Wrong on many accounts. The Codex Sinaiticus has never been tested for age, the way it is made up is from a style from the middle ages in 8 sheets on one leaf. Tischendorf looked at it and said it appears to be around 400 Ad, then stole the first lot he came away with from St. Catherine's Monastery. A few years later has to use back door politics to force St. Catherine to loan him the rest of the Codex. But the real writer of the Codex is not from the middle ages but Simonides who wrote it in 1839-40. And the more you really look into this Codex and Simonides the more his story of writing the Codex is found to be true and the more you look into Tischendorf the more his story falls apart.
right on brother. The parchment it is written on is old enough to have worm holes but no worm hole ever intrudes on a word. Words go right up to the hole then continue after it. There are pages which have a worm hole(s) but the preceding and succeeding pages are free from worm holes. That is a pretty neat worm trick, better than a "stupid pet trick" in fact. Not only so but the pages of Sinaiticus are supple enough to be leafed through. The codex Alexandrinus on the other hand is truly an old 5th century document. It cannot be handled or else the pages disintegrate. The 44 leaves which Tischendorf originally took and gave to his benefactor are still almost pure white. The remainder of the codex is brownish in color. Probably discolored on purpose to make it look old. But the poker tell is the 44 white pages (they can be seen here: codexsinaiticus.org/en/). The scholars could keep up the charade while no one could view it but the chickens are coming home to roust and the hoax is on the verge of being exposed.
Because those chapters were added later on. There are also chapters which are there, that are not included in the Bible that is commercially sold today
He is a strong proponent of Sinaiticus. In trying to make it sound far older than anything else, he states the next oldest New Testament is 500 years newer (at 1:00 this video), but he never identifies what codex he is referring to. Multiple articles state that Codex Vaticanus is of the same century as Codex Sinaiticus, and that Codex Bezae , while not a complete New Testament, is dated only 50 years later. Papyrus 75 is actually OLDER than Sinaiticus. In addition, both Codex Alexandrinus Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (Gospels only), Codex Guelferbytanus B (Luke & John only), and the fragments Codex Washingtonianus and Uncial 061 are all dated to the 400s, only one century later.
You are a fool. All of them you mentioned are only in parts but Dr in this video was saying that Codex Sinaiticus was the oldest complete new testament.
I just started getting interested in this topic and this youtube comment is literally the most helpful thing I've read so far. I just wanted a list of the different codices so I could research each one so thanks!
In short, these two codices are old simply because, first, they were written on extremely expensive and durable antelope skins, and secondly, they were so full of errors, alterations, and deletions, that they were never used by true believers and seldom even by their own custodians. Thus they had little chance of wearing away." John Burgon on Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Bing search
Excuse me, may I ask you if you know who did all the graffiti (errors, alterations and deletions) on those sacred books and when did it change from perfection to 'no big deal'? 🤦🏻♀️I wouldn't be surprised if you answered the🇮🇹Italian🇻🇦Vatican. Thanks for your time and may the Lord protect you.
@@rinalore9416 Jerome's Vulgate which used 4th century or earlier Greek texts to translate has Mark 16:9-20 and the Woman in adultery which the Vatican Codex doesn't. 39 Articles of Religion All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical. Blessings.
@@jamessheffield4173 Ha ha, you're what's known here as a Heinz 57, I have no idea what a RI swamp Yankee is though. Are you a🎓Theologian? I'm 25% shanty🇮🇪Irish, 25%🇬🇧Britishy, 25%🦅First Nations and 25%🇨🇦Canadian, which means I must be a mutt. I will never understand why they removed articles and books, it's only caused many to go astray. 💐I wish you all the best in these turbulent times in history and I pray the Lord keeps you safe.
