Steven Avery
Administrator
The colouring done between 1844 and 1859 gives us a wonderful BEFORE and AFTER view of the tampering.
Leipzig 86 pages is BEFORE, white parchment
London pages 1859 are AFTER. yellowed, streaky and stained.
David W. Daniels has done an incredible job documenting this on two videos.
And it is a key part of the SART pages on www.sinaiticus.net
Even the COVER of David's book shows the composite picture.
The super-clincher is that this matches PERFECTLY the called shot of Kallinikos, published in 1862 to 1864,
that the manuscript had been deliberately coloured in the 1850s. Kallinikos emphasized this repeatedly and clearly.
Using simple and powerful historical forensics, this is virtually proof positive that the colouring occurred.
(By itself this does not prove that Sinaiticus is 1800s, but it surely makes any other theory very, very difficult.)
=========================
Despite all this, a number of the writers and speakers on Sinaiticus authenticity have NOT gotten the colour straight. As an example, they talk a about the Leipzig pages being coloured, which is absurd and nonsensical. They were white parchment in 1844, they are white parchment today.
Please, be very careful with claims and material that comes from other than the SART team, and people properly referencing our material. (Best is if they give proper acknowledgement, with the specific sources. Our research is not perfect, but it is thorough and reliable and has involved careful and prayerful labours over a few years.
SART TEAM
David W. Daniels
Steven Avery
Mark Michie
Rohan Meyer
=========================
If in doubt, contact us, through the sinaiticus.net site, personal contacts, Facebook (there is even a group called Sinaiticus.)
There are other problems, major problems, in material that is out there, I have partial reviews on this forum of the books by Bill Cooper and David Sorenson that go into some of these details.
To be fair, sometimes these writers, especially Bill Cooper, express certain issues very well. And raise valid points that we may have missed. We appreciate those points, and will give credit when using their ideas and words.
=========================
Thanks!
Leipzig 86 pages is BEFORE, white parchment
London pages 1859 are AFTER. yellowed, streaky and stained.
David W. Daniels has done an incredible job documenting this on two videos.
And it is a key part of the SART pages on www.sinaiticus.net
Even the COVER of David's book shows the composite picture.
The super-clincher is that this matches PERFECTLY the called shot of Kallinikos, published in 1862 to 1864,
that the manuscript had been deliberately coloured in the 1850s. Kallinikos emphasized this repeatedly and clearly.
Using simple and powerful historical forensics, this is virtually proof positive that the colouring occurred.
(By itself this does not prove that Sinaiticus is 1800s, but it surely makes any other theory very, very difficult.)
=========================
Despite all this, a number of the writers and speakers on Sinaiticus authenticity have NOT gotten the colour straight. As an example, they talk a about the Leipzig pages being coloured, which is absurd and nonsensical. They were white parchment in 1844, they are white parchment today.
Please, be very careful with claims and material that comes from other than the SART team, and people properly referencing our material. (Best is if they give proper acknowledgement, with the specific sources. Our research is not perfect, but it is thorough and reliable and has involved careful and prayerful labours over a few years.
SART TEAM
David W. Daniels
Steven Avery
Mark Michie
Rohan Meyer
=========================
If in doubt, contact us, through the sinaiticus.net site, personal contacts, Facebook (there is even a group called Sinaiticus.)
There are other problems, major problems, in material that is out there, I have partial reviews on this forum of the books by Bill Cooper and David Sorenson that go into some of these details.
To be fair, sometimes these writers, especially Bill Cooper, express certain issues very well. And raise valid points that we may have missed. We appreciate those points, and will give credit when using their ideas and words.
=========================
Thanks!
Last edited: