In Matthew 9/10 (Sinaiticus) you can find both versions, ιϲλ (Iota Sigma Lambda) and ιηλ (Iota Eta lambda), on the same page. I think this is realy interesting, because it looks like the whole page was writtern by the same guy. Why should he use 2 different abbreviations for the same word?
Why do people forget the accusative form? Never mind that.
Chris wrote:When I first heard about Nomina sacra (9 months ago), I came to the same question. I read some posts and webpages about the topic, but they all have only a list with nominative and genitive. Dative, accusative and vocative are missing. And I was confused. I wanted to get a better overview and maybe a table with Nomina sacra and all 5 cases, but I couldn't find one in the web. And I was wondering why, and still do. It's not that hard. Even a beginner like me can do this, though perhaps not without errors.
Part from my webpage, that ist still under costruktion and not yet online.
The Nomina sacra above are all from Codex Sinaiticus.
But remember the book is from 1907, and some papyri and manuscripts like Egerton Papyrus 2 with the Nomen sacrum IH (iota-eta) were still unknown at this time.
Peter Kirby wrote:Nice find there LC. Remember also earlier that the Christogram XR was a pre-Christian siglum in the margin of miss or excerpts of Homer marking certain passages as 'useful' or 'excellent' for quotation.
We already know that scholars routinely posit Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint. I wonder whether they may have ever put this christogramin the margin, with the same intention? Indeed I wonder whether we have some such mss already where scholars assumed the mark meant messianic or Christ instead. Do we?
Peter, what do you mean by
'We already know that scholars routinely *posit* Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint' ??
Peter Kirby wrote:Nice find there LC. Remember also earlier that the Christogram XR was a pre-Christian siglum in the margin of miss or excerpts of Homer marking certain passages as 'useful' or 'excellent' for quotation.
We already know that scholars routinely posit Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint. I wonder whether they may have ever put this christogramin the margin, with the same intention? Indeed I wonder whether we have some such mss already where scholars assumed the mark meant messianic or Christ instead. Do we?
Peter, what do you mean by
'We already know that scholars routinely *posit* Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint' ??
Care to elaborate?
The term in the trade here is testimonia, which can be used to dig up literature regarding this topic.
While they are often 'posited' to be behind certain Christian authors' use of the Septuagint, their existence in general (= extracts from the Septuagint) isn't solely hypothetical.
Along with the idea of the possibility of "sayings collections" attributed to Jesus (confirmed by Nag Hammadi), this could be a considered a case where the conjecture seems to have come before the 'hard' evidence (from Qumran and Oxyrhynchus). Apparently J. Rendel Harris in the early 20th century can be given credit for developing the idea.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Peter Kirby wrote:Nice find there LC. Remember also earlier that the Christogram XR was a pre-Christian siglum in the margin of miss or excerpts of Homer marking certain passages as 'useful' or 'excellent' for quotation.
We already know that scholars routinely posit Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint. I wonder whether they may have ever put this christogramin the margin, with the same intention? Indeed I wonder whether we have some such mss already where scholars assumed the mark meant messianic or Christ instead. Do we?
Peter, what do you mean by
'We already know that scholars routinely *posit* Christian compilations of extracts from the Septuagint' ??
Care to elaborate?
The term in the trade here is testimonia, which can be used to dig up literature regarding this topic.
While they are often 'posited' to be behind certain Christian authors' use of the Septuagint, their existence in general (= extracts from the Septuagint) isn't solely hypothetical.
Along with the idea of the possibility of "sayings collections" attributed to Jesus (confirmed by Nag Hammadi), this could be a considered a case where the conjecture seems to have come before the 'hard' evidence (from Qumran and Oxyrhynchus). Apparently J. Rendel Harris in the early 20th century can be given credit for developing the idea.
TESTIMONIES, by RENDEL HARRIS with the assistance of VACHER BURCH
PART I
Cambridge :at the University Press 1916
CHAPTER II
FURTHER PROOFS OF THE ANTIQUITY OF THE TESTIMONY BOOK
It is becoming increasingly clear that the Testimony Book is earlier in date than some of the earliest books of the New Testament; and that it is not mere oral Testimony that is involved is also clear from the antiquity and wide diffusion of errors which can only have arisen in a written book. [pg 21]...
MrMacSon wrote:
That's an interesting table. Thanks.
Thankl you MrMacSon. My website is now online, but I'm still working on it. I don't know, if it is helpful or not. The website is in german language, but the tables don't need much translation I think. I will make an english version as soon as I have learned PHP. Each image on the site is linked to the online bibles Codex Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Coislinianus, Bezae to the chapter and page I found them. Sadly this doesn't work for Codex Alexandrinus.
Please contact me to report errors. You can contact me here in this forums, or here: nomina@nomina-sacra.info
Please do not be angry if I do not answer immediately, I have a lot to do atm. Thank you.
slevin wrote:so far as I am aware, (i.e. probably wrong), the ancient scribes, for DSS, placed little dots above a word, like YHWH, for example, to signal something that could be contentious.... Perhaps the little dots triggered the notion of "nomina sacra", which are not exclusively used for "sacred" people or places!!
What do you mean was contentious about the name YHWH? The pronunciation of it?
My research on the prophecies of the Messiah's resurrection: http://rakovskii.livejournal.com
Peter Kirby wrote:If so, why does this happen in Sinaiticus but not in other manuscripts, where the person speaking is also there "a young man" and not God?
If I understood you right, you are talking about the not abbreviated Jesus (IHESOUN) in Mark 16,6 in the Codex Sinaiticus and why there is no other IHCOYC found in the manuscripts? Or do you only talk about the scene, when the women came to the grave of Jesus?
If you meant it generally and not only for the scene in the tomb, I have something from an old german book, that might be interesting for you. The book was written by Ludwig Traube in 1907, who introduced the term Nomina sacra. I don't know if there is an english translation, sorry. On page 113 and 114 I read something intersting (red):
I'm not allowed to post url's. The title is:"NOMINA SACRA - Versuch einer Geschichte der christlichen Kürzung". You can find it on the web.
Paraphrasing:
in B2 and B4, IC XC was used a countless times for Jesus Christ, three times IHCOYC was written. Also in Sinaiticus there is a such lost IHCOYN.
B2 is Codex Vaticanus 2066. I'm not sure with B4. Ludwig Traube wrote, that he thinks most times when the name of Jesus was not abbreviated, it was unintended, but only when Jesus was meant and not Joshua or Sirach from the old testament.
Wow. Chris last posted here 6.5 years ago, but all credits go to him for finding a IHSOUN in Sinaiticus as well as pointing out the Traube "trove" - even though Traube apparently overlooked John and Matthew 3 on his Bezae analysis
