Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

For those of you who missed it - it's over, not that it ever had any strengths in the first place. Dr Tommy Wasserman - an ACTUAL scholar with an ACTUAL PhD who has done ACTUAL work with Sinaiticus (as opposed to Steven Avery, who cannot read Greek OR Russian but insists upon posting snipe hunts all...

For those of you who missed it - it's over, not that it ever had any strengths in the first place. Dr Tommy Wasserman - an ACTUAL scholar with an ACTUAL PhD who has done ACTUAL work with Sinaiticus (as opposed to Steven Avery, who cannot read Greek OR Russian but insists upon posting snipe hunts all...

Once again - we see where an active imagination and zero knowledge of Bible manuscripts leads.

I'll just remind everyone: there's a reason this nonsense is being posted HERE and not presented in any sort of scholarly forum....and it isn't because of how GOOD it is. (Wonder why our boy Stevie won't point out the DIFFERENCES between these two manuscripts, often in verses around the alleged anom...

This shows you the level of Bill Brown's posting. I said nothing inaccurate so thank you. This is a reference to the fact that our group supplied the first known English translation, by employing a professional translator of the Old Slavonian text, of the Porfiry Uspensky words about the manuscript...

Just notice his ENTIRE enterprise is based on this gratuitous assumption. (I get a laugh watching this guy careen around trying to make evidence say something that it doesn't).

It should be pointed out that the Claromontanus-Sinaiticus relationship essentially closes the issue of Sinaiticus being a 4th century manuscript. (It is not.) It should be pointed out that Avery used his conclusion to come to his conclusion and is engaging in a circular argument. It should also be...

The understanding of Simonides is much greater in Europe especially from German down to the Balkans, also Italy. The 2014 Conference in Vienna was an interesting event. I am trying to see if there is documentation of his Russian period after Simonides was quieted down on Sinaiticus. Some of the mat...

Yes, the papyri were dated a century or more earlier - e.g. (made up numbers) 225 AD (range of 200-250 or 175-275, range as little as 50 years given at times) when they they should have been 3rd-4th c., even possibly 5th. (225-425, range of 200 years, maybe even more, 250, 300 years). They were dat...

Am I reading this correctly that Steve Avery is advocating a 45AD date for GMark? Yes. He is a Lukan prioritist. He has ZERO REASON to believe this other than he wants to do so. He has zero training in source, form, or redaction criticism, cannot even read Greek and is a KJV Onlyist who (get this) ...