Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 12 of 12

Thread: Porfiry Uspensky views Sinaiticus in 1845 and 1850

  1. Default

    A correction was made about the above on the textualcriticism forum.

    Although Uspensky felt that the text had to be no earlier than Euthalius, the reasons did not have to do with the Euthalian sections in Acts.

    All the basic concerns above remain about circularity and such. I'll include more on this later.

    ADDED 10/18/2018: much more can be added here from additional research and discussions with scholars. The key issues involve sense-lines.
    Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-18-2018 at 08:29 AM.

  2. Default Noroff tries to counter Uspensky

    ‘These relics have been exposed to the sight of the whole people of the capital for the space of two weeks; and this people looked affectionately on the relic of Sinaitic antiquity, and kissed it devoutly, knowing nothing of its heretical origin, neither perceiving any foul odour from it. I expect that Tischendorf, knowing well how dangerous this relic is for us, laughed in secret at our blissful ignorance.’
    The Journal of Sacred Literature and Biblical Record (1864)

    Die Anfechtungen der Sinai-Bibel - (Assaults on the Sinai Bible)

    Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-18-2018 at 08:30 AM.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts