Welcome to Summit Theological Seminary
"Teaching God's Word to God's World"
2766 Airport Road, Peru, Indiana 46970, (765) 472-4111
Question
About Bible Versions
George
L. Faull
Dear Brother Faull,
Please read the enclosed booklet
entitled: "Which Bible Should You Read?" by Nelson, and then give me
your comments. He defends the Rheims Douay Version be-cause it is from
the Vulgate.
Answer: The term The
Vulgate originally applied to the Septuagint
Version. It meant "the regularly used text". This is how both
Jerome and Augustine used the term Vulgate.
In fact, then the Vulgate applied to
a Greek text, not a Latin one. The term was not used of
Jerome's version till Roger Bacon in the 13th century. Even then it
was not used exclusively of it. In the East the term applied to the Septuagint. Finally, in the West Jerome
Version came to be referred to as the Vulgate.
It came to be the mother of the English
Versions from Bede, Wycliffe, Coverdale, Rheims, and Douay. These were
compared to the Hebrew and Greek texts. Luther's translation as
well as the King James Version were
greatly influenced by the Latin Vulgate.
Remember,
the first two centuries of the Roman Church literature was Greek, not Latin. The
same is true of bishops and liturgy. It was not till the third century that Latin was used by the Church in Italy.
This created a need for a Latin Bible
that was acceptable to all. Pope Damacus commissioned Jerome to produce an
"authorized" version for the Latin Church. His version was the Latin Vulgate. This was around 382 A.D.
Was the Church without God's revelation
for all those years?
No,
it was in Greek and Hebrew. It is not known for sure if Jerome translated only
the Gospels or the whole New Testament. It is also questionable
as to whether he translated the whole Old
Testament. He translated the Old
Testament from Greek, not Hebrew, as he followed the Septuagint (LXX) of the Old Testament. His translation was in Latin. Being displeased with the LXX, he later translated from Hebrew
to Latin. Augustine considered the LXX on a par with the Hebrew text, and this produced problems
between the two men.
It
was not till Pope Gregory (of the sixth century) put the Vulgate on an equal
footing with other Latin Versions. The Vulgate began to be emended almost immediately even in the 6th
century. Read what you will, there are serious faults with the idea that the Vulgate being a perfect revelation.
Thomas
A. Nelson's book, Which Bible Should You
Read? is ludicrous in light of brief research that can be done in The International Standard Bible
Encyclopedia, the Cyclopedia of Biblical Theological and
Ecclesiastical Literature, and
Neander's Church History. Please note these quotes:
"But
Jerome must have given far greater offence by another useful undertaking, viz.
a new version of the Old Testament,
not according to the Alexandrian translation,
which before this had alone been accepted, but according to the Hebrew. This appeared to many, even of
those who did not belong to the class of ignorant persons, a great piece of
Impiety - to pretend to understand the Old Testament better than the seventy
inspired interpreters - better than the apostles who had followed this
translation, and who would have given another translation if they had
considered it to be necessary - to allow one's self to be so misled by Jews as
for their accommodation to falsify the writings of the Old Testament. [Neander's
Church History, ii, 684 sq.]
"From the present stage of Biblical
philology and exegesis the Vulgate can be charged, indeed, with innumerable
faults, inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and arbitrary dealing in particulars;
but, notwithstanding these, it deserves, as a whole, the highest praise for the
boldness with which it went back from the half-deified Septuagint directly to
the original Hebrew; for its union of fidelity and freedom; and for the
dignity, clearness, and gracefulness of its style." [The Cyclopedia of Biblical Theological and
Ecclesiastical Literature, from the "Vulgate," page 836]
"It is a false humility to rate as
nothing the inheritance of ages. If the investigation of the laws of language,
the clear perception of principles of grammar, the accurate investigation of
words, the minute comparison of ancient texts, the wide study of antiquity, the
long lessons of experience, have contributed nothing towards a fuller
understanding of Holy Scripture, all trust in Divine Providence is gone. If we
are not in this respect far in advance of the simple peasant or half-trained
scholar of North Africa, or even of the laborious student of Bethlehem, we have
proved false to their example, and dishonor them by our indolence. It would be
a thankless task to quote instances where the Latin version renders the Greek
incorrectly. Such faults arise most commonly from a servile adherence to the
exact words of the original, and thus that which is an error in rendering
proves a fresh evidence of the scrupulous care with which the translator
generally followed the text before him." [The Cyclopedia of Biblical
Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature, from the "Vulgate,"
page 836].