when was the bullshit written.
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/...ng-of-p75/
The jesus freaks love to try to make this shit as early as possible and the paleographers are consistently telling them to go screw themselves.
By the way, P. 75 is a fairly lengthy document which contains much of "luke" and "john." The problem is that there are parts missing like luke's soliloquy on Gethsemane - obviously that was a later addition - and john's "woman taken in adultery" which all but the dumbest of fundies already know is a much later fabrication.
So much for "inerrancy."
https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/...ng-of-p75/
Quote:In the latest issue of Journal of Biblical Literature, Brent Nongbri has a lengthy article directly challenging the now-commonly accepted date of NT papyrus P75 (P.Bodmer XIV-XV): “Reconsidering the Place of Papyrus Bodmer XIV-XV (P75) in the Textual Criticism of the New Testament,” JBL 135.2 (2016): 405-37.
Since its publication in the early 1960s, P75 has often been taken as likely dated approximately 175-225 CE, with some scholars preferring a date somewhat later into the 3rd century. But Nongbri proposes that a 4th-century date is just as plausible, perhaps even more so.
The jesus freaks love to try to make this shit as early as possible and the paleographers are consistently telling them to go screw themselves.
By the way, P. 75 is a fairly lengthy document which contains much of "luke" and "john." The problem is that there are parts missing like luke's soliloquy on Gethsemane - obviously that was a later addition - and john's "woman taken in adultery" which all but the dumbest of fundies already know is a much later fabrication.
So much for "inerrancy."
