Was Lucian of Antioch good or bad?

0 (0%)
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 0

Voting closed: March 04, 2006, 02:57:38 AM

Author Topic: Sons of Arius  (Read 2951 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline WayFinder

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Sons of Arius
« on: February 25, 2006, 02:57:38 AM »
Wikipedia's entry on Lucian of Antioch reads in part:

The most enduring memorial of the life of Lucian ... was his influence on Biblical study. Receiving the literal sense alone, he laid stress on the need of textual accuracy and undertook to revise the Septuagint based on the original Hebrew. His edition was widely used in the 4th century (Jerome, De Vir. III. I, xxvii Praef. ad Paralip.; Adv. Rufium xxvi, Epist., 106). He also published a rescension of the New Testament.

Likewise, Benjamin George Wilkinson writes in Truth Triumphant:

The Protestant denominations are built upon that manuscript of the Greek New Testament sometimes called Textus Receptus, or the Received Text. It is that Greek New Testament from which the writings of the apostles in Greek have been translated into English, German, Dutch and other languages. During the dark ages the Received Text was practically unknown outside the Greek Church. It was restored to Christendom by the labours of that great scholar Erasmus. It is altogether too little known that the real editor of the Received Text was Lucian. None of Lucian's enemies fails to credit him with this work. Neither Lucian nor Erasmus, but rather the apostles, wrote the Greek New Testament. However, Lucian's day was an age of apostasy when a flood of depravations was systematically attempting to devastate both the Bible manuscripts and Bible theology. Origen, of the Alexandrian college, made his editions and commentaries of the Bible a secure retreat for all errors, and deformed them with philosophical speculations introducing casuistry and lying. Lucian's unrivalled success in verifying, safeguarding, and transmitting those divine writings left a heritage for which all generations should be thankful.
Quoted in [1]

And the feedback from Amazon customers who have bought copies of George Ricker Berry's Interlinear KJV Parallel New Testament in Greek and English is naught but glowing praise.  Further, the BibleStudy.org website [2] credibly claims that even the Authorized Version ("King James Version", so-called) contains errors that can be corrected by returning to the Textus Receptus.  In the same vein, it has been argued that the Authorized Version was compiled under Catholic influences [3].  This author personally found one (1) such error quite readily, in the translation of Saint Matthew 5:47, where the Greek reads ethnikos ("gentiles", from the Hebrew goy) but the AV translates it as "publican" (echoing the previous verse) [4].


Lucian of Antioch (who was martyred) did a great service to mankind.  To wit, Lucian = Good Guy

Yeah or Nay?

[1] http://atschool.eduweb.co.uk//sbs777/vital/kjv/part1-3.html
[2] http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/kjverror.html
[3] See for example, http://www.catholicapologetics.net/0002kjv.htm#The%20Catholic%20influence%20on%20the%20King%20James%20Version:
[4] http://www.scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/Greek_Index.htm This is the Westcott - Hort translation, which is a compromise with the Roman MSS (Vaticanus, Sinaiaticus)

Offline ozgeorge

  • I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 16,379
  • My plans for retirement.
    • Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Australia
Re: Sons of Arius
« Reply #1 on: February 25, 2006, 09:23:41 AM »
The response choices you provide are non sequitur to your poll question, and it doesn't make any sense. You ask if St. Lucian was "good or bad" and the only possible responses you allow for are "yes" or "no".
If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.