SART team references - Steven Avery and Mark Michie

Steven Avery

Some contras put together every reference to Steven Avery.
Thanks! (I may cross-reference a bit with the page numbers in the hard copy.)


Little things, like: “What color was Sinaiticus?”
“How was it found?” “How many pieces are there?” “Where were they?” These questions led to other, also basic questions: “Who else was there when this happened, to verify it?” “What did they say happened?” “Can we trust them?” Ah, that is the question! Who can we trust? As I began to study more, especially with the help of researcher Steven Avery, who had found many documents that I had been struggling to find, I started to realize that somebody, somewhere, had to be lying! (Kindle Locations 353-360).

Researcher Steven Avery contacted me in early 2014 and let me look at an amazing thing. He told me that they had put the Sinaiticus —what we have of it— online! (Kindle Locations 761-762).

In early 2014, Steven Avery asked me to look at these photos, especially the CFA pages. I told him “I am not sure what I could contribute, though I don’t mind looking.” So I just looked at the CFA and other Sinaiticus pages, back and forth, over and over, for hours. Steven gave me a hint that perhaps someone whitened up the pages of the CFA. So I was looking to see if there was evidence of this. But what I found was even stranger: someone had darkened the rest of Sinaiticus! (Kindle Locations 790-794).

Does this look white to you? As I told Steven Avery, it looks like coffee stains, tea stains, tobacco juice stains —something like that. Some pages are lighter than others, for sure. But none seems as white as any pages of the CFA. (Kindle Locations 816-818)

I am indebted to researcher Steven Avery once again for his painstaking research. (Kindle Locations 962-963).

I and my fellow researchers, Steven Avery and Mark Michie, wanted to know what Uspensky wrote. But none of us knows Old Slavonic. Thankfully, a missionary to Ukraine, John Spillman, got it translated for us, from Old Slavonic, into Russian, then into English. (Kindle Locations 1413-1415).

What can you prove about Sinaiticus? It’s almost like someone created it out of the air, to give textual critics and palaeographers something to analyze for years on end, and make them hunger to compare it with Vaticanus. There’s no proof of provenance with Sinaiticus. It’s almost poof! provenance, as Steven Avery says.
(Kindle Locations 1978-1982).

In September of 2014, producer Chris Pinto interviewed me outside Nashville. At that time I didn’t have a 50th of the information I have now regarding Sinaiticus, Tischendorf, or Manly P. Hall; nor did I have high-resolution photos of Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, thanks to Steven Avery and Mark Michie; nor did I have the actual facsimiles of them, thanks to Brother Jack McElroy. (Kindle Locations 2509-2512).

So the King James Bible has been on a lot of people’s hit lists. And the Sinaiticus, it turns out, was the Greek Codex that set the ball rolling against the King James and toward the Alexandrian stream of manuscripts. This includes Codex Vaticanus, housed at the Vatican (of course). So I turned my focus onto the Sinaiticus. Researcher Steven Avery had shown me actual photographs of Sinaiticus in March 2014. He was willing to consider the idea that a guy named Constantine Simonides had actually put together the Codex Sinaiticus around 1840. Chris Pinto had fronted that theory in his Bible video: Tares Among the Wheat. I told Steven that I had “a very, very, very hard time believing” that Constantine Simonides, a peddler of what he said were ancient manuscripts, had anything to do with the Codex Sinaiticus. Even if Sinaiticus were not an ancient codex, I believed what Scrivener and others had said, that Simonides was a con man. It seemed he kept finding the most gullible people, and sold many counterfeits to them. (Kindle Locations 2547-2557).

Fact #1: Someone darkened Sinaiticus! Steven Avery showed me, where I could actually see high-quality photographs of Sinaiticus for the first time! I was looking to see if someone whitened the 43 pages of animal skin that Tischendorf brought from St. Catherine’s monastery in the Egyptian peninsula to Leipzig. This was called the Codex Friderico-Augustanus, or CFA. (Kindle Locations 2574-2577).

And I’ve shown you the evidence that someone darkened Sinaiticus. I’ve had the theory it was Tischendorf, to make Sinaiticus look older, because Steven Avery showed me the website,, where I could see it for myself back in 2014. (Kindle Locations 3130-3132).

In February 2016, Steven Avery contacted Dirk Jongkind, author of the 2013 book, Scribal Habits of Codex Sinaiticus. Listen to what he says about Tischendorf:

It is still fascinating how Tischendorf got away with the part published in Codex Friderico Augustanus, and whether or not he had seen the New Testament part already, in 1844. He [Tischendorf] only speaks about the 130 leaves of the Greek Old Testament, but I would not put it beyond him to consciously suppress his knowledge of the wider manuscript (which would mean that between Tischendorf and Uspensky [between 1844 and 1845] the manuscript was not reunited at all, as it had been together).
So as of February of 2016, Dirk Jongkind was open to the idea that Tischendorf “got away with” the 43 folia. That sounds a lot like Kallinikos’ claim, that Tischendorf secretly cut out and stole those 43 folia. And so Tischendorf also hid the fact that it wasn’t a bunch of loose sheets, but a bound book. (Kindle Locations 3282-3291).