(June 26, 2014 at 10:52 pm)Irrational Wrote:
So what were they translating/referencing again if not the Vulgate or some older non-English copy of the Scriptures that were being referenced and quoted by several authors and theologians way before the 14th century?
You're not well-equipped with the proper critical thinking skills, it seems.
(June 25, 2014 at 8:43 pm)ThomM Wrote: Do you inform people that there was NEVER a person named Jesus who lived at the supposed time of the christ - ?
Never is a strong word. I find that agnosticism regarding Jesus' existence is more reasonable.
Here's a critique of your favorite Bible. http://www.reformation.org/latin-vulgate-unmasked.html
It seems that the Vulgate wasn't very reliable.
http://brandplucked.webs.com/vulgateonlyvskjb.htm
"A papal commission worked for many years after the Council of Trent, but was not able to produce an authentic edition. Pope Sixtus took matters into his own hands and produced his own revision, which appeared in May 1590. The Sixtus Latin Vulgate was full of errors, "some two thousand of them introduced by the Pope himself" (Janus, The Pope and the Council, Boston: Roberts Brothers, 1870). In September 1590 the College of Cardinals stopped all sales and bought up and destroyed as many copies as possible. Another edition finally appeared in 1592, which became the official Bible of the Roman Catholic Church (H. Wheeler Robinson, Ancient and English Versions of the Bible, Oxford: Clarendon" Press, 1940, p. 120).