Stephanus and Sinaiaticus

Say a word. Well, I wouldn't want to cause an issue. Well, it's been a while. It's been a while. Good morning doctor. I'm not sure how we're gonna do this. I do not have a projector set up or anything.

It wouldn't really help us with this anyhow. A few weeks ago that I would put these things in, and so I did. You can ask my wife. This thing is incredibly heavy. I'm not even sure that, yeah, it is much heavier than Codex Ricotonius, shall we say.

We looked at some pictures of, how am I going to do this? I can't just, you know, hold something up and have you all see it. So, this is a full-size facsimile copy of Codex Sinaiticus. Upside down, that's nice.

Obviously, the Codex as it exists today exists in multiple locations. This is all of it, no matter where it is. It's been digitized and high quality photography taken of it. And so, sort of gives you an idea of how big it would have been, even though the pages are actually rather finer than the glossy print paper that this is printed on.

So, it wouldn't have been quite as heavy. I'd estimate between 35 and 45 pounds. It's a beast. It was not a pocket New Testament, shall we say, in any way. But, we looked at a couple of the, well, what were these, what were the, what category would this, this may be from our previous, previous, I was taking notes, actually.

This, would this be a papyri? It's not a papyri. So, what is it? Well, it's Codex. It's made of vellum. What other term was used? Well, it's an, it's certainly an Alexandrian in its test, its text type, but of non-Alexandrian.

It is, the other term that we used was unseal, unseal texts. And, what was the date? Anyone remember? The time of the Council of Nicaea. We know, according to Church history, Constantine gave some money for manuscripts, because Rome had been destroying so many thousands.

And, one of the theories is that Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were both. That's a possibility. When this was in New Testament, there, even yet, early sections, Genesis, you know, that, that happens with, with ancient manuscripts.

Things fall apart, bindings give way, so on and so forth. But, so, it gives us one of the earliest Greek Septuagint translations that we have. And then, of course, the New Testament, as well, pretty much in the order of the books that we have them, have them today.

Erasmus, Stephanus, and the Textus Receptus

And, so, most of it is in the, the British Library or Museum, British Museum, I think now. There's some still at St. Catharines. There's some in Russia, because the story of it basically being stolen from the monks, and finally making its way to England, is a story of political intrigue, and money, and all sorts of things like that.

But, obviously, there are a lot of people who really dislike this manuscript. The King James Only folks do. Because, really, when you think about the history of the New Testament, I can text here to show you in a moment.

I've, I mentioned at the last time we were together, the history of where our English New Testaments came from. And, I happen to, extra credit for the date, 1516. And, it is actually a diaglot. He is much more concerned.

Anyone remember about how many manuscripts he had to work with? About half a dozen. About six. The oldest that he had was from around the year one. So, he primarily relied upon one from around 1200 A .D.

Did I tell you the story of the Book of Revelation with Erasmus? You're saying yes. You're sort of nodding yes. But, you've heard it. So, you're, you're probably conflating things. To get the job done, because there was actually, the New Testament had been printed.

But, it was many volumes. It was multi-volume work by Cardinal Jimenez. And, it was waiting papal approval. So, his printer didn't want to get scooped. All publishers put pressure on authors to get it done.

So, he was looking for a manuscript of the Book of Revelation. And, he could not find one in the library in Basel, Switzerland, which is where, the whole reason he had gone there is he figured there would be lots of manuscripts.

He finally finds a commentary on the Greek text of the Book of Revelation from the commentary on the Book of Revelation, which led to a number of problems and issues. Latin into Greek for the last few verses of the Book of Revelation.

And, came up with some interesting readings. Did a great job, but came up with some interesting readings that remain to this day. He did five editions up to 1535. He was Calvary starting in 1551. There's one of Stephanos, one of Basel, printed Greek New Testaments.

Stephanos and Basel take Erasmus and make very minor changes. They're not really examining manuscripts. Sort of taking what Erasmus put together, which was not the reason it was the default text. Like that.

These seven printed text translations of the New Testament. The King James translators were not using manuscripts. They were using printed editions of Erasmus. And, there are differences, small differences, but there are differences.

And, the result is an English translation of the New Testament, which we version of 1611. It was translated between 1604 and 1611. Well, this family of James become known as the Textus Receptus. All right.

Or, abbreviated TR. And, that came from an advertising blurb in 1633. The other things have changed. And, so they called it the Text Received by All. The Textus Receptus. And, that's where the name came from.

So, it was an advertising blurb. Somebody trying to sell something. But, that's where the term came from. What happens is a fellow by the name of Scrivener, centuries later, decided, you know, there are differences between each of these printed editions.

I'm going to look at the King James New Testament. And, I'm going to see what reading the King James translators chose when there's a difference between Erasmus, Stephanus, and Beza. And, I'm going to create the Greek text by the Textual Trinitarian Bible Society in London.

