Was Codex Sinaiticus Written In 1840!

Enough here to cast serious doubt on the antiquity and authenticity of Codex Siniaticus

Dr Moorman has shown that Sinaiticus was written In 1840. Newspaper evidences from 1860' are given.

It was like having the author sitting next to me and shouting at me non-stop from beginning to end. The first exclamation mark is on the front cover – where the text actually requires a question mark. From the Preface on one is confronted with bold text, capital letters, italics, underlinings and exclamation marks, often combined with each other and sometimes in larger font sizes. So this book is an assault on the reader from beginning to end. It is also a self-published book, so we should not be surprised by the many typing, spelling and formatting errors.Any writer whose argument is supported by facts does not need to shout or to try to intimidate the reader, but throughout the whole of this book Moorman seeks to intimidate those who don’t support his views, so I found finishing the book difficult, but I persevered, as I believe that one is not justified in reviewing a book if one has not read the whole of it.Moorman starts with his conclusion and then picks and chooses information and statements that he claims support his position, ignoring facts that demonstrate the falseness of his argument and denigrating those with whom he disagrees.He dedicates this book to “A fervent defender of the King James Bible and its underlying Text” and adds, “May God continue to bless his gifted ministry”. We thus see that Moorman’s position is that the King James Bible is the “true” Bible and that anything else is a “corruption” (p. 125, etc). His use of the title “King James Bible” betrays that he is an American, as in the UK this translation is normally referred to as the “Authorised Version” and it is a strange fact that the United States is the place where the advocates of the “King James Version Only” are most active and aggressive in their attacks on those who do not accept their claims.Moorman recommends other conspiracy theorists who are active on-line (see p. 17) and repeatedly quotes from them. This is the ultimate demonstration of a circular argument, especially as he supresses or misrepresents all evidence that undermines his claims.However, he is only likely to convince people who demonstrate two characteristics:A fanatical devotion to the King James Version of the Bible;A total lack of awareness of the facts concerning Codex Sinaiticus and other ancient manuscripts of the Bible.Moorman gives (p. 135) some autobiographical information that he clearly considers key. Thus we learn that he “studied for a while at the Indianapolis campus of Purdue University, attended briefly Indiana Bible College, and graduated from Tennessee Temple Bible School”. He has also published a series of books that he describes as “defending the King James Bible and the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words that underlie it”.He bases his claims on two assumptions:1) That everything written by Greek convicted fraudster and con-man Constantine Simonides is true;2) That everything written by the highly-respected German academic Constantine Tischendorf is false and a deception. Yet Tischendorf received his Ph.D. from a leading German university, throughout the decades of his professional activity he was the leading expert on the text of the Greek Bible and in recognition of this he was awarded further degrees and honours by leading universities throughout Europe, including both Oxford and Cambridge (Porter, p. 76).In the 1850s Simonides was arrested in Germany for fraudulently selling fake Greek documents to German universities. He was found guilty and imprisoned. One of the leading academics whose expert knowledge unmasked his forgeries was Constantine Tischendorf. (These facts are not mentioned by Mr Moorman.)On his release from prison in Germany, Simonides travelled to the U.K., where he continued offering Greek manuscripts for sale and made remarkable claims about these articles. When, in 1862, Tischendorf published the text of Codex Sinaiticus, Simonides saw a chance to get revenge. He claimed that Sinaiticus was not ancient, because he himself had written it in 1840. For a while this caused a frenzy in sections of the English press, until Simonides was again revealed to be lying. So the only person who denied the authenticity of Codex Sinaiticus was the person who had a score to settle with Tischendorf.Whenever obvious untruths were uncovered in Simonides’ story, he would either claim that he had been mistranslated or create new details which he said explained why his previous statements had been misunderstood.A large part of Moorman’s book consists of lengthy quotations from letters by Simonides and from translations into English of letters in Greek purportedly from a famous leading Greek Orthodox monk in Alexandria that Simonides declared supported his claims – although contemporaries who knew Simonides and saw the letters concluded that these letters were in fact written in Simonides’ own handwriting! The British Consul in Alexandria searched for this monk and reached the conclusion that no such person existed. Naturally, Moorman does not mention this. To this are added letters by an Englishman concerned that the rejection by British academics of Simonides’ claims was “un-English”, and so he sought to defend him, eventually accepting everything that Simonides claimed.Many of these quotations are repeated at length twice or three times in the book, with the frequent addition by Moorman of bold lettering, underlining, capital letters and exclamation marks.Moorman concludes (“FACT TWO”) that “The Vatican was the source of the corruption in Sinaiticus”, (“FACT THREE”) that “someone slipped the young Simonides a rogue manuscript that would bring it in line with Vaticanus”, although he adds, “We do not know [in bold] the identity of the Vatican “plant” or who was on the Vatican’s payroll.” (p. 125)He also states (“FACT FIVE”) that “Tischendorf, funded by a Catholic king” was “subtlety (sic) “steered” by Rome” (p. 126) and that he “was being courted directed (sic) by Rome.” (p. 99). He says that this was all part of “A VATICAN PLOT” (p. 95) and that “the Vatican conspired to remove Mark 16:9-20 from the Bible!” (p. 97, exclamation mark in original.)Those who wish to obtain the full facts on this matter would be encouraged to read “Codex Sinaiticus and the Simonides Affair” by J. K. Elliott. Moorman copies Simonides’ letters from this book but on his first mention of Elliott he dismisses Elliott’s critical evaluation of Simonides as “absurd” (p. 14) and thereafter gives no indication of Elliott’s conclusions, nor any information that does not support his (Moorman’s) claims.“Constantine Tischendorf”, by Stanley E Porter, also gives information on Tischendorf’s life and work and includes reprints of two works by Tischendorf.For more information on the text and translations of the Bible, I would also recommend “The King James Only Controversy” by James R White.It is to be regretted that Moorman’s passion for the King James text of the Bible has caused him to produce this deeply misleading and unpleasant book, based on outlandish claims and sources that have been demonstrated to be untrustworthy.A brief word about my qualifications for reviewing this book: I have a 1st Class Honours degree in languages and theology and a Ph.D. in Linguistics. I have taught New Testament Greek to adults in Spain and am the author of the Spanish version of the leading textbook on Koiné Greek, Jeremy Duff’s “”The Essentials of New Testament Greek” (Spanish title “Curso de Griego Bíblico”, published in 2019 by Editorial CLIE). I have a particular acquaintance with Greek manuscripts of the Bible and have lectured on Codex Sinaiticus in Spain and England.

Very cool book! got it today.

Very thought provoking.

Interesting information