Papyrus 75... or,

[Minimalist]

when was the bullshit written.

https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/...ng-of-p75/

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."

[Wyrd of Gawd]

when was the bullshit written.

https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2016/...ng-of-p75/

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."

It looks like it's written in Modern Greek to me, which wasn't in existence in 225 CE.  Put it in the BS pile.

[Minimalist]

I have no idea what you are looking at.  There is no image of the text on that link that I can see.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

I have no idea what you are looking at.  There is no image of the text on that link that I can see.

I used this:  https://www.google.com/search?q=papyrus+...b-GbrhM%3A

[ignoramus]

It's all greek to me!

[Minimalist]

P75 is described as being in the Alexandrian Text Type. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexandrian_text-type

One of the oldest and later replaced by the Byzantine Text Type...not for the least of reasons being that Egypt was overrun by Arabs.