The whole "so they couldn't read it themselves" is blatant anti-Catholic bs. A single bible would take years to produce, and cost the equivalent of a house today. They were chained to keep them safe from theft.
In AD 1 most people in Europe could read at least some Latin or Greek, but by AD 1000 almost nobody could read. A few monks in Ireland kept learning alive.
Literacy was well established in early 18th century England, when books geared towards children became far more common. Near the end of the century, as many as 50 were printed every year in major cities around England.
Yea, thats why I think its neat my ancestors were reading/writing as early as 1580. Something the royal family and churches did not want people doing. Because of "fake news" and all that.
Wouldn't you assume that the newly established Church would want its devotees to immerse themselves in the sanctioned New Testament, especially since the Church went to great lengths to eliminate competing Gospels? And wouldn't the best way of spreading the "good news" be to ensure that every Christian had direct access to the Bible?
That's not what happened. The Church actually discouraged the populace from reading the Bible on their own -- a policy that intensified through the Middle Ages and later, with the addition of a prohibition forbidding translation of the Bible into native languages.
Wrong. The Protestant Reformation wasn't organic. Luther and Calvin BOTH had (((backers))), and it was in many ways a power (and gold) grab. Heretical movements have been fomented by antichristian enemies for millenia. And sadly, the susceptible took the bait. Now they have lie and cope, like you're doing.
15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
Jesus gave Peter the keys to heaven and earth, changed his name from Simon to Petros (which means rock), then proceeded to say on this rock He would build His Church. Then at the end of John, Jesus foretells Peter's future, which involves him being in a leadership role, and throughout Acts the apostles all look to Peter as leader.
I mean the issue continues today, like why is the primary traditional mass latin still? It’s a dead language. I really appreciate the orthodox mindset of always focusing on translating the texts to make them accessible and preserving the ancient liturgies in the language the community prefers.
Using a "dead" language is based. The meaning cannot change. For example, if someone in the 1800s said "Let's go outside and be gay and fruitful", it would hold an entirely different meaning today, despite using the exact same words. Latin never changes. It's solid.
Using a language they typically don’t understand is a contributing factor to making people feel alienated by the Roman Catholic Church back during the Protestant reformation and it continues today.
The Lord is the author of all languages, from Babel till today. The Old Testament was in Hebrew, the New Testament was written in Greek our Lord Jesus Christ spoke Aramaic. We are called to make disciples of all nations/ethnos. Does that mean we should teach them all Latin and require intensive education from them experience traditional worship? Nah translate the texts and liturgy for everyone. Christ is risen!
Fun fact: it's named "Vulgate" because when it was translated to Latin, that was the "vulgar", meaning common, language most people used. The translator was given sainthood for the same act later English translators were killed for.
St. Jerome poured his life's energy into the vulgate translation. He did a good job of it in a time where a man couldn't use a translation app. It was, for the time, an accessible translation finished in like the late 300s when Latin was still spoken.
They did good not to give it to them. The printing press gave rise to the whole "it's me and muh Bible" protestant movement going completely wild with interpretation of the liturgical text, leading to what we have today - megachurches, cult leaders and lgbt churches with gay/female pastors.
Yes, him too. This is obvious heresy. Also bold-faced ecumenism towards a one-world religion like the Abu Dabi inter-faith center. As if the Christian Trinitarian God is the same as the demons jews and muslims worship. There's no such thing as commonality between "Abrahamic religions". This is in the same category as "judeo-christian values".
Lol, its peasants like my ancestors, who helped create this country, with crazy ideas that they read, in books like the bible.
Take Rev John Wing for example, a unworthy minister who lived about 500 years ago.
He claimed that we had our own connections to god, we didnt need a pastor to tell us what god was thinking. Stuff like this is the basis of western democracy.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
If it werent for "peasants" like my ancestors, wed still be relying on priests and kings/queens to interpret gods will for us lmao.
Lol, its peasants like my ancestors, who helped create this country, with crazy ideas that they read, in books like the bible.
Take Rev John Wing for example, a unworthy minister who lived about 500 years ago.
He claimed that we had our own connections to god, we didnt need a pastor to tell us what god was thinking. Stuff like this is the basis of western democracy.
I know, and the degenerate dying culture we live in now, that touted western democracy, is the logical conclusion, the fruit of the theological and ecclesiological fallacies of the reformation. Was the Catholic Church corrupt? Sure it was and it still is. But that doesn't mean the protestants were correct in uprooting Christianity from its tradition and reinterpreting everything as they pleased, creating as many interpretations as there are people reading the text. Christianity is all about tradition and succession. That's why we get the full linage of Jesus in the gospels, or the many references to the OT, the rituals which are taken from OT and transformed by Christ, the liturgy or the "laying of hands" as a way to pass on the Holy Spirit. Take all that away and you get a guy (if you're lucky) in a suit preaching their personal interpretation of Scripture in an office building. That's a self-help session, not a liturgy and it has nothing to do with the early Christian Church.
If it werent for "peasants" like my ancestors, wed still be relying on priests and kings/queens to interpret gods will for us lmao.
Why is that bad? Do we fare better now having 1000+ fake churches and various new age demonic interpretations of Scripture? There is only one truth in Christ. In fact Christians still rely on the Church for interpretation because that's the only true interpretation there is - through tradition, apostolic succession and the Church. The Bible (both testaments) was written by the Church Fathers inspired by the Holy Spirit, it's a product of that tradition.
the dating of this book is way off. Decorative borders on the pages and colored illustrations are a dead give away, not to mention they were using codexs and rolled manuscripts then. Id bet my life that book is less then 500 years old
its funny how they say all these dates go back 1000+ years. in the 14th century the version of the vulgate they were using was sangallensis lol which isn't even the whole bible. Nor is it a book. its animal skin manuscripts.
dont you find it weird that they say they had the whole thing complete in book form in the 7th century, but then for some reason ended up useing a incomplete form written on animal skin for the next 700 years?
The bible appears to be a collection of even older stories. And the church obliterated anyone or anything still dedicated to the old pagan gods. Remember the bible says there is only one god and you must worship him. Anything else is blasphemy.
Im willing to bet, we could find the bible in its unadulterated form, in the vaticans basement somewhere.
Here is the interesting thing about these old books, when pages would fall apart, they would be replaced. So parts of the book are prolly less than a few hundred years old. Im willing to bet the spine is as old as they say it is.
It looks "big" but its handpressed paper, much thicker than commercial made paper. Im also willing to bet its filled with full page illustrations like the kind we see in this pic.
The whole "so they couldn't read it themselves" is blatant anti-Catholic bs. A single bible would take years to produce, and cost the equivalent of a house today. They were chained to keep them safe from theft.
That is true, before the Guttenberg Press monks and priests would take years copying and illustrating copies of the bible.
In AD 1 most people in Europe could read at least some Latin or Greek, but by AD 1000 almost nobody could read. A few monks in Ireland kept learning alive.
Yea, thats why I think its neat my ancestors were reading/writing as early as 1580. Something the royal family and churches did not want people doing. Because of "fake news" and all that.
https://archive.is/20230821175306/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-christians-were-denied-access-to-their-bible-for-1000-years_b_3303545
If what you said was true there would be no Protestants.
Catholics are pagans who perverted Christianity in order to control people.
Wrong. The Protestant Reformation wasn't organic. Luther and Calvin BOTH had (((backers))), and it was in many ways a power (and gold) grab. Heretical movements have been fomented by antichristian enemies for millenia. And sadly, the susceptible took the bait. Now they have lie and cope, like you're doing.
Well, at least we see their fruits now.
Pure projection about lying and coping.
There is no evidence in the Bible that supports the papacy.
You can’t present any logical reasoning so you jump to fallacious attacks on character and projections.
Jesus gave Peter the keys to heaven and earth, changed his name from Simon to Petros (which means rock), then proceeded to say on this rock He would build His Church. Then at the end of John, Jesus foretells Peter's future, which involves him being in a leadership role, and throughout Acts the apostles all look to Peter as leader.
No he didn’t.
That is made up pagan bullshit.
Show me the verse where this bullshit you claim happens.
Because none of that is in the Bible and if it is you should be able to point directly to where it is.
Matthew 16:18 https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/peter-the-rock Quit being such a faggot, heretic.
Protestantism only took place after the invention of the printing press.
Once the common man could read it the Jesuits had to discredit it, enter the heliocentric cosmology fraud.
Jesuits Erased The Flat Earth
https://odysee.com/@stpierrs:f/video_2023-11-11_21-46-05:c
I mean the issue continues today, like why is the primary traditional mass latin still? It’s a dead language. I really appreciate the orthodox mindset of always focusing on translating the texts to make them accessible and preserving the ancient liturgies in the language the community prefers.
Using a "dead" language is based. The meaning cannot change. For example, if someone in the 1800s said "Let's go outside and be gay and fruitful", it would hold an entirely different meaning today, despite using the exact same words. Latin never changes. It's solid.
Using a language they typically don’t understand is a contributing factor to making people feel alienated by the Roman Catholic Church back during the Protestant reformation and it continues today.
The Lord is the author of all languages, from Babel till today. The Old Testament was in Hebrew, the New Testament was written in Greek our Lord Jesus Christ spoke Aramaic. We are called to make disciples of all nations/ethnos. Does that mean we should teach them all Latin and require intensive education from them experience traditional worship? Nah translate the texts and liturgy for everyone. Christ is risen!
Fun fact: it's named "Vulgate" because when it was translated to Latin, that was the "vulgar", meaning common, language most people used. The translator was given sainthood for the same act later English translators were killed for.
St. Jerome poured his life's energy into the vulgate translation. He did a good job of it in a time where a man couldn't use a translation app. It was, for the time, an accessible translation finished in like the late 300s when Latin was still spoken.
I decline to comment on the latter.
I'll comment on the latter: Bullshit.
I won't comment on that later, because it's not worth it.
The war on the flow of information imposed upon by the elites against the peasants is as old as time.
We are now seeing the equivalent with online censorship for the same reason.
They did good not to give it to them. The printing press gave rise to the whole "it's me and muh Bible" protestant movement going completely wild with interpretation of the liturgical text, leading to what we have today - megachurches, cult leaders and lgbt churches with gay/female pastors.
Yes, him too. This is obvious heresy. Also bold-faced ecumenism towards a one-world religion like the Abu Dabi inter-faith center. As if the Christian Trinitarian God is the same as the demons jews and muslims worship. There's no such thing as commonality between "Abrahamic religions". This is in the same category as "judeo-christian values".
Lol, its peasants like my ancestors, who helped create this country, with crazy ideas that they read, in books like the bible.
Take Rev John Wing for example, a unworthy minister who lived about 500 years ago.
He claimed that we had our own connections to god, we didnt need a pastor to tell us what god was thinking. Stuff like this is the basis of western democracy.
https://www.amazon.ca/-/fr/John-Flushing-Wing/dp/1372812334
If it werent for "peasants" like my ancestors, wed still be relying on priests and kings/queens to interpret gods will for us lmao.
I know, and the degenerate dying culture we live in now, that touted western democracy, is the logical conclusion, the fruit of the theological and ecclesiological fallacies of the reformation. Was the Catholic Church corrupt? Sure it was and it still is. But that doesn't mean the protestants were correct in uprooting Christianity from its tradition and reinterpreting everything as they pleased, creating as many interpretations as there are people reading the text. Christianity is all about tradition and succession. That's why we get the full linage of Jesus in the gospels, or the many references to the OT, the rituals which are taken from OT and transformed by Christ, the liturgy or the "laying of hands" as a way to pass on the Holy Spirit. Take all that away and you get a guy (if you're lucky) in a suit preaching their personal interpretation of Scripture in an office building. That's a self-help session, not a liturgy and it has nothing to do with the early Christian Church.
Why is that bad? Do we fare better now having 1000+ fake churches and various new age demonic interpretations of Scripture? There is only one truth in Christ. In fact Christians still rely on the Church for interpretation because that's the only true interpretation there is - through tradition, apostolic succession and the Church. The Bible (both testaments) was written by the Church Fathers inspired by the Holy Spirit, it's a product of that tradition.
the dating of this book is way off. Decorative borders on the pages and colored illustrations are a dead give away, not to mention they were using codexs and rolled manuscripts then. Id bet my life that book is less then 500 years old
It's a good thing then your life isn't on the line.
It was an extremely limited edition, one of three commissioned by Abbot Ceolfrith in 692.
its funny how they say all these dates go back 1000+ years. in the 14th century the version of the vulgate they were using was sangallensis lol which isn't even the whole bible. Nor is it a book. its animal skin manuscripts.
dont you find it weird that they say they had the whole thing complete in book form in the 7th century, but then for some reason ended up useing a incomplete form written on animal skin for the next 700 years?
naw, someone lied
The bible appears to be a collection of even older stories. And the church obliterated anyone or anything still dedicated to the old pagan gods. Remember the bible says there is only one god and you must worship him. Anything else is blasphemy.
Im willing to bet, we could find the bible in its unadulterated form, in the vaticans basement somewhere.
Here is the interesting thing about these old books, when pages would fall apart, they would be replaced. So parts of the book are prolly less than a few hundred years old. Im willing to bet the spine is as old as they say it is.
It looks "big" but its handpressed paper, much thicker than commercial made paper. Im also willing to bet its filled with full page illustrations like the kind we see in this pic.
Old books like this are vellum, made of sheepskin, ya ignorant loon.