Papyrus Magdalene (p64) .. and the priest is simple!!!

 Papyrus Magdalene ( P64 ) and Priest Basit

Christian priests in general, and Egyptian priests in particular, are known for using deception and devious methods as a pretext to fool the minds of the simple readers of the church. In a style no different from this, we see the simple priest selecting all the strange and rejected opinions of the Christian scholars and transferring them to his books as if they were the truth with which he silences opponents and refutes their doubts. I am amazed by the style with which he addresses the followers of his writings from the church. When I read his writings, I am overcome by a feeling that is a mixture of anger and resentment, so I wonder in surprise how the educated Christians remain silent about what the priest writes? .. And the answer I have is that this man is the one who was authorized by the church to defend the remains of the wreckage of what is called the infallibility of the Holy Book .. after it collapsed in the face of academic scientific criticism .. and the belief that the copyists of the New Testament distorted the texts became the prevailing belief among biblical criticism scholars .. each copyist as much as he could .. to make the text conform to his personal belief .. and there is no longer anyone who denies this except those who have deviation in their hearts and a veil over their eyes so they do not acknowledge what is now established .. so he found no alternative but to deviate behind the strange opinions as long as it conforms to what he wants to go to from nonsense .. and we now have a clear example of this ..

The aforementioned priest says [1] :

3- The Papyrus of the Gospel of St. Matthew (P64); The most recent and most wonderful of these modern discoveries is the one concerning the Gospel of St. Matthew, as some claimed that its author was not St. Matthew or one of the other apostles!! Papyrus ( P64 ) consisting of three fragments from the Gospel of St. Matthew was found in a church in Luxor in 1901 AD and then settled in Magdalene College in Oxford, and it was dated to have been written between 150-200 AD. Then the prominent German papyrologist Carsten Thiede rediscovered this manuscript again after seeing it for the first time in February 1994 AD. He then visited Oxford four times because of it so that he could study it in detail. After many complex studies, he discovered that it definitely dates back to 65 AD and that the writer of the Gospel must have been one of the apostles of Christ and that the writer of the manuscript itself must have been one of those who witnessed Christ with his own eyes. This news caused a stir in the world and shattered all the theories against the Bible and the Christian faith. The news was published in international newspapers and news agencies in 1994, and then the British Daily Mail published the news on March 23, 1996 under the title "Is this eyewitness testimony proving that Jesus lived on earth?" in two full pages, announcing the end of the claims and allegations of critics who claimed that the Gospels were written long after the ascension of Christ, and confirmed that the copyist of this papyrus must have been one of those who saw and listened to the Lord Jesus Christ. The author of the article also confirms that the language used in the papyrus is clear, direct and unadorned, and is conclusive evidence that its writer lived through the excitement and tension of the decisive moments of Jesus' life. It also shows that the disciples, at the time of the Lord's Supper and the Lord's announcement that one of them would betray him, were all speaking at once, complaining and afraid: "It is not really me, Lord." The language controls the tension and terror of that turbulent moment.

His words ended..

Honestly, if he knew that some of his readers would understand what he was writing, he would not have uttered such nonsense!

The priest first began by stating the importance of the papyrus and that it is the most wonderful modern discovery, according to him.. Then he followed that with the suspicion he wanted to respond to, which is { Some claimed that its writer was not Saint Matthew or one of the other apostles!! }.. So what was his response to this claim?!.. His response was the discovery of a papyrus of the Gospel of Matthew dating back to the first century specifically and " without a doubt " the year 65 AD (and this is all a lie as will be shown) .. So suppose it actually dates back to the year 65 .. Does this mean that its writer was one of the apostles?!

Don't Christians know that the phenomenon of bees was very widespread in this early church era?! It is not necessary for bees to occur on a person after his death .. Rather, it may occur while he is alive and well.. Is there an example of this in the early church era?!.. The answer: Yes! Here are two pieces of evidence:

1. We read carefully this text from the letter attributed to Paul and sent to the Thessalonians in the second letter, chapter two, verse one:

1Now we beseech you, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto him: 2that you be not quickly shaken in mind, nor be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word , nor by letter as from us : that the day of Christ is at hand.

In the translation of the Book of Life:

1But concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we beg you, brothers, 2 not to be easily troubled in your thoughts or to be alarmed, either by a suggestion or a report or a letter falsely attributed to us , claiming that the day of the Lord has already come.

The text clearly indicates the occurrence of forgery and begging in a person's life...

2. One of the most famous Roman physicists in the second century AD was called Gilan. He wrote many books. He said in one of his books that he was once walking in the street and found a book for sale by the physicist Gilan! He found two men arguing over whether Gilan really wrote it or not! Gilan was not its writer at all. When he returned home, he began writing a book, "How can you identify books written by Gilan?" [2]

The phenomenon of bees was very common in this era. If we assume, for the sake of argument, that the papyrus dates back to the year 65 AD.. This does not mean that its writer was one of the apostles and there is no evidence for this!!!

Rather, more importantly, the one who is begging here places the name of the forged writer within the text of the fabricated text, as happened with Gilan, for example.. So what about a text that does not carry any name or even an indication that the writer saw or knew Jesus personally!!!

Then he continues his provocative speech, saying:

It was dated to have been written between 150 and 200 AD. Then the prominent German papyrologist Carsten Thiede rediscovered this manuscript again after seeing it for the first time in February 1994 AD. He then visited Oxford four times because of it so that he could study it in detail. After many complex studies, he discovered that it definitely dates back to 65 AD and that the writer of the Gospel must have been one of the apostles of Christ and that the writer of the manuscript itself must have been one of those who had seen Christ with eyewitness testimony.

Consider the words of the venerable priest when he said {it was being dated} .. as if these historians were ignorant losers who do not understand anything, then this one who owns the magic lantern "Thedi" came and did what no one else has done .. and he really did .. the saying is true " He who speaks about what he does not understand will do wonders! " .. So Thedi brought out the genie from the magic lantern .. and he delighted us with his wonders .. and came out to us with what the priest hums .. and unfortunately our father Basit did not tell us about those ingenious, unique and complex laboratory studies through which Thedi discovered that the papyrus dates back with certainty to the year 65 AD .. What is this beauty, our father!! .. Have you ever seen someone determine the ages of papyri with such precision?! ..

This is their method! .. And they are the only ones who know how to do anything else! .. Marginalizing the statements of scientists even if their strength is at its peak .. and shedding light on the opinions of scientific deviants as long as they are in favor of the subject they write about .. And there is no power or strength except with God!!!

The honorable father marginalized the historians’ statements about the papyrus as dating back to the beginning of the third century and shed light on the statement of “Thede”.. and since he quotes it contrary to the consensus of scholars of papyri.. he must “inflate” Thede’s image in front of the readers.. making him a prominent scholar in the field of papyri!! So who is this Thede that the priest quotes from?!

Schmidt says [3] that he is the German Karsten Peter Thede who has never conducted academic research, has no certificates or credentials, and who “inserted” himself among scholars, has no credibility in academic circles, and his claims are not based on any evidence. And the buyers of his books must request their money back since they were deceived and bought a lie. [4]

So what about the media hype that “destroyed” all the theories that are against the Bible as he claims?!

I do not know what it is that destroys all the theories that are against the Bible.. Are Thede’s failed opinions what destroyed all the theories that are against the Bible?! .. Strange!!

Of course the priest quotes some of what the newspapers said.. But why didn’t he quote what the newspapers said faithfully?! ..

Why didn’t he quote what the Journal of Higher Criticism said or what the famous German newspaper Der Spiegel said or what Biblical Archaeology Review said about this work of Thede?!

You can refer to the statements of these newspapers in this link

and look at the writer of the article the priest quotes from and his powerful mind in his statement:

The author of the article also emphasizes that the language used in the papyrus is clear, direct, and unadorned, and is conclusive evidence that its writer lived through the excitement and tension of the crucial moments in Jesus’ life.

