It seems that the codex sinaiticus website has crashed under all the publicity. Shame. Mind you, the way it’s getting written up is almost guaranteed to have people flocking to it. I think it’s great that these images are available. Unfortunately the BBC decided to link to an earlier magazine article when news of this digital project first broke on the public.
It contains the most ridiculously popularising and exaggerated take of the Ehrman line going.
What is probably the oldest known Bible is being digitised, reuniting its scattered parts for the first time since its discovery 160 years ago. It is markedly different from its modern equivalent. … It shows there have been thousands of alterations to today’s bible … [it] has books which are missing from the Authorised Version … it does not have crucial verses relating to the Resurrection
No wonder the site crashes under that kind of alternative Christianity publicity. There is of course “no modern equivalent” and it is a complete nonsense to speak of differences between the text of Sinaiticus and modern reconstructed texts as “alterations to today’s bible”. Describing Barnabas and The Shepherd as “missing from the Authorised Version” is a daft way of putting it and I assume the “crucial verses” relating to the resurrection mean the various alternate endings to Mark’s gospel.
Reading this sensationalised drivel of “Two Bibles” however, underlines just how ignorant people are about basic textual criticism, and explains why the Bart Ehrman Christian conspiracy line sells, and why the Sinaiticus site has crashed.
{ 3 comments }
works fine here. maybe all the richard branson internet providers in the uk are the prob.
It’s back online here now as well. But hey – why should I miss a chance to bash overblown sensationalism
Maybe a KJVO wrote it?
Comments on this entry are closed.