Bible study is an important part of spiritual life. After chastity and meditation, it is good to bring that inspiration as close as we can to the scriptures - the best we can find, the closest possible to what Yeshuah, Peter and the apostles tried to teach us. No matter how far into clown world we find ourselves, the Bible remains the world's most popular and important book. And no matter how far the canaanites have gone to corrupt these scriptures, the relatively good KJV, they hate, remains the most trusted. This article will concern the great naked canaanite emperor in the Bible room, the codex on which all their textual corruptions are based, Codex Sinaiticus. What if it was just another jewniversity dogma? If the "oldest and best" manuscript being used for modern bibles were held up to professional standards, would it even be considered genuine, much less textually useful?
Academia, as we all now know well, is entirely corrupted with canaanite ideologies, and this situation gives birth to the idea that the real world is in fact outside that system. Well in the real world of authentication, there are actual objects for sale, and the buyers actually care if they are genuine or not; a very good example of where they can be found is at the auction house. There, in this suddenly serious, non-clownworld space, there are four determinations to make in verifying an article: 1) provenance 2) chain of custody 3) chemical composition 4) is it copied? if so, from what? (source documents).
The canaanite establishment, like with any of its other weird dogmas like baal earth, dinos, ETs, Greek-letter king viruses, and evilution, has never bothered to verify its core source document of the desired spiritual White genocide. Surprise, surprise. Lamestream sources confirm: Sinaiticus has no provenance:
Little is known of the manuscript's early history. 
As for number two, the chain of custody story starts in the 1840's, i.e., there is no proof of this thing existing before this time. Chemical testing, number three, was once ordered for Sinaiticus, but then cancelled (in April, 2015). So "super bible" has never been tested. Further there is textual analysis: Sinaiticus contains a chaotic mixture of styles. Ironically (as everything so happens in clownworld), the alleged discoverer himself, Tischendorf, published a book on the "latinized Greek", i.e., medieval language, in his super-bible, a particularly glaring "case closed" issue, as it is obviously impossible for any codex dated to around 350 AD. As if that weren't enough, it has 23,000 errors, the most of any alleged biblical codex in existence. This would give any sane observer a strong doubt that the text's writer was even trying to make any serious Bible intended for church use and study. (It turns out, as we shall see, that it was made as a faux antique collector's item only):
Tischendorf originally documented some 14,800 corrections in the manuscript. But in 2009 in the BBC FOUR documentary on [the codex], they state that the manuscript has about 23,000 corrections, and they go on to say that since because of the amount of correction that it "can't be the immutable word of God". 
Finally, the pages have been rearranged, intentionally stained, and butchered in a final attempt to artificially age it, eliminate any clear identifying marks, and further advance a doctrinal agenda.
Now that we're sure it's fake we can ask: Why, when and how? 
In the history of Bible versions, there is a family of scam bibles from the gnostics who deny that Jesus is God and eliminate any scripture that suggests the fact. While the apostles were busy copying and sending out authentic texts from Antioch, Syria, the canaanites in Alexandria Egypt were churning out corrupted texts, which thankfully to any discerning observer, differ greatly among themselves. The two main texts of the three Alexandrian (Egyptian) have over 4,000 differences between them. According to their chaos-worshipping canaanite fathers, the order and selection of books therein is strange, heretical and would offend even the average Christian. In a continuation of this Egyptian cabalist lodge and fake news outlet in the age of Sinaiticus, we have the Westcott-Hort axis of occult one-world religionists combining and mixing these texts. As these destroyers lack imagination, their official, resulting text is missing over 6,000 scriptures, including key parts like Jesus asking Yahweh, "Why have you foresaken me?", among many others. Here's another synopsis of this historical turn of blibical events:
With the discovery of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic Library in the 1940's, it became clear that the early unorthodox sect known as the "Gnostics" did not believe in the deity of Jesus Christ. Nor did they really believe in His humanity either. They believed He was a "guiding spirit" sent to earth by the "True God" (not the YHWH of the Old Testament, incidently, whom they considered to be a blind, insane angel who created the material world against Sophia's or "Wisdom" i.e. the True God's will). Jesus' mission according to the Gnostics, was to impart special knowledge or "Gnosis" to spirits trapped in this material world seeking release. Thus, Jesus never died on the cross, was never resurrected, was not God, nor was He human. Mysteriously, but rather conveniently, all the altered or missing texts in the Alexandrian Codices always happen to involve one or a combination of these subjects. Consider: where was the center of operations for this unorthodox sect? Alexandria, Egypt.
Now, the pieces fall into place. All these "missing" verses were in the original texts written by the apostles. The older manuscripts & the many quotes from the 1st and 2nd century church fathers more than confirm that as fact. However, since these verses did not agree with the theology being taught by the Gnostics, when they made their own Coptic copies of the Greek originals, they conveniently altered or deleted them to suit their own ideas of what God should say. Westcott & Hort, along with many in Victorian Era England such as Arthur Conan Doyle, Charles Darwin (a divinity school graduate) & HG Wells, were caught up in the occult, spiritism & secular humanist questioning of the validity of orthodox Christianity typical of the time. These corrupted Coptic texts easily appealed to Westcott & Hort's own sensibilities (as testified to by their surviving correspondence with each other). Nevertheless, they did indeed make an excellent Greek translation of what knowingly or unknowingly was a horrendous, blasphemous, heavily edited & thus corrupted Coptic translation of a Greek original.
In other words, in the 19th century, the Bible was still largely understood to be the story of how Yahweh became man (incarnated as Jesus). Yet the canaanite Alexandrian texts, with all their contradictions among themselves, thousands of omissions, and haphazard combination of translation styles, seem to have a gnostic/masonic impetus: to say that man can become God.
Up to this point, even the Catholic Bible was using the Textus Receptus as its base text (it was the Vatican that hired Eusebius), and 1650 years had reportedly passed before the sudden and miraculous "new discovery" of Sinaiticus ("Aleph", because they consider it the first and best). Even if their fantastic claims about it were true, it wouldn't even be the oldest.
When someone says that B and Aleph [Sinaiticus] are the oldest available manuscripts, they are lying. There are many Syriac and Latin translations from as far back as the SECOND CENTURY that agree with the King James readings. For instance, the Pashitta (145 A.D.), and the Old Syriac (400 A.D.) both contain strong support for the King James readings. There are about fifty extant copies of the Old Latin from about 157 A.D., which is over two hundred years before Jerome was conveniently chosen by Rome to "revise" it. Then Ulfilas produced a Gothic version for Europe in A.D. 330. The Armenian Bible, which agrees with the King James, has over 1,200 extant copies and was translated by Mesrob around the year 400. Sinaiticus and Vaticanus are clearly NOT the oldest and best manuscripts. 
For example, The Oxford Papyri - This fragment known as the Oxford Papyri or P-64, may be the oldest NT text ever found. For centuries scholars have believed that the NT Gospels were not written by the Apostles in the 1st c. but were passed on by word of mouth from generation to generation for 100 years to be finally penned by scribes some time in the 2nd c.AD. This papyrus text dated to cAD50, a mere 20 years after the crucifixion, seems to provide proof that at least the Gospel of Matthew was an eyewitness account, written by a disciple who lived during the days when Christ Himself was on earth. 
We all know there were Tischendorf, the trophy goy, and Constantine Simonides, who penned it. But the 45-year plot's mastermind was Simonides' maternal great uncle who went by three different names: Vassileos, Vissarion and Benedict. He clearly wanted Barnabas and the Shepherd of Hermas included in his new bible. He apprently wanted it to replace the current orthodox Bible, or any real Bible for that matter.
It's an interesting cohencidence that Benedict went to retire in Athos in 1821 just as the people of his hometown were being massacred by the Ottomans for a rebellion he helped to foment. He later wrote a personal letter to royalty asking that his home island of Symi be included in the newly-formed Greece. His bio looks hyped and hardly confirmable - that he was a teacher and translator of twelve languages. He taught at the Acadamy of Ayvalik/Cidoniae for 35 years, which was well-known as a hotbed of cabala. These connections, actions and accolades mirror closely the story of an illuminati/mason, if not a full-blooded canaanite. He hired his nephew to do the calligraphy because 1) he was practically blind from all the textual work, especially by candlelight, over all those years, 2) they were blood relatives, 3) his nephew was an expert calligrapher, and 4) this hid his name and face from the public.
The hoax was pushed over onto the public by Tischendorf's main supporter, Henry Bradshaw, who admittedly offered zero proof for his support:
I was not to be convinced against the evidence of my senses. - Journal of Sacred Literature, Vol. 3, p. 480
Simonides' main supporter, on the other hand, was a monk at Athos, Kallinikos Hieromonachos, who literally saw him writing it, and who corroborated many details of the true story. His own testinony has, through modern methods, been thoroughly verified, but was falsely alleged to be a forger, principly by Scrivener. Simonides' was naive, honest, and caught in the middle of all these macchinations.
Whoever put Tischendorf up as the front man of this scam knew very well what he was doing. There is very little background information available on him. One can only guess from his actual behavior, this masonic photo, and his oddly good social connections that come out of nowhere that he was some sort of kikesucker. One would assume, given that he was from Saxony and was a student at the University of Leipzig, that he was Protestant, or pro-Reformation. Although he was reportedly initially sponsored by Frederik Augustus, King of Saxony, he made his monumental discovery at St. Catherine's Monastery, i.e. the Eastern Orthodox Church. From that point, he got hit up with a massive gofundme from the Russian Orthodox Tsar Alexander II at St. Petersburg, who received (at least a portion of) the published Codex and rewarded the monastery with gifts. As well, the universities of Cambridge and Oxford awarded Tischendorf honorary doctoral degrees.
Simonides' great uncle Benedict was a mason who hired Simonides under the pretext of creating an antique-looking bible as a gift to the czar of Russia, perhaps trying to convince him to change the TR orthodox Bible to a cabalistic one. Nationalist movements are often supported by globalist canaanites (like Catalonia and Soros recently). Simonides seemed to thoroughly believe in his uncle's empire-splitting ideology and fought as a "Greek patriot", and his insistence that he penned Sinaiticus from Benedict's 45-year collection was also of no advantage to him (also considering it was of particularly crappy quality, filled with thousands of errors (the most errors I've ever heard of), covered in layer after layer of corrections, dumped in a trash bin by monks etc). He emerges in the story as a kind of honest hero. Very ironically, as stated above, Tischendorf had full opportunity to vindicate himself of Simonides' accusations (and the latter was better-credentialled than he), but the former, believing firmly and correctly in the power of his masonic connections, refused. Tischendorf obviously could have also opted to choose an objective third party and expert to judge its authenticity, but that, like any other scientific test, was never done.
These...were created at one of the highest learning institutions in the world’s largest imperial world-power at that time – Great Britain. Members of these clubs and the occult associations that they went on to found, such as The Society for Psychical Research started the modern New Age movement, became and were prominent members of British Royalty and politics, as well as occupied the highest positions in the Anglican Church including that which is equivalent to that of the Pope in the RCC, the Archbishop of Canterbury. To say that Westcott and Hort were well-connected is an understatement.
It's interesting to note that Westcott and Hort were also Jesuits, the canaanite "counter revolution" group who loved "Jews" and universalism (globalism/zionism, that any "race" can be Christian). Also very interesting, is that they were both protestant and Catholic (just as Tischendorf was a Lutheran collaborating with Pope Gregory the 16th), which proves again that protestant/Catholic, left/right dichotomies are a false narrative. 
Hort, like any occultist of his time, hated the real Bible, the Textus Receptus:
...that vile Textus Receptus... "The Life and Letters of Fenton John Anthony Hort," Vol. 1, p. 211
Fenton Hort chaired a committee to create a new Greek text based on Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.
Hort's partner was an Anglican bishop named B.F. Wescott. Tragellus and Scrivener were also committee members. The committee also invited (((John Henry Newman))), a Catholic priest. Philip Schaff led a committee to form the American Standard Version in 1901 based on the same Greek texts created by Wescott and Hort. He created a new theology and the Parliament of World Religions (Chicago, 1893). Present were key leaders in hinduism, buddhism, islam etc. and even theosophy with Annie Besant, co-author of the magazine, "Lucifer". The Lord's Prayer was re-titled "The Universal Prayer", and they asked, "Have we not all one Father?" Schaff said, "...This unity has been strikingly illustrated in the Anglo American Revision of the Authorized Version of the Scriptures..." "The Dawn of Religious Pluralism," Richard Seager, p. 95
Sinaiticus project (British) established a website and foundation around the text, yet omits Tischendorf's own written story of having found it in a trash bin, among other important historic information about its emergence. They claim St. Catherine's monks brought the text to Tischendorf's attention in 1844. They claimed they would tell the full story of the codex/texts, but in the end they make no mention of the four-year controversy with Constantine Simonides.
It's pleasing to note that this whole conspiracy against the Bible has only been around 40% successful. KJV still exceeds 60% of global Bible sales, and it's a biased translation, but it maintains the true texts as its basis.
"Thy word is true from the beginning, and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever." Psalm 119:160. ",,,the Scriptures cannot be broken..." John 10:35 "Heaven and Earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away." Matthew 24:35 "For all flesh is grass, and all the glory of man is as the flower of the grass...the grass withereth, and the flower of thereof falleth away...but the word of the Lord endureth for ever." 1 Peter 1:24-25
The principle Aleph/Sinaiticus gatekeeper in current year is a canaanite, Tommy Wasserman. One can hardly read what he writes, either darkened by the shadow cast by his hook-shaped, money-sniffing nose or washed out by the glare from his DHT-ravaged, bald head. If you want to publish anything against Slimy-act-icus, you'll have to get through him.
In our trying times, Christian Identity is fast-gaining popular support, and Christogenea is doubtess in the center of that. Despite its truths - Israelite identity, Uncle Adolf's goodness, and its astute biblical exegesis - it's rife with contradictions and weaknesses, persisting even as we are clearly nearing the end of the world.
Christogenea, with its founding in America, its acceptance of sola scriptura, rejection of the Trinity (in favor of monarchial modalism), rejection of even the traditional Catholic church among other stances, has apparent protestant leanings. In spite of this, it is heavily invested in gnostic texts originating in the Vatican (Roman Catholic), which were penned by Greek orthodox in Greece and Egypt.
The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth. - 1 Tim. 2:15
We thank God constantly for this, that when you receive the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but what it truly is - the word of God that works in you believers. - 1 Thess. 2:13
Hold fast to the traditions that you were taught, either by word of mouth or by a letter of ours. - 2 Thess. 2:15
Sola scriptura, though sounding reasonable on the surface, falls apart in just two minutes of research and consideration. People weren't even literate, books were not easily reproduced nor disseminated, the new testament didn't exist yet, and the cannon was not decided during the apostolic period (before 325 AD). Even the Bible itself rejects this doctrine in many ways. 
Yeshua stated, "Anyone who does not heed the Church shall be considered as the heathen and the publican" Matt 16, 18. The Church's infallible authority was handed to Peter, and that Church also decided what are to be considered sacred scriptures (first Church, then scriptures). It is because of infallible apostolic tradition that we know who wrote the gospels and other books of the Bible in the first place, facts you will not all find within the scriptures themselves. The Muratorian Cannon, circa AD 150, omits Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and includes the Apocalypse of Peter. So before 325 there was no established cannon, 4/5 people couldn't read anyway, and it was difficult to reproduce and disseminate books. It is therefore absurd to insist that every Christian become a Bible nerd or go to hell.
SS is yet another doctrine which makes every common pastor a pope and dictator. If the Bible is the only word of God, but the Bible is written in two foreign languages in a distant era with poetic meter, idioms, alliteration, cultural historical and archeological context, then it needs interpreting by experts and is, in practice, absolutely not accessible to the common man as is. Sola scriptura, therefore, makes the interpreter and expert a mini-pope with his own denomination and reign, and the bible he references a direct source of programming, instead of moral thinking. Thus, it is readily admitted that canaanites control publishing, media and academia, but what is rarely discussed is how sola scriptura puts those canaanites directly in control of the minds of Christians.
