Reader’s Reply

006

New Mt. Sinai Manuscripts

To the editor:

In 1978 a friend sent me a clipping from the Los Angeles Times (May 6, 1978), entitled “Hoard of Early Christian Texts Reported.” According to this Associated Press report, “Greek Orthodox monks on Mt. Sinai are hoarding a major discovery of early Christian texts they found by accident in their monastery two years ago. West German biblical scholar Martin Hengel says the monks found the treasure when they tore down an old wall and found a storage cavity. The piles of manuscripts, written by early inhabitants of the monastery, are now in 47 large cartons, he said. … He said the thousands of parchment and papyrus fragments, some dating back to before A.D. 300, include at least one real sensation—eight missing pages from the Codex Sinaiticus, a priceless, fourth-century Greek Bible manuscript now in the British Museum.”

Since then, I’ve wondered why I have not heard more of it—until I read BAR’s reports on the 40-year delay in the publication of certain Dead Sea Scroll materials. I began to perceive a pattern: I hope I am wrong, but will we have to wait 40 years for the publication of the Mt. Sinai documents, like the Israelites waiting in the Sinai wilderness?

James H. Charlesworth of Princeton Theological Seminary replies:

The letter from J. K. is informed, but also understandably confused. Let me try to put rapidly into perspective, in an extremely abbreviated form, the facts as I now understand them. I have obtained the following information from three trips to St. Catherine’s Monastery and from correspondence with the monks and others involved in the discovery.

First, there was a fire in St. Catherine’s Monastery in 1972. The fire was in the northern section of the Monastery beside the wall. In this area of the Monastery there was a tremendous amount of wood construction.

Second, the debris from the fire was cleared in 1975 and two rooms were “discovered” hidden in the wall.

Third, in these rooms were discovered approximately 4,000 manuscripts, broken manuscripts in numerous languages, broken icons, and an old Byzantine door:

Fourth, yes, J. K. is accurate when he says that some leaves of Codex Sinaiticus were recovered. Indeed, I am pleased to report that I held some of these in my hands. I can state at this time only that far more than eight leaves were recovered, but that at the present I am sworn not to publish the knowledge I have until I receive permission and a green light from His Eminence Archbishop Damianos.

Fifth, J. K. is definitely wrong regarding his fear of delayed publication. With the help of the brilliant and personable editor David Noel Freedman, I have published several articles on the discoveries. In 1981 I revised these, and along with a significant foreword by David Noel Freedman, I published the monograph entitled, “The New Discoveries in St. Catherine’s Monastery: A Preliminary Report on the Manuscripts” (ASOR, Monograph Series No. 3; Winona Lake, IN, 1981).

In July 1985 I was in St. Catherine’s Monastery and talked with His Eminence Archbishop Damianos about numerous matters. One of them, of course, was the discovery of the thousands of manuscripts, including the greatest collection of uncials [handwritten Greek and Latin manuscripts] in the world. He encouraged me to learn more, and in fact told me a tremendous amount, including his own hypothesis regarding the reason the manuscripts were discovered and why they had been placed there. He then handed me the first publication on the manuscripts’ discovery. It is a catalog of the Arabic manuscripts. It is edited and written by I. E. Mei¬mareµ and published in Athens (1985). The catalog is brilliantly done, with 142 facsimiles with Arabic and Greek descriptions. There are also 20 colored photographs of these manuscripts. Many of them have very attractive rubrics, miniatures, and multicolored illustrations, often with Greek iconographic clarifications.

Archbishop Damianos informed me that the description of the Greek codexes should be out within this year: It is in fact in final published form. He encouraged me to polish my own popular account, which he perused rapidly while we were together. This popular account will contain over 39 photographs of the manuscripts and of the site in which the discoveries 008were placed. His Eminence Archbishop Damianos will have his monks read my book for accuracy and supply a preface. The profits from the work will be shared equally with the Monastery. He and I are exploring and developing ways to improve the relationships between East and West and to lay the foundation so that no longer will the monks and the Monastery be abused by scholars and others. The Monastery deserves our full support and should receive, if not all of the profits, at least 50% of those from any popular scholarly publication.

Obviously, the present statement is in anticipation of my own publications on these significant discoveries. I am not verifying some of the important and intriguing aspects of the discoveries because I must protect the confidences placed in me by the members of the Holy Council of St. Catherine’s Monastery and by His Eminence Damianos himself. My main emphasis will always be upon the high quality of these dedicated men and the sacredness of the traditions and site they commemorate and help us to respect and revere.

Daniel Fragments Ready for Press

To the editor:

Professor Frank Moore Cross, Jr. has a fragment of Daniel from Cave 4, which is reputed to have considerable paleographical significance (See Cross’s book The Ancient Library of Qumran, rev. ed. [Garden City: 1961], p. 43.) Has this fragment been photographed? What are his plans for publishing it?

Frank Moore Cross replies:

The Daniel fragments are being edited by Eugene Ulrich, to whom I assigned them. His edition is ready for press.

Picking a Bone Here and There

To the editor:

I have just received my first copy of Bible Review. I want to thank you for a job well done. The articles were informative and thought provoking, the lay-out and graphics are stupendous.

So, the bone I want to pick should be seen in the context of nearly complete satisfaction with your magazine. I look forward to learning from it for many years.

However, I do feel strongly that your terminology reflects a Christian bias which is inappropriate in a truly ecumenical magazine. I do not regard the Hebrew Bible as an “Old Testament,” nor should the Greek bible be referred to as “New” with all the theological baggage that implies. On a related point, I do not divide the chronology of the world based on Jesus’ lifetime, I would ask that you use “B.C.E.”—Before the Common Era, and “C.E.”—Common Era.

Please consider these requested changes. Words matter, and phrases which are inextricably linked to a specific theological slant exclude some of us from our common heritage.

A Biblical Literalist Looks at Bible Review

To the editor:

I feel compelled to write because of the negative letters Bible Review has received. It struck me that these letters are rather unfair and often irrational. Since I first began to subscribe to your sister publication Biblical Archaeology Review, I have often found articles that I do not agree with and just as often I found articles and assumptions that offended my personal faith in God. I must say that even then I never felt compelled to cancel my subscription or write a nasty letter.

These two magazines are scholarly compilations of facts and theories. I realize that as a biblical literalist I will find articles, theories and assorted assumptions I would not agree with, but as a faithful follower of Christ Jesus I find that according to scripture we are often exhorted to search, know and study the writings. As Paul expressed to Timothy, “study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). I believe that without the aid of the Holy Spirit one cannot rightly understand the Scriptures. I also believe that what has been handed down to us today is very likely flawed for various reasons (i.e., interpretation, translation, transcription, etc.). This is why, though not adequately educated, I turn to the Greek translations of the Bible and subscribe to this fairly scholarly magazine, in the hope and faith that through these endeavors I might have a greater command of the Scriptures so as to be a better worker for our Lord.

A Bright Nine-Year-Old

To the editor:

Thank you for this issue of Bible Review. I have enjoyed what I have read so far. My daughter, who is nine this month, shared with me how much she too enjoyed this issue.

I am a home-schooling parent. Bible Review will be happily passed to other families of home-schoolers.

To the editor:

As director of the religious education resource center at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis, I am going to place this fine journal on our shelves for availability to our users.

To the editor:

I am delighted at the appearance of Bible Review. At last I can refer undergraduates to a periodical that provides articles by leading scholars in language that is not too technical and does not assume vast prior knowledge. Thank you!

New Mt. Sinai Manuscripts
To the editor: