Text from Book of Mark Found in Ancient Mask May Be Oldest Known Copy of Gospel

Mark pdEgypt — Text from the book of Mark that was found inside of an ancient Egyptian mummy mask may be the oldest copy of the gospel—even if just in a portion—known to man.

Through carbon dating and analyzation of the artifact, it is believed that the document is from within the first century following the death and resurrection of Christ. Heretofore, the oldest known copies of the gospels on record are from the second century.

According to reports, the rich in Egypt were often buried in masks made of flaked gold and other precious metals, but the common people were sometimes buried in masks created from recycled documents. Using a process to carefully melt the glue holding the documents together, in 2012 researchers discovered a papyrus sheet in one mask that contained text believed to be from the book of Mark—one of the four gospels in the New Testament.

But the discussion was recently revived after one of the researchers working on the project spoke about the significance of the find and the ongoing discovery of documents hidden in commoner’s burial masks.

“We’re recovering ancient documents from the first, second and third centuries,” lead researcher Craig Evans, a professor of New Testament studies at Acadia Divinity College in Nova Scotia, told Live Science. “Not just Christian documents, not just biblical documents, but classical Greek texts, business papers, various mundane papers, personal letters.”

Joe Carter at the Gospel Coalition states that the discovery of the biblical text is important because it helps to provide further evidence as to when Mark wrote his gospel and how quickly it began to circulate around the world.

“Andreas J. Köstenberger and Justin Taylor have argued that the evidence suggests the exact date of Jesus crucifixion was April 3, AD 33,” he wrote in a blog post on Tuesday. “A fragment from before AD 80 would establish that the gospel of Mark had not only been written within 50 years of Jesus’ death and resurrection, but that it would have already begun to circulate widely.”

  • Connect with Christian News

“To have a first-century witness to the text of the New Testament is unprecedented,” added Denny Burk, a professor of Biblical Studies at Boyce College. “That a fragment of Mark was found in Egypt is even more astonishing. That would seem to require that the original was probably penned decades before.”

But some like Burk may wonder why the gospel text was found in Egypt since Mark likely wrote the text under the rule of the Roman empire.

“In the Roman empire mail moved almost as quickly as it does today,” Evans told The Gospel Herald. “A letter put aboard a packet in Ephesus (today’s Turkey) could be in Egypt within one week. Something written in Rome could be in Egypt being read within a few weeks. Mark was written in the late 60s, so finding a copy of Mark in Egypt dating to the 80s is not strange in the least.”

The text from the find is set to be published later this year. Researchers have held back some of the information surrounding the discovery until that time.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Miguel de la Pena

    Awesome. I noticed how they used carbon dating to date it, which made me think of how carbon dating is routinely discredited when discussing the age of the earth being in the millions. Hmm…

    • Robin Ingles-Barrett

      Carbon dating is never used to discuss millions of years. The half life of carbon 14 is less than 6000 years and would be completely transformed into nitrogen in less than a million years. If the whole Earth were radiocarbon it would completely turn to nitrogen in less than a million years. Furthermore, radiocarbon dating has assumptions attached to it that have been proven wrong, like the assumption that the decay rate never changes. Carbon dating is pretty accurate up to 4500 years. Moreover, carbon dating proves the Earth is young, because we find radiocarbon in every dinosaur bone and diamond that we test, proving they cannot be millions of years old.

      • Fundisi

        Yes, thank you.

      • Pax Humana

        Why not just settle the matter the same way that laboratories and police crime scene units handle the matter by using tandem access mass spectrometry machines?

      • Craig R

        Yeah, right. Here ya go, Robin, Fifty pages of real science.

        http://ncse.com/files/pub/CEJ/pdfs/CEJ_30.pdf

        • Robin Ingles-Barrett

          That’s not how you discuss issues Craig. You should site the paper and make pertinent points. I could just as easily say, “yeah right Craig. Here’s thousands of pages of real science.”
          http://www.answersingenesis.org
          http://www.icr.org

          • Craig R

            Actually talkorigins.org refutes every crackpot idea put forth in your links, you’re just too lazy and/or afraid to read the truth.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Actually, http://www.icr.org and http://www.answersingenesis.org refutes every crackpot idea put forth by your links, you’re just too lazy and/or afraid to read the truth.