Anyway, I will leave you with a picture of the papyrus that the writer is talking about and my comment on what he says.. Thank God for the blessing of reason!!!

This is how, my beloved, we see how the priests play with the minds of the people, and God is the helper. The most that a papyrus can provide is determining an approximate age for the source from which it was copied by determining its age. This happens in many ways, such as examining the writing method, the materials used, and others. But for someone to say that a papyrus led them to believe that its writer was one of the apostles, just like that, without the slightest scientific evidence, is a liar, as is the case with us here. This is clear and obvious liarization for anyone with eyes.

Papyrus dating

First of all, we must know that it is impossible to know the exact date of writing of any papyrus with the precision with which the priest speaks.. and even emphasizes this date.. but the scholars prefer to say, for example, that a certain papyrus was written between such and such years.. or dates back to such and such year, plus or minus fifty years or more.. and so on.. unless there is something in the papyrus that truly determines the date of its writing, such as mentioning the date of its writing in such a way that this date falls within the range determined by the science of paleography [5] for the papyrus.. but for someone to say that a papyrus like this one we are talking about was written in such and such year specifically and with complete precision.. that is complete nonsense.. and the truth is that we do not have a single papyrus of the New Testament whose date of writing is known precisely.. and there is no manuscript of the New Testament dated before 835 AD [6] . Regarding the fact that our father Quds determined its date to be 65 AD, Theedi, from whom Basit quotes, does not see this extreme precision, or as Father Basit says, “ certainly [7] ”.. Rather, he says “perhaps” (but not necessarily) that it dates back to before 70 AD [8] !!!! So where did the priest get this nonsense from?!

Theedi, from whom the priest quotes, does not determine a specific date for the papyrus.. How did he get this date?!

Theedi, from whom the priest quotes, says sometimes “ that it dates back to a time after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem ” [9] and other times “ that it dates back to the first century ” [10],

meaning that he clearly does not determine a specific date for the papyrus.. Rather, he himself said that he does not give a specific date for the papyrus, but rather dates it back to the last third of the first century [11] ?!!

So what do you say now, dear Christian, about those who defend Jesuitism?!!!

Scientists follow known methods to determine the ages of papyri based on paleography and then comparing the text and the way it was written with other similar papyri, but whose date of writing is known!!!

By following these methods, scientists were able to determine the age of the mentioned papyrus. They dated it back to the late second century or early third century. That is, around 200 AD.

So why did Thede ignore this consensus of scientists on dating the papyrus here?! And why did he not address their evidence for this dating in his writings?!!!

The simple answer to this dating is that Thede was interested in examining manuscripts dating back to the first century [12] and tried as much as possible to find similarities between the way the letters were written in those papyri and Papyrus 64. However, he made a big mistake by neglecting to examine the papyri that scientists relied on to date the papyrus [13] , which are closer to Papyrus 64 than those dating back to the first century!!!

And as we have seen before, Thede sees in the manuscripts what is not in them, as he did with the Qumran Papyrus 7Q5 and the letter Nu in its second line... so he does the same here... he sees in the letters a similarity that does not exist!!... He also turned a blind eye to a clear similarity in more recent manuscripts and did not pay attention to it... The question now is simple:

Are those the many complex studies that Thedi has done?!

Do you treat papyri according to your own whims?!!

I do not want to go into the details of the papyrus, its letters, the similarity between it and the aforementioned papyri, or the differences between it and other papyri in the way the letters are written, etc., as this will not benefit the vast majority of readers. Rather, my goal in what was written above was to demonstrate the slander in what Father Basit mentioned! .. and that without this method he cannot defend his Jesuitism .. and God is the one sought for help,

and God is behind the intention, He guides the way.

