A Torpedo in the Hold: Roman Catholic Involvement in the Text-Critical Industry


What do we make of this information? Pray, brothers and sisters. . .

The Antipas Chronicles

Jerusalem Blade from the Puritan Board:

Now we get to a different aspect of the matter. One that is not often brought into the discussion. E.R., to answer you directly, No, I do not charge or insinuate “non-KJV users with Roman Catholic tendencies”! However—and it’s a big “however”—many Reformed folks may simply be unaware of Roman Catholic involvement in the text-critical industry.

For instance, it does not inspire confidence in Reformed persons that the publishers of the Critical Text, the United Bible Societies, unabashedly serve the Vatican and the Pope, of whom UBS General Secretary Michael Perreau said,

“Pope Francis embodies several ‘first ever’ aspects: he’s the first Jesuit pope, the first Latin American pope, and the first to choose St Francis of Assisi as the patron of his papacy. He combines modesty, not least in his lifestyle, with fervent engagement for the poor, and traditional Catholic theology with courageous…

View original post 644 more words

27 thoughts on “A Torpedo in the Hold: Roman Catholic Involvement in the Text-Critical Industry”

  1. Maria, I am curious if you ever read James White’s book, “The King James Only Controversy: Can You Trust Modern Translations?” As White points out in the article below, “King James Only advocates are quick to accuse modern Greek texts of being somehow “polluted” by Roman Catholicism, and yet it is the TR itself that often imports entire passages on the basis of the authority of the Latin Vulgate.”

    http://vintage.aomin.org/DiVietro.html

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

  2. What doesn’t have any Roman Catholic influence? They are like the fat bull butting the sheep…
    FTA: The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].
    Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.]. (my note: to this day! Leaders, and leaders to be, meet with the pope)
    And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth. – Project Wittenburg, Book of Concord, Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/concord/web/smc-pope.html

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  3. “It remains that Rome’s agenda has succeeded: the doctrine of Sola Scriptura as the Reformation’s foundation has been destroyed. We are in disarray.

    “Oh, it may seem we are thriving, and individual churches (and individual souls) may seem to be so, for the time, but the Reformation ship has taken a torpedo in the hold, and the leak cannot be mended.”

    A very interesting post, indeed, Maria. When people like Kenneth Copeland starts praising the pope, we’ve got problems but I guess Mr. Copeland had problems before he started downing the Reformation. I would agree that the Reformation has taken a “torpedo in the hold” but then what true doctrine of scriptures are not attacked these days from every side? My intention with this statement is, of course, not to get the pope and his fellows (some that seem not to like him real well) off of the hook when it comes to the idea that they have superior theology.
    I wish this writer had been more specific about which Bibles he thought were influenced by the Catholic Church. This is a subject I know little about. Are there certain versions we should be leery of?
    Also, as long as there are Christians I don’t think we have to worry about sola scriptura being destroyed.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    • Chris, I enjoyed your comment. It is benefiting me to go to the original source of this post by The Antipas Chronicles, the Puritan Board discussion forum. Below is the link. The emphasis there is upon the Critical Text versus the Received text and those Bibles that use either for translation, and that the Vatican along with the United Bible Society has promoted the Critical Text. The United Bible Society has even been working under the supervision of the Vatican. Right now I’m reading the following thread that The Antipas Chronicles used. (I still intend to read all the links offered in the comments here at my reblog!)

      https://puritanboard.com/threads/so-many-kjv-arguments.94744/

      We can find out which Bibles were translated from which text ourselves.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • Thank you for the link, Maria. I know that the Vatican has pretty much bought into much of the textual criticism of the past century or so to the point that the literal version of the Genesis creation account is not authoritative. Evolution is just fine with many Catholic leaders including recent popes.
        I’m definitely way on the learning curve on this subject and I am very interested. I’ll definitely check the link and get back to you if I have anything I think I may contribute.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

          • I do get a chance to be active in the creation/evolution “discussion” that is continuously taking place on Facebook and other places. It is quite amazing how so many Christians are ditching the literal Creation story in favor of Darwinian evolution. In fact, in the “discussions” I’m monitoring and involved in YECs like me are considered a bit naive if not a lot naive. A large percentage of scientists do not think a literal Genesis story is possible because they feel the research they have done provides too much evidence to the contrary. I am comfortable with my position of standing with the first eleven chapters of Genesis as literal. I was just studying the evolution of whales today and had a “discussion” with a nice young man who studies fossils for a living. He is very bright and he was very kind to me, a combination not always easy to find. I am nowhere near as convinced as he and those on his side of the issue are. I’ll will continue to learn but God’s Word is truth. I will leave my fate in the hands of the God responsible for the Genesis account.

            Liked by 1 person

            Reply

              • Yes. It is an issue of the authority of the Word of God. One has to ditch the literal Genesis account to accept evolution. The other day I informed someone who isn’t sure if he believes in God or not that one couldn’t accept both. He and another finally admitted that this was true. He then went on to question the entirety of the book of Exodus stating there was no scientific evidence for that either.
                Once one starts down that road it can become very bumpy.
                I try and remember to pray when I’m there. As I try and treat them like I would like to be treated, I have been treated pretty well. I question the wisdom of some of the things YECs spout to evolutionists. Some are not helping the situation at all. Thank you for your prayers. I have learned a lot and I am more convinced of my position now more than ever. But they are as certain as I am. I pray for them.

                Liked by 1 person

              • Chris, people today struggle a lot with this issue, wanting scientific proof but no one was present in the world in the beginning to observe things and gather scientific evidence.

                It’s really helpful to the cause of truth that you have learned and can distinguish between weak and strong arguments!

                Liked by 1 person

              • Honest scientists admit “scientific proof” is elusive and even unattainable.

                Here is an article that was shared by one of the evolutionists on one of the forums I peruse:

                https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2017/11/22/scientific-proof-is-a-myth/#2a2694112fb1

                It’s a good article though I disagree with the ending of it.

                As far as distinguishing between weak an strong arguments, I have no idea where I stand in that department. I guess I’m glad that it sounds like I might have something to contribute. I do have strong convictions be they right or wrong. I cannot jettison the Genesis account from the text of scripture. Something very strong within me will not let me do it. I will “say,” though, that if I believed there was as much evidence for the theory of evolution as there is for the Christian faith then I would be deeply conflicted.
                Scientists who have our position are by far in the minority in their professions. I like to ask questions of those who are professionals in evolutionary fields. It can be very interesting.
                There is a lot at stake, as you have noted, based on this issue. Jobs and reputations, to name two, are riding on the validity of the Darwinist view. I, for one, can’t wait to see how it all turns out.

                Liked by 1 person

              • BTW…My mom slept all day today. That gave me time to get all sorts of things done and still have some online time as well.
                I did finally wake her when her meds were due and she ate her current only favorite, coconut cream pie. I was able to sneak some protein drink in as well!

                Liked by 1 person

Please share your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.