Steven Avery
Administrator
reddit
I clearly remember recently reading that Sinaiticus was missing several NT books. Now everywhere I look says that the Sinaiticus NT is complete. What gives?
SecurityTheaterNews
That makes sense, since I was examining both of them about the same time. Thank you.
Another question that I have is how did pieces Sinaiticus end up in so many pieces in different places? And it looks like different leaves of the Codex have turned up every now and then in different places.
Wouldn't the entire codex be bound together?
For that matter, how in the world would Tischendorf not only have noticed loose leaves of Sinaiticus in the trash at St Catherine's, but somehow recognize them as super important. The whole story just doesn't make sense. And the story about finding loose leaves of the Ms in a hidden room in 1975?
There is a bunch of stuff about Sinaitucus that just doesn't make sense.
This codex that was so zealously guarded and preserved for so many centuries just getting scattered around willy-nilly
purebible
The Tischendorf discovery story is "under a cloud". There are too many holes, such as the fact that Porfiry Uspensky published a fragment from the New Testament even before the supposed New Testament discovery in 1859 by Tischendorf. He saw the whole manuscript in 1845, and his publication of his visit in 1856 talks of the books.
The 1975 "New Finds" is legitimate and there are Sinaiticus fragments there. However when you look at them closely you find that they may have been a result of actions from Tischendorf. e.g. The Hermas leaves were an embarrassment because Simonides had published a very similar Hermas in 1856.
Standard consensus scholarship says that Sinaiticus was written in the 4th century, which makes the pristine New Testament, not a word gone after 1500 years of heavy use, a puzzling positive anomaly. An alternate theory is sympathetic to the claims from Constantine SImonides that the manuscript was actually created on Mount Athos c. 1840.
The simple fact is that there was very little examination of the actual manuscript, however after the Codex Sinaiticus Project of 2009 there has been much greater ability to understand manuscript quirks.
Naugrith
· 2 hr. ago
Moderator
This is an excellent summary, but I'm afraid we will require a source for it. Please could you edit your post to include one. Many thanks.
===========================
As to
Tischendorf story "under a cloud"
Codex Sinaiticus: New Perspectives on the Ancient Biblical Manuscript (2015)
Ch 14 The Recent History of Codex Sinaiticus: Insights from the Sinai Archives p. 189-200
by Nicholas Fyssas
" since his (Tischendorf's) version justifies his acts, as saving the manuscript from its ignorant owners, one should be very cautious in accepting it without serious reservations." - p. 190
Uspensky book and seeing manuscript in 1845 and publishing NT fragment from Corinthians
New Finds has Sinaiticus fragments
possible actions from Tischendorf:
the Hermas leaves being an embarrassment
Genesis 24
Simonides Hermas in 1856
4th century standard consensus scholarship
not one word gone
alternate theory of Simonides and Athos
little examination
after 2009 CSP more available
I clearly remember recently reading that Sinaiticus was missing several NT books. Now everywhere I look says that the Sinaiticus NT is complete. What gives?
https://www.reddit.com/user/SecurityTheaterNews/SecurityTheaterNews
That makes sense, since I was examining both of them about the same time. Thank you.
Another question that I have is how did pieces Sinaiticus end up in so many pieces in different places? And it looks like different leaves of the Codex have turned up every now and then in different places.
Wouldn't the entire codex be bound together?
For that matter, how in the world would Tischendorf not only have noticed loose leaves of Sinaiticus in the trash at St Catherine's, but somehow recognize them as super important. The whole story just doesn't make sense. And the story about finding loose leaves of the Ms in a hidden room in 1975?
There is a bunch of stuff about Sinaitucus that just doesn't make sense.
This codex that was so zealously guarded and preserved for so many centuries just getting scattered around willy-nilly
purebible
The Tischendorf discovery story is "under a cloud". There are too many holes, such as the fact that Porfiry Uspensky published a fragment from the New Testament even before the supposed New Testament discovery in 1859 by Tischendorf. He saw the whole manuscript in 1845, and his publication of his visit in 1856 talks of the books.
The 1975 "New Finds" is legitimate and there are Sinaiticus fragments there. However when you look at them closely you find that they may have been a result of actions from Tischendorf. e.g. The Hermas leaves were an embarrassment because Simonides had published a very similar Hermas in 1856.
Standard consensus scholarship says that Sinaiticus was written in the 4th century, which makes the pristine New Testament, not a word gone after 1500 years of heavy use, a puzzling positive anomaly. An alternate theory is sympathetic to the claims from Constantine SImonides that the manuscript was actually created on Mount Athos c. 1840.
The simple fact is that there was very little examination of the actual manuscript, however after the Codex Sinaiticus Project of 2009 there has been much greater ability to understand manuscript quirks.
Naugrith
· 2 hr. ago
Moderator
This is an excellent summary, but I'm afraid we will require a source for it. Please could you edit your post to include one. Many thanks.
===========================
As to
Tischendorf story "under a cloud"
Codex Sinaiticus: New Perspectives on the Ancient Biblical Manuscript (2015)
Ch 14 The Recent History of Codex Sinaiticus: Insights from the Sinai Archives p. 189-200
by Nicholas Fyssas
" since his (Tischendorf's) version justifies his acts, as saving the manuscript from its ignorant owners, one should be very cautious in accepting it without serious reservations." - p. 190
Uspensky book and seeing manuscript in 1845 and publishing NT fragment from Corinthians
New Finds has Sinaiticus fragments
possible actions from Tischendorf:
the Hermas leaves being an embarrassment
Genesis 24
Simonides Hermas in 1856
4th century standard consensus scholarship
not one word gone
alternate theory of Simonides and Athos
little examination
after 2009 CSP more available
Last edited: