The Birmingham age-herald., 1913-07-06


| a third owner, who probably lived in
| the sixth century. Prof Sanders has
| assumed that the reference is to the
| church of Timothy in the monastery of
| the Ninedresser, whose patron saint
was martyr in the time of Diocletian
| Ihfs monastery was on the left bank
of the Nile. near Cairo, and perished
about the thirteenth century Probably
| all four manuscripts had been given
| to some more out-of- the-way monas-
terry for safekeeping, where finally they
were buried in the ruins, until they
| We're found and came into the hands of
Ali at Gizeh.
The manuscript is written on parch-
ment of medium thickness, which has
| suffered considerably from age wear
and exposure. Fortunately, however 1t
was kept between thick board covers.
| and the decay affected only the edges
OF the manuscript the text being every
where legible. 1t numbers 1877 leaves,
or 374 pages, of which 372 are written.
There are two blank pages at the end
of John.
Originally the manuscript had six
| more pages. Those that are lost doubt
less disappeared early in its history.
and since their loss the appearance of
| the manuscript indicates, it has been
bound once or twice. The character
| or the writing shows that no marks
We're made on the manuscript after the
sixth century. 1t was doubtless kept in
some Coptic monastery for several hun
dred years, but exhibited at times be-
cause of its great age and value. Can
die drippings are found on the first
pages of each gospel indicating that
these were the ones usually shown.
| The order of the Gospels is not that of
our version, but this: Matthew, John,
Luke, Mark the same as that found in
the best old Latin manuscripts.
A Parent Manuscript
The manuscript shows about 160 cor
rections, mostly by erasure and rewrit-
| ing, made by the scribe himself, or. as
professor Sanders thinks, by someone
else who lol<ed over the work and in
corporated changes. These corrections
are said to be of particular interest be-
cause they throw light on an older
parent manuscript.
The extraordinary variation in the
affiliations of the text shows that the
parent manuscripts must have been
| formed out of at least seven indepen-
dent parts" said Professor Sanders.
Such a variety of sources indicates
that the history of the earlier manu-
| script goes back to a time when the
| Biblical manuscripts in that locality
were all but lost. The fact that the
| first and last leaves of the first qure
| OF John We're worn seems to prove that
1
| by being concealed in the clothing of
some of the faithful. There Is a COM
paratively small portion of this manu-
script, comprising John, the first two
quires of Luke and the latter part of
Mark. which can be considered as ma
| tive Egyptian text. Matthew and the
| last two-thirds of Luke must have come
from Antioch, while the first part of
Mark came in from North Africa"
The King James version of the Bible
| is translation of the Constantinople
Greek text, text descended from the
Antioch recension; while the changes in
| the revised version are due in part to
the influence OF manuscripts which are
descended from the Alexandrian recen-
sion. This manuscript in portions
agrees with one, and in other places
with the other tradition.
In the Antioch portion 1t gives the
last words of the Lords prayer Mat
thew 6:13: For Thine is the Kingdom
and the power and the glory forever.
Amen"
The following passages are also pres
ent: Matthew 1923: When it is even
Ing, ye say, it will be fair weather. for
the sky is red and lowering. Ye can
discern the face of the sky; but We
cannot judge the signs of the times"
Ihese and other brief phrases are
omitted in the Alexandrian recension
In the Alexandrian portion 1t agrees
in certain notable omissions, as for
instance. in the story of the woman
taken in adultery; in John S:59, the
words going through the midst of
them, and so passed by" and in Luke
4:4, the words, but by every word
of Cod" and in Luke AIS, the phrase
ito heal the broken hearted"
Evidences of the Early Text
There are in certain portions of the
manuscript evidences of the early text
before it was corrected "This" said
Professor Sanders, rs shown in uncor-
rected portions of it's text, or in places
Where 1T does not conform to the type
adopted in the corrected part. For in
stance, failing to follow the model of
the Antioch recension, 1t omits the
words, Matthew 27:35, that it might be
fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet. they parted my garments
among them, and upon my vesture did
they cast lots and in Luke 22:43-44
And there appeared an angel unto
him from heaven, strengthening him.
And being in an agony he prayed more
earnestly; and his sweat was as ii it
were great drops of blood falling down
to the ground In Luke 90 "a, the
words Jesus said. Father, forgive them,
for they know not what they do. are
omitted.
"As examples of omission in the ear
of Antioch and Alexandria, may be
quoted the following phrases John 5:4.
| For an angel went down at a certain
season into the pool and troubled the
water; whosoever then first after the
troubling of the water stepped in was
| made whole of whatsoever disease he
had Mark GIL, Verify / say unto
you, 1T shall be more tolerable for So
dom and Gomorrha in the day of
Judgment than for that city, In Mark
7;S, Washing of pots and cups and
many other things ye do In Mark
9;59, And every sacrifice shall be salted
with salt Mark 11:2S, But IL ye do
not forgive, neither Will your Father
which is in heaven forgive your tres
passes. In Luke 3:23-3s the genealogy
of Jesus is omitted. In the very early
times the genealogy was sometimes
considered as a preface and not as a
part of the Gospel of Matthew This
manuscript seems to be decisive on the
question of the contradiction between
the genealogies and the divine birth of
which scholars have recently made so
much Instead of emitting the story
of the divine birth we should omit the
! genealogies, against the original con-
nection of which with the present gos-
pels there is some manuscript evil
| dence."
An Addition 10 Mark
| over against these omissions there is
INN nrfa mi ~,