The Codex Syriacus | The discovery of the oldest gospels in Syriac

The Sisters of Sinai - How Two Lady Adventurers Discovered the Hidden Gospels
Agnes and Margaret Smith were not your typical Victorian scholars or adventurers. Female, middle-aged, and without university degrees or formal language training, the twin sisters nevertheless made one of the most important scriptural discoveries of their time: the earliest known copy of the Gospels in ancient Syriac, the language that Jesus spoke.
The Syriac Sinaiticus, a late 4th century codex also known also as the Sinaitic Palimpsest or the Codex Syriacus, contains a translation of the four canonical gospels of the New Testament into Syriac. It is the oldest translation of the Bible into any language. In 778 CE it was palimpsested with a vita of female saints and martyrs. The Syriac Sinaiticus is the oldest copy of the gospels in Syriac. The Syriac Sinaiticus: The Oldest Translation of the Bible
Circa 375 CE
stcatherines.mused.org/en/ite...
Armed with a crash course in Syriac, a dialect of Jesus’ own Aramaic, and 1,000 photographic plates, the sisters made their way across the forbidding Sinai wilderness.
For example, the late 19th century saw great advances in textual criticism, leading up to the publication of Albert Schweitzer’s classic The Quest of the Historical Jesus. But The Sisters of Sinai offers barely three pages on the textual contributions of the Sinai Palimpset, and only brief references to how those discoveries related to the general flow of textual criticism of the age. As another example, we learn that the sisters played an important role in Solomon Schechter’s discovery of the manuscript horde in the Cairo Genizah, but surprisingly, there is no mention of perhaps the two most important documents discovered by Schechter, the tenth century and the 12th-century fragments of the so-called Damascus Document that ultimately came to be identified as a foundational work of the Qumran Essenes.
Arriving at St. Catherine’s, the sisters quickly ingratiated themselves with their hosts and asked to examine the monastery’s most ancient manuscripts. One codex in particular caught Agnes’s attention. Filthy, with its leaves stuck together, it had probably not been touched for centuries. At first, it appeared to be an unexciting document, a synopsis of the lives of female saints, of which there were many known copies. But on close examination, Agnes discovered that it was a palimpset-that is, a document over-written upon an even more ancient document, and the latter turned out to be the oldest copy heretofore discovered of the Four Gospels in Syriac.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/r...
The Remarkable Story of the Sinai Palimpsest
Janet Soskice recounts the incredible discovery of the Sinai Palimpsest, one of the most important ancient Biblical manuscripts ever found
As far as ancient Biblical artifacts go, the palimpsest was an astonishing discovery that would eventually become known as the Sinai Palimpsest.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...
In A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, Bruce Metzger writes: “Clement of Alexandria and Origen [early third century] show no knowledge of the existence of these verses; furthermore Eusebius and Jerome attest that the passage was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark known to them.”1 The language and style of the Greek is clearly not Markan, and it is pretty evident that what the forger did was take sections of the endings of Matthew, Luke and John and simply create a “proper” ending.
Even though this longer ending became the preferred one, there are two other endings, one short and the second an expansion of the longer ending, that also show up in various manuscripts
The faith that Mark reflects, namely that Jesus has been “raised up” or lifted up to heaven, is precisely parallel to that of Paul-who is the earliest witness to this understanding of Jesus’ resurrection. Paul notably parallels his own visionary experience to that of Peter, James, and the rest of the apostles. What this means is that when Paul wrote, in the 50s CE, this was the resurrection faith of the early followers of Jesus. Since Matthew, Luke, and John come so much later, and clearly reflect the period after 70 CE when all of the first witnesses were dead-including Peter, Paul, and James the brother of Jesus, they are clearly 2nd generation traditions and should not be given priority.
www.biblicalarchaeology.org/d...

[@raymollyraymolly722]

My Lebanese grandfather used to speak the original Aramaic Language and still used in the Maronite Catholic Churches in Lebanon.

[@zeus_x00]

❤

[@dorianphilotheates3769]

Raymolly Raymolly - I have attended Holy Mass in Maronite Catholic Churches and the Aramaic liturgy is beautiful (I read Ancient Aramaic and Syriac). But the liturgy presented in this video is Greek.

[@raymollyraymolly722]

@@dorianphilotheates3769 Dorian, it’s good you can read it and I hope one day I can learn it. May God bless you .

[@dorianphilotheates3769]

@@raymollyraymolly722 - And you, my friend.

[@elena.t3251]

We still speak Aramaic every day. And we are very proud that we have survived despite 2000 years of destruction. Yewish, Roman, catholics ottomans, Until now

[@mathewar8576]

❤

[@vtino4825]

yet the Aramaic that you speak is different from the Galilean first century Aramaic that Yeshua spoke.

[@slabman2599]

⁠@@vtino4825if you knew as much as you act to know you would know gallileans were from Assyria Assyrians all knew how to speak it and it was modernized into syriac lol

[@devasiamunjely]

The SyrioMalabar Church in India is since 52 AD and the services are in Aramaic, though the Roman Catholic Church and the Portuguese vandalized and robbed most of the churches still we have documents, our way and belief system is sharply different from other denominations, We are proud of being a Syrian Christian that too from India.

[@freethinker3054]

FYI Christianity didn't exist in the year 52. Come to reality. Don't waste your whole life on cooked stories.

[@christopherjcarson]

Beautiful comment,what a heritage in Christ you enjoy! Thankyou for your share!

[@Shaleqa_Adenan]

Our true Christian faith keepers! God bless all of you from Ethiopian 🇪🇹 orthodox!

[@christopherjcarson]

@@Shaleqa_Adenan Like your comment, my thoughts aswell!

[@freethinker3054]

@@Shaleqa_Adenan Someone created stories and you stupidly blindly believe them.

[@reyalpEleluku]

No resurrection in the short ending of Mark? Verse 6 reads 'But he said to them, Do not be terrified. You seek Jesus the Nazarene who was crucified. He is risen, He is not here. See the place where they had placed him.' I still recommend John Burgon's _The Last Twelve Verses of Mark_ 1871.

[@PjotrII]

Exactly - it is there... the "specialist" made a huge stretch. Syriacus ends after verse 8.

[@ThePapsforshort]

...really love documentaries like this one; no political persuasion, no predestined conclusion, just - this is what we've discovered! Please, can all others follow...?! ...a great upload imo!

[@georgeo785]

No. Original Scriptures are the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus

[@vtino4825]

@@georgeo785 Masoretic texts came from the middle ages. the Qumran texts is the oldest, about a century before the first century and has significant differences when compared with the Masoretic.

[@georgeo785]

@@vtino4825 youtube won't let me post my reply. I am moving to Rumble. KZbin sucks

[@anarchorepublican5954]

...of course there is "a predestined conclusion"..after all, this Doc is scripted...it's only presenting itself as a ongoing search for "Truth"....even as a sort of Expedition itself !...an Entertaining approach ! ...having said that...Yes!.. very interesting...and factual information.. I wish the whole Documentary had been uploaded...instead of just a couple of short segments...sounds like very good use of a hour ...anyone know the actual Title?

[@kamarudinhj.dolmoin8578]

The absolute truth is never ever afraid..

[@paulg444]

Just ponder for a moment that the original scribes, took that copy of the gospels and thought it so common and so ubiquitous that using the velum for another new purpose was perfectly reasonable. This is overwhelming evidence that copies of the gospels were almost everywhere in the ancient world at that time.

[@PjotrII]

Interesting, but one important detail is that in the video he says: (6:30) the "treath" is there is no resurrection... well, that is not true, as Codex Syraicus includes all to Mark 16:8, so it includes: "5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has risen! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’” 8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid. So claiming there was no resurrection is a HUGE STRETCH. It is clearly there! They enter the empty tomb, see an angel who says Jesus has risen. PERIOD. What is not included in the codex is that Jesus appeared to the disciples.

[@sammygoodnight]

I've never been particularly bothered by the short ending of Mark. The core of Paul's letters are early and uncontested by even the most close-minded 'skeptics' and Paul affirms the central fact of the resurrection repeatedly.

[@georgeo785]

Paul is the Apostle to the gentiles. The Original Scriptures are the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus. You can trust anything that comes out of alexandria egypt. Israel was warned that Egypt is a type of the world. The devil is hard at work his time is running out

[@lancenebeker8055]

But what they believe in theology of Paul marcion and others where the bringer of the good news originally

[@lancenebeker8055]

They where the ones who made first scripure book 10 letters of Paul and one by marcion and the first to say that they where the bringer of the good news. Even in our Bible Paul letters have gnostic theology words in Paul's letters

[@bensoliman8326]

I refer you to a book called: Paul the myth maker

[@joshuab2437]

We can't leave out the possibility of sinister Gnostic infiltrators attempting to change the text to deny the resurrection!

[@haroldgroff2100]

They have the assumptions wrong. The missing portions of the gospels were not “added later” they were removed by the scholars who had gnostic leaning. The writings of the early church fathers from 100 to 300 years before Codex Sinaiticus and Syriacus do include these writings

[@yewfaiwan6053]

I think he is right about the last sentence of Mark stating that the disciples were trembling with alarm and fear but his is wrong about the fact there is no reference to the resurrection. Before the "trembling with alarm and fear sentence" it was written - "And going into the tomb, they saw a young man sitting [there] on the right [side], clothed in a [[a]long, stately, sweeping] robe of white, and they were utterly amazed and struck with terror. And he said to them, Do not be amazed and terrified; you are looking for Jesus of Nazareth, Who was crucified. He has risen; He is not here. See the place where they laid Him. But be going; tell the disciples and Peter, He goes before you into Galilee; you will see Him there, [just] as He told you."

[@cuteMONSTER.]

So its a myth , didn't you understand???

[@outofthebox7]

@@cuteMONSTER. You wish! We have the rest of the New Testament writers and we have our personal supernatural experiences with him. Having said that if you eyes to see, see: "(Mk. 16:8) Does Mark not mention the resurrection? CLAIM: Critics argue that our earliest gospel (Mark) doesn’t contain eyewitnesses of the resurrection. Some even go so far as to say that Mark doesn’t affirm Jesus’ resurrection at all. Is this the case? RESPONSE: It is disingenuous to say that Mark doesn’t mention affirm the resurrection of Jesus. On our count, the resurrection is predicted by Jesus five times, and the angel at the tomb also teaches that Jesus rose. This makes a total of six predictions or affirmations of Jesus’ resurrection: (1) “He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again” (Mk. 8:31). (2) “He gave them orders not to relate to anyone what they had seen, until the Son of Man rose from the dead” (Mk. 9:9). (3) “He was teaching His disciples and telling them, ‘The Son of Man is to be delivered into the hands of men, and they will kill Him; and when He has been killed, He will rise three days later’” (Mk. 9:31). This passes the criterion of embarrassment, because the subsequent verse states, “But they did not understand this statement, and they were afraid to ask Him” (Mk. 9:32). The disciples couldn’t grasp what he was talking about. This bolsters the historical credibility of the account, because it contains the criterion of embarrassment. (4) “Behold, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be delivered to the chief priests and the scribes; and they will condemn Him to death and will hand Him over to the Gentiles. 34 They will mock Him and spit on Him, and scourge Him and kill Him, and three days later He will rise again” (Mk. 10:33-34) (5) Immediately before Peter expressed his absolute loyalty to Jesus, we read that Jesus predicted, “But after I have been raised, I will go ahead of you to Galilee” (Mk. 14:28). (6) At the end of the gospel, an angel tells the women, “‘Do not be amazed; you are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who has been crucified. He has risen; He is not here; behold, here is the place where they laid Him. But go, tell His disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you to Galilee; there you will see Him, just as He told you’” (Mk. 16:6-7). Notice that the same person who died (“Jesus the Nazarene… has been crucified”) was also the same person who was raised (“Jesus the Nazarene… He has risen”). Throughout Mark, Jesus’ predictions always come to fruition. So, the reader would expect these predictions to come about as well." -From: Evidence unseen

[@haroldgodwinson5043]

@@outofthebox7 Fair points. I would also point out that the codex syriacus is not the oldest record of the gospel of Mark. Further, the copy of the gospel in the codex syriacus was deemed suitable enough for recycling rather than keeping. It seems self evident that other copies were being made at the time, and yet this particular copy was repurposed (perhaps due scribal errors?). We also have evidence that Paul commenced his writings around 5 or so years after the crucifixion, in which he plainly talks about the resurrection. There are also contemporary non Christian authors that write about the Christian movement at that time. The writings of the apostolic fathers talk about the resurrection and long predate the codex syriacus. So the resurrection narrative was definitely contemporary around the time of Jesus's death. Ultimately, all this documentary has successfully pointed out is that one particular copy of one of the gospels written in about the 4th of 5th centuries stopped abruptly. This copy wasn't deemed suitable for preservation for whatever reason. Draw your own conclusions.

[@nonfecittaliter4361]

The real purpose of the authors of this video is to deny the resurrection of Christ: not the manuscripts, not the Syriac language, nor the twins, that is just a way to 'wrap' the lie.

[@cuteMONSTER.]

@@outofthebox7 🙏🙏🙏👏👏👏 thomas incidence forgot those 3 gospels, nice experience they have, i am thinking about you, how can you believe such a things

[@jumanjiday7970]

Wow❤

[@ready1fire1aim1]

