[ Reina Valera & NIV ] [ Subvert the Bible ] [ Ask a KJVO ] [ Almost KJV only ? ] [ KJV & Good Language ] [ What is a "Corrupt" Manuscript ? ] [ Notes on KJV Preface ] [ KJV NEWS ] [ Riplinger ] [ Dynamic Equivalence ] [ Doing Your Own Research ] [ King James Witchcraft ] [ Few Manuscripts & KJV ] [ Can a TRANSLATION be Inspired ? ] [ The Implications of Modern Versions - Does God Deceive People ? ] [ Historic and Orthodox Position on preservation of the Holy Bible ] [ Myth of Outdated Language ] [ Strain AT a gnat Matthew 23-24 ] [ Printing Errors in KJV King James Version KJVO ] [ Review of the book King James Onlyism - A New Sect KJVO Myths ] [ Jesus Christ only begotten Son of God ] [ Latin Vulgate ] [ QUESTIONS - LATIN VULGATE ] [ Role of Church ] [ Scofield ] [ SCOFIELD 2 (W & H) ] [ Foreign Language KJVs ] [ Vatican News ] [ Ankerberg and KJVO ] [ Cold - Love ] [ Where to Start ] [ The Word and Words ] [ False Pastors & Prophets ]

THE LATIN VULGATE

True History of the Latin Vulgate Version of the Bible

THE KJV and the Latin Vulgate

The Roman Catholic Versions of the Bible are themselves based on the Catholic Latin Vulgate of Jerome.

The Latin Vulgate is a translation from the Greek into Latin, that was made by Jerome, a roman catholic church leader. The Latin Vulgate agrees with the Corrupt Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

The reason why is not hard to figure out: those manuscripts are among those that Jerome used for his corrupted Latin Vulgate. Of Course those manuscripts - that are the basis for the Vulgate would agree with the sources upon which they are based.  We do not know exactly Why Jerome chose the Greek Texts that he did for his version of the Bible. We do know today that the Greek Manuscripts that Jerome chose Disagrees with 99% of the Other Greek Manuscripts of the New Testament, and they agree with less than 1 %. 

Maybe Jerome knew his Manuscripts were false, maybe he did not. What he did know is that His version DISAGREED with almost all of the other copies of the Greek New Testament. Printing did not exist at the time, but there are 5000 greek manuscripts of the New Testament that are written in Ancient Koine Greek, and there are another Twenty Thousand Lectionaries - which were used by local church congregations all around the Roman Empire, from the time of Jerome and EARLIER, and those Greek Church Lectionaries which were the ones used by the Early Church and the Early Christians DISAGREE with the Greek Text  used by Jerome for his particular version of the Latin. 

As a matter of public record, Jerome's Greek New Testament comes from Egypt and the Alexandrian Church, which was a church known to have been corrupted in its theology as well as its manuscripts. The Alexandrian church mixed pagan religion with Christianity. 

There is a Different version of the New Testament in Latin that Predates the New Testament of Jerome's Latin Vulgate. Jerome knew that his version would replace the older Latin. (The Older Latin Bible is called the Italic or the Vetus Itala, its dating can be traced and established by its internal characteristics and the kind of Latin that it uses. The composition of Jerome's Latin version is much later).

Jerome comments that he thought it would take several decades because the other Latin New Testament was so well known.  Not many of those Latin New Testaments - which predate Jerome's Latin Vulgate have survived.  But of those which have, the overwhelming majority in Latin [Vetus Itala] AGREE with the New Testament in Greek and - once again - Disagree with the version edited by Jerome. 

FREE and AVAILABLE

ENGLISH-LATIN  and LATIN-ENGLISH DICTIONARY IN PDF

----------------

From the Corrupt Vulgate in Latin to a corrupted version in English

The most famous Catholic Version of the Bible is the Douay (Douay-Rheims) version of the Bible. It was translated at the direction of a Protestant defector (something most Catholics do not know). The Douay-Rheims version is itself based on the Latin Vulgate. In other words, the English Douay version is based on a text [in latin] which agrees with Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. No wonder it is corrupt, since it relies on corrupted manuscripts.

Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus – contrary to what is popularly believed – do NOT Agree with each other. The test is simple for those who have the courage to do the research: You can actually buy facsimile copies of both 1) Codex Sinaiticus and 2) Codex Vaticanus in Ancient (Koine) Greek.

Simply buy those manuscripts and start comparing the two. They are more Un-like each other than they resemble each other. They are well known for their mutual contradiction. There are more than TWO THOUSAND differences – between them.

They are also in the Minority Greek Texts of the Bible. In other words, not only do they disagree with each other, but they disagree with 99% of the 5000+ Greek Manuscripts that we DO have of the Bible that are written in Ancient Greek.

In Other words, they are regretably Fake Bibles, from Corrupted Manuscripts. There are also more than 3000 Differences between either Codex Sinaiticus or Codex Vaticanus – AND: the REST of the Greek Manuscripts of the Bible (That those 2 manuscripts disagree with).

The Latin version of Jerome could not possibly be the original Bible nor the original Manuscripts that the Bible came from - for a very simple reason: Jerome translated his own copy of the Bible, and named it the Latin Vulgate around 405 A.D. That was more than Three Hundred years (300) after the Bible was written, and there already was a Latin translation (that Augustine and others refer to) called the Vetus Itala. This is the Latin version that agrees with the Greek Textus Receptus (which is based on manuscripts called Byzantine manuscripts based on the style of Ancient Greek used). 

The Roman Catholic Church found this version difficult to accept because the Roman Catholic Church leaders disagreed with its christian teachings. They needed a different Bible to come along and sound more confusing. In order to make this happen, they hired Jerome. 

But the Latin Vulgate was competing with Latin Versions of the Bible that were far more accurate, and with the Greek New Testament. The Latin Vulgate did not take the place of the original Vetus Itala until around the 700 A.D., and only with the heavy institutional push of the Roman Catholic Church priests. 

The Roman Catholic Church frankly did not care much about Bible versions in anycase. Most of the common people were 

1) not supposed to read 

2) were never actually going to read and 

3) were never going to have Access to a Bible personally. (At least this is what the Priests thought).

How then would any average person actually learn or know the contents of the Bible for themselves ?

It was the position of the Roman Catholic Cardinals that they would tell the people what to think in anycase - and Not let the people decide for themselves. The Protestants changed this when they insisted on teaching everyone to read, and then on giving people copies of the Bible to read for themselves, and make up their own minds. 

We can know for a fact that the Catholic Church did not care much about its own methods of transmissions of the Bible. This is another problem with the Latin Vulgate. It becomes very difficult to decide just which verse should have "which content" when the Roman Catholic Church begins to publish Latin Vulgates that have discrepancies, verses missing and verses changed, from one version of the Latin Vulgate to another.

That does not tend to reinforce an impression that the Roman Catholic Church was acting as a Careful custodian of the Bible. Contrast that approach with care that the Jews took with the Old Testament, in their transmission and recopying process. The Jews went so far as to count each and every letter of the Old Testament and to be able to tell which books of the Old Testament were authentic on the basis of the Letter Count of the Books of the Old Testament, which the Christians adopted and accepted. 

Contrast the Approach of the Protestants in welcoming the Study of the Bible with the approach of the Inquisition which was to burn those who were found to have copies of the Bible in their possession. 

As late as the 1800s, scholars waited with anticipation to read the official version of the New Testament in Greek that was going to be published in Rome by the Roman Catholic Church, that would help both the faithful and the scholarly to know which version of the Bible they would be able to put their faith in. 

The edition was finally published, but it was found not only to be a contradiction to the majority of historic Greek manuscripts, but also to be a contradiction to the very Greek Text which it claimed to be a faithful reproduction of. 

The particular edition in question is the one published in the later 1800s by Cardinal Mai. It was supposed to be a faithful copy of the Greek New Testament which was in Codex Vaticanus.  But the multi-volume work was a disaster, poorly edited with Bible verses omitted, changed, and passages missing. It not only did not conform to the historic Greek Text of the New Testament. It did not even conform to the false and mistaken text of the Codex Vaticanus, which it claimed to be a faithful copy of.  It was only because Scholars had been able to previously study Codex Vaticanus - that they were able to hold the work of Cardinal Mai to account. If it were not for honest scholars unafraid to tell the truth about Cardinal Mai, Catholics would never have known.  The work was withdrawn in disgrace.

A great majority of the older copies of Jerome's Latin Vulgate omit verses, and contradict each other. Finding contradicting copies of the Latin Vulgate is hardly difficult. This was only one more reason why Protestants found it necessary to translate copies of the Bible for themselves: because the Catholic Church leaders had a disdain for the common people, and no interest nor care to actually inform them - of the contents of the Bible for themselves. 

At the time of the Reformation, the Catholic Church did not have a Bible in English easily available (though copies did exist and have survived). It only had the Latin Vulgate. The Roman Catholic Church based its doctrines on the Latin Vulgate - or at least it claimed to do this. Many authors, priests, nobles, and observers simply informed the Catholic Leaders that they were contradicting the Previous leaders and Popes of the Roman Catholic Church. Those who usually said those things were hunted down and killed. 

Part II

What version of the bible do Catholics use? 

