Michael Swift on 8 'holies' in Revelation 4:8

Steven Avery

Administrator
Pure Bible

Textus Receptus Academy

One of the clearest evidences to me that Codex Sinaiticus is a work produced at Mt Athos by Simonides and his Greek Orthodox kin is the very blatant nod to the Orthodox Octoechos in Revelation 4:8 where we find the Ἅγιος repeated an incredible and completely non-authentic 8 times. The Orthodox Octoechos was not admitted until the Quinisext Council of 692. It was not developed as a concept until Pseudo-John of Damascus in the late 7th century. Whoever our scribe is, he is a very interested party in propagandising Orthodox Byzantine tradition. This is no fourth century scribe as the eightfold tonal system would not exist for another 3 centuries. There is no way on earth that a fourth century scribe gives a nod to the 7th century Octoechos. Sorry, folks. That doesn't happen. This work is a production of Simonides. This was no mistaken scribal reduplication. This is an intentional and first hand nod to the Orthodox Octoechos. Any Eastern Orthodox church member would understand that immediately. Only a scribe steeped in Byzantine tradition does this, and no one else. It is an unmistakable earmark of Simonides. 4:8 "και αναπαυϲιν ουχ εξοϲαν ημεραϲ και νυκτοϲ λεγοντεϲ αγιοϲ · αγιοϲ · αγιοϲ · αγιοϲ · αγιοϲ · αγιοϲ ˙ αγιοϲ αγιοϲ κϲ ┬ θϲ παντοκρατωρ · ο ην και ο ων και ο ερχομενοϲ" http://www.codexsinaiticus.org/en/manuscript.aspx?dir=next&folioNo=2&lid=en&quireNo=90&side=v&zoomSlider=0#

The specific number of 8 Ἅγιος, having 3 syllables each, indicates that the scribe is well aware of what he is doing and that they signify the 24 stichera, 3 contained in each of the 8 echos. This cannot have come from the 4th century. I cannot overstate that. This is pure 7th century Byzantine music theory at earliest.

Yes, and there's a very real reason. There eight tonal mode progressions comprised of 3 stichera in each of the eight echos. This would be very apparent to a Greek Orthodox monk trained in Byzantine music theory and to not many others. How likely is it that a scribe from the 4th century did this? It's not likely at all because it's impossible as the Octoechos system didn't even exist. In other words, it is impossible for this to be a manuscript any earlier than the 7th century. And I mean impossible. Yet, as it is in a 4th century script, it is impossible for it to be from the 7th century. Ergo, it is impossible for Sinaiticus to be anything but a modern anachronism or forgery. Impossible. Revelation 4:8 seals the deal. This is Simonides' work. He wasn't lying.

There is one verse that all scribes always get right - the Triadic Declaration. So, if it is not only not right, but duplicated, that's a giant road sign that the scribe is trying to call our attention to something very significant.

There are three syllables in Ἅγιος. Multiplied 8 times, we arrive at 24 syllables signifying the 24 stichera of the Octoechos. That is its significance and its only significance. Simonides might as well have signed his name to this manuscript. Connect the dots. Sinaiticus is an anachronistic celebration of all things Greek Orthodox. It rings back to a time of the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople. It belies the blatant nationalism of its scribe .

If you listen to the various stichera of the echos, you find that even in English they begin with the traditional 'Hagia' during Orthros. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMq8yrv6WGo
 

Steven Avery

Administrator
Pure Bible

It looks like everything early is 3, quite an array:

Ephraem
Tertullian
Primasius of Hadrumetum (540)
Fulgentius
Victorinus (c. 260)
Apringius of Béja (548)
Beatus of Liebana (786)

Syriac, Armenian, Aethiopic, Arabic

(Andreas may be too ubiquitious to have a single entry.)

Maybe diserte is explained in the collation list. Which is in the front of Volume 1

Catalog and description
https://archive.org/.../HoskierApokalyp.../page/n67/mode/2up

Vol 2 may have more info, but is not as easily available.

===================

Patristic Commentaries on Revelation
Francis X. Gumerlock
http://www.kerux.com/doc/2302a5.asp
===================

Thus Juan Hernandez, like many not capable of thinking outside the Tischendorf box easily, has to reverse logic on its head:

Codex Sinaiticus: An Early Christian Commentary on the Apocalypse? (2015)
https://www.academia.edu/.../Codex_Sinaiticus_An_Early...

Finally, we have the multiplication of ‘Holies’ in Revelation 4:8. Rather than reading, ‘Holy, Holy, Holy is the Lord God Almighty’, Sinaiticus ascribes holiness to God eight times – just one shy of a perfect nine– which would be capable of crediting three ‘holies’ to each member of the Godhead.While we stop short of attributing such a motive to our scribe, it is nonetheless interesting that the later Trisagion Hymn does precisely that. 27 Perhaps the hymn’s origin can be traced to this kind of incremental expansion.
 
Top