May, 2013: While Jews study a number of religious books-from the Talmud to the Shulchan Aruch-the text that provides the religion’s very foundation is the Torah. And the version of the Torah most commonly studied by Jews is known as the Masoretic text, the most authoritative Hebrew version of the Torah. But it is not the only one. A small, ancient sect known as the Samaritans rely on the Torah, and the Torah alone, as their sole religious text-and the Samaritans use a somewhat different version. Two weeks ago, the first English translation of this Hebrew text was published by Samaritan historian and scholar Binyamin Tsedaka: The Israelite Samaritan Version of the Torah. There are some 6,000 instances where this version of the Torah differs from the Masoretic text; the question for scholars is which version is more complete, or more accurate. The 6,000 differences between the two Torahs that Tsedaka highlights in bold in his book can be split into two categories: 3,000 of the differences are orthographical, meaning there are spelling differences or additional words placed in the text, while the other 3,000 are more significant in changing the Torah’s narrative. Some of the orthographical changes help make the story read more smoothly. For example, in Genesis 4:8, when Cain talks to Abel, the Masoretic version reads, “Now Cain said to his brother Abel, while they were in the field, Cain attacked his brother Abel and killed him,” whereas the Samaritan Torah contains additional words: “Now Cain said to his brother Abel, ‘Let’s go out to the field.’ ” The Samaritan Torah also offers a slightly different version of some stories. It includes parts of dialogues that are not found in the Masoretic text: For example, in Exodus chapters 7 through 11, the Samaritan Torah contains whole conversations between Moses, Aaron, and Pharaoh that the Masoretic text does not. The other differences that are significant in narrative sometimes change the story, and sometimes “fix” small sentences that appear incoherent. In Exodus 12:40, for example, the Masoretic text reads: “The length of the time the Israelites lived in Egypt was 430 years,” a sentence that has created massive chronological problems for Jewish historians, since there is no way to make the genealogies last that long. In the Samaritan version, however, the text reads: “The length of time the Israelites lived in Canaan and in Egypt was 430 years.” Earlier in Exodus, in 4:25, the Samaritan Torah offers an alternative narrative to the slightly problematic story about Moses’ son not being circumcised when an angel of God “sought to kill him.” The thought that Moses did not circumcise his son, as the Masoretic text states, seems inconceivable to many Jewish commentators, Tsedaka noted. The Samaritan text, however, reads that it was Moses’ wife, Tziporah, who had to “circumcise her blocked heart” by cutting off her belief in the idol-worshiping ways of Midyan, her homeland. A mention of an “internal circumcision” is later found in Deuteronomy 10:16 in both versions, which reads, “circumcise the foreskin of your heart, and stiffen your neck no longer.”

[@ready1fire1aim1]

Perhaps the most variant of texts within the two Torahs is the differences in the Ten Commandments. “The Commandments are all in the form of ‘do’ and ‘don’t do,’ ” Tsedaka asserted. “The Masoretic version includes the intro of ‘I am your God that took you out of Egypt,’ as a commandment, when we see it as an introduction. Our Ten Commandments start later, and we have our last commandment to establish Mount Gerizim.” While an “extra” commandment to establish an altar on Mount Gerizim might seem random in the Masoretic text, the part that follows the Ten Commandants in the Masoretic version talks about the forbidden action of building stairs to an altar. Some scholars believe that the Masoretic text would not be discussing steps to an altar without talking about an altar first, and so some believe there might be a part of the text that is missing in the Masoretic version. Until the 1950s, Bible scholars turned to the Jewish Masoretic text as the definitive version of the Torah, virtually ignoring the Samaritan text. However, in the winter of 1947, a group of archeological specialists searching through 11 caves in Qumran happened upon the Dead Sea Scrolls. After rigorous study of the scrolls, researchers have come to believe there were several versions of the Torah being studied throughout Jewish history, according to Eugene Ulrich, a theology professor at University of Notre Dame. The scrolls they found in Qumran matched the Samaritan text more closely than the Masoretic text, leading some researchers to believe the Samaritan text held validity in the minds of Jews during the Second Temple period and that both texts were once studied together. “Finding the Dead Sea Scrolls proved that there were two versions, if not more, of the Torah circulating within Judaism, but they were all dealt with with equal validity and respect,” said Ulrich, who served as one of the chief editors on the Dead Sea Scrolls International Publication Project. “The Samaritan Torah and Masoretic Torah used to be studied side by side. The Masoretic text wasn’t always the authoritative version. They were both seen as important during the Second Temple time period.” Ulrich said after the destruction of the Second Temple, the people split into three groups, each with their own text: The rabbis took the Masoretic text for their own, the Samaritans took theirs, and the early Christians used much of a different version called the Septuagint-a Masoretic version translated into Greek in the 2nd century BCE-in what later become the Christian Bible. While most differences between the two Torahs are only slight and may not even be apparent to an untrained eye, according to Ulrich, the Samaritan Torah provides a more coherent reading because the story flows better in its text. “There are whole passages of stories missing from the Masoretic version,” he said. “A lot of the stories in Exodus and Deuteronomy are missing parts of the conversation, leaving the reader alone to do much assumption as the story goes on. In the Samaritan Torah, however, these gaps are filled, providing a smoother encounter of what actually happened.” James Charlesworth, a professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Princeton University’s Department of Biblical studies, said the Samaritan Torah is his preferred version for some readings of the Bible. “As the stories and histories go, the Samaritan Pentateuch appears to be more favorable because the voice of the text reads more clear[ly],” he said. “In my judgment, the Masoretic version has some corrupt parts of it, and the Samaritan Torah is the best reading we have. There are sentences scholars are left to either reinterpret or simply ignore because they seem they don’t belong.” Charlesworth believes Jews and Christians have not shown the Samaritan text the proper respect it deserves: Thousands of years ago, Samaritans and Jews had a shared interest in both scriptures, but the Samaritan Torah later became shunned. Charlesworth said this English translation would finally provide the academic world insight into the origins of the development of scripture. The Samaritans claim their Torah is older and more authentic: “It’s more logical that a group of people who’ve lived in one place for thousands of years have kept their Torah preserved,” Tsedaka asserted, “as compared to a people who have moved all over the world.” But some Bible critics side with the Masoretic version, citing it as older and, indeed, more authentic. Referring to a principal of textual criticism called lectio difficilior potior, which states that a harder reading of a text is preferred to an easier reading, Yeshiva University’s Aaron Koller said some scholars believe the Samaritan Torah’s text, which presents fewer interpretive problems, proves that it had been tampered with. “Some scholars believe someone took an original version of the Torah and simplified it to the Samaritan version,” he explained. “It’s hard to believe a difficult reading of a text is original, because why would someone change a text to make it unclear? Rather when a text is simplified, it’s easier to believe that the text was altered in order to make it simpler.” Koller noted that the consensus view held by most Bible scholars is that the Masoretic version of the Torah is the older, original version. The structural changes of the Samaritan Torah give reason to believe it’s been changed, he said, but that should not stop people from studying it. Both should be studied, he said, to understand the history of interpretations of the Torah-a book that continues to unfold with meaning as time goes on. “Outside of the Samaritan community, most believe the Samaritan Torah was an editorial revision of the Masoretic text,” Koller said. “But they are a group that consider themselves heirs to biblical Israel, just like the Jews. It’s important just to learn the remarkable tradition they’ve preserved for 2,500 years.”

[@tyson2777]

I have to admitt it's a long time since I read about these texts, but from what I remember, the Masoretic texts are written from memory by 70 rabbis, about 1000 years ago. That's probably why it differs from other copies of the Torah. The rabbies just forgot alot of the original Torah and their unconsious memory filled in some of the gaps.

[@user-bo8nb2mi]

​​​No, all 72 (not 70) Jewish translators (not rabbis) translated in exact same way the Torah words from the original Hebrew into Greek after each one was placed in a different room by Greek pharaoh of Egypt Ptolemy ll Philadelphus (285-247 b.c.e.)

[@quiricomazarin476]

Septuagint is better than masoretic.... God preferred the septuagint.

[@christofferraby4712]

The Samaritans' Torah is the original Torah because it is written in the original Hebrew script as was used in ancient Israel before the Assyrians and Babylonians invaded Samaria(Northern Israel) and Judah (Southern Israel). This is supported by archeology. All the ancient coins from Judah from before the Babylonian invasion/exile use the same alphabet in Hebrew as the Samaritans. Hebrew inscriptions that were found in King Yehezkel's (Hezekiah) tunnel in Jerusalem are also using the same written Hebrew as the Samaritans.

[@paulhudson4254]

If the nice lady is uncomfortable she may consider leaving the service! 🌺☦️🌺

[@mammam4827]

It is himmm

[@vtino4825]

the meetings of the early centuries were not as sombre, grave, morose, long-winding and ritualistic as what developed later after the establishment of Constantinian Nicene version of christianity

[@gussetma1945]

It proves that the scribes who transcribed Mark had an exemplar with the short ending.

[@BrianJohnson-lx3zd]

I understand making the short ending of Mark sound like doesn't contain the resurrection makes it all very dramatic, but it's also not true. Even the short ending contains 16:5-7. "And entering the tomb, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, dressed in a white robe, and they were alarmed. And he said to them, “Do not be alarmed. You seek Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has risen; he is not here. See the place where they laid him. But go, tell his disciples and Peter that he is going before you to Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.”

[@PjotrII]

Exactly! The video is misleading!

[@HeatherHair]

What is the name of this documentary and who is the host in order to watch it?

[@WrestlingwithGod]

Dr. Jeff Rose is the host/Smithsonian series called Bible Hunters

[@stevewagner7507]

Those who believe the "short" ending of Mark does serious damage to the Gospel message fail to account for the fact that the early church fathers still developed all of the major Christian doctrines well before the "long" ending was provided. By claiming that this find cancels the resurrection, they are imagining that the early Christians had a different faith than the present day faith. This is simply wishful thinking by those who do not have Faith.

[@PjotrII]

I want to be clear! Syraicus INCLUDES the resurrection, just read it (that is verse 6)... Syriacus ends after verse 8 (ending with they were afraid). the video is misleading - suggesting (unless one is aware) that there is no resurrection in Syriacus - that is 100% wrong. Please check ANY reliable source if you are uncertain!

[@wazirakbarkhan.wardag..]

Correct me if im wrong But did the speaker at the very beginning of the video say "allah akbari" ?

[@Anwar-Mian]

Wasn’t the Aramaic New Testament translated from Geek. So Aramaic New Testament was originally written Aramaic.

[@adventist77]

Out of the mouth of 2-3 witnesses will my word be established. Well... we have that. Mark just testified of Him.

[@SuzanaMantovaniCerqueira]

How I would love to visit all these old primitive churches.

[@b_ks]

Is syriac the same as syrian aramaic?

