Oldest known Bible goes online

[tokutter]

It's funny, I actually took the time to look up and cross reference a source that outlines all of the additions and omissions, and none of the nay sayers have even pointed to the first ACTUAL descrepency. All any of you can do is stand on the sidelines and point to the idea that there is a difference (how ever small) between a 1700 year old copy of the bible and a modern bible itself. How about this if you dont want to talk book chapter and verse. Show me another 1700 year old book that is still in print that has as few or fewer changes than the bible does. Maybe we can start there. If your not able to find anything and your not willing to discuss the actual changes made then know your arguements are empty and meaningless. Akin to the trash talk a 12 year old gives after he has had his but kicked, by the fat kid.

That's neither here nor there Drich.....your bible is still one book short.....it's called the book of Mormon....and the sooner you realize that your path to salvation flows through the prophet Joseph Smith the better off you'll be....unless you believe people of questionable character somehow piggy backed a religion onto another religion and that it's all bullshit........tell you, what I'll get you Mitt Romney's number......maybe he can help you see the light.

[Minimalist]

Yeah - hardly any changes at all in the supposedly inerrant word of the fucking lord, huh?

The text of the New Testament lacks several passages:[19]

Omitted verses

Gospel of Matthew 12:47, 16:2b-3, 17:21, 18:11, 23:14, Matthew 24:35;
Gospel of Mark 7:16, 9:44, 9:46, 11:26, 15:28, 16:9–20 (Long ending of the Gospel Mark, referring to the appearance of Jesus to many people following the resurrection)
Gospel of Luke 17:36
Gospel of John 5:4, Pericope adulterae (7:53–8:11) (see Image "John 7:53–8:11"), 16:15, 20:5b-6, 21:25
Acts of the Apostles 8:37; 15:34; 24:7; 28:29;[20]
Epistle to the Romans 16:24

Page of the codex with text of Matthew 6:4–32

Omitted phrases

Matthew 5:44 εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωμὲνους ὑμᾶς, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς (bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you);[21]
Matthew 6:13 – ὅτι σοῦ ἐστιν ἡ βασιλεία καὶ ἡ δύναμις καὶ ἡ δόξα εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας. ἀμήν (For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.) omitted.[22]
Matthew 10:39a – ο ευρων την ψυχην αυτου απολεσει αυτην, και (Ηe who finds his life will lose it, and);[23]
Matthew 15:6 – η την μητερα (αυτου) (or (his) mother);[24]
Matthew 20:23 και το βαπτισμα ο εγω βαπτιζομαι βαπτισθησεσθε (and be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with)[25]
Matthew 23:35 – υιου βαραχιου (son of Barachi'ah) omitted; this omission is supported only by codex 59 (by the first hand), three Evangelistaria (ℓ 6, ℓ 13, and ℓ 185), and Eusebius.[26]
Mark 1:1 – υιου θεου "the Son of God" omitted.[27]
Mark 10:7 – omitted και προσκολληθησεται προς την γυναικα αυτου (and be joined to his wife), as in codices Codex Vaticanus Graecus 1209, Codex Athous Lavrensis, 892, ℓ 48, syrs, goth.[28]

Luke 9:55b-56a – καὶ εἶπεν, Οὐκ οἲδατε ποίου πνεύματος ἐστε ὑμεις; ὁ γὰρ υἱὸς τοῦ ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἦηλθεν ψυχὰς ἀνθρώπων ἀπολέσαι ἀλλὰ σῶσαι (and He said: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them) omitted as in codices: P45, P75, B, C, L, Θ, Ξ, 33, 700, 892, 1241, syr, copbo;[29]
John 4:9 – ου γαρ συνχρωνται Ιουδαιοι Σαμαριταις (Jews have no dealings with Samaritans), it is one of so-called Western non-interpolations; omission is supported by D, a, b, d, e, j, copfay, it was supplemented by the first corrector (before leaving scriptorium);[30]

Some passages were excluded by the correctors:
Additional phrase to John 21:7 on the margin – οι δε ειπον δι οληϲ τηϲ νυκτοϲ ε κοπιαϲαμεν και ουδεν ελαβομεν επι δε τω ϲω ρηματι βαλουμεν

Matthew 24:36 – phrase ουδε ο υιος (nor the Son) the first corrector marked as doubtful, but the second corrector (b) removed the mark.[31]
Mark 10:40 ητοιμασται υπο του πατρος μου (instead of ητοιμασται) – the first corrector marked "υπο του πατρος μου" as doubtful, but the second corrector removed the mark.[32]
In Luke 11:4 ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ (but deliver us from evil) included by the original scribe, marked by the first corrector (a) as doubtful, but the third corrector © removed the mark.[33]
Christ's agony at Gethsemane (Luke 22:43–44) – included by the original scribe, marked by the first corrector as doubtful, but the third corrector © removed the mark.[34]
Luke 23:34a, "Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" – it was included by the first scribe, marked by the first corrector as doubtful, but a third corrector removed the mark.[35]

