The falsified LXX was meant to support the NT. Nomina sacra for Christ / xristos in the "OT"

[Steven Avery]

Traube does notice exceptions, and seems to suggest distinguishing between OT and NT for Sinaiticus: yet apparently, I overlooked Sin B1 and Sin C...
I have most of my material on the laptop, server as well as phone - so here's your Traube Sinaiticus page
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_hI4T ... 9/mode/2up
It continues on the next two pages

Thanks!

I'm looking for unusual forms, maybe very short, on words like David, possibly Jerusalem, where Sinaiticus is really taking a later Greek or Latin style NS that is not in earlier mss.

Here is the page where I am stashing info.
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... -mss.3020/

However, we are juggling three projects right now, one has to do with the Bulgarian's analysis, another is the Revelation element to the Andreas commentary.

[mlinssen]

Traube does notice exceptions, and seems to suggest distinguishing between OT and NT for Sinaiticus: yet apparently, I overlooked Sin B1 and Sin C...
I have most of my material on the laptop, server as well as phone - so here's your Traube Sinaiticus page
https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_hI4T ... 9/mode/2up
It continues on the next two pages

Thanks!

I'm looking for unusual forms, maybe very short, on words like David, possibly Jerusalem, where Sinaiticus is really taking a later Greek or Latin style NS that is not in earlier mss.

Here is the page where I am stashing info.
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... -mss.3020/

However, we are juggling three projects right now, one has to do with the Bulgarian's analysis, another is the Revelation element to the Andreas commentary.

Just get the transcription and sort all words uniquely, that shouldn't take more than 5 minutes. I presume that you'd have a full concordance of Sinaiticus, of course