First: The
legend articulated:
Background
to the legend: Eusebius, The Life of the Blessed Emperor Constantine, 4.36-37.
The legend
promoted: See Fragments of Truth video (42:29).
Second: Three
Reasons the legend is NOT true.
First: There is no explicit evidence that Sinaiticus
and Vaticanus were among the “de luxe” copies mentioned by Eusebius. There are
certainly no indications of this in the mss. themselves.
Second: According to Eusebius, the copies ordered
by Constantine were for the church in and around Constantinople.
Sinaiticus
and Vaticanus, however, are both generally associated with Egypt.
To use now outdated
text-type language. Copies made in Constantinople would most likely have reflected
the “Byzantine” text and not the “Alexandrian” text.
Third: There are numerous differences
between Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, which would be unlikely if they had been
among these works that were made to order.
Dean John
Burgon in The Revision Revised (1881) noted thousands of differences
between the two manuscripts in the Gospels alone (see this
article).
There is
even a significant difference in the ordering of the books. Sinaiticus places
Acts after the Pauline letters and before the General epistles, while Vaticanus
places Acts after the Gospels and before the Pauline epistles.
Three: This
legend has long-been discounted even by mainstream scholars.
See:
Bruce
Metzger, The Text of the NT: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration
(1964): 7-8.
D. C.
Parker, Codex Sinaiticus: The Story of the World’s Oldest Bible (2010): 19-22.
Conclusion:
Clearly,
this scholarly legend has been fabricated by some to promote a level of prestige
and acceptance of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus as premiere authorities.
No comments:
Post a Comment