KJV Tampering as a precursor to Sinaiaticus Fraud

[Steven Avery]

the 1844 CFA theft by Tischendorf
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... dorf.3037/

To be clear, I am allowing the possibility of monastery-Tischendorf collusion in the theft, or a wink-wink from his cronies, but the evidence is very very strong that Tischendorf took those pages without authorization, warrant, receipt or anything.

[ebion]

the 1844 CFA theft by Tischendorf
https://www.purebibleforum.com/index.ph ... dorf.3037/

To be clear, I am allowing the possibility of monastery-Tischendorf collusion in the theft, or a wink-wink from his cronies, but the evidence is very very strong that Tischendorf took those pages without authorization, warrant, receipt or anything.

I concur, and my opinion is that the wink-wink must have come from the Patriarch.

So the Patriarch of Jerusalem is wink-winking to an operation financed by the highest levels of the Vatican.

What do you mean by Kallinikos - “by permission of the librarian”? What is that quote from?

[StephenGoranson]

That the Vatican and the Patriarch, in that era, in that manner, colluded as speculated above, besides lacking evidence, is improbable.
And, perhaps, also speculation influenced by prior views--though two differing views--about the Bible.

[Steven Avery]

What do you mean by Kallinikos - “by permission of the librarian”? What is that quote from?

This relates to the big heist of 1859:

The Journal of Sacred Literature (1863-04)
https://books.google.com/books?id=vvgDAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA212

Kallinikos Hieromononachos, Oct 15, 1862, Alexandria

Simonides... not coming in time, neglected the matter altogether, until Dr. Tischendorf, coming to the Greek monastery of Sinai in 1844, in the month of May (if my memory does not deceive me), and remaining there several days, and getting into his hands, by permission of the librarian, the codex we are speaking of, and perusing and reperusing it frequently, abstracted secretly a small portion of it, but left the largest portion in the place where it was, and departed undisturbed. And last of all, coming again to the same monastery, he obtained also the remaining portion of it through the Russian Consul, in exchange for hyperbolical promises, never, in my judgment, likely to be fulfilled.

[Steven Avery]

That the Vatican and the Patriarch, in that era, in that manner, colluded as speculated above, besides lacking evidence, is improbable.
And, perhaps, also speculation influenced by prior views--though two differing views--about the Bible.

We see through a glass darkly.
There are suspicious elements, especially involving the Vatican fawning over Lutheran Tischendorf.

One native Greek biographer of Constantine Simonides takes the position that he was covering for the monastery, in its cooperation with Tischendorf.

And I agree that direct cooperation in such a venture between the Patriarch and the Vatican (Jesuits) is a difficult theory. However, Jesuits are not the most transparent group!

Anyone should smell the stench of the enterprise, especially when you see the beautiful condition of the supposedly ancient, supposedly heavily used century-by-century manuscript. And the visual 1844 and 1859 differences that match the Simonides-Kalliniikos colouring accusation, which was hidden until 2009. And there is the no-provenance element.

However, many are entranced by the deeply entrenched Sinaiticus scholarship.

[StephenGoranson]

"Sinaiticus scholarship," if you are familiar with it, misled many scholars, precisely in your view, how?

[Steven Avery]

"Sinaiticus scholarship," if you are familiar with it, misled many scholars, precisely in your view, how?

The main problem was that it quickly had an established date of 4th century, without examining the manuscript. This led to scholars unable to consider what would be more reasonable textual relationships. (Also the material sciences were forced to revamp their theories.)

To give one example, it was noted that the Zurich Psalter matches extremely well with one Sinaiticus corrector. An interesting phenomenon. With a tabula rasa you would clearly consider the possibility that the Psalter, or any sister manuscript, was used directly for the Sinaiticus corrections. However, that possiblity, by far the most Ockham-friendly attempt, has not even been mentioned in the scholarship. Simply because of the errant "consensus" dating of Sinaiticus.

There are MANY places where the scholars were misled.

Including the formation of the Critical Text, where Sinaiticus was given a super-role.

[Steven Avery]

Here is another one.

It is rare for one extant manuscript to match perfectly as a source text for the homoeoteleutons in another ms. Yet Claromontanus has a number of spots where its line lengths and formatting fit as the source for Sinaiticus missing lines.

In a sensible scholarship world, this would be a matter of great interest. Probability examination would be active. However, since it does not fit the Sinaiticus consensus dating narrative, this rather amazing phenomenon is ignored.

[StephenGoranson]

re: Steven Avery, Sun Feb 04, 2024 6:30 pm

Your proposal has not been "ignored" in "sensible scholarship."

For example, a fine textual scholar, Tommy Wasserman, already responded to and countered your apparently misleading characterization, assuming he was accurately quoted, in this very forum, BC&HF. And you replied there the next day. So, unless you forgot, what you wrote above is quite false.

Re: Codex Sinaiticus - the white parchment Friderico-Augusta

Post by Maestroh » Mon Apr 03, 2017 9:43 am

viewtopic.php?p=67158#p67158

[Jair]

I hate to tell you this ebion, you seem like a nice enough guy, but I consider all of XCaninty pure fiction.

I used to be able to think like that, and but then in digging into the texts I came across the plans of our enemies to eradicate and enslave us, and the importance they attach specifically to destroying Christianity.

Sorta like: it doesn't matter if you believe in Satan if you have enemies that do. You had better study their plans and know everything there is to know, whether you are a believer or not. Look at how Disney is not only woke, but Satanic. How your laws have been changed to make reading a NTBible a "hate crime". How asking for the truth about DoD countermeasures that they are injecting globally is a criminal offence. And how your tax dollars are funding the Brigades or the Units or the Agencies that are spamming our forums.

They're most worried about Christianity, so they use wars of religion to attack it. And by the same token, I've come to appreciate that an authentic Chritianity, without the perversions of the Constantinian/Mithran churches, is the best tool we have to fight their enslavement. Whether you are a believer or not.

PS: If you're not paranoid, it just means you haven't been paying attention :-,)

Huh? Genuinely what do you mean by this?

Am I interpreting correctly that you identify as a Christian? So do I. But why should I be paranoid? I don’t get it…