User talk:Witr

Welcome! welcome page

Hello, Witr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially what you did for Codex Sinaiticus. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome!

As you see, the NT mss project is a long one. We have not too much workers, and we are looking for the generous volunteers we can get. Your work is good. I hope you will work. We need a lot of new articles, we need to expand existed articles. Codex Sinaiticus is almost finished.

If we use sources to the article like Codex Sinaiticus, we need use academic journals, and books written by scholars. These are primary sources (of course not always it is possible). Programms from radio, TV, or popular magazines are not primary sources, though it is good to use them too. Weblinks are not primary souerces too. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 06:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Codex Sinaiticus

Are you really believe that Tischendorf stolen codex? Why three more fragments discovered in the monastery in the beginning of the 20th century by Beneshevich were also sent to Petersburg? It means the story of monks is not true. There is a correspondence between Tischendorf and monastery after 1859. You need read this:

T. C. Skeat, "The Last Chapter in the History of the Codex Sinaiticus", Novum Testamentum XLII, 4, pp. 313-315.
CSNTM

and this:

Evangelical Textual Criticism.

Of course we can ascribed opinion of monks in the article, but this opinion is doubtful. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 06:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree with you, the romantic story of its burning is unbelievable. The stolen story is for tourists. Majority of experts think that Vaticanus is older. It is not very important which codex is oldest, but quality of the text. Sinaiticus in John 7:8 has: "I am not going up to this feast" (it means Jesus lied), Vaticanus has: "I am not yet going to this feast". Of course Sinaiticus in John 1:1-8:38 represents the Western text, not Alexandrian, but NA27 followed after Sinaiticus. This reading represents RSV. Usually I agreed with the modern Textual Criticism, but not in this case. This reading we can find only in manuscripts of the Western text-type.Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 23:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Witr/sandboxy

User:Witr/sandboxy, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Witr/sandboxy and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Witr/sandboxy during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Ironholds (talk) 16:02, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthus: January 2012

ICHTHUS

January 2012

In this issue...

Ichthus is published by WikiProject Christianity
For submissions and subscriptions contact the Newsroom

Proposed deletion of David C. Parker

The article David C. Parker has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable author/academic; requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. None provided, nor found in Google News. Quotations provided are not biographical.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Wikipedical (talk) 20:48, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]