These omissions are typical for the Alexandrian text-type.[36]
Interpolations

Matthew 8:13 (see Luke 7:10)

It has additional text: καὶ ὑποστρέψας ὁ ἑκατοντάρχος εἰς τὸν οἶκον αὐτοῦ ἐν αὐτῃ τῇ ὦρᾳ εὗρεν τὸν παῖδα ὑγιαίνοντα (and when the centurion returned to the house in that hour, he found the slave well) as well as codices C, (N), Θ, (0250), f1, (33, 1241), g1, syrh.[37]

Matthew 10:12 (see Luke 10:5)

It reads λέγοντες εἰρήνη τῷ οἴκῳ τούτῳ (say peace to be this house) after αυτην. The reading was deleted by the first corrector, but the second corrector restored it. The reading is used by manuscripts: Bezae, Regius, Washingtonianus, Koridethi, manuscripts f 1, 22, 1010 (1424), it, vgcl.[38][39]

Matthew 27:49 (see John 19:34)

In Matthew 27:49 the codex contains added text: ἄλλος δὲ λαβὼν λόγχην ἒνυξεν αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευράν, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὖδορ καὶ αἳμα (the other took a spear and pierced His side, and immediately came out water and blood). This reading was derived from John 19:34 and occurs in other manuscripts of the Alexandrian text-type.[40]

Unique and other textual variants
Page from facsimile edition (1862); 1 Chr 9:27–10:11

Matthew 7:22 – It has additional word πολλα (numerous): "and cast out numerous demons in your name?". It is not supported by any other manuscript.[41]

Matthew 8:12 – It has ἐξελεύσονται (will go out) instead of ἐκβληθήσονται (will be thrown). This variant is supported only by one Greek manuscript Uncial 0250, and by Codex Bobiensis, syrc, s, p, pal, arm, Diatessaron.[42]

Matthew 13:54 – Ordinary reading εις την πατριδα αυτου (to his own country) changed into εις την αντιπατριδα αυτου (to his own Antipatris), and in Acts 8:5 εις την πολιν της Σαμαρειας replaced into εις την πολιν της Καισαριας. These two variants do not exist in any other manuscript, and it seems they were made by a scribe. According to T. C. Skeat they suggest Caesarea as a place in which the manuscript was made.[43]

Matthew 16:12 – It has textual variant της ζυμης των αρτων των Φαρισαιων και Σαδδουκαιων (leaven of bread of the Pharisees and Sadducees) supported only by Codex Corbeiensis I and Curetonian Gospels.

Luke 1:26 – "Nazareth" is called "a city of Judea".

Luke 2:37 – εβδομηκοντα (seventy), all manuscripts have ογδοηκοντα (eighty);[44]

John 1:28 – The second corrector made unique textual variant Βηθαραβα. This textual variant has only codex 892, syrh and several other manuscripts.[45]

John 1:34 – It reads ὁ ἐκλεκτός (chosen one) together with the manuscripts \mathfrak{P}5, \mathfrak{P}106, b, e, ff2, syrc, and syrs instead of ordinary word υἱος (son).

John 2:3 – Where ordinarily reading "And when they wanted wine", or "And when wine failed", Codex Sinaiticus has "And they had no wine, because the wine of the marriage feast was finished" (supported by a and j);

John 6:10 – It reads τρισχιλιοι (three thousands) for πεντακισχιλιοι (five thousands); the second corrector changed into πεντακισχιλιοι.[46]

Acts 11:20 – It reads εὐαγγελιστας (Evangelists) instead of ἑλληνιστάς (Hellenists);[47]

In Acts 14:9, the word "not" inserted before "heard"; in Hebr. 2:4 "harvests" instead of "distributions"; in 1 Peter 5:13 word "Babylon" replaced into "Church".[47]

2 Timothy 4:10 – it reads Γαλλιαν for Γαλατιαν, the reading of the codex is supported by along with Ephraemi Rescriptus, 81, 104, 326, 436.[48]
Witness of some readings of "majority"

It is the oldest witness for the phrase μη αποστερησης (do not defraud) in Mark 10:19. This phrase was not included by the manuscripts: Codex Vaticanus (added by second corrector), Codex Cyprius, Codex Washingtonianus, Codex Athous Lavrensis, f1, f13, 28, 700, 1010, 1079, 1242, 1546, 2148, ℓ 10, ℓ 950, ℓ 1642, ℓ 1761, syrs, arm, geo. This is variant of the majority manuscripts.[49]

In Mark 13:33 it is the oldest witness of the variant και προσευχεσθε (and pray). Codex B and D do not include this passage.[50]

In Luke 8:48 it has θυγατερ (daughter) as in the Byzantine manuscripts, instead of the Alexandrian θυγατηρ (daughter), supported by the manuscripts: B K L W Θ.[51]
Orthodox reading

In 1 John 5:6 it has textual variant δι' ὕδατος καὶ αἵματος καὶ πνεύματος (through water and blood and spirit) together with the manuscripts: Codex Alexandrinus, 104, 424c, 614, 1739c, 2412, 2495, ℓ 598m, syrh, copsa, copbo, Origen.[52][n 3] Bart D. Ehrman says this was a corrupt reading from the orthodox party.[53]

You fundies are such fools.

[John V]

Have you guys ever seen a study Bible? They commonly include footnotes noting differences between manuscripts. It's not like this is a revelation to us.

[Minimalist]

Do they leave out big parts of your holy horseshit, too?

You clowns always have an excuse, don't you?

[Aractus]

Here Min, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftHecLxquCg

The host is a bit of a douche and clearly not approaching it from a neutral POV, however the two scholars (well mainly the one scholar - Dr Daniel B Wallace) explains Greek mss textual variations very well.

[littleendian]

Here Min, watch this:

That video bores me out of my skull, just like the rest of the dusty, dull Christian dogma.

Funny how the bible apologists keep avoiding the "minor" issues of the bible regulating slavery and the practice of killing non-virgins brides in very brutal ways, or how women should basically just STFU (Timothy 2:12) (*).

I'd really like to see you weasel your way out of these, but I'm sure you're just going to continue to ignore those. Which to me just shows that even the most fanatic Christian doesn't really believe the thing is for real but picks out the parts that seem reasonable.

If people like you wouldn't take this horse manure serious it'd really be funny as hell.

edit: (*) And lets not forget the bible calling homosexuality a "perversity".

[Aractus]

^ Go and practise falling down.

[littleendian]

^ Go and practise falling down.

q.e.d.

[Brian37]

Pretty cool but knowing xtians they'll just silence the tracks or talk woo woo until people drop it. we already know their off in the head denial is inate in us all and they seem already a couple steps ahead in that department of thinking so i have little reason to think they'll change.

Okay, what I find disappointing in this thread is the uninformed opinions that are being posted. It's just as bad as 9/11 "truthers" who have no idea of what the facts really are.

Post your opinion, fine, but first go and inform yourself.

1. This is not the "oldest" copy of the Bible.
2. It is of Alexandrian text-type. We know about the textual variants in the greek mss, we have scholars who specialize on these variants. We use critical texts as the basis for the Biblical text, therefore, any mss will contain variants from it.
3. The order of the OT books is arranged differently from the Jewish order, the order of the NT books is largely irrelevant as their order (as we have them in our Bible) is based (loosely) on type and length.
4. There's nothing new about this, it's a text type that has been studied for centuries, and the codex isn't new. We are discovering new mss all the time, and that's what is really exciting.

If you stuck any holy book next to a copy of Harry Potter please tell me how history and order and language used makes the fantastic claims in either different or true?

A Yellow Brick Road comic book is still a comic book regardless of if the comic book is taken as fact or fiction.

While the history of these books are documented it will never make the fantastic claims in them true, or the gods people claim are the head characters in these books real.

We have evidence of the beliefs of the Ancient Egyptians and their history is well documented, but it does not make Isis or Osirus or Horus real merely because people wrote the claims down or depicted them in buildings or art or tombs.

[Minimalist]

Danny,

Ehrman says, flat out, that most of the errors are insignificant but he was coming from a literalist fundie background which insisted that this holy horseshit was the inerrant word of god. Thus, when he discovered the many errors in it he was forced to confront the possibility that "god" was inept or that this crap was just as fallible as anything else.

The mindless prattling of fundamentalist xtians that this ancient (poorly-written) literature is direct from the god hotline is a constant factor on this side of the pond. As you can see from reading this forum we have numerous purveyors of that particular line. Jackoffs like G-C are hopeless cases....although fun to shit on.

However, when entire passages are added or deleted these cannot be put off to scribal "error." These are attempts BY MEN to advance their own particular agenda centuries after this shit was allegedly written.

It is pointless to blame Ehrman who merely publicized what has been known to scholars for centuries. Xtians love to personalize their enemies hence "Darwin" is the great apostate (in spite of being a creationist himself!) for merely pointing out what has been going on in evolutionary terms and Ehrman is a traitor because he found out that their precious fucking bible is a load of shit. The nut jobs will never forgive either of them but fortunately the nutjobs seem to be dying out.

Thank god!