The site offers much in the way of NDASP studies, including the elimination of protestant/Catholic duality in Positive Christianity. In historical context, this was Hitler unifying the German People under Christ, and forbidding brother wars between the canaanite-created dichotomies of left vs. right, Catholic vs. protestant†. Yet the site and its orthodox adherents preach daily against Catholics, orthodox, the use of icons, water baptism, baby baptism, the trinity and other standard traditional fare. They seem to prefer infighting instead of attacking the canaanite, something Hitler was very strictly focused on.
Further, Hitler Himself was a Catholic, and remained so (without Vatican rebuttal) His whole life. His use of the swastika that they love so much at the site, comes from the door frame of the Catholic monastery where He went to school. Apparently, also, the earliest Christians were using the ankh and the swastika as their preferred symbols, yet these are the people that Christogenea rejects as any kind of guide on interpretation of the scripture.
Christogenea disseminates a lot of interesting and highly relevant historical information and evidence concerning our People, its Tribes and their biblical names and connections. Yet, in its support of the septuagint, it denies our traditional genealogy, the genealogy of Jesus, as occurring over a period of roughly six and four thousand years respectively. This puts them in an awkward position in regards to armageddon and flat earth, as well as various biblical discourses, parallels and references. With more than two millenia of added human history (from nothing), Finck's CI straddles on the fence between biblical cosmology and modern, masonic evilutionary science, ultimately endorsing neither explicitly. Further, with these added years, the entire beresheet, one-day millenia theology extant in the Bible and early Christianity are systematically ignored. Thus, all that brilliant and helpful biblical analysis disappears when regarding a more precise description of the creation and a date for its end.
Cosmology is the very first and most important part of the Bible - the creation story which tells us where we came from, where we are, where we are going, and thus the meaning of our lives as a whole. In second place is genealogy, and beyond this, discussions concerning Yahweh's castisement of His People and the consequent end of the world make up a fair part of biblical discussion. Concerning the latter, the law book Deuteronomy is concerned with armageddon. Isaiah, Ezekiel, Obediah, and Daniel (among others) are all quite concerned about it, too. Even Jonah's famously curt five-word sermon concerns it. And finally, it forms the entire last book of the Bible, which is arguably just as important as the its first book, Genesis. Christogenea's "Christreich" deals with this theme, but does not arrive at any precision.
One therefore observes that Christogenea is forced into a corner and generally left out of relevant end-times discussions through their absurd claim that the LXX exists, and that it pre-dates the Masoretic Text. The moderators there reject precise dating for armageddon, and wholesale accept the masonic/gnostic LXX and Sinaiticus myths.
William Finck, in my opinion, attempts to usurp the Apostles, apostolic traditions and ante-nicean fathers as a guide to biblical interpretation. He certainly deserves to be considered a guide, and a very good guide, but his use of the alexandrian texts is an over-reaching of his authority. Further, as he is an expert in Greek, but not Hebrew, the Alexandrian texts (including Sinaiticus and the LXX fabricated from it) assert a false authority over the OT. So although his textual analysis is brilliant and helpful, it's lacking that bit of credibility. This is the apparent origin of the "Pope Finck" title being thrown around by his detractors.
That said, this splintering of Church authority into thousands of mini-popes with their own mini, infighting fiefdoms is a natural and intended consequence of the reformation.
† Both protestant and Catholic, after canaanites again took root in Europe, were controlled by the cabal and driven into endless, senseless and tragic brother wars (article). Positive Christianity undoes this and re-establishes our main goal as Christians in preserving our fellow White man and fighting the devil (the canaanite)
Peter Arvo has a condensed, concisely, and autistically-referenced version of the article below (though not CI nor Catholic) (hyperlinked pdf or jpeg). His course affirming the real Bible is also very useful
Christian Pinto's "Tares among the Wheat", a documentary on the Sinaiticus fraud (but quickly degenerates into a protestant shill operation) [the review better stays on topic]
Steven Avery, David W. Daniels et. al.'s sinaiticus.net
"Sinaiticus Problematicus  
Brian Shepherd's talk A good Italian article from "Rifugiati di pella"
The LXX fraud (with a useful list of external links)
Will Kinney's concise refutation of LXX
Was there a BC septuagint?  Textus Receptus  
Peter Dimond's sola scriptura vs. illiteracy 
Nick Vanderlaan exposes the book of Esther  
Peter Dimond debates sola scriptura