One of the most respected Koine Greek grammar scholars in the world, Dan Wallace seriously messed up. Not a historian, one can only assume he must have somehow completely forgotten the very well-known Tischendorf story. Shocking a scholar would get such a common story this wrong. However, everything Wallace says from 1m30s-2m4s is COMPLETELY FALSE. The shocking thing is that Dan Wallace's entire story about photographs and Russia is SHOCKINGLY FALSE and contradicts the even more reputable Bruce Metzger book "The Text of the New Testament"'s account of this story on pg 62-64. Metzger's book is the most reputable work in the field and required $60 text in the top college/seminary classes. The real story went like this: The Eastern Orthodox monks let Tishendorf look at some manuscripts but REFUSED to let Tischendorf borrow and take them even though he visited in 1844, 1853, 1859 and tried to buy them. Tishendorf had to get a monastery in Cairo to send for the manuscripts and then he was allowed to borrow 8 pages at a time to copy. Later, the monks gifted it to the czar Alexander II of Russia. No one stole it. 1862 the czar paid to have it published at his expense. The NT was photographed in 1911 and OT in 1922 by Professor Krisopp Lake. Russia then SOLD it to the British around 1933 for £100,000 (about $500,000 at the time). Why did Wallace slander Russia and accuse them of stealing when Russia actually acquired Sinaiticus and published it and then sold it to British Museum? Insane nonsense.
Are you a🇷🇺Russian living in🇷🇺Russia? If so, then you should know nobody in this🌎world trusts you or any other warmongering🇷🇺Russian. The whole population of🇷🇺Russia keeps their heads under rocks and have no choice but to believe any lying thing any lying Dictator says (or else end up in a Serbian prison or dead). Whether you are or not🇷🇺Russian, I will pray for you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
Thank you for setting that record straight. I was listening to this guy talk about it being the oldest by 500 years, and was like, What? Then that fairytale he gave about what happened to the manuscript was some serious fiction. Never heard any other source give an account remotely close to that. Dude completely discredited himself with me.
I saw a short documentary (here on UA-cam) where Norwegian Adventists visited the monastery. The chief librarian of the monastery related, in English in 2024, the version that Dan Wallace is relaying here (that Tishendorf gave them a signed promissory note that he would return the manuscript if they asked). I wonder if they have changed their minds and this is now their official position?
Aside from the question of authenticity, if the codes is the basis for the New Testament, why are two books found in the codex missing from Bibles today - the Shepherd of Hermes and the Epistle of Barnabas. What is canon seems to be a matter of church/sect/denomination choice rather than divine inspiration.
Has there been any carbon dating of these pages and if not why? So may people are calling this thing a fraud but have no solid proof. Why not give solid proof to its authentication to help people like myself?
I think every🇬🇧Britishy Museum is filled with other🌎countries items obtained through evil $means$. I hope one day each piece in every🇬🇧UK Museum should be traced back to it's place of origin and returned with a🏰Kingdom's👑King apology. 💐Thanks for sharing and may the Lord keep you protected.
I do not agree this idea of being one of the oldest text. There sufficient prove that it was written by in the idea of time a current scholar so why would any scholar believe the lie of its genuineness?
@@skjones91199 [This is just the mainstream story that is told to everyone in seminary and Bible school. Totally false. ] This isn't even! Wallace just made up the whole story about Russia stealing it. That's flatly contradicted by the mainsteam story in Metzger's "The Test of the New Testament" printed since 1964.
@@justmemories6323 Metzger's The Test of the New Testament was destroyed by a book printed in the late 1880's long before it came out I have 100 s books on these subjects including The Test of the New Testament, just say Metzger is a poisoner of his believes and not looking hard into text and what is really there, and if you read his book carefully you will see the weakness of the main augments.
Why you didn't tell them the words/names: Jesus, Christ, christian wasn't in this codex? This came before the KJV and it doesn't have a revelation nor has the name Jesus in it.
I've read and listened to many of your talks and teachings and overall I think you're excellent but you're misleading a little bit on the codex Sianaticus vs codex Vaticanis. Both were written in the 4th century AD and most scholars agree that codex vaticanus is slightly older plus it's a much more complete copy of the whole Bible, and there are only small portions mainly of Hebrews and some from Revelations missing compared to our current Bibles. Also the vast majority of current day Bibles are based mostly on codex vaticanus and not codex sianiticus. Rather than dissing the Catholic churches codex vaticanus you should be pointing out the slight differences between the two oldest copies of our current Bible instead of ignoring the larger and more complete version. Frankly it's beneath you to be so biased and it makes me wonder if you're just anti-catholic. Please use your extraordinary knowledge and gifts to elucidate the truth remembering Christ said "I am the way and the truth and the life!"
Herman Charles Hoskier (1864-1938), was a biblical scholar, British textual critic, and son of a merchant banker, Herman Hoskier (1832-1904).[1] Hoskier, as textual critic, generally but not entirely supported the Byzantine text-type against the Alexandrian text-type. He compared, in Codex B and It Allies, the text of Codex Vaticanus with Codex Sinaiticus, and showed how many significant disagreements the best witnesses of the Alexandrian text have. Hoskier attempted to demonstrate that Vaticanus presents a text which has been conformed to the Coptic versions. Bing search
@@jamessheffield4173 thank you and that's interesting but the majority of scholars still agree codex vaticanus is older and more complete. But it's a good thing we have both of them. 😊✝️
@@jspanyer To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel by Jennifer Knust (Author), Tommy Wasserman (Author) both CT scholars state on page 186 that the provenance of both codices is unknown. Pax.
Absolutely not true. Simonides created that manuscript in the 19th century for the Russian Czar. Its the thousands of discarded pages from Simonides' project to create an authentic-looking complete manuscript as a gift to the Russian Czar. The monks were using the pages as fire starter Tichendorf found them. That's why there are chapters missing from it and not from derivations of Texctus Receptus.
Photography had progressed by the 1860s. They probably would have had to take the photos outside as flash was not sufficient for clear indoor photography of the print in a codex.
I have heard a critic who believes just in the textus receptus say that not two verses between vaticanus and sinaiticus are exact... I guess he is just taking stuff too far and teaching halves in order to defend his ideology. Do you have any thoughts on that one? Thanks in advance.
Codex sinaiticus was a fraud. What about the controversy surrounding it? What was the name of the guy who claims to have written it? edit: SIMONIDES wrote it
And guess what? The 1901 American Standard Version used the Sinaiticus as its textual base for the New Testament translation. A very fine translation too!
The Bible is the inspired word of God written by about 40 different authors inspired by God Himself over a period 1600 years. Your Quran has about 34 different versions each contradicting the other. Yet muslims claim ' it came from the sky '.
The shocking thing is that Dan Wallace's (a reputable Greek scholar) entire story about photographs and Russia is SHOCKINGLY FALSE and contradicts the even more reputable Bruce Metzger book "The Text of the New Testament"'s account of this story on pg 63-64. This book is the most reputable work in the field and required $60 text for all college/seminary classes. The monks gifted it to the czar. No one stole it. 1862 the czar paid to have it published. The NT was photographed in 1911 and OT in 1922 by Professor Krisopp Lake. Russia then SOLD it to the British around 1930s for L100,000 (about $500,000).
Lol, that "Wallace needs to do his homework." The whole waste basket story is a myth/urban legend popular with KJV onlyists. Tischendorf’s own account, as the only witness inside the monastery, is completely different.
@@zackl113 Zach there are other accounts, also the manuscript was not complete when Trichendorf first saw in St. Catherine's Monastery, vellum is cleaned and reused, not burnt. Vellum is kept when about to be reused in what everyone calls a waste basket, this is a bad word for the basket used for this propose. Also why have not all the 30,000 + corrects to the Codex Sinaiticus been published along with the text? Zach the more one looks into the Codex Sinaiticus the 400AD date does not hold up. The margin corrects number in the thousands (near to 40,000 if the number I saw is correct), the misplacement of text and non use of other texts not in the Codex Sinaiticus was destroyed by a book published long before we where born. Some of these texts not used are confirmed by early church fathers pre 400 AD. The Codex Sinaiticus is not a forgery, and it was not written around 400 AD, but much later near to 1839-40. It was to be a gift to the Czar Nicholas I, it had a title page to that effect that was seen by one witness and claim by the person that wrote the Codex Sinaiticus. Simonides story on his writing the Codex Sinaiticus holds up the more you look into it, Trichendorf story does not hold up, look deep into the stories of both and all the witnesses. The main fact is the Codex Sinaiticus was written on leaf's that are not used until the middle ages and not in 400AD, first tells one it is a much later product than the 400AD date given by Trichendorf, so he is wrong out the gate, it gets worse from there, when looking into this case. I still question why this Codex was not published with all the margin notes and corrections.
2 books were dropped from codex of sinaiticus: "The Shepherd of Hermas", a heavily allegorical work full of visions and parables and "The Epistle of Barnabas" which contains text about the Jews as the killers of Christ, denial of christ divinity, denial of trinity, prophecy about coming prophet named Muhammed (these books found 200 years before the coming of prophet Muhammed) Yes, these are the facts they hide from you, all these centuries
{Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad SAW) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii, 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), - he commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Taiyibat [(i.e. all good and lawful) as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.], and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khaba'ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. So those who believe in him (Muhammad SAW), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Quran) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful.} Quraan, Alaraf :157
2 books were dropped from codex of sinaiticus: "The Shepherd of Hermas", a heavily allegorical work full of visions and parables and "The Epistle of Barnabas" which contains text about the Jews as the killers of Christ, denial of christ divinity, denial of trinity, prophecy about coming prophet named Muhammed (these books found 200 years before the coming of prophet Muhammed) Yes, these are the facts they hide from you, all these centuries.
Not facts but heresies which muslims conveniently hold on to in order to defend their false narrative. Do you have the copy of the original Quran? Who wrote it? Do not tell me it descended from the sky.
@@Jin-dc7gl no it didn’t descend from anywhere, it was memorized by thousands and now by millions, + more than one billion Muslim recite its verses 5 times a day
Not true about Muhammad, but yes The Shepherd of Hermas and Barnabas were dropped in future editions, and the "Jews" they malign were the Pharisees and Sadducees who were colluding with the Romans to kill the Christian Jews, who were primarily Essence probably. 😉✝️🤍
Wrong on many accounts. The Codex Sinaiticus has never been tested for age, the way it is made up is from a style from the middle ages in 8 sheets on one leaf. Tischendorf looked at it and said it appears to be around 400 Ad, then stole the first lot he came away with from St. Catherine's Monastery. A few years later has to use back door politics to force St. Catherine to loan him the rest of the Codex. But the real writer of the Codex is not from the middle ages but Simonides who wrote it in 1839-40. And the more you really look into this Codex and Simonides the more his story of writing the Codex is found to be true and the more you look into Tischendorf the more his story falls apart.
Amen, there is little talk about Simonides, and usually its just scoffing him. Most are deceived about Sinaiticus.
It can be tested now. Highly unlikely to be from later.
But they won’t test it cause they know it’s crap
right on brother.
The parchment it is written on is old enough to have worm holes but no worm hole ever intrudes on a word. Words go right up to the hole then continue after it. There are pages which have a worm hole(s) but the preceding and succeeding pages are free from worm holes. That is a pretty neat worm trick, better than a "stupid pet trick" in fact. Not only so but the pages of Sinaiticus are supple enough to be leafed through. The codex Alexandrinus on the other hand is truly an old 5th century document. It cannot be handled or else the pages disintegrate. The 44 leaves which Tischendorf originally took and gave to his benefactor are still almost pure white. The remainder of the codex is brownish in color. Probably discolored on purpose to make it look old. But the poker tell is the 44 white pages (they can be seen here: codexsinaiticus.org/en/). The scholars could keep up the charade while no one could view it but the chickens are coming home to roust and the hoax is on the verge of being exposed.
I saw it at the British Libary several years ago. Wow.
There are chapters missing from a number of Chapters through out the codex.
Because those chapters were added later on. There are also chapters which are there, that are not included in the Bible that is commercially sold today
If desagree from the other 5000 manuscripts called received text its not good for sound doctrine
Mount Sinai is in Arabia. Galatians 4:25
He is a strong proponent of Sinaiticus. In trying to make it sound far older than anything else, he states the next oldest New Testament is 500 years newer (at 1:00 this video), but he never identifies what codex he is referring to. Multiple articles state that Codex Vaticanus is of the same century as Codex Sinaiticus, and that Codex Bezae
, while not a complete New Testament, is dated only 50 years later. Papyrus 75 is actually OLDER than Sinaiticus. In addition, both Codex Alexandrinus Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus (Gospels only), Codex Guelferbytanus B (Luke & John only), and the fragments Codex Washingtonianus and Uncial 061 are all dated to the 400s, only one century later.
