Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
About Kodex W, For Dave Bauscher
#1
Shlama Dave,

I would like to ask again: Do you feel that this 'Kodex W' is "The Original Autographs" of the New Testament?

If so, does this put you back in the Greek Primacy school?

I would appreciate an answer to these questions.

Thank you, Albion
Reply
#2
Are we all allowed to give our thoughts on Codex W, or is this thread reserved for Mr. Bauscher?
Reply
#3
Shlama Akhi Albion & Dawid,

Of course anyone may reply to this thread. Albion simply wanted to address a specific issue in it.

I am not a Greek primacist! I simply point out that a first century Greek manuscript has apparently been identified which also has Aramaic seals and
dates for the four Greek Gospels with the authors' names of those Gospels written also in Aramaic, using Herodian script (1st century). I believe as I have for quite a few years now, that the Greek is a translation of the Peshitta. This Codex W would be one of the first Greek manuscripts translated from The Peshitta Gospels.

The book I mentioned is certainly worth obtaining, as it has plenty of magnified photos, showing the dates and signatures in the Aramaic seals hidden in the Greek letters themselves & alongside them in many places, forming artistic designs. The covers of the manuscript has primitive looking paintings of the four apostles (shown also in the book) with Aramaic messages hidden in their clothing and even on their faces!

I've studied Greek textual Criticism since 1974, but I have never seen anything like this ever presented in any book or article on the subject.
I doubt the author sees this the way I do. He seems to think the Greek is the original. I have written him about my discovery of The Peshitta as the original, with the codes I have found and the proofs that the Greek was often mistranslated from Aramaic by misreading one Aramaic letter in a word, changing the meaning altogether.

I never got a response to my long letter to Dr. Woodard, though he is keeping me posted about new material he is publishing, so I'm on his mailing list.

Blessings to all,

Dave Bauscher
Reply
#4
Dave Bauscher said:

"I am not a Greek primacist! I simply point out that a first century Greek manuscript has apparently been identified which also has Aramaic seals and
dates for the four Greek Gospels with the authors' names of those Gospels written also in Aramaic, using Herodian script (1st century). I believe as I have for quite a few years now, that the Greek is a translation of the Peshitta. This Codex W would be one of the first Greek manuscripts translated from The Peshitta Gospels."


Dave, that's a big sigh of relief for me!

Not quite the 'Nestea plunge' <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: --> but ALMOST!

Thanks for writing!!

Shlama, Albion
Reply
#5
The problem with this codex is that it is almost certainly not even a first century document. Codecies were not used until the third or fourth century C.E.
Next, most agree that John was not written until about 95 C.E. How could Mark have compiled this, then?
Note also that the text is missing Mark 15:13-38 and John 14:26-16:7. This could not be Apostolic in origin. It also has an interpolation after Mark 16:4.
Also indicative of a late date is the way the text shifts from one textual family to another abruptly. It doesn't just have mixed readings. It is unique in the fact that it will by skipping happily along in consistant Byzantine readings and suddenly bam! It's Western all of a sudden. This indicates that it was copied from several other mss of various families, which would force it to have a late date.
All in all, I would say that this codex can't legitimately be dated earlier than the fourth century C.E.

Shalom,
Dawid
Reply
#6
Dawid Wrote:Codecies were not used until the third or fourth century C.E.

Shlama,

I could be wrong but I believe the medium of codex was used in the first and second centuries - didn't the Roman poet Martialis use or compile a codex? He lived during the first century. The main method of writing was on scrolls and single sheets of parchment or papryi wasn't it? Would it be out of order to think that sheets were compiled into a single volume? Curios.

Ya'aqub
Reply
#7
Shlama AKhay Yaaqub & Dawid,

The codex was reportedly used by Julius Caesar in writing his journals. Here is an excerpt on the subject I found:

"In the first century, the form of the manuscript book begins to shift from the scroll to the codex, though this transition may not be "complete" until around the fourth century. For first drafts, brief writings, and notes the Romans use various forms of bound parchment leaves. For diplomas and other brief documents they write on bronze, lead, and wood. For formal presentations they prefer the paprus scroll. The scroll remains the prefered form for literary works until the 4th century. The first recorded use of the codex for literary works is attributed to Martial who experiments with the format in the first century. "Some have said that Julius Caesar invented the first codex during the Gallic Wars. He would issue scrolls folded up accordion style and use the "pages" as reference points." Scribes prefer to write on the side of papyrus with the fibers running horizontally. When they write on the outside of the scroll the writing on outside is easily worn off.
The transition from the scroll to the codex is often credited to early Christians."

So it is possible for a codex to be first century. I cannot account for the missing passages, though it would be nothing short of miraculous to find even a 4th century mss. with no missing passages or leaves. Vaticanus the 4th century ms. is missing leaves from the last few chapters of Hebrews. To find a first century ms. with no missing pages would be even more unusual.

John Mark did not write John's Greek Gospel, but John did, and Barnabas apparently also wrote part of it.

You really cannot write this off out of hand. You need to read the book and see the Aramaic & Hebrew seals in the script of Qumran's Dead Sea Scrolls to believe it.

Dave
Reply
#8
gbausc Wrote:Shlama AKhay Yaaqub & Dawid,

The codex was reportedly used by Julius Caesar in writing his journals. Here is an excerpt on the subject I found:

"In the first century, the form of the manuscript book begins to shift from the scroll to the codex, though this transition may not be "complete" until around the fourth century. For first drafts, brief writings, and notes the Romans use various forms of bound parchment leaves. For diplomas and other brief documents they write on bronze, lead, and wood. For formal presentations they prefer the paprus scroll. The scroll remains the prefered form for literary works until the 4th century. The first recorded use of the codex for literary works is attributed to Martial who experiments with the format in the first century. "Some have said that Julius Caesar invented the first codex during the Gallic Wars. He would issue scrolls folded up accordion style and use the "pages" as reference points." Scribes prefer to write on the side of papyrus with the fibers running horizontally. When they write on the outside of the scroll the writing on outside is easily worn off.
The transition from the scroll to the codex is often credited to early Christians."

