move, and millions of souls were saved as the truth of God was disseminated around the world. The Bible had tremendous influence all over the globe because it had been hidden for so many centuries in the lies of the Roman Catholic Church.
What did the Reformers think about the Roman Catholic Church?
It is important to remember that the Church of Rome back then did not want Christians to own and read the Bible in their language, for the apparent reason that the many Catholic doctrinal contradictions and lies would become known and cause dissension. Almost all of the Reformers, including Luther and Calvin, believed that the Pope or office of the Papacy was the Antichrist described in the Bible. Other terms used for the antichrist are the little horn of Daniel 7, and the man of sin and son of perdition. These theologians also believed, many of them that is, that the woman riding the beast drunken with the blood of the saints in the Book of Revelation, described the Roman Catholic Church. What other entity has more ‘blood of the saints’ on its hands than the Roman Catholic Church organization? And up until the close of the 19th century, this was the dominant view.
Charles Spurgeon (1834 to 1892), according to the authors of the video series I mentioned, claimed that Spurgeon called the pope antichrist and the Catholic religion the whore of Babylon. From the reviews I have read, Mr. Spurgeon was an enemy of the many false doctrines of the Roman Catholic organization’s views of truth. Knowing of the murder of so many millions of genuine Christians over the centuries by the Roman Catholic Church, it is no wonder that this view was the dominant view. Could Bible believing Christians react in any other way to all the false teachings of the Roman Catholic organization? For genuine believers in Jesus Christ, Rome’s false teachings and continual persecution of genuine believers couldn’t result in any other view of the Catholic organization or the Papacy.
How did it happen that Evangelicals in the 20th and 21st centuries embraced Roman Catholicism?
Why did many evangelicals stop believing that the pope was the man of sin (antichrist, little horn, man of sin, son of perdition) and the Roman Catholic Church the whore of Babylon? What happened that Evangelical leaders such as Billy Graham, Bill Bright, Chuck Colson, Dr. James Dobson, Rick Warren, and many others converted to Roman Catholicism? We will explore these questions further.
Rome’s Response
With movable type and the printing press, the popes couldn’t burn Bibles faster than they could be printed. How then would the Roman Catholic Church stifle the influence of the Bible and overturn the Protestant Reformation? What new strategies must they employ to curb the Bible’s credibility and improve their influence? The short answer to these questions is that the Roman Catholic organization gave fickle backslidden Protestants the thing they desired the most, to join them in their efforts to strengthen the power and influence of the Catholic Church. If they wanted a higher position, that is what they got. If they wished for fame, that is what they got. More on this later as we consider the Jesuits in Part 8.
Even in the darkest period, when the Catholic Church organization hid the Word of God from the people and murdered an exceedingly great number who refused their false doctrines, there were many genuine Christians. They are the remnant of God (the true church of God) and have existed since the apostolic age outside of the Roman Catholic Church/organization. The Holy Spirit of God moved on men and women to come out of this evil religious system. These believers knew how imperative it was to have the Word of God distributed to all the people. Only the truth of the Bible could defeat the lies of the Roman Catholic organization. Getting the Word of God into the hands of the masses, in a language they could understand, started a revolution. God promised that His word would never return void.
Millions of people, over the centuries, came to the light of the truth and rejected the darkness of the Christianized paganism of the Roman Catholic Church organization. The Great Reformation was the focal point of the last 500 years. Rome did not just sit back and let it happen. The Roman Catholic Church fought back and is still fighting back. Its warfare is no longer outwardly militaristic but much more covert these days.
“Now the serpent was more subtle (cunning, wily, or crafty) than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Yea, hath God said, ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?” Genesis 3:1, emphasis added. The serpent has always tried to destroy confidence in the Word of God. He wasn’t about to quit now.
The Spirit of God birthed the Great Reformation, which birthed the KJV Bible of 1611, the crowning achievement of the Reformation, according to some authors that I respect. Over the next few centuries (17th, 18th, and 19th), believers that the Word and Spirit of God empowered, evangelized the masses in many nations around the world. God was on the move. This new Bible and its spread of the truth represented a head wound to the Roman Catholic Church. After the KJV Bible, there were no other translations for a very long time. Bible translation was finally done right, taking into account all previous works.
What made the King James Version of the Bible so valuable and influential?
