Let's look at the Codex Sinaiticus (א)...said by H. P. Blavatsky to be "the Bible in true."

"Madame Helena Petrovna Blavatsky connections to Westcott & Hort:

"H. P. Blavatsky also attended the "Ghostly Guild" meetings with Westcott and Hort, along with Charles Darwin. In her books Isis Unveiled Vol. 1 and 2, and The Secret Doctrine Vol. 1 and 2, Blavatsky says, "we have the Bible in true in Codex Sinaiticus (א) and Codex Vaticanus (B)"

"and goes on to say "Westcott and Hort were true scholars that corrected the errors in previous versions." Blavatsky also said that Westcott was the father of "channeling."

"Some of the followers of Blavatsky also claimed to be under the control of spirits through automatic writing, etc. In 1891, Annie Besant (1847-1933) succeeded Blavatsky as head of the Theosophical Society.

"From 1889, until Blavatsky's death in 1891, Besant was a co-editor of the Theosophical Society's "Lucifer Magazine." Besant, and her associates, hated the King James Bible:

"The English translation (Authorized Version--KJV) is wretchedly imperfect. Errors abound in it, and some of them are of a most laughable description. On this account, great calls have been made for the new translation..." (Charles Bradlaugh, Annie Wood Besant, Charles Watts, The Freethinker's Text-book, 1876)

from: https://www.bibleready.org/modern-translations

"Codex Sinaiticus (Codex A) This is an ancient hand-written copy of the Greek Bible (OT & NT). It is an Alexandrian text-type manuscript, proving its origin to be Alexadria, Egypt. In 1844 forty-three leaves were found in a kindling bin at a Monastery at the base of Mt. Sinai by the Russian evolutionary archaeologist Constantine von Tischendorf.

"Tischendorf lived and studied during the height of German Rationalism which had a profound effect on biblical textual criticism. He was taught by his university professors that the bible couldn't be trusted and the current text couldn't be known. He was on a mission to find the "real" bible.

"The Codex leaves he found were shortly to be used as kindling to light a stove. Two heaps of leaves like the one he found had already been used this way by the monks who regarded them as worthless. Apparently, they had not taken the same classes that Tischendorf had. The second part of the manuscript was found in 1959 during a return trip. Parts of the Codex were eventually scattered across four libraries around the world, with the largest part residing in the British Library.

"Originally, it contained the whole of both Testaments. The final codex contained an almost complete Greek Old Testament (or Septuagint) along with a complete New Testament. More recently, with much fanfare the manuscript pieces have been reunited and a copy of the manuscript has been made available online.

"Between the 4th and 12th centuries, seven or more correctors worked on this codex, making it one of the most corrected manuscripts in existence. (Milne, H. J. M. and Skeat, T.C. (1938). Scribes and Correctors of Codex Sinaiticus)

"Tischendorf, during his investigation in Petersburg enumerated 14,800 corrections in only the portion which was held in Petersburg (2/3 of the codex). (Metzger, Bruce M., (1991). Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Palaeography, p. 77)

"This implies that the full codex could have about 20,000 corrections. In addition to these corrections, some letters were marked above them by dots indicating that they were doubtful.


"Tischendorf, also believed that four separate scribes copied the work (whom he named A, B, C, and D) and that five correctors (whom he designated a, b, c, d, and e) amended portions. He posited that one of the correctors was contemporaneous with the original scribes and that the others dated to the sixth and seventh centuries. It is now agreed, after Milne and Skeats' reinvestigation, that scribe C never existed.

"The three remaining scribes are still identified by the letters that Tischendorf gave them: A, B, and D.

"According to Aland, future correctors of Sinaiticus numbered at least seven. They are known as a, b, c, ca, cb, cc, e. (Aland, Kurt and Aland, Barbara (1995). The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, p. 107-108.

"The image, below, is from the Codex Sinaiticus Quire 36, folio 4 recto.

"It is easy to see the faint outline of the previous text, numerous scribal "corrections" and marginal notes. Since this manuscript continued to be "corrected" between the 4th and 12th centuries A.D. '

"It is not difficult to see why this apparently not widely used.




"It is equally easy to imagine how textual critics, eager to justify their college expenses and to make a name for themselves, could have a field day with this text and spend years trying to figure out which of the scratch-outs, write-overs, marginal notations, and doubtful letters are to be preserved and which ones are to be discarded. This of course is a recipe for error, especially if it is held out to be the standard by which all other texts are measured.

"Because of the widespread acceptance of Sinaiticus in high academic ecclesiastical circles, secularists then turn around and try to use this example to "prove" the unreliability of all bibles to an uninformed public. Consider what the BBC has to say about Sinaiticus:

"According to BBC news, "The Codex - and other early manuscripts - omit some mentions of ascension of Jesus into heaven, and key references to the Resurrection, which the Archbishop of Canterbury has said is essential for Christian belief.

"Other differences concern how Jesus behaved. In one passage of the Codex, Jesus is said to be "angry" as he healed a leper, whereas the modern text records him as healing with "compassion".... Nor are there words of forgiveness from the cross. Jesus does not say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do". Fundamentalists, who believe every word in the Bible is true, may find these differences unsettling."

The article goes on to gleefully highlight:

"Mr. Ehrman was a born-again Bible-believing Evangelical until he read the original Greek texts and noticed some discrepancies. 'The Bible we now use can't be the inerrant word of God', he says, 'since what we have are the sometimes mistaken words copied by fallible scribes.' "

The article wraps up by proclaiming:

" 'It should be regarded as a living text, something constantly changing as generation after generation tries to understand the mind of God,' says David Parker, a Christian working on digitizing the Codex. Others may take it as more evidence that the Bible is the word of man, not God."

"I would like to add just one last sentence to that BBC article:

"Still others might take these findings as more evidence that the Sinaiticus manuscript should simply be placed back into the garbage can from where it was found. (Ok, I'm kidding a little here)

"But, millions of believers simply do not agree that this manuscript should be given such prominence in light of the thousands of other manuscripts and scriptural quotes from early church leaders, some of whom were disciples of the apostles.

"It just doesn't make sense to ignore all these other sources and place this suspect one above the rest."

 

what?

what?

Do you know something?

 

The BBC and that article are anti-Bible and pro-Mr. Ehrman, highlighted in blue,
but even they have enough common sense to state the things they do, in red, below.

"According to BBC news, "The Codex - and other early manuscripts - omit some mentions of ascension of Jesus into heaven, and key references to the Resurrection, which the Archbishop of Canterbury has said is essential for Christian belief.

"Other differences concern how Jesus behaved. In one passage of the Codex, Jesus is said to be "angry" as he healed a leper, whereas the modern text records him as healing with "compassion".... Nor are there words of forgiveness from the cross. Jesus does not say "Father forgive them for they know not what they do". Fundamentalists, who believe every word in the Bible is true, may find these differences unsettling."

The article goes on to gleefully highlight:

"Mr. Ehrman was a born-again Bible-believing Evangelical until he read the original Greek texts and noticed some discrepancies. 'The Bible we now use can't be the inerrant word of God', he says, 'since what we have are the sometimes mistaken words copied by fallible scribes.' "

The article wraps up by proclaiming:

" 'It should be regarded as a living text, something constantly changing as generation after generation tries to understand the mind of God,' says David Parker, a Christian working on digitizing the Codex. Others may take it as more evidence that the Bible is the word of man, not God."

"I would like to add just one last sentence to that BBC article:

"Still others might take these findings as more evidence that the Sinaiticus manuscript should simply be placed back into the garbage can from where it was found. (Ok, I'm kidding a little here)

"But, millions of believers simply do not agree that this manuscript should be given such prominence in light of the thousands of other manuscripts and scriptural quotes from early church leaders, some of whom were disciples of the apostles.

"It just doesn't make sense to ignore all these other sources and place this suspect one above the rest."

 

Is this what 'most scholars' say?

Maybe, he was from Kentucky.

In 1880 there were 8 Tischendorf families living in Kentucky.

The mix-up comes from him being 'a Russian noble'.

"In 1869 the Tsar awarded Tischendorf the style of "von" Tischendorf as a Russian noble.

"He returned a third time in January 1859 under the patronage of Tsar Alexander II of Russia with the active aid of the Russian government to find more of the Codex Frederico-Augustanus or similar ancient Biblical texts. On 4 February, the last day of his visit, he was shown a text which he recognized as significant – the Codex Sinaiticus – a Greek manuscript of the complete New Testament and parts of the Old Testament dating to the 4th century.[citation needed]

"Tischendorf persuaded the monks to present the manuscript to Tsar Alexander II of Russia, at the cost of the Tsar it was published in 1862 (in four folio volumes). Those[who?] ignorant of the details of his discovery of the Codex Sinaiticus accused Tischendorf of buying manuscripts from ignorant monastery librarians at low prices. Indeed, he was never rich, but he staunchly defended the rights of the monks at Saint Catherine's Monastery when he persuaded them eventually to send the manuscript to the Tsar. This took approximately 10 years because the abbot of St Catherines had to be re-elected and confirmed in office in Cairo and in Jerusalem, and during those 10 years no one in the monastery had the authority to hand over any documents. However the documents were handed over in due course following a signed and sealed letter to the Tsar Alexander II (Schenkungsurkunde). Even so, the monks of Mt. Sinai still display a receipt-letter from Tischendorf promising to return the manuscript to them in the case that the donation can not be done. This token-letter had to be destroyed, following the late issue of a "Schenkungsurkunde". This donation act regulated the Codex exchange with the Tsar, against 9000 Rubels and Rumanian estate protection. The Tsar was seen as the protector of Greek-Orthodox Christians. Thought lost since the Russian revolution, the document (Schenkungsurkunde) has now resurfaced in St Petersburg 2003, and has also been long before commented upon by other scholars like Kurt Aland. The monastery has disputed the existence of the gift certificate (Schenkungsurkunde) since the British Library was named as the new owner of the Codex. Now following the late find of the gift certificate by the National Russian Library the existence cannot be disputed in earnest.[10]

"In 1869 the Tsar awarded Tischendorf the style of "von" Tischendorf as a Russian noble. 327 facsimile editions of the Codex were printed in Leipzig for the Tsar (instead of a salary for the three-year work of Tischendorf the Tsar gave him 100 copies for reselling) in order to celebrate the 1000th anniversary of the traditional foundation of the Rus' state in 862 with the publication of this most amazing find. Supporting the production of the facsimile, all made with special print characters for each of the 4 scribes of the Codex Sinaiticus, was shift work and contributed to Tischendorf's early demise due to exhausting work for months also during nights. Thus the Codex found its way to the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg.[10]"

Are you sure? No, you are not sure.

I know all about the discombobulations concerning William Wynn Westcott.

More irrelevant idiosyncrasies. Maybe, maybe not, to one extent or another.

The important type thing is their being Occultists and publishing such things as, "Lucifer Magazine."

"Besant, and her associates, hated the King James Bible", not entirely unlike many toy soldiers, today.

 

The camels you are swallowing (that you posted an error-fill OP), compared to the irrelevant idiosyncrasy gnats you say you "offered proof of several examples of such" (whether you did, or not), are not commensurate with Christianity.

The truths of the OP are commensurate with Christianity.

Let's look at the Codex Sinaiticus (א)...said by H. P. Blavatsky to be "the Bible in true."