Steven Avery
Administrator
Codex Sinaiticus and the Book of Psalms - Albert Pietersma
http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm/CodexSinaiticus+Psalms(2009).pdf
Avoid https
https://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm/CodexSinaiticus+Psalms(2009).pdf
9 pages to read
Circularity
rule 2: when the three older groups disagree among themselves, the reading which equals the Masoretic Text is deemed to be OG
Psalm 13:3
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=13&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
(pic on special page with Vaticanus et al)
Psalm 17:20
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=4&lid=en&quireNo=59&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 24:14
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=24&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 65:1 (Christian addition)
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=65&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
¶ To the chief Musician, ASong or Psalm. Make a joyful noise unto God, all ye lands:
A Psalm of Resurrection
εις το τελος ωδη ψαλμου αναστασεως αλαλαξατε τω θεω πασα η γη'
Resurrection is OMITTED!
ειϲ το τελοϲ ωδη ψαλμου
ξε
αλαλαξατε τω θω παϲα η γη
Psalm 70:21
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=3&lid=en&quireNo=61&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 118:104
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=2&lid=en&quireNo=63&side=v&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 134:17
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=5&lid=en&quireNo=63&side=v&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 146:8
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...ook=26&chapter=146&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Interestingly, no manuscript makes its appearance more often than does S in the eight instances Rahlfs brackets. As a result, one might conclude on that basis that S is a very good witness to the Old Greek text of Psalms. 22
The reason for Rahlfs’ judgment is not difficult to find. All eight items are, on the one hand, lacking in MT, and, on the other hand, the intra-textual origin of most of them is patently obvious. In that light, it is not surprising that, in Rahlfs’ apparatus criticus, one frequently encounters the notation “ex” followed, typically, by a Psalms reference suggesting the possible origin of a given variant. What is surprising—to echo P. L. Hedley—is that Rahlfs did not take his own notation more seriously, at least to the point of placing more square brackets to signal many more items are of doubtful originality.
Most of Rahlfs’ evidence for Hebraizing in MS S, as already noted, consists of “omissions” that correspond to MT. But “omissions” that equal the Hebrew cannot help but bring into view a central issue in the evaluation of a translated text: when does such correspondence reflect the original text and when is it indicative of Hebraizing corrective activity? Or might it indicate neither and simply be a careless mistake by a scribe? An example may help illustrate:
http://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm/CodexSinaiticus+Psalms(2009).pdf
Avoid https
https://homes.chass.utoronto.ca/~pietersm/CodexSinaiticus+Psalms(2009).pdf
9 pages to read
Circularity
rule 2: when the three older groups disagree among themselves, the reading which equals the Masoretic Text is deemed to be OG
Psalm 13:3
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=13&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
(pic on special page with Vaticanus et al)
Psalm 17:20
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=4&lid=en&quireNo=59&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 24:14
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=24&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 65:1 (Christian addition)
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...book=26&chapter=65&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
¶ To the chief Musician, A
A Psalm of Resurrection
εις το τελος ωδη ψαλμου αναστασεως αλαλαξατε τω θεω πασα η γη'
Resurrection is OMITTED!
ειϲ το τελοϲ ωδη ψαλμου
ξε
αλαλαξατε τω θω παϲα η γη
Psalm 70:21
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=3&lid=en&quireNo=61&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 118:104
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=2&lid=en&quireNo=63&side=v&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 134:17
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...lioNo=5&lid=en&quireNo=63&side=v&zoomSlider=0
Psalm 146:8
https://codexsinaiticus.org/en/manu...ook=26&chapter=146&lid=en&side=r&zoomSlider=0
Interestingly, no manuscript makes its appearance more often than does S in the eight instances Rahlfs brackets. As a result, one might conclude on that basis that S is a very good witness to the Old Greek text of Psalms. 22
The reason for Rahlfs’ judgment is not difficult to find. All eight items are, on the one hand, lacking in MT, and, on the other hand, the intra-textual origin of most of them is patently obvious. In that light, it is not surprising that, in Rahlfs’ apparatus criticus, one frequently encounters the notation “ex” followed, typically, by a Psalms reference suggesting the possible origin of a given variant. What is surprising—to echo P. L. Hedley—is that Rahlfs did not take his own notation more seriously, at least to the point of placing more square brackets to signal many more items are of doubtful originality.
Most of Rahlfs’ evidence for Hebraizing in MS S, as already noted, consists of “omissions” that correspond to MT. But “omissions” that equal the Hebrew cannot help but bring into view a central issue in the evaluation of a translated text: when does such correspondence reflect the original text and when is it indicative of Hebraizing corrective activity? Or might it indicate neither and simply be a careless mistake by a scribe? An example may help illustrate:
Last edited: