An Honest Mistake in the Codex Sinaiticus

Studying Koine Greek is quite difficult. Muito deficil. I don't think I can be fluent in it.

But there are perks in being familiar with this New Testament language. Specially, when you're reading ancient manuscripts like the Codex Sinaticus and the Codex Vaticanus. These 2 are the oldest existing Bibles in the world and therefore, the most reliable source. However, I am a little biased, I favor the Sinaiticus more than the Vaticanus because the latter has the word "Vatican" in it, hehe.

There are a number of Bible translations that are based on newer manuscripts. And some of these newer manuscripts are edited copies of the Sinaitucus and the Vaticanus. I say edited because these newer versions used cursive koine greek and and they have used small casings and there are spaces between words. The difference is like this:

vs

THEQUICKBROWNFOX

So that's basically the difference. The former is cursive script, with small cases and there are spaces between words. Unlike the latter, which makes it  quite difficult to read.

But because the S and V (my shortcut version) uses all caps and have no spaces and have not used cursive lettering, these 2 ancient documents looked organised, neat, and very beautiful.

There are other differences as well. For example, the capital letter for the letter Sigma in these newer manuscripts was Σ. While in the S and V's version of Sigma looks like the letter C.

Anyway, when I started learning Koine Greek, I of course wanted to study first my most favorite verse in the entire Bible (1 Cor 13:1-2) using the Codex Sinaiticus:

I started to read that and I wanted to memorize it but my curiosity got the better of me. So I took a peek at the Codex Vaticanus:

This copy of the Vaticanus is a little blurry but can you still spot the difference?

The Vaticanus copy is longer!

An Honest Mistake

I would like to emphasize that particular omission in the Sinaiticus copy was simply an honest mistake, done in good faith. The Sinaiticus scribe probably, and most likely, when copying a much older manuscript, simply missed a line. This is understandable. There were no computers back then, and a human error is somehow acceptable.

Michael Marlowe, a Bible researcher, in his article in 2011, was able to explain this:

a common mistake of copyists called parablepsis (looking beside) due to a homoiotéleuton (an identical ending) of words in the immediate context.  

These omissions are readily recognized.  

...the scribe had copied the verse up to the end of the first occurrence of the phrase “and have not charity,” but when he looked up to his example again to continue copying, his eye fell upon the second occurrence of the phrase, from which he continued, omitting all of those words between the two occurrences of the phrase.

That's why God willed that a number of manuscripts remain un-burned and un-destroyed by enemies of faith so that we can compare and confirm these sacred texts.

Of course there are omissions  and additions in other documents that have been done with malice and with criminal intent, as prophesied in the book of Revelations, but those topics can be discussed in another time, God willing.

That's it pancit!

To God be the Glory!