“An Opinion about [Or: "on" "concerning"] the Sinaitic manuscript, containing an incomplete Old Testament and the entire New Testament with the Epistle of Barnabas and the Book of Hermas”
By Fr. Archimandrite Porfiry Uspensky
. This accidental discovery gave me reason to think again about the fate of this Bible [i.e. Codex Sinaiticus]. It was evident that it had been in great neglect for a very long time, and was even soiled and dirty, as evidenced by the large stains and blackness on [Or: "darkness of" "the dark colour of"] the fragments of it that I keep. It was obvious that the Sinai-ites did not look after it,
Sounds like the Judith page that was washed, likely by Tischendorf.
Uspensky squirreled that one away.
Anyway, there is a glaring logic problem here.
400+ pristine pages, 86 noticeable for their whiteness with minimal stains and grease, youthful, flexible, clean, pristine. An amazing manuscript, which Morozov called out.
And we are supposed to estimate the age by a few dirty scraps, ignoring 99%+ of the manuscript?
Bridge for sale.
And I was surprised when cjab made this logical blunder, here it is Uspensky, convincing TNC.
(Can’t anybody here play this game?)
