[ScotArt]

The Latin only version of the Bible was the only available Bible back in the early centuries from around 400AD to 1400AD. Question, 'How then was Bible teaching achieved?' The fact was that way back then most of the people were illiterate peasants and couldn't read anyway, so Bible study was out. Another fact of the times was that books were extremely rare, since printing was not yet invented. So what congregations were then in existence must only have been taught Bible as word of mouth, (Oral tradition? Memorising?) by the few who could then read and could read Latin.
Does this imply that the Bible was not/is not essential to conversion? I presume that the Holy Spirit was still regenerating but that the literate Christians were few and far between? therefore Bible reading very rare.
PS Anybody aware of sites which deals with this period and the evangelical method then employed?

[Samuel]

Link.
http://www.ritchies.net/churchhi.htm

[CKG]

Originally Posted by Samuel

Link.
http://www.ritchies.net/churchhi.htm

Better known as "Church History from a Reformed Perspective".

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by ScotArt

The Latin only version of the Bible was the only available Bible back in the early centuries from around 400AD to 1400AD. Question, 'How then was Bible teaching achieved?' The fact was that way back then most of the people were illiterate peasants and couldn't read anyway, so Bible study was out. Another fact of the times was that books were extremely rare, since printing was not yet invented. So what congregations were then in existence must only have been taught Bible as word of mouth, (Oral tradition? Memorising?) by the few who could then read and could read Latin.
Does this imply that the Bible was not/is not essential to conversion? I presume that the Holy Spirit was still regenerating but that the literate Christians were few and far between? therefore Bible reading very rare.
PS Anybody aware of sites which deals with this period and the evangelical method then employed?

Scot, two things:

Ro 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Ac 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.
Ro 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!

If reading a Bible is essential to salvation, then those who cannot read or those who could not are in a bad way. The Scriptures above show that hearing the Gospel is as efficacious as reading a gospel tract or having the gospel preached to people who cannot read.

Second, the Latin Vulgate of Romanism and Jerome are not the only bibles available in this period. Not only are the original manuscripts represented by over 5000 Greek manuscripts, they are attested to by over 10,000 Old Latin manuscripts. The existence of the Body of Christ in this period is evidence of educated and multilingual evangelists who read the Scriptures in Latin, and in obedience to I Cor. 14, were able to then speak, to preach, the gospel in Flemish, Gaeilic, Welsh, Celt, Goth, the 14 dialects of Gaul(France) etc.

Grace and peace

tony

[ScotArt]

Thankyou Samuel. I am reading that site.
Thankyou CKG for the info.

Tonybones2112
Thanks for that Tony. Per Romans 10. That was one of the reasons for my enquiry. I see the word "hearing" used at that point as meaning more than just being within earshot - but also "being able to hear by grace and faith." Therefore considering the "elect" back then and effective evangelism, I would say that the Spirit guided them into all truth by the same method He employs today.
As we can observe in the secular world education can be a sinful vanity in man, for him to consider a lack of it precludes the conversion of sinners is a deceiving principle. We should be humbled by the Spirits work regardless of man's intellectual progress. Wisdom is the gift of God but churches today are in danger of presuming all too much in favour of man's developing in education, technology and science, as if he can achieve this of himself.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by ScotArt

Thankyou Samuel. I am reading that site.
Thankyou CKG for the info.

Tonybones2112
Thanks for that Tony. Per Romans 10. That was one of the reasons for my enquiry. I see the word "hearing" used at that point as meaning more than just being within earshot - but also "being able to hear by grace and faith." Therefore considering the "elect" back then and effective evangelism, I would say that the Spirit guided them into all truth by the same method He employs today.
As we can observe in the secular world education can be a sinful vanity in man, for him to consider a lack of it precludes the conversion of sinners is a deceiving principle. We should be humbled by the Spirits work regardless of man's intellectual progress. Wisdom is the gift of God but churches today are in danger of presuming all too much in favour of man's developing in education, technology and science, as if he can achieve this of himself.

You are welcome and I agree with you. Man is ever learning and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Education in and of itself is not a bad thing, we would not have doctors without it, it is how mankind applies education is the problem. Roman Catholicism has always had the practice, keep the peasants dumb so we can be the fount of knowledge.

For a good understanding of history in the Dark Ages from the "secular" history point of view I'm going to recommend to you Joseph and Frances Gies and their series of "medieval" books. They give a very good look into life in England and France in around the 13th Century AD. They do touch on Romanism but only in pointing out it as being the dominant religion that tied itself into the governing of the locals. The books are fascinating and if you search AMAZON you can find used and unmarked copies for a dollar apiece if you shop around the different merchants. If you believe secular history, there was no Bible Christianity during the Dark Ages and this is false. Our steadfast stand on the KJV and it's precursors is rooted in our belief that the true Christian church has been here since day one, scattered and persecuted but here. I'm going to recommend Dr. Peter Ruckman's two volume CHURCH HISTORY. Dr. Ruckman can be a hard read, but these two books are scrupulously researched and footnoted

One day Jesus Christ and Peter were talking. The present Jewish-Gentile Body of Christ had not been revealed to anyone. Jesus promised and prophesied that "His church", the tiny, believing remnant of Restored Israel, the gates of hell would not prevail against. Israel fell, and through their fall we Gentiles were grafted into that remnant, rather than through the OT requirement that we Gentiles would rise through Israel's rise, and the promise remained, the gates of hell have not prevailed against us or His wordsand will not when God returns to His dealings with Israel.

Grace and peace to you Scot

Tony

[chette777]

two forms of medieval evangelism were practiced by the RC they were to sell indulgences to the masses and to incorporate the local culture into the practices of the church.

But that is not our way. changed lives and speaking the truth was the normal way evangelism was done then and today. these big tent meetings are not the norm.

[cliffordsndrs451]

I have often considered that period of time. If you've had a chance to read Strobel's book, "The Case For Christ", it covers some good information about the very early church not bathed in all the rumors of the period. He uses some solid experts that reinforce how people talked about and wrote about Christ. Even though there was rampant illiteracy, there still was solid evangelism apart from Catholic Dogma. There has always been a strong chain of truth protected by the hand of God throughout the ages.

Also, most Jewish children were educated so those that became saved also built a strong belief in education.

[tonybones2112]

Originally Posted by cliffordsndrs451

I have often considered that period of time. If you've had a chance to read Strobel's book, "The Case For Christ", it covers some good information about the very early church not bathed in all the rumors of the period. He uses some solid experts that reinforce how people talked about and wrote about Christ. Even though there was rampant illiteracy, there still was solid evangelism apart from Catholic Dogma. There has always been a strong chain of truth protected by the hand of God throughout the ages.

Also, most Jewish children were educated so those that became saved also built a strong belief in education.

One rule of thumb I used was seeing who in what period of history the Catholics were burning, they were most cases Bible Christians. I've researched my own sect, the Grace Dispensationalists, and found them traced back to the "Paulicians" of the 3d Century AD. The Catholics said they were this and they were that. In truth they were hyper-evangelistic, did not baptize in water, and emphasized Paul's books as being authoritative for them, so I guess if you put a name on me, then I am a Paulician.

Grace and peace

Tony