TwoNoteableCorruptions
Well-known member
Except for the over-writting of the faded ink...
That faded over a thousand years plus...
Codex Sinaiticus - the facts
- Thread starter cjab
- Start date
Except for the over-writting of the faded ink...
That faded over a thousand years plus...
Steven Avery
Well-known member
I'll simply wait for you to show the destroyed words in the New Testament.
How about even one?
christ_undivided
Well-known member
In your own words, I would still like to know why you're targeting "Sinaiticus"?
The portion of the codex held by the British Library consists of 346½ folios, 694 pages (38.1 cm x 34.5 cm), constituting over half of the original work. Of these folios, 199 belong to the Old Testament, including the apocrypha (deuterocanonical), and 147½ belong to the New Testament, along with two other books, the Epistle of Barnabas and part of The Shepherd of Hermas. The apocryphal books present in the surviving part of the Septuagint are 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, 1 and 4 Maccabees, Wisdom, and Sirach.[11][14] The books of the New Testament are arranged in this order: the four Gospels, the epistles of Paul (Hebrews follows 2 Thess.), the Acts of the Apostles,[n 2] the General Epistles, and the Book of Revelation. The fact that some parts of the codex are preserved in good condition while others are in very poor condition suggests they were separated and stored in several places.[15]: 313–315
[15] Skeat, Theodore Cressy (2000). "The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus". Novum Testamentum. Brill. XLII, 4 (4): 313–315
That alone destroys Avery's position. The reinforcing.
New fragment of Codex Sinaiticus discovered
Tomorrow's Independent carries an interesting story about the find of a previously unseen section of Codex Sinaiticus: Fragment from world...
ntweblog.blogspot.com
New fragment of Codex Sinaiticus discovered
. . A Greek student conservator who is studying for his PhD in Britain, Mr Sarris had been involved in the British Library's project to digitise the Codex and quickly recognised the distinct Greek lettering when he saw it poking through a section of the book binding. Speaking from the Greek island of Patmos yesterday, Mr Sarris said: "It was a really exciting moment. Although it is not my area of expertise, I had helped with the online project so the Codex had been heavily imprinted in my memory. I began checking the height of the letters and the columns and quickly realised we were looking at an unseen part of the Codex.
New fragment of Codex Sinaiticus discovered
Tomorrow's Independent carries an interesting story about the find of a previously unseen section of Codex Sinaiticus: Fragment from world...
ntweblog.blogspot.com
Finding Additional Leaves of the Codex Sinaiticus in a Book Binding : History of Information
Finding Additional Leaves of the Codex Sinaiticus in a Book Binding
www.historyofinformation.com
Finding Additional Leaves of the Codex Sinaiticus in a Book Binding
5/26/1975 to 2014
https://www.historyofinformation.com/detail.php?id=952
During restoration work on May 26, 1975 the monks of St. Catherine's monastery at Mount Sinai Offsite Linkdiscovered a sealed room in the monastery that contained art treasures and 1148 manuscripts, in various languages, of which 305 were complete. Among the the fragments were 12 complete leaves, and some fragments, of the Codex Sinaiticus.
In Burgon's words, at p78 "The Revision Revised," א and B are "two false witnesses."
א is said to have thousands of differences to the KJV.
My puzzle is why the obsession with א but not B? Or is it just that א is more open to conspiracy theories, allowing the conspiracy theorist to demonstate his talents, which is likely much of the attraction in casting them as "false witnesses".
Their plan is to first discredit Sinaiticus for not being real. Then they would move on to Vaticanus claiming it wasn't real as well. Then they can prove that Westcott and Hort were mistaken, then "they" will somehow get credit for restoring the AV ("their" particular one). Their still somehow wanting to take on Hort (1800s, outdated) to defeat him.
They prefer this than making the Bible more accurate. We all now know that Hort was wrong about many things, and they seem to dwell in his mistakes, committing the same errors. If the KJV shares an error with Hort they will defend it with their last breath. Ironically as Textual Critics they are more like Hort than anyone else.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Interesting approach.
The jab pharma-$ mandate disaster,
along with the difficulties “returning” to the moon,
along with CIA involvement in the JFK assassination,
and 10% for the big guy on Hunter’s laptop,
and much more …
have pretty much destroyed “conspiracy theory” as a pejorative.
christ_undivided
Well-known member
Why deflect?
Steven Avery
Well-known member
So your position is that some weak ink being reinforced in a few pages must mean 1,500 years of wear (although it is trivially easy for the calligraphist to use weak ink).
While the superb New Testament, and the many pages even in the OT of super-ink, unreinforced, shows that those manuscript sections and pages are new, say ... c. AD 1840. Simply impossible to have been subject to 1500 years of aging and deterioration and use.
Interesting ... hmmm .. the same manuscript has two different ages?
Which one wins?
The answer, my friend, is blowing in the parchment.
Last edited:
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Simply showing why the "conspiracy theory" charge is an embarrassment to those making the charge.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Vaticanus at least has some provenance, we know it was in the Vatican library in the late 1400s. The idea of 4th century is basically just a guess, and many had a later date, until Westcott and Hort needed early dates for the two manuscripts for their theories. Vaticanus has its own quirks, here is one:
Wieland Willker
Codex Vaticanus Graece 1209, B/03
http://www.willker.de/wie/Vaticanus/general.html
There's more likelihood of you winning the lottery than proving Sinaiticus was a 19th century fake. The problem with conspiracy theorists is that, like Alex Jones, they never know when to stop. They become more and more emboldened, and are unable to appraise their true position with respect to the facts, and with respect to what is morally right to credit, which are, beyond reasonable doubt in this case, that both א and B are authentic, as has been known since the 19th century.
As for the 'difficulties' of returning to the moon, The United States spent $25.8 billion on Project Apollo between 1960 and 1973, or approximately $257 billion when adjusted for inflation to 2020 dollars, (contrasted with aid to Ukraine = $68 billion).
So you reckon all that money was spent on a plan to deceive the people or the Russians? Your conspiracy theory will have to explain where all the money went, if it did not go on what it was actually spent on: again an insurmountable task for you.
The problem is, you can't see yourself, and you can't see reality for what it is. Conspiracy theories are what cults feed off. They do not honor God. True religion is not a cult. Christianity is not a cult. Historically, many conceived Christianity as cultic, and such cults, as based on conspiracy theories, were continually excommunicated: consider Epiphanius of Salamis and his Panarion, or Irenaeus's Against Heresies.
For the KJV to be made the object of veneration is cultic.
Last edited:
That's an interesting insight. However I wouldn't agree with the idea that KJVOists should be seen as textual critics. For the most part, they do not attain such an exalted academic status. KJVOists are relatively unlearned fanatics and extremists in defying even the consensus of history and academia (e.g. The Johannine comma). Any genuine textual critic is to be preferred, whatever their POV.
Whatever the text of the KJV is, is what they go with. Of course when there are textual variants in the KJV then they don't acknowledge them. But when Professor Hort agrees with the KJV against others they automatically go with Hort. They have no choice, it was made before they were born to go with Horts decisions. That why I said they are more like Hort. Bound by his decisions, unlike thinking people's decisions.
Last edited:
Bound to Hort's decisions, but bound by their KJVO delusion.
But when you say, "agrees with the KJV against others", can you be more precise, with specific examples? There are places where he retains a qualified textus receptus (bracketed) but I should imagine there is seldom an unqualified preference for the textus receptus against the rest.
Last edited:
My apologies. I am wasting you time. I was just pointing out when KJVOnlys talk trash about Hort, yet the KJV and Hort will agree against other editions of the Greek New Testament. Sometimes even all other editions, they are forced to agree with the one they were talking trash about. I liked to point out the ironic situation they find themselves in. Did not mean to side track.
Steven Avery
Well-known member
Don Petit, NASA astronaut:
“I’d go to the moon in a nanosecond. The problem is we don’t have the technology to do that anymore. We used to but we destroyed that technology and it’s a painful process to build it back again.”