So it is possible for a codex to be first century. I cannot account for the missing passages, though it would be nothing short of miraculous to find even a 4th century mss. with no missing passages or leaves. Vaticanus the 4th century ms. is missing leaves from the last few chapters of Hebrews. To find a first century ms. with no missing pages would be even more unusual.

John Mark did not write John's Greek Gospel, but John did, and Barnabas apparently also wrote part of it.

You really cannot write this off out of hand. You need to read the book and see the Aramaic & Hebrew seals in the script of Qumran's Dead Sea Scrolls to believe it.

Dave

Shlama,

Good information. Thank you.

Ya'aqub
Reply
#9
Shlama all--

While I am not going to weigh in on the subject of this Kodex's age, I did see something in my other research that seemed to relate to it. I was excerpting WIlliam Norton's work ("A Translation, in English Daily Used, of the Peshito-Syriac Text, and of the Received Greek Text of Hebrews, James, 1 Peter, and 1 John") for use in the appendices for Mari/PEACE and came across this quote on page 29:

A MANUSCRIPT OF THE FOUR GOSPELS IN SYRIAC, BEARING DATE A. D. 78, is mentioned by J. S. Asseman, in his Bibliotheca. The manuscript was preserved at Baghdad on the river Tigris; at the end it had these words under written; "This sacred book was finished on Wedneday, the 18th day of the month Conun, in the year 389," that is of the Greeks, which was A. D. 78, "by the hand of the Apostle Achaeus, a fellow labourer of Mar Maris, and a disciple of the Apostle Mar Thaddeus, whom we intreat to pray for us." This prayer implies that the statement was written after the time of Achaeus (who is probably the person called also Aggaeus), and Dr. Glocester Ridley says that Achaeus died A. D. 48. For this and other reasons J. D. Michaelis says that the statement "is of no authority." (Marsh's Michaelis, 1823, vol. ii., pg. 31).

THE GREAT NUMBER OF CONVERTS made by Thaddeus, needed to be supplied immediately with WRITTEN DIVINE RECORDS IN SYRIAC, to teach them what to believe and what to do. Greek books would not have been suitable, for their language was Syriac. The ancient Syriac copy of "The Teaching of Thaddeus," from which the above extracts are taken, states that not only King Abgar, and many of the people of that city, were converted, but many also throughout "all Mesopotamia, and the regions round about it." It says that Thaddeus "received all those who trusted in the Anointed, and immersed them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Spirit of Holiness"; that the king gave money with which a house of worship was built; that in it they "offered praises all the days of their lives;" that in the worship conducted there, the teachers "read in the Old Covenant and in the New, and in the Prophets, and in the Acts of the Apostles every day."

By the New Covenant seems to be meant the Gospels; for the New Covenant is distinguished from the Acts of the Apostles, and a little afterwards it is said that many people assembled from day to day, and came to the prayers of the service, and the [reading of the] Old Covenant and of the New in four parts. (See Syriac, pp. 13, 15). The Syriac of this narrative is like that of the Peshito itself; a fact which corroborates the statement that the Peshito was made by the care of Thaddeus.

SOME DOUBT, however, attaches to some of the above statements, because, "The Teaching of Thaddeus" has at the end, received forged additions. Dr. Glocester Ridley says that Achaeus (sometimes called Aggaeus), a disciple of Thaddeus, died A. D. 48. Serapion was bishop of Antioch about A. D. 192-214; Zephyrinus was bishop of Rome 202-217. Yet in this record it is said that when Aggaeus died, "Palut received the hand of priesthood from Serapion, bishop of Antioch, which hand Serapion received from Zephyrinus, bishop of Rome, from the succession of the hand of priesthood of Simon Cephas." So that though the above extracts do not seem to be corrupted, some of them may be so.

And so, if this quote is genuine and correct about such a mss being out there, it might be exactly the kind of Aramaic progenitor that we would expect a Kodex W to come from. I have though no other documentation as where the Aramaic mss is, of it is has been destoyed or lost since its notation. I think though that the western skepticism towards the "Doctrine of Addai" though has little bearing as to whether this codex of the NT is valid or has factual info about itself.

As a Nazarene though I find this date, 78, to be of pecular interest. Reason being, that is only 5 years after the death of the legendary Rabbi Gamaliel (yes THAT one, the teacher of Rav Shaul), whom the Talmud says wrote a parody on the Gospel of Matthew. The date also concords with the COE idea of the canon being certified only through the hands of living apostles and their known associates. While Matthew, Mark, Luke, Peter, Paul and James were all gone sometime in the 60's, more than enough of other writers and their assistants (John for instance) wre around to keep certifying the canon. My ROUGH estimation of when the COE might have stopped accepting books for inclusion would be just a few years later, about 80 CE. If John wrote Rev in CE 96, even though he was technically still alive, it didn't reach the COE's door in time for this certification process. So that seems to be the time when the last of the COE canon was added to.

Whatever the case may be, I thought you all might find that interesting!

Shlama w'burkate
Andrew Gabriel Roth
Reply
#10
Shlama Akhi,

Thank you very much for your input on this. It is quite a fascinating topic.

Ya'aqub
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)