A text that is the work of Scrivener. And, what it reflects in the King James translators. Now, there are entire churches that view that little blue case found Greek New Testament as the final word. It's the final word as far as what the New Testament should say.

But, in reality, there's no manuscript in the world that reads the way that that does. Because, it is actually a Greek New Testament based upon an English translation. And, it's amazing how many people will say, this is it.

This is what God. This is the final word. You don't, Baptists who take that view. They're like me at all. And, they're, some of them are aware that the TR they have is the work of Scrivener. But, you know, looking at the King James choices.

The reasons that they will argue is they will look at our own. They'll say, see, it's them. That was the TR. Well, by default, for example, in his New Testament commentaries, will point out differences in manuscripts and differences in readings.

And, at times, will reject. The reading ends up in the Textus Receptus. So, the idea that all of the early Baptist writers and the authors of the 1689 contextual criticism just simply isn't true. And, in fact, the vast majority, at a particular point in time.

And so, it's, I think, is an abuse of their place in history to say, ah, see, we've got a particular fashion. Well, what does this have to do with Sinaiticus? Well, the default Greek text up until, which is published, manuscripts, well, more than, well, three.

But, two, especially, had come to light in that century, Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, along with Alexandrinus as well. And so, those who are fans of the Textus Receptus, or the traditional text, or the Byzantine text, whatever you want to call it, I remember, I think it was, I think it was like a Denny's type place.

They had set up a room for the speakers to have dinner together at this conference I was speaking at. This was years ago. It was about 2000, 2001. And, Dave Hunt was there. And, it was literally as we were leaving the room, somebody said something about Sinaiticus.

And, I remember Dave Hunt saying, yeah, well, that's what you get for using a manuscript that was found in a trash can. And, there's all sorts of stories about how Sinaiticus was found. All sorts of controversy, mainly going to the fact that Tischendorf probably ripped off the monks and was not exactly honest in how he got hold of it in that sense.

But, it was mainly just between he and the monks and who gets to have credit for it. But, it's certainly not the theory that somebody else wrote it at that particular time. The reason that this is so vilified is because it began the process of dethroning the Texas Receptus as the final authority.

And so, those who continue to see it as the final authority, well, they really, really, really don't like it. So, I guess what I'll do is I'll just introduce both the texts and I'll have folks who want to come up and take a look at them.

And, in this, I know I've brought this before. It's the first time I've brought this, I know that. I didn't get it all that long ago. It was a gift from somebody. But, I know I have brought this before.

And, of the two, this is one we have to be much more careful of. And, this is my 1550. That's not Codex Sinaiticus. This is 465 years old. It's current estimated value is $35 ,000. So, I won't be passing it around currently.

But, this is New Testament that was published without verse numeration. So, this is the work of Stephanos. This one was published in, put it up very carefully here, to the Acts of the Apostles. It was published in Paris and then moved from Paris to Geneva.

And, it is, you can see it right there, Stephanos 1550. It's one of the seven that was used by the King James translators. Is it possible that a King James translator used that very one? Sure. There are only so many of them left today.

It may not have been, may have been. There's no way of knowing. But, that certainly is the text. And, it's amazing to me, anyways, that when you look at the condition, 465, I have books from the Yellowed Moor.

And, its pages has. They knew how to make paper back then. And, we still know how to make paper today. We just don't because we're cheap. But, it is, it's amazing to see. The font was developed by a guy that some of you who do computer work are going to go, oh.

The font that is used there is, was developed by a man by the name of Garamond. And, if you've ever looked through your fonts on your Windows or Mac machine, there's almost all M-O-N-D font. This guy that worked with Stephanos in designing fonts back in the day when printing was a little less, a little more art form and a little less computer than it is, than it is today.

As I said, this is the last one that does not have verse enumeration. The 1551 Stephanos text has the verse divisions in it. And, that then becomes the basis for the verse divisions. No, Geneva was 99, wasn't it?

All these translations were heavily influenced by the Latin Vulgate as well. 1560, okay. Original, okay, all right. So, that's just after Stephanos impact of any. And, many have pointed out that it's pretty much Tyndale in what, 70 percent of the language is pretty much straight out of Tyndale.

So, there were predecessors to it to be certain. Okay, what I'd like to do is give you all a chance to take a look at this, if you'd like. I'll, if we need to, if we want to do anything with the Greek text, I'll have to do that.

But, you're certainly free to thumb through here if you'd like. You'll, you will see, for example, I have it open here, 100 years. And so, you'll find that kind of better shape than others. Some are clearer, easier to read.

But, you take a look at that. And, if you want to look at a particular in this one, we can only get about, what, about five people at a time. So, why don't we just do it by rows if you want to come up and get a closer look.

We'll start up front. Sorry if you sat in the back, you know. There you go. It's back row Baptist. Don't get to have as much time looking at the cool stuff, you know. So, this is Acts, Proccystone Apostle and Acts of the Apostles.

