The Critical Use of Faulty Manuscripts

Codex Sinaiticus is often defective, omitting a large number of words. Why then is it esteemed by critics? Because it is possible to use a manuscript with discernment, making allowances for its characteristic errors. Most of the omissions in Codex Sinaiticus have occurred by reason of a common mistake of copyists called di homoeotéleuton (Greek for "because of a similar ending"), which the scribe of Sinaiticus was especially prone to make. These omissions are readily recognized. Below are three examples. In the following passages the italicized words are omitted in Sinaiticus.

1 Cor. 13:1-2. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2 And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.

Here the scribe had copied the verse up to the end of the first "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. Now a more complicated example:

1 Cor. 15:25-27. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. 27 For he hath put all things under his feet.

Here it is not immediately clear what has happened. But when it is known that in some early manuscripts the order of clauses is as shown below, once again we see that the scribe's eye has jumped from the first occurrence of a phrase to the second occurrence:

For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. For he hath put all things under his feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.

And in the very next verse another such omission:

1 Cor. 15:27-28. But when he saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did subject unto him all things. 28 And when there shall be subjected unto him all things, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that put all things under him, that God may be all in all.

These di homoeotéleuton omissions number about 300 in the New Testament of Codex Sinaiticus. And because they are readily recognized as scribal errors, they are not taken seriously as various readings by the editors of critical editions. The three omissions used for examples above, and many more like them, are not even mentioned in the notes of the critical editions currently used by translators.

Other omissions are taken more seriously, however, especially when they are confirmed by Codex Vaticanus and other manuscripts of better quality. Sinaiticus is also regarded more highly as a good witness in the case of substitutions and additions. The scribe of Sinaiticus was not given to making capricious substitutions and additions. Other scribes were guilty of this fault, as may be seen from Codex Claromontanus, for instance, which is another very old manuscript. And so even the oldest manuscripts are not followed blindly, but intelligently.

Regarding Vaticanus: it is much better than Sinaiticus, and generally worthy of confidence. But even it is not used uncritically; its readings are adopted when they are confirmed by a variety of early witnesses, such as the versions, Fathers, and Papyrus 46. Even Papyrus 46, from a.d. 200, is not used uncritically. It is important to recognize the need for a diversity of witnesses from different regions. Critics aim to recover the readings of Catholic Antiquity, and guard against regionalisms. It is often asserted by Majority text advocates that the modern critical texts are distinctively Egyptian, that they rely entirely upon manuscripts recovered from Egypt. This is simply untrue. The Greek copies used by the critical editors are indeed mostly from Egypt, but these are also compared with quotations and early versions from all quarters of the ancient world.