The differences found between the text of the Codex Sinaiticus and the
NT as perceived by Christians today, are nearly shocking. Even though
scholars have worked on the manuscripts for years, there are very few
who even know of the differences, and even fewer who still have to come
to terms with them.
After the Sinaiticus had been written, later correctors had laid hands
on it for centuries, and had made alterations and notes on the text
itself. Some mistakes were caused by faulty eyesight or hearing
(from dictation), others were deliberate interpolations and alterations
due to changes in doctrinal or theological beliefs. Tischendorf alone,
counted 14,800 corrections in the Sinaiticus, made by nine
separate correctors, coming to the conclusion, that it was not the four
scribes (who had similar writing) but the readers who made the errors.
Such errors were scientifically proved.
When the Sinaiticus was examined under ultra violet light, it was
discovered, that the Gospel of John:21 originally ended at v.24. with a
tail piece 'The Gospel according to John' , which was later
erased writing over the tail piece, inserting the present v.25 (This
last verse is used to emphasize on the selective character of the
Gospel) 'There were many other things Jesus did if all were
written down, the world itself; I suppose would not hold all the books
that would have to be written '.
Because the Codex Sinaiticus was worked over by later correctors long
after it was first written. Most correctors who had their own doctrinal
theories, made an attempt to alterate the text. But a later corrector
would usually identify the alteration, and would carefully try to amend
the alteration. The scribes would place dots or brackets besides a
particular text that needed to be deleted. The process of alterations
and omissions, for doctrinal reasons at work, can be seen in the
following examples:
[1] 'There appeared unto him an Angel from heaven, strengthening him.
And being in Agony, he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat became as it
were great drops of blood falling down upon the ground' [Luke 22:43-44]
This text, clearly indicating that Jesus needed the support of an Angel,
and that before his arrest and trial he was in agony. In Sinaiticus a
scribe has placed dots beside this text, indicating it ought to be
deleted. (This scribe obviously knew that this text could weaken the
faith of many Christians. For why would a Son of God, who is supposed to
be on the same level of God, need the support of an Angel?
And if he knew that he was going to make such a graceful sacrifice, then
why was he in agony?). Later on, another scribe carefully tried to erase
the dots.
[2] 'But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels in
heaven, but my father only.' [Mathew 24:36 - English authorized version]
In the Sinaitic version, after the words 'not the angels in heaven' the
following words are also included, 'Neither the son' (also bracketed for
deletion). This again must have been removed through fear of doctrinal
misunderstanding, probably by someone who thought it unacceptable that
Jesus might not be on the same level of knowledge as God.
The words 'Neither the son' in Mathew 24:36, had been marked for
deletion by a corrector before the Ms came into the hands of Jerome, who
supposed the omission to have the approval of Origen; but renewed
examination of the original has confirmed the phrase was deleted by a
corrector.
[3] 'The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the son of God.' [Mark
1:1]
The received text of the Bible begins the gospel of Mark, with the above
verse. In the Sinaitic version, the words, 'the son of God ' are not
deleted, neither altered, but are absent, probably never written.
[4] Mark tells of the leper who says to Jesus 'If you will you can make
me clean. Jesus moved with compassion, stretched out his hand and
touched him, and said I will be clean.'[Mark 1:41-42 English authorized
version] Mark 1:41
The Sinaitic version, continuous with 'Jesus, Angry, stretched out his
hand and touched him, and said I will, be clean'.
It seems, that later manuscript scribes probably thought, to attribute
anger to Jesus at this point, made him appear too human. So alter the
word 'angry' to 'moved with compassion'.
[5] In the gospel of John 5:1-3, Jesus comes across a great many sick
persons Iying by a pool. The following verse of John 5:4 'For an angel
went down at a certain season into the pool and troubled the water.
Whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in it
was made whole of the whatever disease he had'. This later insertion is
not to be found in the Sinaiticus.
[6] 'Then his son said, "Father, I have sinned against heaven and
against you. l no longer deserve to be called your son. Make me like one
of your hired servants." (The Parable of the prodigal son) . [Luke
15:21-Codex Sinaiticus]
Apparently in all later manuscripts, the son himself so unexpectedly
welcomed by his father, omits to offer himself 'as one of the hired
servants'.
[7] 'Now as he blessed them, and was parted from them, and was carried
up to heaven'. [Luke 24:51]
Sinaiticus omits 'carried up to heaven', this must have been
deliberately inserted in later manuscripts. However if this omission in
the Sinaiticus is correct, then there is no reference at all to the
'Ascension' in any of the original texts of the gospels.
The evidence of the Sinaiticus Proved to be very disturbing for many,
especially, at one point, 20th century Theologians found the witness of
the Codex Sinaiticus so disturbing, that they were forced to
re-consider, the central doctrine of the Christian faith itself: 'The
resurrection of Jesus Christ himself'.
According to Codex Sinaiticus, Codice' s Syriacus, Vaticanus, Bobiensis,
100 early Armenian manuscripts, and two of the oldest Georgian
translations, the gospel of Mark originally ended at ch. 16. v.8.
'And they went out quickly and fled from the sepulchure, for they
trembled and were amazed, neither said they anything to any man for they
were afraid'.
This is the ending of the gospel of Mark according to Codex Sinaiticus.
It does not so end, in the authorised version of the English Bible, nor
in the Received text of any of the orthodox Christian churches. Their
versions are all continued with a further 12 verses. But many mnuscripts
are to be found where scribes themselves add a note, that, the last 11
verses of Mark do not appear in older copies.
The gospels of Mathew and Luke were defended by many, as being older
than Mark' s version which was judged as essentially secondary to them,
so the evidence of the Sinaiticus could still be set aside.
This led to the synoptic problem and scholarly debate. Eventually
successive, scholarly confirmations proved Mark to be the first written
gospel, owing him priority in the order of the gospels. The gospel
of Mark, ending the way it did in the Sinaiticus, made it evident, that,
the earliest gospel tradition stressed only on the empty tomb and
ignored altogether any supposed appearances of Jesus bodily risen from
the dead. This conviction clearly and obviously leads to the belief
that, not only was Jesus, somehow still alive, but, when he he had
appeared to his followers after the crucifixion it was in 'bodily' form,
to which Jesus testifies in the following verse;
'They were still talking about all this when he himself stood among them
and said to them, 'peace be with you ! '. In a state of alarm and
fright, they thought they were seeing a ghost. but he said, 'why are you
so agitated, and why are these doubts rising in your hearts? Look at my
hands and feet; yes it is I indeed touch me and see for your selves; a
ghost has no flesh and bones as you can see I have. 'And as he showed
them his hands and feet. their joy was so great that they still could
not believe it, and they stood there dumfounded. so he said to them,
'have you anything here to eat? ' And they offered him a piece of
grilled fish, which he took and ate before their eyes'. [Luke 24:36-43]
So, just as earlier believers felt obliged to provide endings to Mark's
gospel, likewise twentieth century Christians of then refuse to accept
that the gospel could have ended where it does, and they set about
providing reconstructions of, what he should have written or intended to
write. Which would still not effect the priority of Mark amongst the
gospel writers. So the truth of the Codex Sinaiticus would have to be
accepted or rejected as it stands.
* * *
>From (if I understand my own notes) stuff which can be found at
http://scholar.cc.emory.edu/scripts/TC/TC.html
Doctrinal Alterations
Explanation
The Church Fathers repeatedly accuse the heretics of corrupting the
Scriptures in order to support their special views. For example,
Marcion, in the mid-second century, expunged his copies of the
Gospel of Luke of all references to the Jewish background of Jesus.
Either a scribe eliminated or altered what was potentially damaging to
his own views or introduced alterations which would support
his view.
Examples
John 7:8
Although in this verse Jesus states that he is not going to the feast,
he seems to have changed his mind after his brothers leave (v. 10). It
seems to suggest that Jesus either lied to them about going to the
feast or went back on his prior decision. In any case, scribes were
struck by the possible inconsistency and in order to alleviate it,
changed the "not" to "not yet" which also appears in a later clause.
Luke 23:32
To avoid the implication in this text that Jesus was also a criminal,
most Greek witnesses have changed the sequence of words to solve the
difficulty. Of the modern translations, the Revised Standard
Version, the New American Standard Bible and the New International
Version all follow the largest number of manuscripts instead of the
stronger support based on antiquity and on internal evidence.
* * *
Ciao.
-- Michael Fisher, ET1/SS USN ret., lawstudent* * * He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself. Thomas Paine