Replies

1. On God Manifest in the Flesh – 1 Tim 3:16

I don’t have a lot of time today, so I’ll be brief. Codex Alexandrinus is a compromised witness to the proper translation of 1 Tim 3:16. There are numerous eyewitnesses of the orginal who testify to “theos,” i.e., God, being used, not “hos” or “ho.” The problem, explained in part below, is that in the all-caps originals, “theos” was often abbreviated as Theta-Sigma (TS), and if the manuscript was sufficiently deteriorated, the Theta could end up looking like an Omega (O). The scribes would preempt any possible confusion by ensuring that all such abbreviations had a faint horizontal bar drawn over the top of the TS. But what if both the middle Theta bar and the upper bar had grown even fainter for age of the document? Sometimes, a well-meaning scribe would attempt to retouch the lines. But for the future of manuscript debates, this was not good, because it left the document open to debate as having been tampered with.

Enter Codex Alexandrinus. This document had number in-person examiners who certified that the TS had faint but intact Theta and abbreviation bars, giving “theos.” But apparently, someone well-meaning caretaker of the text has tried to “fix” the Theta, but in the process has, from a critical point of view, voided the value of that manuscript as a witness to the text of 1 Tim 3:16. Inasmuch as the great body of uncompromised textual testimony affirms the TS (”theos”) reading, Codex Alexandrinus provides no credible basis for uprooting that reading, especially when it comes to us third-hand from that beacon of purity known as Wikipedia.

Here is a word from one who has seen the text in question with his own eyes:

“This is very frequent in the oldest MSS., and is continually recurring in the Codex Bexae, and Codex Alexandrinus. If, therefore, the middle stroke of the “Theta”, in “Theos”, happened to be faint, or obliterated, and the dash above not very apparent, both of which I have observed in ancient MSS., then QC, the contraction for “Theos”, God, might be mistaken for “os” which or who; and vice versa. This appears to have been the case in the Codex Alexandrinus, in this passage. To me there is ample reason to believe that the Codex Alexandrinus originally read “Theos”, God, in this place; but the stroke becoming faint by length of time and injudicious handling, of which the MS. in this place has had a large proportion, some person has supplied the place, most reprehensibly, with a thick black line. This has destroyed the evidence of this MS., as now it can neither be quoted pro or con, though it is very likely that the person who supplied the ink line, did it from a conscientious conviction that “Theos” was the original reading of this MS. I examined this MS. about thirty years ago, and this was the conviction that rested then on my mind. I have seen the MS. several times since, and have not changed my opinion. The enemies of the Deity of Christ have been at as much pains to destroy the evidence afforded by the common reading in support of this doctrine as if this text were the only one by which it can be supported; they must be aware that John 1:1, and 14, proclaim the same truth; and that in those verses there is no authority to doubt the genuineness of the reading. We read, therefore, God was manifested in the flesh, and I cannot see what good sense can be taken out of, the GOSPEL was manifested in the flesh; or, the mystery of godliness was manifested in the flesh. After seriously considering this subject in every point of light, I hold with the reading in the commonly received text” (Adam Clarke, Clarke’s Commentary, Vol. 8, ppg.151-152).

2. There is no 2 today. Maybe later. Your “I AM” analysis is messed up too. But later. Miles to go before I rest ….

Peace,