[@Nostrudoomus]

Hmmm, it had a lot of corrections, but was very beautiful, sounds like someone kept it around because it was very beautiful but it was rejected as a document because it had so many mistakes in it and that is also why the book of Mark was not finished, another mistake or was not worth finishing. When you consider that Mark was an apostle of Paul and consider Paul’s story it’s hard to see how Paul could ever deny the resurrection. How could Saul become Paul without visions and miracles from Jesus, it does not seem possible. And considering this is only one ☝🏻 document it’s no wonder it is ignored by modern Christianity.

[@vtino4825]

that is your opinion and guess, for sure.

[@tonyseoud200]

The video should have displayed the last page of Mark. Why not? Because the remaining versus were left blank. There’s blank space on the page.Probably the they couldn’t read the original! Show on you description some links to the original images of the book!

[@PjotrII]

Contrary to the video suggesting there was no resurrection, fact is that Even syraicus includes verses up to verse 16:8... and in verse 6 it says the angel answers them: HE IS RISEN. Check ANY reliable source if you are uncertain.

[@telasmshinges6850]

Hey lay sound odd I’m Mexican never been anywhere just in USA but I can read the codex syriacus I’m not religious only got faith I can read 120 languages

[@bluetigerlozano59]

Yeah, that’s believable. lol

[@stephenconnolly1830]

Four centuries AD for the date of the manuscript - clearly, the early Christians had little interest in preserving the gospels. This is in stark contrast to the Muslim community's tremendous efforts to ensure the Qur'an was recorded accurately for posterity.

[@DeepJiesel]

Completely false. First, the gospels were written based on accounts of eyewitnesses then still living, like John the Elder, or Aristion. Second, there were many variants of the Quran. Caliph Uthman had all variant readings and translations he did not agree with confiscated and burnt.

[@osamabajrai732]

Amazing Orginal Jess Books by Syrianic or lets say Arameic Language

[@nibiruresearch]

A remarkable story. There must be many more ancient texts that are never correctly translated. We can go on philosophizing about the Bible, creation, God and the end of time for another hundred years, but we will not understand anything as long as we ignore ancient knowledge that tells us that our planet Earth is facing a recurring, predictable but inescapable natural disaster. That cataclysm triggers the end of time, which is marked by a great flood, but then a recreation of humanity ensues. Plato is the youngest source of ancient knowledge. He knew about a recurring natural disaster caused by a celestial body. So there is no supernatural god involved. That celestial body is planet 9, also known as Nibiru. Its orbit is as predictable as the solar eclips next year. At o min 6 sec. we see the symbol of this planet, the square cross. Wake up and read: "What I know about Nibiru". An e-book that explains many of your questions about the history of humanity, flood stories and the bond between humans and an extraterrestrial civilization that guides mankind in troubling times. We show an unexpected large number of depictions to prove our point. Google know nibiru 4

[@NMMD1531]

I believe the reason Mark initially did not include resurrection accounts is because people understood Christ to be ALIVE and RETURNING. The history of HIS crucifixion and death needed to be initially recorded. People had to believe he actually died first.

[@OksintasObones]

Simply because it did not happen.. no ressurection

[@nemobahari1]

Yes, just because Mark didnt mention it doesnt mean Matthew Luke and John’s gospels also, @oksintasobones. Dont judge the whole by one part only.

[@christopherjcarson]

Like your comment, it’s so full of faith!

[@PjotrII]

I want to add, contrary to a vague suggestion in the video that this codex DO mention the resurrection! So the "specialist" at 6:30 is STRETCHING the truth. Listening to him makes one think there is no resurrection. Codex Syraicus includes all to Mark 16:8, so it includes: "5 As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right side, and they were alarmed. 6 “Don’t be alarmed,” he said. “You are looking for Jesus the Nazarene, who was crucified. He has RISEN! He is not here. See the place where they laid him. 7 But go, tell his disciples and Peter, ‘He is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him, just as he told you.’ 8 Trembling and bewildered, the women went out and fled from the tomb. They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid." So claiming there was no resurrection is a HUGE STRETCH. It is clearly there! They enter the empty tomb, see an angel who says Jesus has risen. PERIOD. What is not included in the codex is that Jesus appeared to the disciples.

[@PjotrII]

@@OksintasObones Even codex Syriacus includes the resurrection, do not be fooled by "specialists" who want to make exclusive claims.

[@rashidrahman9673]

One day we will find the original ingeel (Evangel) in the mountains of Lebanon 🇱🇧, this has been prophesied, by the Noble prophet Muhammad, (saw).

[@amyapplegate4356]

Mt. Sineyi?

[@0123945678]

Μt. Sinai and the Monastery of St Catherine

[@ahaven566]

It is disturbing that you use the short ending of Mark to raise doubt about the resurrection of Jesus and you ignore John 20 which provide full account, describing the appearance of Jesus after his death. John and Mathew were witnesses to the events but Mark was a child.

[@PjotrII]

Even worse in the video is that Syraicus includes verses up to 16:8 and in verse 6 it says HE HAS RISEN... so even that codex support resurrection.

