Codex Sinaiticus - the white parchment Friderico-Augustanus

[rakovsky]

How different are sinaicitus verses from other Bible versions?

What is the motive? Fame and cash?

[Steven Avery]

Excellent new video!

Sinaiticus Coincidences? - David W. Daniels - Feb, 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_4WdDG-smU
17 minutes. Watch and enjoy. And some discussion in the comments section on the Youtube page.

And for more info, starting from a Facebook traffic-cop post:

Sinaiticus Problematicus
https://www.facebook.com/groups/purebib ... 864462367/

Although there is also plenty of fine stuff right on the threads in this forum.

Sinaiticus authenticity - the single most significant Bible ms textual question today!

And I just noticed that the shadow poster Bill Brown helped us out by bumping this thread recently.
I'll check later if he offers any substance

Steven Avery
Asheville,NY

[Steven Avery]

How different are sinaicitus verses from other Bible versions?
What is the motive? Fame and cash?

Great questions.

The difference is fairly large, in terms of doctrine. This was hashed out in the 1860s when Porfiry Uspensky accused the text of being heretical, on issues like the virgin birth. That could be another discussion.

However, the signficance is not so much the Sinaiticus oddball variants, which are often rejected, especially singulars. The big signfiicance is how it became a Robin to the Vaticanus Batman in creating the Westcott-Hort recension (which is the foundation of all Critical Text editions since 1881). Without Sinaiticus it is safe to say that the recension would never have been accepted. (For this, you go into the turgid Hortian explanations and the scholarship reactions in the following years.)

Another significance is the abject corruption of the text. The thousands of errors and obvious corruptions, that are generally just ignored and passed over. It is scribally a disaster.

> Fame and cash?

In terms of the vain-glorious Tischendorf, these were clearly key motives.

The question of a hidden hand behind the Critical Text is another element to be considered. Tischendorf's passport was found right outside the monastery in pristine condition.

The last line was edgy humor. However, there are a lot of strange circumstances, such as when Tischendorf had the ms. in his private hands with two unnamed Germans for months in Cairo in 1859. And the obvious colouring of the part that went to St. Petersburg. Rarely do you ever see such a clear smoking gun, since we have both BEFORE & AFTER of the colouring by lemon-juice available to us today.

Also, looking at what happenned before the ms. suddenly appeared at St. Catherine's is a fascinating project, however a lot of study there has to be conjectural, looking at things like Tischendorf's visits to the papacy, his later comment that he had Vaticanus available at the time, the comment of Hort about "rich materials", stuff like that.

Steven

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

> Fame and cash?

In terms of the vain-glorious Tischendorf, these were clearly key motives.

Shame on you!

Tischendorf was a conservative Christian. His big dream was to discover the original text of the Bible and he was clearly one of the leading manuscript experts of his time. The Csar paid him nothing for the Sinaiticus. After diplomatic communication between Saxony and Russia Tischendorf got one or two hundred books of his printed edition of the Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus and a bit tip.

[Ulan]

> Fame and cash?

In terms of the vain-glorious Tischendorf, these were clearly key motives.

Shame on you!

Tischendorf was a conservative Christian. His big dream was to discover the original text of the Bible and he was clearly one of the leading manuscript experts of his time. The Csar paid him nothing for the Sinaiticus. After diplomatic communication between Saxony and Russia Tischendorf got one or two hundred books of his printed edition of the Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus and a bit tip.

I don't think facts matter when it's about righteous belief .

Anyway, I still think the easiest explanation for the differences is the horrible London climate. I don't think it was a good idea to bring parchment that is that old into the humid air of Britain. Cold and dry winter air in Eastern Europe was much easier on the material.

[Kunigunde Kreuzerin]

I don't think facts matter when it's about righteous belief .

Anyway, I still think the easiest explanation for the differences is the horrible London climate. I don't think it was a good idea to bring parchment that is that old into the humid air of Britain. Cold and dry winter air in Eastern Europe was much easier on the material.

Unbelievable but true: it was permitted to touch all sheets of the Codex. These Brits

[Steven Avery]

> Fame and cash?

In terms of the vain-glorious Tischendorf, these were clearly key motives.

Tischendorf was a conservative Christian. His big dream was to discover the original text of the Bible and he was clearly one of the leading manuscript experts of his time. The Csar paid him nothing for the Sinaiticus. After diplomatic communication between Saxony and Russia Tischendorf got one or two hundred books of his printed edition of the Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus and a bit tip.

This post has a bit about the vain-glorious Tischendorf.

pages age at different rates?
viewtopic.php?p=45894#p45894

Here you can read a bit about his propensity for manuscript theft.

the theft and mutliation of manuscripts
http://www.purebibleforum.com/showthread.php?t=91

However, it is a bit of a distraction here from the Codex itself. The study of the politics in the 1860s regarding the ms are quite interesting. Tischendorf got his honorary Professorship position and laurels. He was held up in getting money (far less important) because of the simple fact that he was accused of having stolen the ms.

Interestingly, you then you had Simonides reported as working in St. Petersburg in the Russian archives.

Steven

[Steven Avery]

Anyway, I still think the easiest explanation for the differences is the horrible London climate. I don't think it was a good idea to bring parchment that is that old into the humid air of Britain. Cold and dry winter air in Eastern Europe was much easier on the material.

An easy explanation is quite worthless when it bumps up against facts and history.

The Brits had careful control over the ms. from 1931 to today. They did a special rebinding of the ms.

1) they never reported this supposed massive discouloring and yellowing (and staining)

2) never reported it to be on reception a white parchment ms. (like you see in Leipzig from the 1844 theft and like Uspensky saw in 1845)

3) unusual colouring and staining throughout the British section (but none in Leipzig) could not have occurred in that time, and was never explained.

4) supposedly suffered 1500 years with heavy use, so it never would be as a white parchment pristine ms. In my searching there is nothing like that in the world

5) said to be in "phenomenally good condition" for its supposed age

The simple facts are that we have a manuscript that is far too good condition for its supposed age,
and the tamperers even graciously left us a BEFORE and AFTER view of the colour tampering.

Which 1850s tampering had been noted by Kallinikos c. 1860, as pointed out in the new youtube.

Sinaiticus Coincidences?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_4WdDG-smU

Thank you for the probative evidence left behind.

Steven

[Ulan]

I don't think facts matter when it's about righteous belief .

Anyway, I still think the easiest explanation for the differences is the horrible London climate. I don't think it was a good idea to bring parchment that is that old into the humid air of Britain. Cold and dry winter air in Eastern Europe was much easier on the material.

Unbelievable but true: it was permitted to touch all sheets of the Codex. These Brits

Nice.

Well, I was told that this is actually a good thing. Unlike papyrus, which you are only supposed to touch with gloves, parchment gets preserved by the oils from fingers. Which means that even experts today touch them with with their bare hands.

[Steven Avery]

Unbelievable but true: it was permitted to touch all sheets of the Codex.

Just curious, where did you read that?
The picture you showed is simply a fuzzy still.

Steven