RE: I bet you don't know this one
June 27, 2014 at 2:54 am
(This post was last modified: June 27, 2014 at 2:56 am by Mudhammam.)
(June 27, 2014 at 2:20 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:(June 27, 2014 at 1:07 am)Pickup_shonuff Wrote: Who said there was an earlier English translation?
We're making progress. There was no earlier English translation because the Englishman Wycliffe and his buddies wrote the Bible.
Now pay attention: There were a number of assorted manuscripts floating around. Even the Vulgate was written by Englishmen as a gift to the Pope. But it was Wycliffe and his buddies that wrote the Bible as we now know it. After that everyone else conformed to Wycliffe's version and they updated the language over time and even added some new ideas. As I referenced before, the Pope who wrote his version added about 2,000 deviations.
So... dumb. I'm done trying to explain the difference between complete and fragmented manuscripts and later translations to you. What do you think canons were? The 27 New Testament books were officially determined in the 4th century. The Vulgate was the Latin translation compiled shortly after. Wycliffe made that available to the English world in the 14th century. There's nothing in the Bible that was altered other than the typical changes that occur in translating from one language to another for the first time based off a single version, the Latin Vulgate. Modern English Bibles aren't even based on Wycliffe's. They're based on all the different fragments and complete manuscripts from as early as the 2nd century and onward. What are you so fucking confused about? This is all common knowledge and agreed upon by everyone with half a brain and the ability to read.
He who loves God cannot endeavour that God should love him in return - Baruch Spinoza