15 Comments

Fascinating! God's word will never fail. Good research, Jason!

Expand full comment

My devotion today - Billy Graham's Peace for Each Day - is titled "Timeless Truth" and is anchored on 2 Timothy 3:16, which I share now because it relates to your devotion today also. Thanks Jason.

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

Expand full comment

It's articles like this that put me so far behind in reading emails. What a great story and the picture of the monastery transported me through time.

Thank you.

Expand full comment

My understanding is that the Codex Sinaiticus has never been scientifically dated, but only through textual analysis, is that correct?

Expand full comment

Thank you. Since von Tischendorf was kind of a character some have questioned the authenticity of the document which is magnificent no matter its age.

Expand full comment

Yes, that's right. The Codex Sinaiticus has been dated to around 330-360 AD through paleographic analysis, which means scholars study things like the writing style, formatting, materials, and text layout to determine its age. They compare these features to other manuscripts we know are from that time period.

Carbon dating isn't typically used on rare manuscripts like this since it would damage the document.

The fourth-century dating is widely accepted by scholars based on all the physical and textual evidence that matches other manuscripts from that era.

Expand full comment

In the wastebasket?

Expand full comment

Yeah, I know. I couldn't find anything that definitively said why they were throwing it away. One account said it was likely paper they would use to start fires. I'm not sure why they thought it was worthless.

Expand full comment

Jason, would you have any recommendation on a specific edition of the Codex to read? I am so very interested in learning more about this document.

Expand full comment

There is a website dedicated to Codex Sinaiticus, though I found it rather lacking. There are some links to translations of some of the text found in the codex. The website itself does tell a fair bit about the actual manuscript.

https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/

There is also some translation work at https://biblestudentarchives.com/documents/SinaiticRevelation.pdf. I cannot vouch for the accuracy or content, but it is organized well and easily readable.

Academia.edu has what they claim is the New Testament translated from the original document - https://www.academia.edu/42846336/Codex_Sinaiticus_The_New_Testament_in_English

These are the best I found.

Expand full comment

Thank you.

Expand full comment

This is a remarkable story (that I had never before heard) and a wonderful message. In John 17:17, is Jesus referring to the Scriptures or to himself as the Word (John 1:1, 17:14)?

Expand full comment

In John 17:17, I believe Jesus is referring to God's revealed truth through Scripture, not to Himself as the Word. While Jesus is called "the Word" (logos) in John 1:1 and embodies truth as God incarnate, in John 17:17 He is asking the Father to sanctify believers through the truth of God's revealed Word (the Scriptures).

This is shown by the parallel use of "word" (logos) in verse 14 of the same prayer, where Jesus says "I have given them your word."

While Jesus is the Word made flesh (John 1:1), in this prayer He is asking the Father to sanctify believers through the truth of Scripture.

Expand full comment

Praise God for Greek Monasteries whose continuity does not - like Wycliffe’s Middle English translation - include the Jerome Vulgate filter of original Greek. Praise God for Tyndale’s work from Greek & Hebrew…of which the KJV “borrowed” 86%.

Expand full comment

To this essay, I say, yes, please grant millions of believers to recognize that our time is short. Now is the time to study apologetics and be ready to defend the reliability of the Bible. Now is the time for boldness with accuracy. Not with oversimplification or casual claims, but the substantive facts as you have briefly written. Well done!

Expand full comment