Outline of Discussion

Steven Avery

1) Agreement - James originally on non-authenticity
2) CSP not having a English translation
3) James White - no scholar


The importance of the issue.

1) historically there never would have been a CT
2) the power of the long con - Tischen-duped for almost 145 con
2427, First Century Mark --- the longest and wildest con

KJV is not the issue - when I was KJV I was happy

The alternate history of the manuscripts

Probability and


The importance of the issue
Historically, Sinaiticus was intrinsic to the development of the Westcott-Hort recension
Today, the 1800s production missed shows the gross limitations of the modern science of manuscripts.

The canard of presuppositionalism
(I actually wrote a Oct 2013 defense of Sinaiticus, quite happily, based on the evidence then available)

Contra Attempts
1) James Snapp and his 20+ Reasons (which are largely a multiplication of nothings :) )

From earlier discussion (go back and listen):
So far two big ones were considered to be the:
Arabic notes (and possible prophecy)
Simonides saying he did only part of Sinaiticus Hermas

Specific variants

I was going to find the spot homoeoteleuton are said to be a late rphenomenon

2) Stanley E. Porter gives 10 reasons based on the James Keith Elliott book

Important overall issues.

Discovering the Colour and Staining Anaomalies

The comparative histories of Simonides and Tischendorf

The evidence that Kallinikos was involved
AND the evidence that there was information from Sinai that demonstrates super-knowledge of Simonides and Kallinikos.
Simple example: that the 1844 abstraction was theft.

The Tischendorf accusation that Hermas included later Latinization material.

The Resistance to ANY Testing of Parchment and Ink
Last edited: