And, as the author of this blog has pointed out, Pinto is being disingenuous. Howse asks why everyone is so upset about questioning the authenticity of just one biblical manuscript among thousands and what difference does it make if it is proven to be fraudulent. To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Leave me a Comment Cancel reply Enter your comment here The Jesuits developed higher textual criticism for the sole purpose of attacking the Reformed doctrine of sola scriptura. There is no need to appeal to such skepticism. You are commenting using your Twitter account.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: You are commenting using your Facebook account. That just so happened to be around the time when Codex Sinaiticus was being published and Simonides just so happened to then claim to be its creator. Revision Revised online Burgon: I want to offer a bit of a response to an interview Chris Pinto gave to Brannon Howse on September 16th in which he attempted to answer the critics of his documentary, Tares Among the Wheat. Pinto is being completely dishonest here. I was listening, again, to the CD linked in that post, titled Codex Sinaiticus.
He claims they did not like the final conclusions of his documentary whatever that means and that any refusal by KJV apologists to promote his documentary is proof that he is allegedly outside the camp of KJV onlyism. There is no need to appeal to such skepticism.
Moreover the codex is written by a least three different scribes, and has a large number of corrections in various hands. Notify me of new comments via email. For every component of this saga, there are opposing opinions. Labels 2 Timothy 3: You are commenting using your WordPress.
The Fantasy of Audllam. I have to go back and correct my very first comment on here…. Reminders of a couple of contributors to this subject 1 year ago.
The NASB continues to adu,lam considered a particularly good translation so it is read regularly on my local Christian radio station, and John MacArthur, one of my favorite teachers, quotes from it in his sermons.
Tischendorf had taken a hand in denouncing the imposture, and Simonides took his revenge by declaring that, while the Uranius was perfectly genuine, he had written another MS.
Chris Pinto’s Disingenuous Response to His Critics | hipandthigh
Pinto has put a lot of stake into the character of Simonides, even calling him a renowned paleographer and manuscript expert. He will tell the truth about the Masons and the Rosicrucians to a certain point until he reaches their source, which is Kabbalistic Judaism.
Some call babglon hypocrisy. First off documentqry are not a King James Only proponent correct? The reason being is that people, Christian westerners to be exact, now had unfettered access to those treasures that they adu,lam did not when those areas were under the control of the Ottomans. Pinto provides quite a bit of historical evidence that Simonides was not known to be a forger and had several supporters, such as Charles Stuart or Stewartwho were quite vocal in their defense of him.
Chris Pinto’s Disingenuous Response to His Critics
But that is not really the issue. Chris Pinto’s latest documentary, Bridge to Babylonis now available [at Noise of Thunder radio or Adullam Films] and it promises to be a thorough expose’ of the briege different ways the English Revision is untrustworthy.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Some external sources on this subject Burgon: My copy of Bridge adulllam Babylon is on its way and I’m looking forward to it.
There is just so much in that CD set, that I have to listen, more than once, to take it all in.
You mean the internet streaming device? Matthew written fifteen years after the Ascension, with fragments of first-century manuscripts of the Epistle of St.
That just so happened to be around the time when Codex Sinaiticus was being published and Simonides just so happened to then claim to be its creator. If you docujentary your history regarding the 18 and 19th centuries, the British Empire became the dominant international superpower.
You mean the codex had non-canonical books with in its pages!?
The story was patently absurd; for in Simonides was only 15 years old, he could not have obtained large leaves of ancient vellum modern vellum is quite differenthe could not have copied it in six months, and no Moscow edition of the Bible with a similar text exists. His errors in misrepresenting the historical facts have been documented, and yet, both men dismiss it out of hand.
The Great Bible Hoax of Chris Pinto’s Bridge to Babylon focuses on the Revision of
Newer Post Older Post Home. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use. Pinto has come under extensive criticism over the last couple of months by a number of folks who take serious aduplam with the egregious assertions he makes in his Tares Among the Wheat documentary regarding the history of Codex Sinaiticus, the oldest and most complete NT codex we have.
What an amazing coincidence. All of that to say that Simonides was certainly not the renowned, scholarly paleographer that Pinto wants to make him out to be. Documentarj has aduklam in common with good. Their presence in the Middle East, coupled with the waning influence of the Ottoman Empire, allowed westerners access to many of the ancient places of the world.