Aleph / 01 / א

Purpose

We will examine one question on this blog, the authenticity of Sinaiticus as a 4th century text.  The main question is .. 4th or 19th century,  although we will also examine the historical arguments that the codex, even if authentic, was from a later date, e.g. 6th century. 

Discussions Planned - Partial List

• Provenance - the 1840 poof factor
  
• Origin - Stories, Myths and Fables
• Why does it matter if Codex Sinaiticus is not authentic?
• Constantine Tischendorf - adventurer, scholar, Count, liar, thief, mutilator of ancient manuscripts
• Constantine Simonides - the fly in the ointment
• Codex Simoneidos  
• England literary controversy - 1862-1864
• Shepherd of Hermas - "coincidence seems almost more singular than can be accounted for by chance"
• Tares Among the Wheat by Chris Pinto
• Ink, Vellum & Binding 
• Ink analysis - "inks have never been chemically characterized"
• Scribes and Correctors
• authenticity, forgery and dating
• "many obvious blunders"
• Burgon and the significance of Codex Aleph
• Hilgenfeld questions what became the Tischendorf-Hort "scholarly consensus"
• Calligraphy 
• Quire numbers 
• Hieroglyphics 
• Retracing
• Rebinding  
• James Anson Farrer - "unsolved mysteries of literature"
• Codex Sinaiticus Project 
• bogus "English translation" of Sinaiticus
• evolution-style circularity
• probability analysis 
• John 21:25 - Tischendorf's x-ray vision, the attack on Samuel Tragelles
• Mark ending - the curious cancel sheet
• the James White - Chris Pinto debate
• James White - "any scholar"
• Alan Kurschner - "documentary lie"
• Lake, Skeat & Milne, Jongkind & Parker 
• Forum Discussions
• Bibliography 
• Summary 

    Let me add a note here.  Being active in textual discussions, I was dismissive of Codex Sinaiticus, as being a junque early text.   When I saw "Tares Among the Wheat" I was more interested in the Vaticanus retracing than the idea that Sinaiticus might not be authentic, since authenticity was always presented as probability=1. On the TC-Alternate forum in 2011 I even wrote up a paragraph of the main reasons that could be given against Simonides involvement.

    In 2013, I became more interested.  Alan Kurschner belligerently and falsely accused Chris Pinto of a "documentary lie", using a James White blunder as his reference. James White and Chris Pinto got ready to square off in the debate. So I figgered I should get more informed.  Out of that developed the studies du jour.

Steven Avery
Bayside, NY 

This blog page is:

Codex Sinaiticus - Authentic?
http://codexaleph.blogspot.com/2014/01/codex-sinaiticus-authentic-aleph-01.html

Pure Bible Central