Kevin McGrane quietly changed his position on the manuscript colours and changed the Cooper paper

Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator

notes on the Kevin McGrane paper - review of Bill Cooper

comments from James Keith Elliott and the British Library in the introduction British Library Introduction p. 3 'aware of the ongoing doubts and concerns about the dating of this extraordinary manuscript.'3 3 private correspondence
www.purebibleforum.com

A Review of
The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus by Dr W. R. Cooper
Against Detailed Background of the Discovery of the Codex
Version 9, November 16, 2018
Kevin McGrane
https://www.academia.edu/37556820/A...iled_background_of_the_discovery_of_the_Codex

Kevin made major changes to the William Cooper paper when he decided to change his position on the comparative colour of the Leipzig and London pages, when he was writing the David Daniels paper. (Which is an interesting study and is actually another problem for Kevin, especially because of the Gavin Moorhead quotation on the notable whiteness of the Leipzig folios.) And I had saved some of the important and salient quotes that he later deleted from the Cooper paper!
 
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
Add my colour quotes here

Check the date of my publication

Also check my conversations

Who is Trevor R. Allin

Cooper started in 2018

==========================

PBF

notes on the Kevin McGrane paper - review of Bill Cooper
Oct 10, 2018
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...evin-mcgrane-paper-review-of-bill-cooper.859/

The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus by William Cooper
Sept 13, 2020
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...x-sinaiticus-by-william-cooper.261/#post-6010

==========================

archive.org for livingwater Oct 22, 2021
https://web.archive.org/web/20211022070008/https://livingwater-spain.com/Cooper_Review.pdf

archive.org for protestanttruth
May 11, 2022
https://web.archive.org/web/2022051...loads/2018/11/Forging-of-Codex-Sinaiticus.pdf

archive.org for academia.edu - 2022 12-24
https://web.archive.org/web/2022122...iled_background_of_the_discovery_of_the_Codex

2026
www.academia.edu

A Review of 'The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus' by Dr W.R. Cooper against detailed background of the discovery of the Codex

A critical review of Dr W.R. Cooper’s thesis in his book ‘The Forging of Codex Sinaiticus‘. The review demonstrates that Dr Cooper’s thesis that Codex Sinaiticus was produced in the nineteenth century is a classic conspiracy theory, and without
www.academia.edu
==========================


1771308221284.png


researchgate - not important
 
Last edited:
Steven Avery

Steven Avery

Administrator
https://www.purebibleforum.com/inde...olour-material-evidences-david-w-daniels.881/

post 5
Introduction p. 3 ....
elicits questions to which convincing answers—especially of any treatment applied to the Leipzig leaves—would be welcome. ...

all the evidence leans towards the Leipzig leaves looking slightly lighter because they have been cleaned and perhaps artificially brightened by conservators... In a misguided way, some such treatment of the Leipzig leaves might have sought to improve contrast: darkening the iron-gall ink, and lightening the substrate. p. 111

The hypothesis that the Leipzig leaves have had an artificial brightening p. 113

Which Photographic facsimile ?
Introduction p. 3 ....

Scholars have been unable easily to compare the state of the various parts of the Codex Sinaiticus manuscript held in Leipzig, London, St Petersburg, and Sinai, all the more so since photographic facsimiles adjusted the tone to give a uniform page coloration, minimizing their differences and obviating colour comparison. A photographic facsimile has very recently been completed in colour by the Codex Sinaiticus Project, so that all the parts can be seen, and compared, but unfortunately the colours are not uniformly represented on their website so the effect is very misleading, and direct visual colour comparisons from the website are invalid. Some differences in physical condition between the leaves recovered in 1844,1859, and 1975, and the fragments recovered at various times, can nevertheless be seen, and this elicits questions to which convincing answers—especially of any treatment applied to the Leipzig leaves—would be welcome.
Click to expand...

McGrane to Cooper

https://protestanttruth.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Forging-of-Codex-Sinaiticus.pdf


If Donaldson is correct on these points, then as the Palatine Latin translation is fifth Century and the Greek may be post-fifth Century then a sixth Century production of Codex Sinaiticus is consistent with these findings. This aligns with Uspensky's mature view that the Codex is a sixth Century copy of a fourth Century exemplar of the New Testament. Added to this, then, were Contemporary (sixth Century) recensions of Hermas and Barnabas with Latin influences from the fifth Century. None of this points to a nineteenth Century production.

... However, the alternative of a fourth Century production of Codex Sinaiticus does not follow from rejection of Dr Cooper's thesis. Important scholars have considered that it is a production of the fifth or sixth Century of a fourth Century exemplar. But whether it is a sixth Century copy of a fourth Century edition or an edition made in the fourth Century, there is an important fourth Century component, in a time when the Church was fighting for its life during the Arian controversies, from which there is ample testimony of the corruption of the Scriptures by the Arians.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top