The KJV translators were, most importantly, humble men and scholars at the same time. Their goal was to make a good Bible, a better Bible. That was their intent. It took seven years. It was the most elaborate system of translation known to the world at the time—their proofs, checks, and balances insured accuracy to the old manuscripts. The translation group consisted of teams. The group consisted of some 40-50 scholars who were all godly men. Every word was reviewed over 14 times before it was agreed on. Each team reviewed the other team’s work. Then each leader or Bishop in England, who knew the original languages, was sent a copy for review and agreement. They sought to reveal the words used by God and not give a personal opinion as to the meaning. Biblical interpretation was left to the individual Christian and the theologians.
For the most part, that is not the case today, where Bible translations are often personal commentaries of the author. New translations are usually done in partnership with the Roman Catholic organization. Imagine that. The “Church” that suppressed the Word of God for many centuries and murdered those who refused to give up the Bible, is now working with the same ‘heretical Christians’ they at one time murdered. Now we all work together to translate the Bible. If the Roman Church had repented, this might make sense. But since the Roman Church has never repented, does this make any sense? Can we put a fox in charge of the chicken coop?
I can hear those telling me that the Catholic Church today is changed and now encourages Catholics to read the Bible. That superficial change is valid. But there has not been any fundamental change of doctrine by the Roman Catholic organization, nor has it ever repented of its many evils over the centuries. To the Roman Catholic organization, the Bible (the Word of God) is still a second-class citizen. It will always be subordinate to Catholic tradition, teaching, and the supremacy of the Pope. A true Bible believing follower of Christ will never agree to that.
What new principle of translating ancient languages is being used by translators today? Dynamic equivalence in translation is the effort to interpret words and meaning. The King James Bible translators refused to use that method. That method is now used by all other translators and encouraged by the Roman Catholic organization. Unlike in different Bible translations, there were no footnotes or commentary allowed in the KJV Bible.
How did the Roman Catholic Church help to destroy the credibility of the KJV of the Bible and the Bible in general?
Given the fact that the translators of the KJV were all non-Catholics and were greatly opposed to the false teachings of the Catholic Church, the Roman Church naturally wanted to destroy it and them. Rome attacked it immediately after it was published in 1611. And a few Protestants agreed. However, many of these “Protestants” were Catholic sympathizers pretending to be Protestants. They might outwardly oppose Rome but inwardly support Rome as a Jesuit-affiliated supporter. This is how the Jesuits worked their evil magic from the inside.
Some of these Protestant compromisers with Rome got money, some got a position, or a reputation and a great name, and a few got a cardinal’s crown (John Henry Newman, for instance-see following paragraph). Jesuits knew that they must infiltrate Protestant circles and ingratiate themselves in these groups. Then slowly but surely, they would bend their Protestant lackies toward Rome.
Also, the Roman Catholic organization, especially the Jesuits, got into education as a primary way to train up the next generation of leaders, scholars, and theologians. Many Protestants would send their children to Catholic institutions of education at all levels where there would be systematically won to Rome and away from pure Christianity. Their success was and is very alarming.
For example, take John Henry Newman. He is a significant person as a ‘Protestant’ turned Catholic and a member of the Oxford movement. The Oxford movement in England was an effort to return to the rituals of Rome and the Pope. The Emerging Church is the same thing where experience, contemplation, and ritual take people away from the Bible. Newman eventually became a Roman Catholic cardinal. His compromise with Rome earned him the crown of a cardinal.
Two followers of Newman were Westcott and Hort. As you know, they came up with an entirely new Greek translation of the New Testament, almost 300 years after the KJV of the Bible was published. They did this based entirely on a couple of new manuscript discoveries that are believed to be the oldest we have. Both of them liked the Oxford Movement and Newman. This is all part of the Counter-Reformation movement by the Jesuits. The Jesuits sought to control the Bible, and they, along with Westcott and Hort, created a new Greek Bible for the New Testament. The Jesuits and Rome hated the KJV. Their objective was to destroy confidence in the KJV of the Bible and any Bible or Biblical understanding contrary to their own. They wanted people to look to the Roman Catholic leadership for answers to their questions about faith and practice, and not the untrustworthy KJV Bible.
As you know, Westcott and Hort created the critical New Testament Greek text out of primarily Vaticanus but also Sinaiticus. This is the Greek text that new translations come from today. New translations are using dynamic or functional equivalence or paraphrase. More on that later.
The goal of the Popes and the Roman Catholic Church is to keep the Bible out of the hands of ordinary people. They wanted to be the sole dispensers of truth. This ensured their power and control. However, there have always been a few believers who knew how important it was for the Bible to be written in the language of the people. They set about to make that happen even at the cost of their lives. Once the Bible could be mass-produced and written in the language of the people, the Roman Catholic organization needed to adapt.
The Roman Catholic Church needed to update its strategic plan. How could they control the people if they had they had a Bible in their language and believed that Bible? How could they reverse the Great Reformation? Their updated plan included the following goals.
- destroy the credibility of the Bible, which would then support the Catholic insistence on the critical role of traditions and church teaching and the authority of the Pope.
- undermine the credibility of the Reformation and the reformers.
- infiltrate Protestant schools, organizations, and churches. Move them in the direction of Rome.
Rome also knew it must get people to doubt the final authority of the Holy Bible. How do they create doubt in the minds of Christians and the world at large about the truth of scripture? What strategies would facilitate that?
1) Convince the Christian Church that the inspiration of the Word of God applies only to the original autographs and not to any other documents or copies.
2) Find older and contradictory ancient manuscripts.
3) Invent materialistic and naturalistic scientific theories contrary to Biblical beliefs. That would also work very well in undermining the credibility and authority of the Bible.
First point, most Evangelical theologians today probably believe that the inspiration of the Bible applies only to the original autographs. Then it is easy to argue in favor of the inerrancy of the Bible (in only the original autographs) since it cannot be tested or proven because all of the original texts are extinct. What faith is there in this empty declaration of theirs? These same scholars and theologians also believe that the Bible we do possess is just like any other book and should be viewed accordingly. What a mistake and lack of faith.
“Of the fifty-three verses containing the word scripture or scriptures, nineteen of them record personal commentary by Jesus. Not once does the Master show a Nicolaitane preference for a verbally inspired autograph, an older manuscript, or a more accurate rendering.” (Taken from the book, Final Authority, written by Dr. William Grady, published by Grady Publications. See page 21).
What Dr. Grady is saying is that Jesus (and all the apostles who quoted from the Old Testament) quoted from copies (not autographs) of the Old Testament as if the copy were the very Word of God. All the old original manuscripts had been copied many times already before Jesus arrived on earth. There were no autographs in existence.
If their argument is to be believed, then the following must also be true. If all the autographs or originals are extinct, then we do not have an inspired Bible. If that is true, then the promise of God to preserve His word forever in Psalm 12:6-7 is false. Moreover, our Bible may still contain some or many errors. That is the implication if “inspiration and inerrancy” applies only to the original autograph.
Second point. Older manuscripts of the Bible have been found, suggesting that Christians have never really had the complete or accurate word of God, and still do not know for sure they have it all. It could be that more ancient manuscripts will be found in the near or distant future. Who knows. Again, God’s promise to preserve His word is not true. The two ancient manuscripts that have done the most mischief are Sinaiticus, discovered by Tischendorf, and Vaticanus. (See the appendix at the end of this article for more details regarding these two codices.)
Third point. The theory of evolution has done much to undermine the credibility and authority of the Holy Scriptures. In an earlier article, I already mentioned a few examples of how the Roman Catholic organization sought to destroy confidence in the Word of God. First, the Roman Catholic church embraced the theory of evolution. Second, a Jesuit priest helped promote the Piltdown Man fraud. Third, a Catholic priest invented the Big Bang theory. Fourth, the Roman Catholic Church has always taught that its interpretation of scripture was final and authoritative, rather than the Bible itself.
The Roman Church and its pope embrace Darwin’s theory of evolution and call the Book of Genesis a myth. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Church blindly believes and supports a book written by a godless man, Darwin, and other godless men who believe in materialistic evolution. There is no need for God in these theories of evolution. Unfortunately, theologians and scholars without faith in the Word of God attempt to accommodate evolutionary theories with Biblical doctrines. What a mess, that only serves to destroy confidence in the Word of God and God Himself. The theory of evolution is soft science at best, and at worst, it is mere godless speculation.
I find it remarkable that the Roman Catholic Church takes Biblical language that is figurative and makes it literal, no matter how absurd that makes their interpretation (transubstantiation). Then the Roman Catholic Church takes what is meant to be interpreted literally (creation) and calls it myth or allegory. The Catholic belief that the ‘end justifies the means’ is the only explanation that makes sense to me.
The plan of the Roman Catholic Church to erode confidence in the Bible, particularly the KJV, is working very well. Questions and doubts about the authority and credibility of the Bible continued to increase year after year. But some have fought back and continue to resist their insidious efforts. All of the men I mentioned at the beginning of this article, who had a hand in bringing the Word of God to the common man and woman, are examples. The millions of martyrs are also examples of fighting back against the Catholic forces of darkness even in the face of torture and death.
A Greek by the name of Simonides is one more example of fighting back. He challenged Tischendorf’s discovery of Sinaiticus and claimed it was his own manuscript and not written centuries ago. (See appendix at the end of this article for more information on Simonides). Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
Most everyone rejoiced over Tischendorf’s discovery, especially the Roman Catholic Church, which hates the KJV of the Bible. As more information was made available with the passage of time, the challenges to Tischendorf’s discovery and what he proposed to do about it became more vocal. Bible believing Christians were fighting back and asking questions.
Were they justified in fighting back and challenging the value of these two discoveries given to the world by the Roman Church organization?
To answer that question, we should examine what this great discovery actually revealed and then assess its value. Our examination will look at each of the two great manuscripts that were found around the same time. (Since then, other smaller fragments have been found).
What is the overall character of the two manuscripts (Vaticanus and Sinaiticus)? Who wrote them, and where did they come from? In the book, A Testimony Founded Forever, The King James Bible Defended in Faith and History, written by James H. Sightler, M., he explains. He hypothesizes that both were written in Alexandria, Egypt, in 640 AD. (Not nearly as old as Tischendorf claimed.) At that time, the Arabs captured the city after a fourteen-month siege. Egyptian authorities removed these manuscripts before the city fell. Then they were taken to the island of Crete and hidden in a cave until AD 832, when the Saracens captured some of the Island. At that time, Vaticanus (B) was taken to Mt. Athos, where the earliest monastic groups were then arising, or to Mistra. Other monks took Sinaiticus (Aleph) to Sinai, where Justinian built the monastery of St. Catherine’s in the eighth century. Both remained in their respective places until Bessarion took Codex B from Athos or Mistra in 1463 and Tischendorf retrieved Aleph in 1859. (Pages 132 and 133 in his book).
This is one of several ideas about where these two manuscripts came from and who wrote them. (Simonides claimed he wrote Sinaiticus). The author points out that the Roman Catholic Church favored Alexandrian authors. Why? Alexandrian texts favored their Catholic doctrines and denied the literal interpretation of scripture. As you may recall, Origen and the school in Alexandra used the allegorical method of Biblical interpretation. Jerome used these two manuscripts or similar ones to prepare the Catholic Latin Vulgate. Rome approves the Catholic Latin Vulgate, and Rome searched out manuscripts that would support the Vulgate because it supported some Catholic dogmas. Alexandrian manuscripts did just that, but were corrupt according to many.
For an example of corruption, consider “1 Timothy 3:16 in the Vulgate and the Rheims-Douay version, which do not have “God was manifested in the flesh” but read “It is a great sacrament of piety which was manifested in flesh.” (Page 130). The Roman Catholic Church is a sacramental religion, and this Alexandrian rendering supports their unbiblical position.
The quality, origin, and date of these two manuscripts are not definite despite what the scholars and experts tell us. Both manuscripts disagree with each other in many thousands of places, and 3,000 places in just the four gospels, according to Dr. Grady (page 98). Why does anyone place credibility in them? Because they are assumed to be older, they are considered better. Older means closer to the originals. But is older better, or does it mean worse? See my previous comments.
Sinaiticus is the most corrected manuscript, with about 14,000 corrections according to Tischendorf himself. That is much higher than others. Did Tischendorf give us an honest account? Did he do a good job copying it? Was his dating objective? He had much to gain by discovering this new manuscript. This manuscript was found in the possession of a Catholic monastery. Why would we believe anything coming out of the Roman Catholic Church organization with its sordid history of forging manuscripts, fraud, and false documents? I would demand two or three external witnesses before I believed it.
Vaticanus looks like a 15th-century manuscript, not a 4th-century one, according to the video authors. Is it possible that it is not truly an ancient manuscript as the expert scholars tell us? The first date the Vatican cataloged it was 1475. How do we know it is a thousand years older? Based on what science? Is this another Romish forgery? All these scholars embraced Vaticanus without questioning it, like they did with Simonides. They used a different standard with Simonides, when it is the Roman Catholic Church that has a vibrant and lengthy history of forgery. (Read Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes at the end of this article.)
The English scholar, Samuel Tregelles (1813-1875), visited Rome and was able to see the Codex, but not for long and not with pen and ink in hand. Tischendorf also visited Rome and was able to spend a total of 42 hours, with only 3 hours at a time with the Vaticanus manuscript, before the priests ended his visit. Almost all of his time was spent in the four gospels. He copied some of it. In 1889-1890, the Vatican released a photocopy of it to the public. How credible is that?
“Strange as it sounds, the most heralded manuscript evidence for rejecting the King James Bible has yet to be handled by serious Bible believing scholars! People like Beale, Gisler, and Nix have chosen a “slide presentation” put together by the most treacherous international gangsters in history (The Roman Catholic Church) over the blood-washed text of the Protestant Reformation.” (Emphasis added, Page 101 of Dr. Grady’s book). Why would anyone believe in the authenticity or integrity of this Vatican codex? Dr. Grady has written extensively about the Roman Catholic Church and the Bible. He, too, has seen the evidence which tells him that the Roman Catholic Church is an apostate and or counterfeit Christian denomination.
As you may recall, Erasmus used Vaticanus in his preparation of a Greek text. Still, he rejected most of its variant readings because it disagreed with the overwhelming majority of Greek manuscripts. (There are over 5,000 Greek manuscripts extant and over 25,000 manuscripts or fragments in various languages.) That makes perfect sense. Unbelieving Hort and Westcott didn’t think so because it got in the way of dethroning the King James Bible or the Received Text, and dethroning Protestantism so that the religion of Rome might prosper.
There were many thousands of corrections in both of these manuscripts. You will recall that the Jesuits were founded just after the 1517 Reformation by Martin Luther. It was established to combat the reformation. It was the Pope’s Counter-Reformation. They wanted to get all of Christendom to acknowledge the role and supremacy of the Pope. But Protestants rejected the pope as the final authority and claimed that the Bible alone was the final authority, Sola Scriptura.
How could the Jesuits destroy the Protestant belief in the Bible as inerrant and the authoritative word of God? These two manuscripts told the world that the 1611 KJV English Bible was not trustworthy. It was full of errors. If that is true, then the Bible can’t be trusted. We must look to the Pope, Church tradition, and scholars for clarity. For Catholics, the Pope is God on earth. He alone decides what is truth.
After the work of 1881, when Westcott and Hort (Anglicans who supported the Oxford Movement, which was an effort to get back to the Roman Catholic Church) and their team revised the underlying Greek text. Subsequent translations have included a Roman Catholic Jesuit or Priest on the translating group or as an advisor. Even the first committee, under Westcott and Hort, had Catholic sympathizers on it, including both Westcott and Hort, who hated the ideas of the Evangelicals regarding the primacy of scriptures and the inspiration of the same. Where was the Protestant representation? How did this happen?
Why would Westcott and Hort be put in charge of a new translation of the Bible?
There is ample reason to believe that these two men, Wescott and Hort, were not born-again Christians. They were Catholic sympathizers. Why would anyone put them in charge of a new translation of the Word of God, which they did not believe in? Just because a person is a Biblical scholar, that doesn’t mean they can be trusted. Translation is as much about trust and fidelity as it is about knowledge and scholarship. I can’t believe that real Christians would put this most critical job in front of godless men. But that is precisely what happened.
Even today, men like conservative evangelical scholar, Dr. James White, think that it is not a problem. After all, Mr. White said in defense of critical scholarship, that he wants the best surgeon to see him about his physical health, not the most Christian surgeon or MD. Really? Handling the Word of God requires a pure heart above all else, not physical or intellectual mastery of some kind. Is that not the most critical attribute? Translators should not be interpreters of the Word of God. We want to know what God said, and not their opinion about what He said and what they think God meant. (To his credit, Dr. White has many videos, probably books, rebuking the false teaching of the Roman Catholic Church. On the issue of the KJV, critical scholarship, and doctrines such as Eternal Security, we see things differently.)
God raised men of God to make sure the common man or woman could read the word of God in their language. Many were murdered by the Roman Catholic Church, which wanted to keep the word of God out of the hands of ordinary Christians. When the word of God was translated into the languages of ordinary people, many left the Roman Catholic Church forever. They now understood how wicked and corrupt the Roman Catholic Church was. Rome fought back and is still fighting back, attempting to destroy confidence in the Bible. They have had some great success, but true believers in Jesus Christ will never give up the fight to stand tall for the truth of the Word of God. True believers will never cease trying to win Catholics to the Jesus Christ of the New Testament. True Christians love Roman Catholics who are caught in the web of lies of Catholicism. They love them enough to tell them the truth.
In the following article, Part 6, Rome’s War on the Bible Continues, will be examined more closely.
Continue reading if you are interested in the appendices I mentioned. 1) Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, 2) Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes, and 3) Simonides.
Appendix: Sinaiticus and Vaticanus
Codex Sinaiticus was discovered in 1844. According to the authors of the video, Lobegott Friedrich Constantine Tischendorf in 1844 was a Bible scholar and is credited with finding this manuscript. Wikipedia states that he “found the world’s oldest and most complete Bible dated to around the mid-4th century and called Codex Sinaiticus in Catholic Saint Catherine’s Monastery at Mount Sinai”. We will come back to the question about the supposed date of this older manuscript in Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.
Tischendorf finds the older text after he meets with Pope Gregory XVI. He was a Protestant scholar but met with the pope, which was very unusual for a Protestant in those years. He also met with other Catholics. Why would this pope recommend him and help him? Was it out of the goodness of his heart? This very pope had already denounced all Bible societies that distributed Bibles around the world. This pope, like other popes before him, hated the KJV of the Bible and all but the Catholic Bible.
A bit of historical background and context is important. A few years later, after this discovery in 1844, it was discovered that the inquisition had continued under the papal system. Just five or six years after Tischendorf visited the pope. Imagine that: a Protestant scholar visits the Pope in Rome, all the while the Roman Catholic Church was killing Christians (Protestants) at the same time. Even as late at 1861 this persecution and torture continued. It is tough to believe this is true, but the authors I have read claim it is true.
In 1873 Charles Spurgeon wrote about the inquisition and about the curse that it entails forever. The pope wore the mark of the beast. The Protestant Tischendorf was received and applauded at the same time. Makes one think. Maybe Tischendorf was more Catholic than Protestant. Sounds pretty reasonable.
His detractors believed that Tischendorf was a Bible critic and a supporter of Rome, even though he claimed to be a Protestant. It was always the plan of the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant schools and turn scholars and preachers slowly but surely toward Rome. They did this with money, recognition, or church offices. Tischendorf was inspired to search out other manuscripts of scripture, probably based on his affinity with Rome and his knowledge of German higher criticism of the Bible. He may not have been aware that his work in this regard was a plan of the Jesuits all along. However, he knew that his work and his claims would create distrust in the Bible, again a plan of the Jesuits.
Following his historic find, in 1866, he said we should now revise the Greek Textus Receptus. His critics believed that Tischendorf and others planned to give Catholics a Greek text that conformed to the Latin Vulgate. Like many other Bible critics, he thought that the earliest manuscript that could be found must be the best, being closest to the original writing. The oldest is by definition the best. But is that true? We already discussed this in some detail. Oldest actually may mean the worst and not the best. Almost every theologian and scholar, including those from the evangelical camp, believe that the older the manuscript is, the better it is. I don’t think that is the best conclusion.
The chief Vatican librarian met with Tischendorf as well. At that meeting, this Catholic priest made much of it known to Cardinal Mai, a Jesuit, and his works brought forth great documents heretofore unknown. Mai was working on the Vaticanus codex B, while Tischendorf was about to discover Sinaiticus. Interesting, isn’t it? Probably all this was coincidental. What do you think?
Sinaiticus was found in a waste basket, which was being used as fuel for a fire. He found a copy of the Bible in this garbage can. He thought it must be older than any other. Tischendorf rescued many of the pages from being burned. He got about 1/3 of it, and the priests suspected great value, so they limited the number he took. He got 43 pages from the fire and published them, but did not state where he got these pages. There were also Old Testament documents. He returned twice more and in 1859 made the most famous discovery. That was the Greek Septuagint or LXX of the Bible. It is said that around 70 Jewish scholars wrote the Septuagint. Some say he stole the manuscript, and others do not. Some say he borrowed the full copy, made a copy, and then returned it. Others insist that we must believe he did a good job copying it, but no one knows much about his process or his checks and balances. Did he really do a good job copying the text? I guess we will never know.
Tischendorf had found both Old Testament and New Testament documents whose age, in his estimation, exceeded all the others he had looked at over twenty years. Some pages look like they were taken out of the fire. But does that confirm his comments? He returned with great success and celebration after the Sinaiticus was published.
How did he know it was so old? Based on what methods did he determine this? Manuscript dating is not like radiocarbon or carbon-14 dating or any radiometric method, which had not been invented as yet. Dating ancient manuscripts, it seems, is very subjective, while others claim it is ‘scientific’. But what does that mean, exactly? The word science is a very malleable term. For some, it provides instant credibility, thinking it is like math, physics, or some other hard science. Others of us know that the word “science” doesn’t cover a multitude of sins as valuable as hard science has been or can be. Science is from the Latin and it means knowledge, systematized knowledge. Much of what is called science is open to broad interpretations and varying speculations.
He sent this document to the pope, who congratulated him. I find that very curious. Why did the Pope commend him? All things portended the fall of the Holy Bible. He became one of the most famous men of the time. Fame is something Rome gladly gives if the price is right.
The blessings of the Roman pontiff still work magic today, even in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Some writers have suggested that Billy Graham owed much of his success to Rome. Billy promised Rome he would not try to get Catholics to join Protestant Churches or criticize Roman Catholic doctrines, among other things. Compromise of the truth has earthly rewards but not heavenly ones. Might this partially explain how successful Mr. Graham was?
