Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

Maestroh wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:06 pm
No carbon dating has been done on Sinaiticus. But then again, it hasn't been done on hardly anything else, either.

John T wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:28 am

Maestroh wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:06 pm
No carbon dating has been done on Sinaiticus. But then again, it hasn't been done on hardly anything else, either.

Houston we have a problem.

Just like the story of how the Dead Sea Scrolls were found and eventually made it to the experts makes for an interesting story but does nothing to prove or disprove the age of the scrolls.

I have already visited the problems of radiocarbon dating with the Dead Sea Scrolls (Atwill and Eisenman) be as they may, the results did settle two things, they weren't forged in the 1800's and some of them were most likely composed during the 1st century CE.

For the Codex Sinaiticus not to under go such testing is inexcusable, (barring lack of funding).

As far as the my error regarding +/- 1,5000, well yes that was a typo, I meant 1,500 years plus or minus. Thanks for the correction.
The point being, modern Radiocarbon dating can easily narrow the date down to within a couple of hundred years.

With all that being said, I know consider the manuscript highly suspect until proven otherwise.
This is getting very interesting.


John T

Maestroh wrote: ↑Tue Jul 24, 2018 6:02 pm
So let's look at what the SART team (and Steven Avery) has REFUSED to answer now for two years. In April 2016, I posted this list of questions on CARM. TO THIS DAY NOT ONE WORD of response has come from this so-called researcher. And these are relevant questions. The fact none of these people has any expertise in any related area ties directly to the "this is why nobody takes you folks seriously." Note the bold below.

1) Where did David Daniels train in paleography?

2) How does the manuscript coming online in 2009 change Avery's 2011 strongly worded opinion about how if one is just familiar with the details, it's OBVIOUS that it is NOT a 19th century document?

3) How many of these scholars have ever come down on the side of saying Simonides told the truth and Sinaiticus dates to the 19th century?

4) Does ANY paleographer in the world date Sinaiticus to the 19th century?

5) Who made the accusation that the manuscript was darkened?

6) Where did Steven Avery study 'forensic history'?

7) How much study of paleography have you (note: Steven Avery) ever done?

8) Does your source Brent Nongbri have ANY papyri that he thinks are dated wrongly by 1500 years?

9) How many Greek MSS has Steven Avery actually handled?

10) How are they to be handled, as in 'what precautions are necessary?'

11) How many Greek MSS has Steven Avery read?

12) How many Greek manuscripts has Steven Avery photographed?

13) How is the lighting to be set?

14) How long did it take you to take the photographs?

15) Can you, Steven Avery, READ Sinaiticus?

16) Do you have ANY EXPERIENCE with photographing manuscripts?

17) Do any of the OTHER two members of the SART team have any REAL experience in linguistics?

18) What are the published works of those in question 17?

19) Do the people at the CSP who host the manuscript online SAY it is an 1800s production?

20) What date then do they give it?

21) How does Steven Avery actually KNOW the manuscript at CSP is really Sinaiticus?

22) How much parchment has Steven Avery actually studied?

23) How many experiments have you ever done on parchment?

24) What date does Brent Nongbri give Sinaiticus?

Secret Alias wrote: ↑Mon Jul 23, 2018 6:44 am Then he certainly belongs at this forum. It should be renamed "The Center for Imaginative Adoption of Historical Facts and Anomalies to Suit Pre-Existent Assumptions Forum"

John T wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 4:46 am As a judge I would find it very troubling if a woman suing for child support refuses to have a DNA test on her child.

Kapyong wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:48 am You can buy your own facsimile for US $700 :
https://www.linguistsoftware.com/codexsin.htm

Kapyong wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 9:48 am Gday John T and all

John T wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 4:46 am As a judge I would find it very troubling if a woman suing for child support refuses to have a DNA test on her child.

You keep mentioning "DNA testing" for Sinaiticus.

How do you think DNA testing applies to dating of ancient MSS ?

Kapyong

PS :
You can buy your own facsimile for US $700 :
https://www.linguistsoftware.com/codexsin.htm

John T wrote: ↑Wed Jul 25, 2018 3:28 am For the Codex Sinaiticus not to under go such testing is inexcusable, (barring lack of funding).