KING JAMES VERSION BIBLE VS. MODERN ENGLISH BIBLE

[Dan_473]

The history of masoretic text is a black box to us, outsiders... who knows what they did. It was not under the church control, the text has been managed under the rabbinic judaism.

But for some info, you can look here:
https://theorthodoxlife.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/masoretic-text-vs-original-hebrew/

so sounds like we don't really know what they did, only that they produced a text.

 

[trofimus]

I know what Codex Sinaticus is; but I have never had direct contact with it. Are the DC books mingled with the canonical books; or are they all in a separate sectin of the document?

You can look here, the codex is fully online (thats why I took it as example, so that we can verify what is or is not there):

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Tobit |

 

[trofimus]

so sounds like we don't really know what they did, only that they produced a text.

Maybe, if somebody would study rabbinic sources... But Christians do not do that, from obvious reasons.

 

[Dan_473]

I know what Codex Sinaticus is; but I have never had direct contact with it. Are the DC books mingled with the canonical books; or are they all in a separate sectin of the document?

tobit is mixed in with the other books

also the nt contains Barnabas and hermes

 

[MarcR]

You can look here, the codex is fully online (thats why I took it as example, so that we can verify what is or is not there):

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Tobit |

Note that in the title the initial T and the final o have horizontal bars above and below the letters.

 

[MarcR]

You can look here, the codex is fully online (thats why I took it as example, so that we can verify what is or is not there):

Codex Sinaiticus - See The Manuscript | Tobit |

The beginning of 2Esdras is missing but in Judith in the title the initial K has a vertical and horizontal bar (resembling a roman L) conjoined over it.

 

[trofimus]

Note that in the title the initial T and the final o have horizontal bars above and below the letters.

Thats probably what remained from the title bordering.

You can see that also in the title of Esther etc.

It will not be anything about DT distinction.

 

[trofimus]

The beginning of 2Esdras is missing but in Judith in the title the initial K has a vertical and horizontal bar (resembling a roman L) conjoined over it.

If something is supposed to be a DT disctincion mark, it has to be in every DT book and in no other book.

These bars seem to be remains of titles decoration. They are preserved in various shapes in all titles.

 

[MarcR]

tobit is mixed in with the other books

also the nt contains Barnabas and hermes

In the NT, the DC books are gathered in a separate section after Revelation

Barnabas in the title has horizontal bars above and below the initial Beta and the final Heta

 

[MarcR]

If something is supposed to be a DT disctincion mark, it has to be in every DT book and in no other book.

These bars seem to be remains of titles decoration. They are preserved in various shapes in all titles.

You appear to be correct. the OT dc books are intermingled with the canonical books without distinction.

The NT dc books are gathered after Revelation. A Jewish congregation would not have used such a ms, even without the NT.

I don't think that this sort of mingling occurred outside of Alexandria.

 

[Dan_473]

In the NT, the DC books are gathered in a separate section after Revelation

Barnabas in the title has horizontal bars above and below the initial Beta and the final Heta

i can't see the bars on my phone

on separate sections, couldn't we also say that Revelation Barnabas and hermes are in a separate section?

 

[Dan_473]

say MarcR,

I'm interested in your take on this Canon

The Muratorian Fragment

 

[MarcR]

say MarcR,

I'm interested in your take on this Canon

The Muratorian Fragment

It appears that at the time the fragment was written, both Shepherd of Hermas and Wisdom of Solomon were used in the churches but not admitted to Canon. The letters by Paul to Laodicea and Alexandria are mentioned elsewhere but lost. There is a letter to Laodicea purporting to be from Paul in existence; but its authenticity is challenged. The epistles of John, Jude, and Peter were not generally accepted until the mid second or early third century; but they were used in many churches.
The apocalypse of Peter was not accepted into canon by the councils because of questionable authenticity. It was used by many churches and may be helpful whether canon or not. I know it exists both in Greek and in English; but I have not been able to find it. It is not generally included in the Apocrypha. Many Pseudepigrapha are available online; but I have not found the Apocalypse of Peter.

 

[trofimus]

A Jewish congregation would not have used such a ms, even without the NT.

Thats possible. This is a Christian Bible, not a Jewish one.

I don't think that this sort of mingling occurred outside of Alexandria.

Can you prove it? Also, not being "mingled" does not mean much, because these books were later, so there is no problem with having them in the end.

 

[Dan_473]

It appears that at the time the fragment was written, both Shepherd of Hermas and Wisdom of Solomon were used in the churches but not admitted to Canon. The letters by Paul to Laodicea and Alexandria are mentioned elsewhere but lost. There is a letter to Laodicea purporting to be from Paul in existence; but its authenticity is challenged. The epistles of John, Jude, and Peter were not generally accepted until the mid second or early third century; but they were used in many churches.
The apocalypse of Peter was not accepted into canon by the councils because of questionable authenticity. It was used by many churches and may be helpful whether canon or not. I know it exists both in Greek and in English; but I have not been able to find it. It is not generally included in the Apocrypha. Many Pseudepigrapha are available online; but I have not found the Apocalypse of Peter.

interestingly,
James and Hebrews are also not mentioned, i believe

 

[trofimus]

interestingly,
James and Hebrews are also not mentioned, i believe

Thats one of reasons why scholars date James and Hebrews to be of later date than the rest of writings.

 

[Dan_473]

Thats possible. This is a Christian Bible, not a Jewish one.



Can you prove it? Also, not being "mingled" does not mean much, because these books were later, so there is no problem with having them in the end.

a thought on hermes being late

does the bible say that the Canon was closed after the apostles?

maybe
i don't know

if so, Revelation is questionable since it appears late and doesn't claim to be written by an apostle

 

[KingJamesVersionBibleOnly]

Hello CC.
It's Monday

 

[Dan_473]

i was able to check out the codex on a laptop today

to be honest, i couldn't see bars around barnabas

i did see some dots
At the same time there seemed to be more dots around
the Apocalypse of John

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I been loving these historical text conversations, I wish you all would open a thread about them minus the KJVO bias. Would be a great line of study I have never done yet.