Digitized Gutenberg Bible Available

Prince_Ali writes "A digital copy of the Gutenburg Bible, the first major Western book printed from movable type, has been made available by The University of Texas, available through the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center. The Ransom Center's copy of the Bible is claimed to be the finest in the world, and is now freely available to anyone who would like to examine it. More information can be found via this CNN.com article."

Turn up the resolution on the scanner

[mwc28]

Excuse my ignorance, it is a wonderfully crafted document, but why go to all the trouble of digitizing a document that you can barely read the digital version of. It might just be my eyes, but its awufully hard to read the text even in latin!

My 2c

Re:The source?

[Brian Knotts]

No. Not Latin. It ("The source") would be Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic.

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[JeanPaulBob]

Don't forget the New American Standard translation, the other major English translation.

Be careful with the NIV, though. It's quite a good translation, but you have to be aware of what you're getting when you read it. The translators used the "dynamic equivalence" philosophy, to make it easier to read. That means they took the more difficult sentences and rephrased them, changing both grammar and vocabulary to a more straight-forward reading level. (Every translation involves interpretation, but dynamic equivalence adds a second layer of "putting it in your own words.")

Here's some good resources:

Unbound Biola [biola.edu] -- Bible search. Most of the major English translations, along with 30 or 40 other languages, ancient and modern.

Read the Bible [bible.com] -- 50 or 60 translations, English and otherwise. Some are available for download, as are the necessary fonts.

Re:Write in the margins?!

[tinrobot]

Actually, 48 out of a print run of approximately 200, to be exact.

Not a bad survival ratio, actually.

Re:Write in the margins?!

[jmauro]

There are only three copies in the United States. It's currently believed [gutenbergbible.net] that only 51 out of the original 200 copies still exist. The sad part about this story is that the British Museum has two complete copies and put them on the web [prodigi.bl.uk]almost 3 years ago. So UTexas posting them really adds nothing to the web, except provide another mirror.

image size

[Anonymous Coward]

It is nice they put this thing online, but it is nothing else than a marketing gag for mmore funds or something.

at the current size [utexas.edu] it is totally useless, you click on enlarge image - and you get an image at a size where it is barely readable. am i supposed to use a magnification glass on my screen or something? If you do it, do it right (read: at right size) or leave it.

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[molo]

Personally, I think it was a mistake to translate the gospels from Aramaic, too.

Weren't they orginally written in Greek to be applicable to a wide audience? It would have been good of the apostles to also provide an Aramaic version too of course, but they were never written. Not that they were literal translations either.. how many years after Jesus's death were they written? Almost 100 years for John's gospel?

-molo

Much better Bible reference

[nacturation]

Rather than use this as a bible reference, a better source is the Skeptic's Annotated Bible [skepticsan...dbible.com]. That'll give you the true dope on the [ahem] "Good" book.

Re:Write in the margins?!

[Mikey-San]

Still wrong. He said "fully intact", and there are only twenty-one complete copies in the entire world. From the site:

"It is one of forty-eight surviving copies and one of twenty-one complete copies in the world."

Re:Props to UT

[Valar]

Well, I must say. You have the uber-large geek testicles. However, I have been other places. This time around, I turned down a lot of those "higher rated" schools (i.e. MIT, CalTech) because I didn't feel like putting up with the loans for school who didn't really have anything special to offer (accept more grant money). And the obscure accomplishments were not "hurrah hurrah for the program", I was just pointing out that UT can be a 'geeky' place too.

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[TitanBL]

If you are truly serious about studying the Bible as a living book, and not as a museum piece, then pick up a New King James or NIV version. These are easily readable and accurately reflect centuries of scholarship.

I see where you are coming from - but you have to keep in mind that the Bible was not written by white - english speaking men. True hermeneutical study of the Bible requires taking into account the historical/cultural context in which it was written. A Language embodies the culture from which it originates. Transliteration provides for a decent bridge between cultures/languages, but never can offer the depth of the original.