You'll notice there aren't any verse. That's still Acts, pretty long. There's Corinthians. And, ah, there's Romans. Yeah, there's Romans 1. I guess we'd leave it open to that. 2010. Yeah, it was a donation in the ministry from a fellow back in New York that had shown it to me in his house.

And, I'd said, whatever you do, remember me in your will. So, he decided to remember me before his will. And, yeah, look at that paper. It's, that paper's doing better than you, Brick. Yeah, yeah. I don't know if she has.

It's the beginning of Romans, end of Acts. Have to look them up, but, I mean, almost every place has things like that and the margins and things. Well, not necessarily commentary, but sometimes textual corrections, sometimes commentary.

Hard to say. I mean, this is probably Old Testament here. And, there's something written in, obviously, in Minya school at a different point in time. Yeah, it's all Greek to you, right? It's the beginning of Romans, the end of Acts right there.

The attorney, he's got a 1611 KJV and stuff. And, he was showing me stuff in his house once, I don't know, back around 2000. And, I had said, he had shown me this. And, I said, remember me in your will.

And, I'd said that a few times. And so, he heard it enough times, he got the hint and decided to wait not to die. Codex Sinaiticus. That's the, this is the Stephanos text of 1550. Oh, that's an outline of Romans.

And, that's the beginning of Romans right there. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You go to Trinity College in Dublin and you go into the reading room there where there's stories of books and it's all the same smell, all the same smell.

Yeah, those definitely look later to me, much later. Probably paragraph divisions. Those are, those look like Old Testament to me. So, I don't see it and think they're very common elsewhere. Uh-huh. It's handwritten.

No, there's places you'll see some markouts and crossouts and stuff stuck in the in between lines and stuff. Depends on the individual. Yeah, 400, 465 years old. Which one? For that, but yeah. Yeah, this is, this is handwritten.

That's printed. Oh, this, they're both gifts. This is, you can buy this. It's about 500 bucks if you can buy it. Yeah, yeah, just 35 ,000 bucks. You said you saw the originals of these, right? Yeah, uh-huh.

Yep, she's 465. Greek. That's the beginning of the Book of Romans. End of Acts, beginning of Romans. Yes. 325, 350. A lot older than this. It is amazing, yeah. Yeah, somewhere in John you can see Kata and then Ioannes, so.

Yeah, yeah, they, they made things nice back then. Our Greek New Testaments aren't quite as, no, oh, oh, no, no, it's not really leather. It's, I don't know what, what you'd call it. Y 'all can touch this one, but not this one.

This is the Stephanos 1550 text. Oh, that's the beginning of Romans. Romans. How long would it take to learn Greek? Depends on how well you want to learn it. Depends on how well you want to learn it. No, this doesn't have a distos.

Everybody who's wanted to see it, see it? Well, you can touch that one. Yeah, you want to touch the one that you can't touch. Yeah, uh-huh, yeah. It's the beginning of Romans. No verse numbers, but I think you can probably see, I'm thinking you can see divisions like that there.

Paulus, the big fancy P. Paulus, Dulas, Iesu, Christian. I'm sorry? Yep, so is that everybody? We've got enough time to look at the textual variant real quick. I have a, obviously, some really nice slides on this, but it does not want to go in there as a beast.

That was definitely not something you'd want to carry with you. If you'll look, have a King James or New King James, a phrase will appear, ESV, NASV, NIV, Holman Christian. If it's a modern translation other than New King James, referring to Jesus.

And so, this is important because it is a question of whether at this particular text, God, greetings. They don't seem to, it seems to be pretty easy to preach sermons and things like that, saying, well, here's clear liberalism.

Here's a clear example where you have bias at play and the liberal, and that's exactly what you're going to get. Saying this is, this is an example of this. We need to remember, which in Latin is the nomina sacra.

And, well, it's pretty much the only way you could abbreviate it, it's os, as theta, and then maguscule or unscripted of the earliest manuscripts. He who is the term has, which becomes in the unseal form.

So, the difference would be, versus, you can see and remember liberalism or this is some type of conspiracy or so on. So, when you're reading somebody else, they're dead. You can't go back and ask, and it doesn't make any sense.

In manuscripts, all say haas. They also would certainly be an orthodox reading, but I certainly would not utilize this particular text as one of the key texts in defending the deity of Christ. In John 118, the King James meet God.

So, it goes both directions. Long line of capital letters, no spaces, and are so few variations deal with, rather than what you would expect, with as much copying as was done in the convent, you'd have a whole lot more.

But, again, and doesn't sell books, it's a whole lot easier to get people riled up. And not good for conspiracy. I think it's important to see. Okay. Father, we do thank you for the preservation of your word, the fact that we have all of this information available to us.

We still have the freedom to talk about these things. Lord, as we especially celebrate the resurrection today, we ask as we go into worship, you would be with us. You would lift up our hearts and our minds that we would be able to sing praises to you and truly honor you in all that we say and do.

We pray in Christ's name. Amen.