Page 81 - Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible Christianity. Based on the King James Bible

BIBLE VERSIONS

(pages 1519-1536) of the manuscript “is catalogued unparalleled, but happily rather unusual in documents
separately as minuscule 1957” (Aland, The Text of the of first-rate importance.’ On many occasions 10, 20, 30,
New Testament, p. 109). 40 words are dropped through very carelessness. Letters
In the Gospels it leaves out 749 entire sentences and and words, even whole sentences, are frequently written
452 clauses, plus 237 other words, all of which are twice over, or begun and immediately cancelled; while
found in hundreds of other Greek manuscripts. The total that gross blunder, whereby a clause is omitted because
number of words omitted in B in the Gospels alone is it happens to end in the same words as the clause
2,877 as compared with the majority of manuscripts preceding, occurs no less than 115 times in the New
(Burgon, The Revision Revised, p. 75). Testament” (John Burgon, The Revision Revised). It is
Vaticanus omits Mark 16:9-20, but a blank space is clear that the scribes who copied the Sinaiticus were not
left for that section of Scripture. John Burgon first wrote faithful men of God who treated the Scriptures with
about this in The Last Twelve Verses of the Gospel of St. utmost reverence. The total number of words omitted in
Mark Vindicated, 1871, pp. 86-87. Aleph in the Gospels alone is 3,455 compared with the
Vaticanus identifies itself as a product of gnostic Greek Received Text (Burgon, p. 75).
corruption in John 1:18, where “the only begotten Son” Mark 16:9-20 is omitted in the Sinaiticus, but it was
is changed to “the only begotten God,” thus originally there and has been erased.
perpetuating the ancient Arian heresy that disassociates Like the Vaticanus, the Sinaiticus exhibits gnostic
the Son of God Jesus Christ from God Himself by influence upon its face by changing “the only begotten
claiming that the Word was not the same as the Son. Son” to “the only begotten God” in John 1:18.
John’s Gospel identifies the Son directly with the Word These manuscripts bear evidence of being corrupt
(John 1:1, 18), but by changing “Son” to “God” in verse above all other Greek uncials or minuscules. Consider
18, this direct association is broken. this important testimony by John Burgon, who
The Sinaiticus (Aleph) codex was discovered by dedicated much of his life to the study of Greek
Constantine Tischendorf at St. Catherine’s Monastery manuscripts and who personally analyzed the Vaticanus
(Greek Orthodox) at Mt. Sinai. He discovered the first in Rome:
part in 1844 and the second in 1859. Like Catholicism, “When we study the New Testament by the light of
the Greek Orthodox Church has a false gospel of grace such Codexes as B Aleph D L, we find ourselves in an
plus works and sacraments and holds the unscriptural entirely new region of experience; confronted by
doctrine of venerating relics. St. Catherine’s Monastery phenomena not only unique but even portentous. The
has one entire room filled with skulls! text has undergone apparently AN HABITUAL, IF NOT
SYSTEMATIC, DEPRAVATION; has been manipulated
The Sinaiticus was written by three different scribes throughout in a wild way. Influences have been
and was corrected later by several others. (This was the demonstrably at work which altogether perplex the
conclusion of an extensive investigation by H.J.M. Milne judgment. The result is simply calamitous. There are
and T.C. Skeat of the British Museum, which was evidences of persistent mutilation, not only of words
published in Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus, and clauses, but of entire sentences. The substitution of
London, 1938.) Tischendorf counted 14,800 corrections one expression for another, and the arbitrary
in this manuscript (David Brown, The Great Uncials, transposition of words, are phenomena of such
2000). Dr. F.H.A. Scrivener, who published A Full perpetual occurrence, that it becomes evident at last
Collation of the Codex Sinaiticus in 1864 testified: “The that which lies before us is not so much an ancient
copy, as an ancient recension of the Sacred Text. And
Codex is covered with alterations of an obviously yet not by any means a recension in the usual sense of
correctional character--brought in by at least ten the word as an authoritative revision; but only as the
different revisers, some of them systematically spread name may be applied to the product of individual
over every page, others occasional, or limited to inaccuracy or caprice, or tasteless assiduity on the part
separate portions of the Ms., many of these being of one or many, at a particular time or in a long series
contemporaneous with the first writer, but for the of years. There are reasons for inferring, that we have
greater part belonging to the sixth or seventh century.” alighted on five specimens of what the misguided piety
Thus it is evident that scribes in bygone centuries did of a primitive age is known to have been fruitful in
not consider the Sinaiticus to represent a pure text. Why producing. ... THESE CODEXES ABOUND WITH SO
it should be so revered by modern textual critics is a MUCH LICENTIOUSNESS OR CARELESSNESS AS TO
SUGGEST THE INFERENCE, THAT THEY ARE IN FACT
mystery. INDEBTED FOR THEIR PRESERVATION TO THEIR
A great amount of carelessness is exhibited in the HOPELESS CHARACTER. Thus it would appear that an
copying and correction. “Codex Sinaiticus ‘abounds with evil reputation ensured their neglect in ancient times;
errors of the eye and pen to an extent not indeed and has procured that they should survive to our own,
long after multitudes which were much better had

Way of Life Encyclopedia of the Bible & Christianity 81