Slashdot Mirror


British Library Puts Oldest Surviving Bible Online

Peace Corps Library writes "BBC reports that about 800 pages of the earliest surviving Christian Bible, the 1,600-year-old Codex Sinaiticus manuscript, have been recovered and put on the Internet. 'The Codex Sinaiticus is one of the world's greatest written treasures,' says Dr. Scot McKendrick, head of Western manuscripts at the British Library. 'This 1,600-year-old manuscript offers a window into the development of early Christianity and first-hand evidence of how the text of the Bible was transmitted from generation to generation.' The New Testament of the Codex Sinaiticus appears in Koine Greek, the original vernacular language, and the Old Testament in the version, known as the Septuagint, that was adopted by early Greek-speaking Christians. For 1,500 years, the Codex Sinaiticus lay undisturbed in a Sinai monastery until it was found in 1844 and split between Egypt, Russia, Germany, and Britain. It is thought to have survived because the desert air was ideal for preservation and because the monastery, on a Christian island in a Muslim sea, remained untouched, its walls unconquered. The British Library is marking the online launch of the manuscript with an exhibition which includes a range of historic items and artifacts linked to the document. 'The availability of the virtual manuscript for study by scholars around the world creates opportunities for collaborative research that would not have been possible just a few years ago.'"

3 of 568 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Potential for translations by jwthompson2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The text of Sinaiticus has been reviewed by scholars already and is part of the critical apparatus used to construct the UBS and NA modern Greek texts of the New Testament. Never mind that we also have manuscripts of individual books that predate even Sinaiticus by 200 years. This is an interesting development in terms of making the text more broadly available, but the impact of Sinaiticus on the actual translations we use today has already happened.

    From the standpoint of textual criticism and biblical translation this is a non-story. From the standpoint of broad accessibility this is a great development. Remember that serious scholars have been able to get facsimiles for this text for years...

    --
    Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther
  2. Re:Bible 0.1.1-beta by g_adams27 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    No, what they reveal is the tremendous accuracy of today's modern translations compared to the papyrii and codeces of antiquity. After all, consider the state of Christianity in the first few centuries A.D. - a bunch of "heretics", hated by the Jews, persecuted by the Romans, and driven underground. It was in that environment that the gospels and letters of Paul, Peter, John, etc. were copied, distributed, re-copied, distributed some more, etc.

    Were there transcription errors? Sure. You try copying something the size of the Bible in secret, by hand, while fearing for your life! But we can reconstruct the original readings of the books of the NT with tremendous accuracy.

    Your insistence that Christians must equate "the literal word of God" with "infallible transcriptions, every single time a book of the Bible is copied" is just plain wrong. That's not what most Christians believe. They believe that the method God used to preserve the text was to have it copied quickly and widely before any single organization could control the process and make "secret" alterations to the Scripture. (Conspiracy theorists who hint darkly about secret councils that burned books or suppressed certain ancient Christian beliefs tend to forget that, even if that was possible, there were no such organizations or counsels like that for many, many centuries . Compare that with Uthman Ibn Affan, who decided which copy of the Qur'an would be canonical, then gathered together and burning all other copies that differed from the official version. Christianity has nothing like that.

  3. Re:Celebrate! by Thanar · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In warning against those who forbid people to marry, St. Paul was referring to Gnostics who taught dualism which viewed material things as bad, and thus rejected marriage and procreation. He was not referring to the Christian practice of celibacy which recognizes the great good of marriage but "have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 19:12).

    Celibacy is a charism, a gift given by God for the building up of the Body of Christ. It is not given to all ("Whoever can accept this, ought to accept it" (Matthew 19:12). Speaking of his own celibacy, St. Paul says, "I wish that all were as I myself am, but each has a particular gift from God, one of one kind and one of another" (1 Cor 7:7).

    In the Catholic Church, celibacy is imposed on no one. Rather, in the western rites of the Catholic Church, candidates for the priesthood are chosen from those who have freely promised celibacy. In the eastern rites, candidates for the priesthood are chosen from both married and celibate men, but bishops are chosen only from celibate priests.

    Fr. Terry Donahue, CC