Catholics have 3 primary bibles that they use:

One in Greek (almost never actually used)

One in Latin

One in English

The Latin Catholic Bible was based on the Catholic Greek Text

The English Catholic Bible was based on the Catholic Greek Text, but especially the Latin Catholic Text.

Most Catholics do not do much Bible study on a personal or individual basis. When they do, most of them switch & become protestants.

The Greek Text of the Roman Catholic Bibles comes from a Manuscript called Codex Vaticanus. It is believed by the RCC that this was one of the 50 Bibles that Eusebius made at the direction of the Pagan Emperor Constantine. Most scholars agree with this, and further note that there are serious discrepancies between this Codex Vaticanus Greek Text and the standard historical Greek Text used by Christians around the world, both before and after. Codex Vaticanus is treated as though it were the work of one person, but it actually has been worked on by at least 10 different people.

Its main claim to fame is that it is supposed to be a "complete" Bible, the theory being that if it were "complete", it would not have been tampered with. But actual examination of the Codex itself shows that it has very much been tampered with. It disagrees with the standard historical Greek Text in more than Three Thousand (3000) places, although people continue to insist that – somehow – these do not affect the outcome. There are many verses simply missing, which are there in earlier manuscripts.

In addition, Codex Vaticanus also has books in it that are not part of the Canon, such as the shepherd of Hermas/hermes. the RCC has used this to imply its own justification that the Bible SHOULD contain apocyphal books, even though these apocryphal books were rejected by the early Church Councils that the RCC claims to follow.

Codex Vaticanus was also given the name of "the septuagint", mainly because it gives it the aura of being older and more authentic. However, it was not the actual septuagint. renaming Codex Vaticanus the septuagint was just a trick to cause us to be deceived. This was done by a specific group of academics known as Textual Critics in the 1800s, many of whom were actually Bible-attackers who were deliberately hostile to Christianity.

There are no Septuagint copies to compare it to today. No one today knows what the septuagint actually looks like or if it truly exists. The story of the septuagint has never been archeologically documented, and our knowledge of it comes from an Apocryphal book called the "letter of aristeas".

The closest greek manuscript to Codex Vaticanus is Codex Sinaiticus, which was re-discovered in the 1800s. It also is trumpeted as one of the Bibles of Eusebius. It probably is. But it contradicts the standard historical Greek Text used by Christians for thousands of years, and it Furthermore contradicts Codex Vaticanus in more than two thousand places.

The Catholic Bible in Latin is called the Latin Vulgate. It was made by a Catholic named Jerome, and intended to replace an older version of the Bible – which already existed at the time when Jerome was trying to give his version of the Bible to the Roman Catholic Church.

The Catholic Bible in English is the Douay or Douay-Rheims version. The Douay version is based on the Latin Vulgate ( and Codex Vaticanus) into English. The Douay Version was finished in 1610, one year before the 1611 KJV. Unable to stop the Protestants from translating the Bible and teaching the people to read it for themselves, the RCC finally decided to come up with one of their own in English.

Thanks to dialectical materialists who gained control of academia after the Revolutions in Europe, Modern Versions of the Bibles have been re-aligned however to agree with the Corrupted Codex Vaticanus. Since 1910 – almost all versions of the Bible, have been switched from being based on the standard Historical Greek Text of the Bible, to false Greek Manuscripts based on the Codex Vaticanus.

Therefore almost all modern versions of the Bible - Whether Roman Catholic OR Protestant - are based on Codex Vaticanus (& Codex Sinaiticus), and that is why Modern Version opponents never tire of pointing out that Modern Versions of the Bible are based on Catholic Bibles & Greek Manuscripts rejected by the early Church.

After the times of Eusebius and Jerome (who followed Eusebius), Codex Vaticanus officially was listed in the Vatican library again by the 1400s. But its earlier use by Catholic Copyists is not in doubt. Although it was used for Catholic Bibles, it was rejected as a corrupt manuscript by the Bible translators of the Reformation.

There are no catholic Bibles in use today that cannot be traced back to Codex Vaticanus. Most catholics do not know this. And if they understood that they were reading Bibles that were different from 99% of the early manuscripts, they would change Bibles, to the King James Version. 

"Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance."

--Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights--

We also Offer some books on Textual Criticism and what has happened with New Testament Manuscripts. You may want to check these out:

Support this Ministry - Buy a Book !

Purchase one of the books we offer and support this ministry !

THE KJV and the Latin Vulgate

Help Support this Ministry

Please Note: We do try to be accurate. If you see anything which you believe

Is not correct on our website, please do bring it to our attention.

Thank you

(XOFC Staff)

Information posted on this page specifically under license of Distributed Content Agreement.

@ 2002/2003 License Holders.