Results 1 to 10 of 22

Thread: notes on the Kevin McGrane paper - review of Bill Cooper

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. Default notes on the Kevin McGrane paper - review of Bill Cooper

    This is an interesting paper. Much of it has to do with blunders in the book of William Cooper. Many good scholarship references. And at least a place or two where I reexamine my positions and understandings, with appreciation for Kevin's efforts. (Many weaknesses in the paper as well, I will try to be fair on both sides on this set of forum posts.)

    Available in a few spots:

    ... A great deal of research unearthed during this undertaking, but not directly relevant to Dr Cooper’s book and so not included here, is expected to appear in a subsequent monograph Codex Sinaiticus and the Three Constantines.
    We look forward to that monograph.

    My Facebook discussion on Pure Bible:

    Pure Bible group

    Sinaiticus Authenticity - Kevin McGrane vs. Bill Cooper
    Many of you know that I have cordially ripped two Sinaiticus non-authenticity books, one by Bill Cooper, one by David Sorenson, as being loaded with blunders and doozies. This is mostly on and also Facebook threads. I’ve warned friends to be careful about any usage of the books, since the weak spots are open for easy broadside attack....
    Before going into wide-ranging issues, the next three posts have a very specific focus, two on integrity, one on a commonly made claim about palaeographers.

    And here is an overview:


    #2-3 - integrity first
    #4 - appeal to the phantom independent palaeographers
    #5 - "treatment applied to the Leipzig pages"
    #6 - flippant dismissal conclusions by KM
    #7 - the imaginary Benedict
    #8 - effectively countering the (irrelevant) individualistic Bill Cooper errors
    #9 - even more Cooper and Sorenson errors not given by Kevin McGrane
    #10 - photographic facsimiles adjusted the tone to give a uniform page coloration (who, when, why?)
    #11 - is the ad hominem component relevant to the Sinaiticus authenticity question? "particularly repugnant"
    #12 - Tischendorf's 1844 theft of 43 leaves p. 35-39
    #13 - Tischendorf's 1859 visit to St Catherine's monastery - p. 41-45
    #14 - is the Jesuit conspiracy theory viable after you discount the Bill Cooper errors?
    #15 - Conclusions: why would a 600 AD Sinaiticus be linked to a "fourth century component"?
    #16 - interesting historical-textual tidbits - Burgon, Nolan and Erasmus
    #17 - the Jesuit conspiracy question - KM proposes that Simonides would have been murdered!
    #18 - The 1975 'New Finds' - p. 46
    #19 - materials analysis - Leipzig had planned tests
    #20 - comparative theories - The Inference to the Best Explanation - begging the question - circular reasoning
    #21 - comments from James Keith Elliott and the British Library
    #22 - Constantine Simonides - p. 47-70
    #23 -
    #24 -
    #25 -

    Please note that I am also going over the Bill Cooper book in detail as well.

    Emphasis is added to various quotes on this thread!
    Last edited by Steven Avery; 10-19-2018 at 06:19 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts