{"id":40695,"date":"2026-02-19T07:00:36","date_gmt":"2026-02-19T12:00:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblicalarchaeology.org\/?p=40695"},"modified":"2026-02-19T09:24:15","modified_gmt":"2026-02-19T14:24:15","slug":"absent-from-codex-sinaiticus-oldest-new-testament","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblicalarchaeology.org\/daily\/biblical-topics\/bible-versions-and-translations\/absent-from-codex-sinaiticus-oldest-new-testament\/","title":{"rendered":"What\u2019s Missing from Codex Sinaiticus, the Oldest New Testament?"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"codex-sinaiticus\"<\/a>

A salvaged page of the Codex Sinaiticus from St. Catherine\u2019s Monastery recovered in 1975. Photo: Courtesy of St. Catherine\u2019s Monastery.<\/em><\/p><\/div>\n

Two hundred years after Constantine Tischendorf<\/a>\u2019s birth, questions remain as to the conditions of his removal of Codex<\/a> Sinaiticus from St. Catherine\u2019s Monastery. Dating to the mid-fourth century C.E., Codex Sinaiticus is the oldest complete manuscript of the New Testament.<\/p>\n

In his article “Hero or Thief? Constantine Tischendorf Turns Two Hundred” in the September\/October 2015 issue of Biblical Archaeology Review<\/em>, Stanley E. Porter contends that Tischendorf should be considered a hero, not a thief<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The text of Codex Sinaiticus differs in numerous instances from that of the authorized version of the Bible in use during Tischendorf\u2019s time. For example, the resurrection narrative at the end of Mark (16:9\u201320) is absent from the Codex Sinaiticus. So is the conclusion of the Lord\u2019s Prayer: \u201cFor thine is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen\u201d (Matthew 6:13). The woman caught in adultery from John 8 is omitted in Codex Sinaiticus.<\/p>\n

According to James Bentley, Tischendorf was not troubled by the omission of the resurrection in Mark because he believed that Matthew was written first and that Mark\u2019s gospel was an abridged version of Matthew\u2019s gospel. If this were true, the absence of resurrection in Mark would not be a problem because it appears in the older Matthean gospel. Modern scholarship generally holds that Mark is in fact the oldest of the Synoptic Gospels, which could cause theological concerns over the omitted resurrection.<\/p>\n

\n\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t
\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

FREE ebook: The Holy Bible: A Buyer's Guide<\/strong> 42 different Bible versions, addressing content, text, style and religious orientation.\r\n<\/p>\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t