Luther, Zwingli, Calvin and Sattler STARTED the Reformation... did they END it?

Discussion in 'Bible Versions/Translations' started by Bismarck, Mar 16, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bismarck

    Bismarck
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    0
    I understand that one major contributing factor driving Martin Luther's break with Rome in 1517 was the publication the previous year (1516) of Erasmus' GREEK Bible. Quite bluntly, there are crucial differences between the Latin Vulgate and the Eastern Orthodox Majority Text (and the related Textus Receptus used by Erasmus), and the early Reformers were very dubious of "Babylon's" authorized texts. For example, Zurich under Zwingli allowed preachers to preach only the "PURE Holy Gospels", clearly implying they thought Rome's texts were IMPURE.

    It was for this reason that Luther and crew BYPASSED the Latin Vulgate in its entirety, diving back to the Orthodox texts for the New Testament and continuing past them to the Hebrew for the Old Testament.

    My question is this:
    ----------------

    The early Reformers BEGAN a process of trying to delve back through the layers of history to unearth the pure, uncorrupted, unmodified original Holy Writings of the Apostles. This is clearly commendable -- and who could rightly complain?

    But since their day -- 500 years ago, no less! -- new texts, like the actual Majority Text and the Syriac Peshitta, as well as the Khabouris Manuscript, and others, have become available.

    So, why not continue in the footsteps of Luther and the others?

    Why not proudly pick up the torch they have handed us?

    Why not charge further forward from the Beachhead they established, and adopt the Majority Text or Peshitta?


    Zane C. Hodges and Arthur L. Farstad published a Greek-English Interlinear New Testament from the Majority Text. See George Ricker Berry and Jay P. Green for Textus Receptus versions.

    Murdoch (1905) published an English translation of the Syriac Peshitta. Also see Burkitt and Cureton.

    Why stop?
     
  2. DeclareHim

    DeclareHim
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think we should investige the other sources and texts of the NT. Including the Versions. I would recommend the Robinson/Pierpont Byzantine Greek NT as even better than the Hodges/Farstad Greek NT. The Peshitta is also an extremely interesting (IMO) document. Interesting points Bismarck.
     
  3. william s. correa

    william s. correa
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2006
    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    0
    Are you an Independent Fundamentalist Baptist or what?
     
  4. DesiderioDomini

    DesiderioDomini
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2005
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    0
    does he needs wear a sign around his neck, or can he think outside the box and search for truth?
     
  5. Aaron

    Aaron
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2000
    Messages:
    15,646
    Likes Received:
    223
    Actually, the Reformation began when John Wycliffe completed the translation of the Latin Vulgate into English (Middle English, actually) in about 1380.
     
  6. mojoala

    mojoala
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2006
    Messages:
    438
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is hilarious!
     
  7. TCassidy

    TCassidy
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2005
    Messages:
    12,163
    Likes Received:
    1,311
    That is hilarious! </font>[/QUOTE]And what, exactly, is hilarious about it? His beliefs and teachings closely match those of Luther, Calvin and other Reformers and he is often referred to as "the morning star of the Reformation."

    Without Wycliffe there may not have been a Reformation!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...