---

[1] The Bible Challenges Its Critics and Those Who Say It Has Been Corrupted, Documents Proving the Authenticity of the New Testament and the Impossibility of Corruption, pp. 163-164

[2] Bart D. Ehrman, The Making of the New Testament Canon, Lecture 04 The Problem of Pseudonymity, minutes 10-13

[3] Daryl D. Schmidt http://www.westarinstitute.org/Fello...t/schmidt.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20041216...t/schmidt.html

[4] Dr MD Magee, The Jesus Papyrus: Eyewitness to Jesus? http://www.askwhy.co.uk/truth/210Thiede.html

[5] Paleography is the science of studying ancient writings. It is a word composed of two Greek syllables: the first is palaeos, meaning old, and the second is graphein, meaning to write. It is concerned with studying the style of writing, the materials used in it, and everything related to it. For more information, you can refer to the Encyclopedia Britannica under the title of Paleography.

"paleography." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica 2007 Ultimate Reference Suite. Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2007.

[6] Bruce M. Metzger - Manuscripts of the Greek Bible: An Introduction to Greek Paleography (Oxford: OUP, 1981) No. 26 (102).

[7] The Bible Challenges Its Critics and Corruptionists, Documents Proving the Authenticity and Impossibility of Corruption of the New Testament, p. 163.

[8] Thiede, 'Reappraisal', 38: 'a Christian codex fragment of the first century, perhaps (though not necessarily) predating AD 70'.

[9] Thiede, 'Reappraisal', 40.

[10] Ibid., 37.

[11] Quoted from correspondence to the present writer (20th Jan. 1995). Quoted from Dr. Peter M. Head THE DATE OF THE MAGDALEN PAPYRUS OF MATTHEW (P. MAGD. GR. 17 = P64): A RESPONSE TO CP THIEDE [12] The most important of these were the manuscripts of Nahal Hever: The Greek Minor Prophets 8HevXIIgr which dates to about 50 AD.. [13] Such asP. Oxy843 andP. Oxy1620 andP. Oxy1819 andP. Oxy661 and othersThe above papyri are taken from the article by Dr. Peter Head The subject is linked in comment No. 11.

Analysis of the oldest manuscripts - p64 - Matthew's Gospel Papyrus

Magdalen papyrus image p64 part of the Gospel of Matthew

These three parts are supposed to contain the following from the Gospel of Matthew
p64 Mat 26.7-8, 26.10, 26.14-15

Mat  26:7  He held on to his head  a sign of  respect.

EMTV a woman came to Him having an alabaster flask of very expensive perfume, and she began to pour it on His head as He reclined to eat

Mat 26 : 8​ ​ἀπώλεια αὕτη
EMTV But when His disciples saw it they became indignant saying Why this waste

This part contains 28 letters, three complete words.

Mat  26:14​​​​    

EMTV Then one of the twelve called Judas Iscariot went to the chief priests

Mat  26:15 ​​They paid  him thirty pieces of silver.

EMTV and said What are you willing to give me if I deliver Him to you And they weighed out for him thirty silver coins

This part contains 26 complete one-letter words.

Mat  26:10 ​​Do good work for me.  

EMTV But when Jesus became aware of it He said to them Why do you trouble the woman ? For she has done a beautiful work for me

This part contains 18 letters, only one complete word

Three parts of the papyrus contain only 72 letters, including five complete words, one of which is a one-letter word and two words of two letters. So, by God, does this papyrus represent anything from the Gospel of Matthew, let alone the entire New Testament? Can we derive anything comprehensible from this papyrus about the Gospel of Matthew? Where do we get the first complete copy of the Gospel of Matthew? Is it from this papyrus? Of course not, we will not get anything from this papyrus. The first complete copy of the Gospel of Matthew is the one found in the Sinaiticus manuscript. So how do we connect the time of the Sinaiticus manuscript with the time of the apostles of Christ? And who can guarantee that what is found in the Sinaiticus is what was found in the Magdalene Papyrus?

Always remember the words of God Almighty

{ And most of them follow nothing but assumption. Indeed, assumption avails nothing against the truth. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of what they do. } Yunus 36

The reference, and the link works from the Wayback Machine:
https://web.archive.org/web/20041216...t/schmidt.html