With Due Respect: Is the Ethiopian Bible the oldest Bible?

 

No, the Ethiopian Bible is not the oldest Bible. This is a common online claim, mostly because people compare the Ethiopian Bible (which was adapted by Ethiopia during 1400s) with the King James Bible (which was complied during the 1600s). Neither translation is the earliest scripture.

The Ethiopian Bible

For the Ethiopian Bible (the canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, written in Ge'ez):The translation of biblical texts into Ge'ez began in the 4th–6th centuries CE, soon after Christianity became the state religion in the Kingdom of Aksum (Ethiopia) in the 4th century.

The oldest surviving Ethiopian biblical manuscripts are the Garima Gospels (illuminated manuscripts of the four Gospels), radiocarbon dated to roughly 330–650 CE (with some samples as early as 390–570 CE). These are among the world's oldest illustrated Christian manuscripts and the earliest in Ge'ez.

However, a full Ethiopian Bible (with its broader canon of 81–88 books, including texts like Enoch and Jubilees not in most other Christian canons) as a complete, compiled collection appears in later manuscripts.

The oldest version

The oldest surviving nearly complete or complete Bibles (as full codices containing both Old and New Testaments in one set of manuscripts) date to the 4th century AD.

Codex Vaticanus (c. 300–325 AD or slightly later): One of the earliest and most complete Greek Bibles (Septuagint Old Testament + New Testament), housed in the Vatican Library. It is missing some parts but is among the oldest.

Codex Sinaiticus (c. 330–360 AD): Contains the oldest complete New Testament and large portions of the Old Testament in Greek. Discovered at St. Catherine's Monastery, it is widely regarded as one of the most important early biblical manuscripts.

With Due Respect: Was Jesus cruicified in the Sinai Bible?

 

Recently, I came across popular historian and author Billy Carson. Billy Carson has continually claimed that a Bible discovered in Sinai in 1844 does not state that Jesus was crucified. He also claimed that this "Sinai Bible" was more accurate than the King James Bible.

The event of Jesus's death is central to Christianity. 

But we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.  - 1 Cor 1:23-24

But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.  - 1 Cor 15:12-14

Thus it is important to examine whether Carson's claim is true.

What is the Sinai Bible?

The Sinai Bible is a misnomer - among scholarly circles it is known as Codex Sinaiticus. As Carson claims, it was dated to 4th century AD, nearly 1200 years before the King James Bible was compiled.

The Codex Sinaiticus consists of the Greek Old Testament, the Greek New Testament, and the Epistles of Barnabus and the Shephard of Hermas. It is considered to be a landmark document, along with Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Vaticanus, as it is one of the most complete manuscripts of the Bible.

A translation of Codex Sinaiticus is here, and clearly states that Jesus was crucified.

And they struck his head with a reed, and spit upon him, and bowing the knees they worshipped him. And when they had derided him, they took of from him the purple, and put on him his own clothes. And they led him out to crucify him, - Mark 15:19-20 [Codex Sinaiticus]

Conclusion

It is unfortunate that Billy Carson continues to pursue this claim, and he eventually was called out by Christian theologian, Wesly Huff as since in the reference video below.

For reference