The 2 "oldest and Most reliable manuscripts" VATICANus and Sainaiticus of course.
If you would like to inspect them maybe you can get a pass from the pope for the vatican library.
Just a few changes here and there - oh well rev A or rev B whats your preference?
If you have eyes to see for yourself:
Correctors:
There are at least two different correctors from the uncial period. Some corrections are not enhanced by the reinforcer and are therefore very early. It seems reasonable to assign these to either the original scribe or a contemporary, who went through the whole codex and corrected several errors.
The second corrector is later and eventually identical with the reinforcer (9th or 10th CE). There are several corrections which leave some text unenhanced and substitute a word or letters.
Tischendorf and the ECM date one corrector to the 6th/7th CE.
There are also a few corrections from the minuscule era.
There are at least two different correctors from the uncial period. Some corrections are not enhanced by the reinforcer and are therefore very early. It seems reasonable to assign these to either the original scribe or a contemporary, who went through the whole codex and corrected several errors.
The second corrector is later and eventually identical with the reinforcer (9th or 10th CE). There are several corrections which leave some text unenhanced and substitute a word or letters.
Tischendorf and the ECM date one corrector to the 6th/7th CE.
There are also a few corrections from the minuscule era.
The text is very ordered except for those occasional troubling "Blank spots" I wonder what was in there in rev c or d?
The blank space in mark 16 just happens to be the right size to contain the traditional ending.
The original text division is a rather archaic one: For a new section the text is beginning afresh on a new line slightly in the left margin (one letter out), and the rest of the last line is left blank.
Oh yeah there are also "other problems"
This is NOT a complete list. Only some examples are given:
1257 A Strange late correction; Mt 16:20, new: DIESTEILATO, old: EPETIMHSEN
and look their eraser made a mess
1257 A Strange late correction; Mt 16:20, new: DIESTEILATO, old: EPETIMHSEN
and look their eraser made a mess
1325 B 7 R Lk 10:39, late correction (illegible), seems wiped out, probably EIS TON OIKON AUTHS.
ROTFL!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 3/31/2004 9:33:50 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
surely any mss with 10 different handwritings is ludicrous.
and which one's are these? And what is your source or authority for making such an observation?
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway - Enter today
