Steven Avery
Administrator
CARM
- Constantine Simonides and Codex Sinaiticus - fragments in book covers and bindings and in disordered heaps, in baskets etc
1853 I do not believe Kallinikos was at St. Catherine’s this time; 2.Why does Daniel's (note Daniel's not Avery) think the phantom Kallinikos was at St. Catherine's Monastery in 1853 when Tischendorf was there? Perhaps Steven Avery can serve as a mediator? I think you mean was not ..
forums.carm.org
From the Kindle edition p. 352-353:1. Why does David believe Simonides was lying about his, allegedly 2nd, 1852 trip to St. Catherine's Monastery?
His statements of the changes to the Codex violate the timeline:
Simonides said that in 1852 the Codex was . .much altered, having an older appearance than it ought to have....” And yet Tischendorf knew what the Codex had looked like in 1844. Had the Codex been changed by the time he saw it in 1859, Tischendorf would have known the difference between what he took in 1844 and its present condition, and certainly he would have called attention to it.
In 1853 Tischendorf went back to St. Catherine’s. During that time he got no sight of the Codex. The previous time he was there was 1844. But Tischendorf couldn’t have colored the Codex then, since 1) his own CFA is white, not yellowed, and 2) Porfiry Uspensky, seeing it in 1845, said it was white. That leaves (as we saw before) only 1859 for the coloring/aging of the Codex.
But Simonides’ statement shows that he does not know that most or all of at least 18 books of the Bible were missing! How can you forget to state that? And we know the state of the Codex. Porfiry Uspensky saw it in 1845 and 1850. He wrote a full description that was printed in 1856. That description exactly matches what was in the Codex in 1859 —except that by the time Tischendorf had it in Cairo, it had become yellowed, and it had Arabic notes.