Codex Vaticanus—B. This manuscript was found in the Vatican library and is reportedly from the 4th century. It is not known when the Vatican received this text or from whom. It was cataloged in the year 1475 in the Vatican Library. It is a Greek manuscript of the Bible. Wikipedia says it is one of the four great uncial codices containing the entire text of the Bible in Greek. The others being Codex Sinaiticus (supposedly the oldest of the four), Codex Alexandrinus, both in the British Library, and Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus held in France. This manuscript became known to the Western world in correspondence between textual critics and Erasmus. Erasmus considered it in preparing the Textus Receptus, but because he viewed the text as erratic, he seldom used its readings if they differed from most of the other Greek Texts of Scripture. Other, more recent translators thought just the opposite and still do today, as I understand it.
Appendix: Roman Catholic Relics, Tricks, Forgeries, and Fakes
“And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.” Revelation 18:23, emphasis added.
Albert Barnes says that this verse may mean that the tricks and pretenses are, “by thy sorceries all the nations are deceived.” Popes and Jesuits forged many documents, over the centuries, to support their claims “by thy sorceries or by their tricks and false pretenses,” the light of the candle of truth gets dimmer until it shines no more.
Roman Catholic clerics have even dug up old bones to sell as relics. They created fake documents and manuscripts, so why not fake relics to make a buck? The end justifies the means, according to these hucksters. The Church of Rome began this trade of merchandising of the gospel before the order of the Jesuits started. All these tricks, pretenses, and false documents helped the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church organization but hurt the cause of Christ. Our present-day prosperity preachers have nothing on the Roman Catholic Church.
We have already mentioned the forgeries of Pope Gregory VII. What follows is a bit more evidence. Constantine supposedly approved the Donation of Constantine. In it, he gave all the Western Roman Empire lands and or authority to the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church. Wikipedia states that it was deemed forged in the 8th century and was used in the 13th century, in support of claims made by the Roman Catholic Church regarding the political power of the papacy. Over time, this document was exposed, and today both Catholics and Protestants agree that it is a forgery. Who forged it in the first place? Can anyone say the word ‘pope’?
Another example, The Decretals of Isador in the ninth century (and the Decretals of Gratiani) were forged documents that were meant to free the papacy and bishops from state oversight and involvement. According to the video authors, there were about 700 pages and many papal references to give Rome power. They were forgeries during the Middle Ages for hundreds of years (600) to deceive the church at large about the authority and control of the pope and the Roman Catholic Church. There is nothing new under the sun.
In 1628, a reformer named David Blondel, a Calvinist Scholar, discovered these were false and forged. Pope Gregory VII was the most notorious forger ever admitted by Catholic scholars. This pope said the pope could never err and that all princes must kiss the feet of the Pope. He relied on forged documents of the past, according to this video series and the book by De Rosa.
In the late 19th century, Charles Spurgeon revealed that the creation of false or forged relics was still going on in his day. The Roman Catholic Church claimed that the relics, including bones of saints, were genuine, but they were not and many were actual animal bones.
Appendix: Simonides
Simonides fights back and challenges Tischendorf. What follows in this section comes from the video series I mentioned earlier. They maintain that Constantine Simonides, a recognized expert in Greek and paleography (1820-1867), challenged Tischendorf’s claim about the age and the findings of Sinaiticus, while all others were congratulating him on his great find. Simonides started an open public debate with Tischendorf. He was a Greek patriot and fought against the Turks and had conflicts with the Roman Catholic Church, both ancient enemies. He knew about ancient manuscripts. He had sold some ancient manuscripts. At one time, he had 5,000 ancient manuscripts. He was a recognized expert in Greek and old manuscripts. In Germany in 1855 he made enemies with Tischendorf, his old nemesis.
Simonides maintained that Sinaiticus was not an old 4th-century manuscript but a document created by him and a couple of other Greeks in the 19th century. He said he had written Sinaiticus-Aleph for the Russian Czar Nicholas I. Tischendorf claimed that he found this manuscript in the monastery at Mt. Sinai. Simonides challenged Tischendorf to a public debate, which he refused.
There was a four-year period of time when Simonides and Tischendorf wrote, expressing opposition to each other. In 2008 the British Museum spoke to this codex but said nothing at all about this controversy. Out of sight, out of mind.
Simonides says this was not a 4th-century work but a 19th-century work. Dr. Tregelles and Dr. Hort said Simonides was a liar and a forger. Both men were Catholic sympathizers. Most newspapers defended Tischendorf and were against Simonides. Rome had many influential friends via the Jesuits in English media, the press, and the pulpit. The Jesuits had significant influence over the media even back then.
Most experts today believe that Simonides was a fraud and a forger. If you want all the details, read the following book. Literary Forgeries, by James Anson Farrer, published by Forgotten Books. He has an entire chapter written about Constantine Simonides, chapter four, starting on page 39. Mr. A. Lang gives an introduction to the book and states that, “Mr. Farrer, in a manner unpopular, but scientific, leaves some of his mysteries unsolved. The case of Simonides is the most puzzling of any, and it seems to clamor for fresh examination. These were unknown when Simonides produced his early papyri, and perhaps they may repay inspection.”
The book, The Literary Churchman, argued the antiquity of Sinaiticus and was not prepared to accept their date as early. Tregelles differed from Tischendorf in stating that there was only one writer. Tischendorf said it was two different writers.
Tischendorf dated the manuscripts to 300 years. But how precise was Tischendorf? Did Tischendorf have the ability to date ancient manuscripts so precisely? (Refer back to my earlier comments about dating. Also refer to Part 7, Dating and Textual Criticism.) Dr. Simonides supposedly knew the science of dating ancient manuscripts, and they did not. These two men were close in age, but Tischendorf did not have near the experience of Simonides, according to the video.
Some experts think dating was more about personal instinct than science. Bradshaw had no scientific proof of the age of Sinaiticus, but he fell back on his instincts. Simonides said he was not trying to deceive anyone with writing this Sinaiticus document, and how it ended up in Sinai. Never were any of these claims investigated. Jame Farrier said this is still an open matter. Were there any other motives that drove the scholars at this time? How about fame and fortune? Tischendorf became a celebrity worldwide for discovering the oldest Bible. None of these guys knew how to date ancient documents like Simonides did. All this, according to the authors of this video series.
Simonides also said that 1 John 5:7 was in the earliest New Testament documents and refuted the higher critics who claimed it was not. Simonides claimed that the Gospel of Matthew was written first, not the Gospel of Mark. Simonides threatened the critics. They said this was all a conspiracy theory. In 1862, the Brighton Observer had an article on this issue. The article stated that he learned that the men of Germany refused to recognize the claims of Simonides and continued its publication. A Greek person or two substantiated the claim by Simonides. Some believed him, and others did not. Tischendorf manipulated the documents to support his claim. Simonides’ markings were all removed in the papers. Could this be the explanation for the burnt pages?
Monks even today deny the story of Tischendorf. He said he found the documents in a burn pile in the monastery. One man who supported Simonides’ claim said he was there when Tischendorf was and that he stole the documents. He also claimed that the papers were washed in lemon juice to give them an aged appearance. Tischendorf and friends denied all this. Simonides said in 1862 that Tischendorf greatly sinned by foisting on the church a document claimed to be old but that is new.
If you look up Simonides on Wikipedia, the first thing you will notice is that they claim, “He was one of the most versatile forgers of the nineteenth century.” Most websites think he was a liar and is not to be taken seriously. But the makers of this three-part video series differ in their telling of the story. I have purchased some of the presenters’ books. I have confidence in them. Before you believe Wikipedia and the other websites, I suggest that you may want to look at this website, TheGreatBiblehoax.blogspot.com. Or watch the three videos on YouTube, each is about 2.5 hours long.
In 2009, Sinaiticus was finished and published. They published the document and its history. But in 2009, they did not publish this controversy with Simonides at all. The British Library omitted Tischendorf’s claim of finding it in a burn pile and made no mention at all of the controversy with Simonides. Was it part of the Jesuit and Catholic agenda to undermine the authority of the Bible? This is the thinking of the video authors. I am certainly suspicious of Tischendorf and his account of finding the manuscript, his dating of it, and his editing and copying of it.
To destroy a man and his position, all one needs to do is to ruin his reputation. Kill the messenger, and the message dies with it. The Roman Catholic Church is a master at this very thing.
In 1864, Simonides reaffirmed his claim, and some people believed him. Others did not, and they charged him as a forger, but that was never proven. Simonides had the only Greek version of the Shepherd of Hermas, which is part of Sinaiticus and the apocrypha. Rome had this book in Latin only, and the Greek translation proved the Latin Vulgate in error. Rome hated him accordingly. After that, Simonides was accused of forging everything.
How much of recorded history is factual, true, and accurate? How much of religious history is factual, true, and precise? Do we not need to examine all this material with open minds and be willing to think it through before we blindly believe what we are told?
