Manuscript evidence

[katherinetrammell]

Yes, what actual, physical, first century proof is there of Jesus? This could include papyri, wall scribblings, pot shards, clay tablets, stelae, tapestry, stone monuments...all dated to at least 35-40 AD. Sorry, but copies and claims or copies or one's "feelings" cannot be used as proof....in science, or a court of law.

Katherine

[Peter Kirby]

Yes, Katherine, you're right. There is no proof of Jesus that would meet any known scientific or legal canons of satisfactory evidence. Our earliest scrap of physical material regarding Jesus is dated from 120 to 170 A.D., according to those who have looked at it paleographically, and it is just a few words from a theological text called the Gospel of John. This is why I maintain that there is, at least, reasonable doubt whether Jesus lived.

[spin]

On the subject of the dating of P52 (P.Ryl.457), Don Barker wrote a section of his article, "The Dating of New Testament Papyri" (New Testament Studies 57 (2011), pp. 571–582), on the fragment, concluding:

• it is difficult to place P.Ryl. 457 in a very narrow time period. When the general style and individual letter features are kept in close connection and keeping in mind how a scribe writing a documentary text may write a literary text differently, it would seem, from the above dated manuscripts, that a date of II or III could be assigned to P.Ryl. 457. This may be unsatisfactory for those who would like to locate P.Ryl. 457 in a narrower time frame but the palaeographical evidence will not allow it. (574)-575

[Peter Kirby]

Sounds about right, but we need to make this a new thread.

[hjalti]

It would be fun to make a chart with the claimed age of P52 on the X-axis and the date of the claim on the Y-axis. Then we could perhaps predict when P52 will be dated to ~40 CE!

[spin]

I don't really understand why they have to keep changing it. Everyone seems so happy with the first dating. Why can't they just leave it alone?

[MrMacSon]

Yes, what actual, physical, first century proof is there of Jesus? This could include papyri, wall scribblings, pot shards, clay tablets, stelae, tapestry, stone monuments...all dated to at least 35-40 AD. Sorry, but copies and claims or copies or one's "feelings" cannot be used as proof....in science, or a court of law.

Katherine

It would be interesting to know when the first archaeological site or artifact, outside the texts and documents, tied to Christianity is in fact dated.

[dewitness]

Yes, what actual, physical, first century proof is there of Jesus? This could include papyri, wall scribblings, pot shards, clay tablets, stelae, tapestry, stone monuments...all dated to at least 35-40 AD. Sorry, but copies and claims or copies or one's "feelings" cannot be used as proof....in science, or a court of law.

Katherine

The description of Jesus by Jesus cult writers show that he was not human so we are not going to find any actual evidence for Jesus.

What we can look for is evidence for a Jesus cult of Christians in the 1st century.

All we find are forgeries.

[spin]

[dewitness]

If a scrap dated to c 120-170 CE is the Gospel of John then such a scrap does not even help to show that Jesus was a figure of history.

The very first verse of the Gospel of John implies Jesus, the Logos was God Creator and that he was in the beginning with God.

John 1:1 KJV

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 The same was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made