You are a fool. All of them you mentioned are only in parts but Dr in this video was saying that Codex Sinaiticus was the oldest complete new testament.
@@jehuissachar8288 You're rude. Kind of my point. He is being deceptive by throwing that word "complete" in there. What did Jesus say about that word?
I just started getting interested in this topic and this youtube comment is literally the most helpful thing I've read so far. I just wanted a list of the different codices so I could research each one so thanks!
@@CornerTalker I wasn't deceived. He said complete Bible. I heard complete Bible. Obviously there are differing degrees of fragments that are older.
@@Papasquatch73 sharper listener than some
In short, these two codices are old simply because, first, they were written on extremely expensive and durable antelope skins, and secondly, they were so full of errors, alterations, and deletions, that they were never used by true believers and seldom even by their own custodians. Thus they had little chance of wearing away." John Burgon on Sinaiticus and Vaticanus Bing search
Excuse me, may I ask you if you know who did all the graffiti (errors, alterations and deletions) on those sacred books and when did it change from perfection to 'no big deal'?
🤦🏻♀️I wouldn't be surprised if you answered the🇮🇹Italian🇻🇦Vatican.
Thanks for your time and may the Lord protect you.
@@rinalore9416 Jerome's Vulgate which used 4th century or earlier Greek texts to translate has Mark 16:9-20 and the Woman in adultery which the Vatican Codex doesn't. 39 Articles of Religion All the Books of the New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive, and account them Canonical. Blessings.
@@jamessheffield4173
Are you speaking as an🇮🇹Italian🇻🇦Vatican representative?
@@rinalore9416 no, I am 50% Tuscan Cafone, 25% Shanty Irish, and 25% RI Swamp Yankee. Blessings.
@@jamessheffield4173
Ha ha, you're what's known here as a Heinz 57, I have no idea what a RI swamp Yankee is though. Are you a🎓Theologian?
I'm 25% shanty🇮🇪Irish, 25%🇬🇧Britishy, 25%🦅First Nations and 25%🇨🇦Canadian, which means I must be a mutt.
I will never understand why they removed articles and books, it's only caused many to go astray.
💐I wish you all the best in these turbulent times in history and I pray the Lord keeps you safe.
Well said. Peace be with you!!!
Where can I read the story? Book name? Thanks
1881 Bible Hoax UA-cam
One of the most respected Koine Greek grammar scholars in the world, Dan Wallace seriously messed up. Not a historian, one can only assume he must have somehow completely forgotten the very well-known Tischendorf story. Shocking a scholar would get such a common story this wrong. However, everything Wallace says from 1m30s-2m4s is COMPLETELY FALSE. The shocking thing is that Dan Wallace's entire story about photographs and Russia is SHOCKINGLY FALSE and contradicts the even more reputable Bruce Metzger book "The Text of the New Testament"'s account of this story on pg 62-64. Metzger's book is the most reputable work in the field and required $60 text in the top college/seminary classes.
The real story went like this: The Eastern Orthodox monks let Tishendorf look at some manuscripts but REFUSED to let Tischendorf borrow and take them even though he visited in 1844, 1853, 1859 and tried to buy them. Tishendorf had to get a monastery in Cairo to send for the manuscripts and then he was allowed to borrow 8 pages at a time to copy. Later, the monks gifted it to the czar Alexander II of Russia. No one stole it. 1862 the czar paid to have it published at his expense. The NT was photographed in 1911 and OT in 1922 by Professor Krisopp Lake. Russia then SOLD it to the British around 1933 for £100,000 (about $500,000 at the time).
Why did Wallace slander Russia and accuse them of stealing when Russia actually acquired Sinaiticus and published it and then sold it to British Museum? Insane nonsense.
thanks for the story. do you have any guesses as to why they waited until 1911 to photograph it? Photography was reliable by the 1840s.
I just love how you beg authority: “Metzgers book is the most reputable work in the field and required $60 text the top college/seminary classes.” 🤨😒🤔
Are you a🇷🇺Russian living in🇷🇺Russia?
If so, then you should know nobody in this🌎world trusts you or any other warmongering🇷🇺Russian.
The whole population of🇷🇺Russia keeps their heads under rocks and have no choice but to believe any lying thing any lying Dictator says (or else end up in a Serbian prison or dead).
Whether you are or not🇷🇺Russian, I will pray for you in the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
Thank you for setting that record straight. I was listening to this guy talk about it being the oldest by 500 years, and was like, What?
Then that fairytale he gave about what happened to the manuscript was some serious fiction. Never heard any other source give an account remotely close to that.
Dude completely discredited himself with me.
I saw a short documentary (here on UA-cam) where Norwegian Adventists visited the monastery. The chief librarian of the monastery related, in English in 2024, the version that Dan Wallace is relaying here (that Tishendorf gave them a signed promissory note that he would return the manuscript if they asked). I wonder if they have changed their minds and this is now their official position?
Many are being deceived by the voice here
You shall know them by their fruits
Aside from the question of authenticity, if the codes is the basis for the New Testament, why are two books found in the codex missing from Bibles today - the Shepherd of Hermes and the Epistle of Barnabas. What is canon seems to be a matter of church/sect/denomination choice rather than divine inspiration.
Has there been any carbon dating of these pages and if not why? So may people are calling this thing a fraud but have no solid proof. Why not give solid proof to its authentication to help people like myself?
Because the majority of people saying that are Muslims 😂😂😂
I think every🇬🇧Britishy Museum is filled with other🌎countries items obtained through evil $means$.
I hope one day each piece in every🇬🇧UK Museum should be traced back to it's place of origin and returned with a🏰Kingdom's👑King apology.
💐Thanks for sharing and may the Lord keep you protected.
Can someone point me to the actual verses that the Sinia Bible says this
Is it an infallible manuscript?
Hope one day I will read this book' amen.
I believe the whole document is now online, although perhaps not in English.
mate this shows that your bible is corrupted
read about it
@@mrenigma1564 how does this show that the Bible is corrupted? It wasn’t even written by the original authors
@@michaelrussell220 can i have a link or adress of it?,
I do not agree this idea of being one of the oldest text. There sufficient prove that it was written by in the idea of time a current scholar so why would any scholar believe the lie of its genuineness?
If you want the real history watch David Daniels because this guy has no proof to back up what he says. David Daniels does
Absolutely! This is just the mainstream story that is told to everyone in seminary and Bible school. Totally false. The facts are undeniable.
Libby, David Daniels' claim that Sinaiticus was made in the 1800s is completely implausible.
@@JamesSnappJr Is a copy the original was destroy and it was "Touch" by the freemanson
@@skjones91199 [This is just the mainstream story that is told to everyone in seminary and Bible school. Totally false. ] This isn't even! Wallace just made up the whole story about Russia stealing it. That's flatly contradicted by the mainsteam story in Metzger's "The Test of the New Testament" printed since 1964.
@@justmemories6323 Metzger's The Test of the New Testament was destroyed by a book printed in the late 1880's long before it came out I have 100
s books on these subjects including The Test of the New Testament, just say Metzger is a poisoner of his believes and not looking hard into text and what is really there, and if you read his book carefully you will see the weakness of the main augments.
Why you didn't tell them the words/names: Jesus, Christ, christian wasn't in this codex? This came before the KJV and it doesn't have a revelation nor has the name Jesus in it.
I've read and listened to many of your talks and teachings and overall I think you're excellent but you're misleading a little bit on the codex Sianaticus vs codex Vaticanis. Both were written in the 4th century AD and most scholars agree that codex vaticanus is slightly older plus it's a much more complete copy of the whole Bible, and there are only small portions mainly of Hebrews and some from Revelations missing compared to our current Bibles. Also the vast majority of current day Bibles are based mostly on codex vaticanus and not codex sianiticus. Rather than dissing the Catholic churches codex vaticanus you should be pointing out the slight differences between the two oldest copies of our current Bible instead of ignoring the larger and more complete version. Frankly it's beneath you to be so biased and it makes me wonder if you're just anti-catholic. Please use your extraordinary knowledge and gifts to elucidate the truth remembering Christ said "I am the way and the truth and the life!"
