Steven Avery and Pinto’s Phantom Manuscripts

The article below that I wrote years ago sheds relevant light upon Steven Avery’s textual receptus claim, and Chris Pinto’s conspiratorial claim and his insistence that the TR tradition goes back to the early church period. http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php/2007/04/19/dean-burgon-and-his-phantom-manuscripts/ See also Ken Willy’s insightful comments on Pinto’s damage control after losing the debate: http://bibleversiondiscussionboard.yuku.com/topic/5650/Pinto-Post-Debate-Damage-Control#.UssEMPbm-XF      

More Commentary on Pinto’s Conspiracy Theory

Fred Butler has further comments on Chris Pinto’s failed performance in the debate: http://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2013/12/29/h-p-blavatsky-for-the-defense/ http://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2013/12/16/why-the-whitepinto-debate-matters/ (Incidentally, I find it telling that Chris Pinto and Brannon Howse refuse to post the debate audio on their respective websites for their people to listen to. If they think Pinto “won” the debate, why not post it? I think we all know the answer …

Chris Pinto vs. James White – Debate Summarized

The Chris Pinto vs. James White debate on whether Codex Sinaiticus is a modern forgery can be boiled down to a few considerations. 1) Constantine Simonides claimed that he wrote the document based on collating pre-existing manuscripts, and that his uncle corrected the document. Both sides agree that he so claimed. Dr. White demonstrated that these claims are essentially impossible, …