[@glenbrisebois8239]

Oh my gosh... maybe the last few pages got torn off in history?

[@PjotrII]

Syriacus have a short ending - but it includes the resurrection (verse 6)... it ends at verse 8. Excluded is Jesus meeting the disciples AFTERWARDS.

[@virginiamessom9551]

Syriac Language is Assyrian Language and it’s Original from Assyrian Language..?

[@anarchorepublican5954]

...maybe rather...Mark just didn't want to try and untangle all the time frames, for all the Resurrection Witness accounts....particularly if at the time of composition..All of the numerous Witnesses were still around to give their testimonies...the short ending actually evidences a very early Mark, in the 50s...

[@PjotrII]

Short note, the short ending DO INCLUDE THE RESURRECTION (in verse 6)! Syriacus ends AFTER verse 8! Contrary to what one could interpret from the video.

[@charlesstepp2083]

Theory of relativity is beyond the understanding of most, however, the mind of the Father is an open book.😅

[@cyndiestafford3150]

40 days of hard work, how many days did Jesus wander the desert? Proverbs 25:2 It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter. Praise God in all things great & small, glory to God, Jesus is KING

[@timorean320]

How many days did it rain for Noah? How long did they wander in desert after Exodus? 40=Probation.

[@civiliseddisobedience3096]

This is so stupid. Mark's gospel was written for a community which had hangers ons, people slightly interested, catchumens, people fully baptised and clergy and bishops. There's no necessity for it to have resurrection appearances because these could have been communicated orally in a liturgical setting to those who were prepared and ready. If catechumens, for instance, had heard Mark 9 9 : He told them to tell no-one what they had seen until the Son of Man had risen from the dead, you would expect them to have a question they would very much like answered. Why should the answer have to be written down? Were the fully initiated likely to forget?

[@PjotrII]

Note Mark 16:6 is included in Syraicus, and it says HE HAS RISEN. The codex ends after verse 8!

[@wendellcount4444]

This is not how the early church worshipped. This all came at least 200 years after the apostles

[@lancenebeker8055]

The Greek Roman church and empire killed and burned anything that did not agree with them.a lot of christ followers were persecuted but very little in the Roman areas many christ followers before Roman became christian

[@georgeo785]

The early believers meet in people's home because of fear of the San Hedrin and the Romans. Paul is the Apostle to the gentiles. roman catholicism started by emperor constantine around the year 325 AD. Read about the Spanish inquisition, crusades and foxxs book of martyrs

[@lancenebeker8055]

@George O have read them and persecution on Roman Christian was minor in certain areas a different times but persecution of non Roman christ followers was bad and after christainity became acknowledged by military around Bridge saving the castle was also a time of christain status.not all christ followers even during the debates.some of them were called

[@lancenebeker8055]

@@georgeo785 meeting in homes there was to be no candle burned and nothing fancy like stain glass etc.many different christ follower not only gnostics. And most followed after paul

[@vtino4825]

@@georgeo785 the early believers met in homes NOT because of persecution. they only continued in the tradition of Jewish synagogues. the first century synagogues were NOT a specially built religious edifice. a synagogue back then was the rabbi's house and the center of the society where many matters were discussed and solved. that is how the FIRST century Ekklesia operated. they were not a religious organization operating in a ritualistic way.

[@anarchorepublican5954]

...I view the long ending of "¿Mark?" (...and also "The Pericope Adutrǣ" {John7:53-8:11} )...as just another very primitive multiple-source for Jesus, His work, witness and resurrection(John 21:25; Luke 1:1}... also entirely "Canon"...if howbeit, of unknown Authorship, much like the Book of Hebrews ....

[@francesshealingpoemsfortwo5734]

God is Love and Light for enlightenment of Love Anointed namely Jesus Christ who is returning quickly for Healing All Nations and Heaven on Earth as promised for The Promised Land to come... #Loveisnotacortisol stress hormone caused by lies, betrayals, corruption, division, abuse and sin which pays the wages of death. #Timetoendallabuse Time for Heaven on Earth as promised for The Promised Land to come... 🕊💖🕊✨✨✨✨

[@sjl197]

Chat here is basically a bunch who vehemently defend constitutional amendments but can’t allow scope for any biblical ones.

[@jean-paulviaud4094]

So 12 Apostles suffered terribly, 11 being martyred, witnesses up to death for a non-event? Yeah sure…. As they said, if Christ isn’t resurrected, our hope is in vain. Though, this documentary is pure bs.

[@ZisWile]

And not only were those Apostles whipped stoned and tortured over 40 years not 1 of them recanted anything. Yet in our "modern" society 11 exceptionally influential and rich men could not keep a secret for 15 days before cracking under scrutiny. Watergate.

[@allangibson8494]

Only two of the Apostles are actually recorded as being martyrs. That the others were is a tradition that appears hundreds of years later.

[@jean-paulviaud4094]

@@allangibson8494 yeah, sure

[@allangibson8494]

@@jean-paulviaud4094 Look up what is actually in the Bible… Thomas rattled around for decades (and is known to have reached India).

[@LoveTruth2023-oj9ew]

East Syriac writing

[@sheilacape4794]

Asshur is "Assyria", passes as the "early dew", builder of Nineveh, a son of Shem, descendants of Dedan- Hosea14:3- Asshur shall not save us..."A far" off- Ps.10:1; Rev.18:10; (Rev.3:10ref.c)- why standeth "afar" off dear Lord? Why hide thyself in times of trouble? *Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I will also keep thee from the hour of temptation=tribulation, which will come upon all the world to try them, (this is now! When Rome fell, America took up where Rome left off; the wound was healed so to speak in Rev.13:3... the great whore!) We've already had 70yrs of captivity and closing in on our Lord's victory as Christ's body! 1Cor.6:2,3- Do you not know that the saints shall judge the world? Luke1:69-71; Jer.23:5,20,36...unto David a righteous Branch=Trump shall reign and prosper and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.... in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly.... for every man's word shall be his burden. For ye have perverted the words of the living God, of "the lord of hosts our God.

[@sammygomes7381]

How could it be a traditional service since the beginning of Christianity when neither Christ nor the apostles said mass. Are you sure they don't mean the beginning of Catholicism or something similar?

[@theresamc4578]

What make you believe that the Apostles did not celebrate Mass? Read St. Paul, you will see it.

[@sammygomes7381]

@@theresamc4578 Very familiar with Paul so you will have to be more specific. Like Peter, Paul preached the gospel, and didn't say mass.

[@fantasia55]

the Last Supper was a Mass.

[@sammygomes7381]

@@fantasia55 The last Supper was not a mass it was a Passover meal which included the Jewish custom of breaking bread. Here is some scriptures to show it was a Passover meal and not a mass. Matthew 26:2 “You know that after two days is the Passover, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to be crucified.” Matthew 26:17 On the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying, “Where will You have us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?” Matthew 26:18 He said, “Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, My time is at hand. I will keep the Passover at your house with My disciples.’ ” Matthew 26:19 The disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the Passover.

[@fantasia55]

@@sammygomes7381 Mass was being celebrated for centuries before the New Testament was established, by the Catholic Church in AD 382 at the Council of Rome.

[@sheilacape4794]

Jesus returns in our tables of stone, it's in Lot's of symbolical references in the heart! You can always look into someone's eyes and know if they're telling you the truth or not, and in silence you see! It's completely spiritual!!! (Mudfossill University with Roger Spurr, will cook your goat! The secrets to life.) Very nefarious proof indeed!

[@Forestgump12able]

So i suppose an Intetpretation of these Books of Scripture is on the Horizon. Oh, surely not.

[@1965startrek]

Follow truth…God is truth.

[@janetkrawiec8332]

Still too old to be the original !

[@Assyrianking507]

Akadian is more accurate

[@LoveTruth2023-oj9ew]

Assyrian church non Maronite non jacobite

[@JamesRichardWiley]

Another man made book full of recorded human thought.

[@CraftyCarder-pe8zx]

Which happens to have some really significant impact on the future of your soul. May God open your eyes and heart to the truth of Jesus the way the truth and the life.

[@DeepJiesel]

Eyewitness accounts. You can disparage it all you like, it still remains the most influential book ever written.

[@RoseSharon7777]

The resurrection is not physical its spiritual as noted by Paul in I Cor. 15. Flesh and blood CANNOT enter the kingdom. 😊

[@onwave]

Why would Jesus tell Thomas to touch His hands to persuade him that He was the same Nazarene body that was crucified? Also, you quoted the Bible wrong.

[@RoseSharon7777]

@@onwave Because the gospels were written as spiritual allegory but we're lateralized by Rome after 70 ad. The resurrection was in the garden of Gethsemane when Jesus died to his carnal will to do the Fathers will. Physical flesh profits nothing.

[@onwave]

No, the Gospels were written as testimony to historical events. That’s the Christian Faith. What you’re suggesting is something like gnosticism and it was dismissed long ago.

[@donaldjohnson2038]

These Gregorian chants are creepy as hell.

[@0123945678]

The chants are not Gregorian. This monastery is a Greek Orthodox church and the chants are Byzantine.

[@cosmiccruxbot3841]

Is this codex older than Sinaticus?

[@allangibson8494]

About the same age. The Codex Vaticanus also has the short ending and the slightly later Armenian codex attributes the long ending to another author, Ariston.

[@pennylanerocker9486]

Well this is all about very interesting though it's more evidence that man didn't agree, or didn't like the wording in the first effort, so wrote over it. There is no dispute that there was a Jesus but all the arguing and bickering about what was really meant in all existing Bibles will have people arguing till the end of time. So is it all worth it? No, man has created all sorts of texts and in the real world we can't ever tell truth from fiction. It's a very nice idea having a set of fairytale of new books but come on...man wrote it all and way after the event.