Herman Charles Hoskier (1864-1938), was a biblical scholar, British textual critic, and son of a merchant banker, Herman Hoskier (1832-1904).[1]
Hoskier, as textual critic, generally but not entirely supported the Byzantine text-type against the Alexandrian text-type. He compared, in Codex B and It Allies, the text of Codex Vaticanus with Codex Sinaiticus, and showed how many significant disagreements the best witnesses of the Alexandrian text have. Hoskier attempted to demonstrate that Vaticanus presents a text which has been conformed to the Coptic versions. Bing search
@@jamessheffield4173 thank you and that's interesting but the majority of scholars still agree codex vaticanus is older and more complete. But it's a good thing we have both of them. 😊✝️
@@jspanyer To Cast the First Stone: The Transmission of a Gospel by Jennifer Knust (Author), Tommy Wasserman (Author) both CT scholars state on page 186 that the provenance of both codices is unknown. Pax.
Liars.......going all the way back to Wescott and Hort ....can't help themselves.
"Zondervan".......enough said.
Does it have all New Testament books ?
Absolutely not true. Simonides created that manuscript in the 19th century for the Russian Czar. Its the thousands of discarded pages from Simonides' project to create an authentic-looking complete manuscript as a gift to the Russian Czar. The monks were using the pages as fire starter Tichendorf found them. That's why there are chapters missing from it and not from derivations of Texctus Receptus.
Pretty sure, this is a green screen background. Not sure why that so annoying lol
😂😂
Love your channel.
@@joshuamercer854 thanks brother!
What should we expect from Zondervan? Their goal is maximize $$$ not necessarily truth. Hell to pay?
What is about?
Didn’t know they had photos back then. Lol
Photography had progressed by the 1860s. They probably would have had to take the photos outside as flash was not sufficient for clear indoor photography of the print in a codex.
I have heard a critic who believes just in the textus receptus say that not two verses between vaticanus and sinaiticus are exact... I guess he is just taking stuff too far and teaching halves in order to defend his ideology. Do you have any thoughts on that one?
Thanks in advance.
Codex sinaiticus was a fraud. What about the controversy surrounding it? What was the name of the guy who claims to have written it?
edit: SIMONIDES wrote it
Siniaticus is a fake
And guess what? The 1901 American Standard Version used the Sinaiticus as its textual base for the New Testament translation. A very fine translation too!
The ephiopian bible is the full bible
I thought Vaticanus is also complete NT and about same age? Reading all the comments, I would say there are lots of anti-Sinaiticus sentiment here.
Simonides would not agree.
Rubbish
Sir, Codex Sinaiticus is a fake. Come on man, do you think we’re stupid?
Codex Sinaiticus is fake!
1881 Bible Hoax
Tentacles of Lies!
Its a fake
Codex Sianiticus is corrupt.
It's a fake.
Yes
Read Quran Bro
Ballu after uthman burn the Quran
@@Ballu12345 ah no,the God of the christian is true.
@@Ballu12345quran says u can marry 9 year olds and beat them when they disobey
@@florencemodina6293yes
Found in the trash bin at St. Catherine's
No it was not in the trash, they made that up to justify stealing it and then not returning it even though they signed an agreement to return it.
Even This Contradictes Each Other
No two are same 🤣
Still they believe Bible is god's word but actually it's man's work
The Bible is the inspired word of God written by about 40 different authors inspired by God Himself over a period 1600 years.
Your Quran has about 34 different versions each contradicting the other.
Yet muslims claim ' it came from the sky '.
What are the Brits doing with it? Return it
The shocking thing is that Dan Wallace's (a reputable Greek scholar) entire story about photographs and Russia is SHOCKINGLY FALSE and contradicts the even more reputable Bruce Metzger book "The Text of the New Testament"'s account of this story on pg 63-64. This book is the most reputable work in the field and required $60 text for all college/seminary classes. The monks gifted it to the czar. No one stole it. 1862 the czar paid to have it published. The NT was photographed in 1911 and OT in 1922 by Professor Krisopp Lake. Russia then SOLD it to the British around 1930s for L100,000 (about $500,000).
This is such a funny sentence lol. "What are the Brits doing with it?" So true
Yes, it was in a waste basket for poorly written manuscripts. Wallace needs to do his homework.
Lol, that "Wallace needs to do his homework." The whole waste basket story is a myth/urban legend popular with KJV onlyists. Tischendorf’s own account, as the only witness inside the monastery, is completely different.
@@zackl113 nope. Sinaiaticus was a poorly written forgery. Wallace failed to mention. A clown.
@@zackl113 Zach there are other accounts, also the manuscript was not complete when Trichendorf first saw in St. Catherine's Monastery, vellum is cleaned and reused, not burnt. Vellum is kept when about to be reused in what everyone calls a waste basket, this is a bad word for the basket used for this propose. Also why have not all the 30,000 + corrects to the Codex Sinaiticus been published along with the text? Zach the more one looks into the Codex Sinaiticus the 400AD date does not hold up. The margin corrects number in the thousands (near to 40,000 if the number I saw is correct), the misplacement of text and non use of other texts not in the Codex Sinaiticus was destroyed by a book published long before we where born. Some of these texts not used are confirmed by early church fathers pre 400 AD. The Codex Sinaiticus is not a forgery, and it was not written around 400 AD, but much later near to 1839-40. It was to be a gift to the Czar Nicholas I, it had a title page to that effect that was seen by one witness and claim by the person that wrote the Codex Sinaiticus. Simonides story on his writing the Codex Sinaiticus holds up the more you look into it, Trichendorf story does not hold up, look deep into the stories of both and all the witnesses. The main fact is the Codex Sinaiticus was written on leaf's that are not used until the middle ages and not in 400AD, first tells one it is a much later product than the 400AD date given by Trichendorf, so he is wrong out the gate, it gets worse from there, when looking into this case. I still question why this Codex was not published with all the margin notes and corrections.
2 books were dropped from codex of sinaiticus:
"The Shepherd of Hermas", a heavily allegorical work full of visions and parables and "The Epistle of Barnabas"
which contains text about the Jews as the killers of Christ, denial of christ divinity, denial of trinity, prophecy about coming prophet named Muhammed (these books found 200 years before the coming of prophet Muhammed)
Yes, these are the facts they hide from you, all these centuries
lol....all the Catholics are claiming it's fake.
Who gave authority this book Author that Bible is completely this 🤣🤣🤣 😂 you know , no 😂. 400 years after Jesus died 🥵 Brain Flow Away
{Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write (i.e. Muhammad SAW) whom they find written with them in the Taurat (Torah) (Deut, xviii, 15) and the Injeel (Gospel) (John xiv, 16), - he commands them for Al-Ma'ruf (i.e. Islamic Monotheism and all that Islam has ordained); and forbids them from Al-Munkar (i.e. disbelief, polytheism of all kinds, and all that Islam has forbidden); he allows them as lawful At-Taiyibat [(i.e. all good and lawful) as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.], and prohibits them as unlawful Al-Khaba'ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons, foods, etc.), he releases them from their heavy burdens (of Allah's Covenant), and from the fetters (bindings) that were upon them. So those who believe in him (Muhammad SAW), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Quran) which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful.}
Quraan, Alaraf :157
2 books were dropped from codex of sinaiticus:
"The Shepherd of Hermas", a heavily allegorical work full of visions and parables and "The Epistle of Barnabas"
which contains text about the Jews as the killers of Christ, denial of christ divinity, denial of trinity, prophecy about coming prophet named Muhammed (these books found 200 years before the coming of prophet Muhammed)
Yes, these are the facts they hide from you, all these centuries.
Not facts but heresies which muslims conveniently hold on to in order to defend their false narrative.
Do you have the copy of the original Quran?
Who wrote it?
Do not tell me it descended from the sky.
@@Jin-dc7gl no it didn’t descend from anywhere, it was memorized by thousands and now by millions, + more than one billion Muslim recite its verses 5 times a day
Not true about Muhammad, but yes The Shepherd of Hermas and Barnabas were dropped in future editions, and the "Jews" they malign were the Pharisees and Sadducees who were colluding with the Romans to kill the Christian Jews, who were primarily Essence probably. 😉✝️🤍