This being said - the Bible was not written in Latin - but the Latin Vulgate (Gutenberg) was translated by men who had access to more primary Biblical documents not available to there predecessors. Being that I had 3 years of latin in HS and 3 in College, I can read (sometimes slowly) the Vulgate, and I would have to say that it offers more detail or precision than than english translations. Makes the NIV look like an impressionist painting - thats for sure. The KJV is very similar to the Vulgate. (The Vulgate was used it to help translate the greek and hebrew texts to english)

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[Trax]

There are a few sites committed to providing detailed and accurate representation of the Aramaic version of the Bible (often called the Peshitta). Peshitta.org [peshitta.org] is the most important since it provides not only an interlinear version of the New Testament (English and Aramaic) but also a forum that discusses the nuances of each and every chapter or verse and lessons in modern Aramaic (Syriac).

Beth Mardutho: The Syriac Institute [bethmardutho.org] is also working on collecting, indexing, and digitizing Aramaic (Syriac) manuscripts, books, and other invaluables from University libraries, personal libraries, monasteries, churches, and persons throughout the world.

All of the collected materials will be digitized according to the DjVu format as found at DjVulibre [sf.net]. You can take a look at some high quality samples of such digitized books, namely Liturgy of the Eastern Churches (Syriac) [bethmardutho.org] or The Syriac Orthodox Liturgy (English) [bethmardutho.org].

Re:it's a nice start ... but-OSSP.

[Anonymous Coward]

"let's see an open source version of this ... "

You mean like this? [sourceforge.net]

Cool

[TheOnlyCoolTim]

And the British one actually has images with a high enough resolution that you can read it. (That is, if your Latin isn't at the level of a three year old Roman.)

Tim

NET Bible

[Micah]

Don't forget the New American Standard translation, the other major English translation.

I've recently become pretty keen on the NET Bible [netbible.com]. It is a fairly new modern translation by a group of scolars, designed for free distribution on the Internet. (I'm still a bit disappointed with their "license", but it's better than most other modern translations. I think there needs to be a good readable modern translation that is as "free" as the KJV.)

Anyway, the NET Bible contains over 50,000 translators notes, some of which are quite useful in determining what the original text likely means. Then there are historical notes and other study notes. Definitely recommended.

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[Micah]

how many years after Jesus's death were they written? Almost 100 years for John's gospel?

I'm not 100% sure, but I've heard they were written in the AD60-70-80 area.

In any case, Paul's letters would have been written before AD 60, so we certainly have good ancient witness to the Christian faith.

Re:An excellent excuse to learn latin

[DarrylM]

I agree that this digitization of the Gutenberg Bible is an interesting development for its historical significance and I'm glad that it's been done. However, I feel that I should address a few of the other things that you've mentioned. (Yes, I am a theology student.)

Then the Catholic church came and decided to take the scriptures away from the people and to try to hide the ceremonies and teachings forcing people to just trust the words of the priests.

Sorry, I don't want to get into a theological debate on this forum, but I respectfully disagree with this; after all, people within the Catholic Church helped establish the modern university and did a great deal to try to educate people.[1] The major problems of getting Scripture to the masses involved widespread illiteracy and the fact that, until the invention of the printing press, Bibles couldn't be easily copied and distributed. It wasn't some sort of high ranking conspiracy that kept Bibles away from the possession of the common people but rather, the issues were essentially of a practical nature.

The history of the Church is very detailed and interesting. Getting into it from a more properly academic perspective would take a bit of time and it's waaaay past my bedtime already :-), but if you are interested in other views on these specific issues, I invite you to check out www.catholic.com [catholic.com] or books such as Frank Sheed's Theology for Beginners.

And even today they try to hide the actions of their priests.

That's an overgeneralization that does not apply in the vast majority of cases, but it does underly a very real and valid concern that people have. I'll quote one of Pope John Paul II's addresses at the World Youth Day in Toronto last year. I think he did a pretty good job of summing up the feelings of those of us within the Catholic Church regarding the tragedies that have come to light recently. (Of course, I'm mindful that mere words cannot erase the immense harm that's been done):

"The harm done by some priests and religious to the young and vulnerable

fills us all with a deep sense of sadness and shame. But think of the vast majority of dedicated and generous priests and religious whose only wish is to serve and do good!"
(full text) [vatican.va]

[1] Particularly, I have in mind the establishment of cathedral schools which helped address the problem of a mostly illiterate population. See Margaret Deansley: A History of the Medieval Church.

Re:Mod parent overrated please!

[superyooser]

After all, looking up Psalm 137:9 in King James Version is much more eloquent:
"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones."

Let's see that with a little context:

O daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be, that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us.

Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.

Babylon, hmmm... Iraq.

I think this is the answer to somebody's sig that reads: Who would Jesus bomb?
:-)

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[1u3hr]

The GB and the printing press also aided civilization tremendously by helping spread knowledge throughout the globe in a quick and timely manner.

Yes -- what's special is that it's one of the first printed books in Europe. The cultural impact on the free dissemination of information was much greater than that of the Internet. (Yes, books were still expensive, but much more numerous and affordable than hand scribed ones.)

the photographs provided by the HRC are not detailed enough to make out the text clearly.

Following a hint in the story, I found the British Library's edition [prodigi.bl.uk], which is much nicer. (Though on UTexas they say you can get high res images on application; I suspect that means buying a CDROM.)

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[BrokenHalo]

For those interested in Gutenberg, Blake Morrison has written a great novel, The Justification of Johann Gutenberg, published by Chatto & Windus and available in paperback. The work is mostly fiction, as details of Gutenberg's life are limited mostly to scanty sources such as legal records. It's a great read, though.

British library put two copies on the web...

[h4mmer5tein]

a few years ago one paper, one vellum. Both copies are online in a readable form ( 1045 / 2048 ) and can be viewed side by side. See them here [prodigi.bl.uk] They actually constitute a usefull research tool in this form as all the text including margin notes is readable via the web, assuming you can read latin of course. It's always nice to see things like this being put up on the web for all to use, but the texas copy one is a little redundant in this instance.

Re:Christianity and the Gutenberg Bible

[Joey Vegetables]

The hard part, as even Mark Twain observed, is not learning the Bible, but living it.

A lot of the "doctrinal" disputes actually result from people doing what they want and trying to find Biblical justification for it, instead of studying what the Bible actually says, and honestly evaluating whether their lives match.

Re:Much better Bible reference

[Tyreth]

Bad link :) I decided to test the website owner's willingness to remove entries, by picking one of his apparent 'contradictions' and see if he'd remove it. He didn't:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/cain. html

Anyone can see that there is no contradiction here. Here's what I wrote to him (excuse how it sounds a bit of a mouthful at the end):

What would it take for you to remove apparent contradictions from your website? From my perusal of a fiew there is quite reasonable explanations that would make it necessary for you to remove, but I'm not sure you will.

I'll give you a small example:

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/cain. html

"A fugitive and a vagabond shalt thou be in the earth."
"And Cain knew his wife, and she conceived, ... and he builded a city."

Quite simply a man can be a vagabond and a fugitive, yet still dwell with a whole family of people. In those times a man was his family, and no doubt his children were outcasts with him. We are not told, but it is easy to imagine that his city was under attack, regarded as being a place of outcasts, etc. It doesn't matter what happened, the point is the verse you claim as contradictory does not necessarily contradict - it only does on the assumption that him building this city meant he was accepted by the world, not rejected.

And that is true of a number of your contradictions. They say things which are not explained in detail, but one of the possible scenarios could mean something contradictory, but doesn't necessarily.

He responded:

Thanks for your interest in the SAB and for your comment regarding Cain. And you may be right about it, too.

Cain may have been a vagabond, wandering around with his family and then later building a city. Who knows? That's the problem with most contradictions -- it's usually possible to find a way out by proposing how-it-could-have-been scenarios.

In my view, the contradictions (though many and real) are the least of the bible's problems. I recommend that you focus on this list, if you really are interested in defending the bible.

You asked if I ever remove contradictions from the SAB. Well yes, I do. Whenever I am convinced that the verses in a contradiction are not contradictory, I remove the contradiction. I only want to include those that would appear contradictory to an objective non-believer. (The Cain contradiction would, in my opinion, fall into that category.)

If he's not willing to change on the simple things, then I'm not going to spend my time pursuing his more important list. I needed to establish first that my time was going to be well spent (the list he referred to was http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cr_short.html)

To me a contradiction is when two opposite, and irreconcilable things are said to be simultaneously true. Such as saying an object is only blue yet it is also only purple. Which is it? Blue or purple? In this Cain story, however, I gave a scenario under which both the statements were true. And that is not a contradiction no matter which way you look at it.

As you can see, he responded politely, I have no bitter feelings. I'm posting this so that others realise that much of the information presented is not contradictory or a problem unless you only look at it from one of many angles.