            See everything you say is arbitrary and unsubstantiated so I can just as easily say them about you and your material.

          • Craig R

            Well….no. Nothing on your crackpot sites refutes anything on talkorigins. Talkorigins, however, refutes everything on your junk science sites. You obviously don’t understand the difference between them.You lose.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Well….no. Nothing on your crackpot sites refutes anything on answer in genesis or icr. Answers in Genesis and icr, however, refute everything on your junk science sites. You obviously don’t understand the difference between them.You lose.

          • Craig R

            Yes, you think like a child, who has not yet learned to think critically.
            The men who wrote your holy book were ignorant. They knew not what the sun was, nor the moon. They had not the faintest idea of what caused the tides. Nor lightning and thunder. Nor anything in nature. The average sixth-grader of today know vastly more than did they. They were not necessarily unintelligent, just ignorant. They had no answers, so they created gods to explain all that they did not understand. Thousands upon thousands of gods. And today, so many of the human animal still cling to those ancient illogical, irrational beliefs. Still clinging to ignorance. What a shame. For all of humanity.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            First statement is an ad hominem attack that has no refutational power behind it. That’s what poor debaters do because they cannot think critically. The men who wrote my holy book were not ignorant, they knew what the sun and moon were. They knew about tides and ocean currents, they even knew the earth was not suspended by anything, contrary to every other ancient culture. If the average sixth grader knows more than how come sixth graders aren’t building huge structures and how come they agent medical doctors like Luke, one of the authors of the Bible? The writers of my holy book did not believe in thousands upon thousands of gods, i am not Hindu. What a shame that people like Isaac Newton, Leonardo Da Vinci, et al clung to these beliefs.

          • Craig R

            Well, it’s only an ad hominem if it’s untrue. In your case it is true.
            And you are wrong that they knew what the sun was. Show me evidence that they did. What writings did they produce that described what the sun was. Go ahead. I’m waiting.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Actually, even if true it is an ad hominem and irrelevant. Where did you study logic, playskool? Ad hominem attacks a persoN and not an argument so even if true it is a fallacy. Better look that up. Genesis 1:16 describes the creation of the sun and moon and stars. Deuteronomy 4:19 and 17:3 command not to worship it. Deuteronomy 33:14 says that the sun is the energy source for growing crops.

          • Craig R

            Ad hominems aren’t irrelevant if they are true. And you are ignorant of science.
            What does Genesis say the sun is? Exactly how was it created?

          • Craig R

            Here’s some truth for you…right from talkorigins.org:

            “On the wall of Gargas Cave in the French Pyrenees are the outlined hands of Ice Age artists which date to at least 12,000 years. Magnificent prehistoric cave art, comparable to that of the world-famous caves of Altamira, Spain and Lascaux, France, was recently discovered in southern France, in the Ardeche River canyon area (Los Angeles Times; Pasadena Star-News January 19, 1995). Its 300 paintings of such animals as bison, reindeer, rhinoceros, woolly rhinoceros, a panther, an owl, a hyena, bears, lions, horses, wild oxen, mammoths, wild goats and other animals is estimated to be between 19,000-22,000 years old. Sorry, no dinosaur drawings were reported!”

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Temple Ta Prohm in Cambodia has a stegasaurus carved into it.

          • Craig R

            Sorry….you fail.
            From Smithonian.com

            “There is a substantial problem, however. Not only does creationism distort nature to fit a narrow theological view, there is no evidence that the carving in question is of a dinosaur. If you look at the carving quickly and at an angle, yes, it does superficially look like a Stegosaurus that a kindergartener made out of play-doh. As anyone who has spent time watching the clouds go by knows, though, an active imagination can turn something plain into something fantastic. If viewed directly, the carving hardly looks Stegosaurus-like at all. The head is large and appears to have large ears and a horn. The “plates” along the back more closely resemble leaves, and the sculpture is a better match for a boar or rhinoceros against a leafy background.
            “Even so, the sculpture only vaguely looks like a rhino or boar. We can be certain that it is not a representation of a living Stegosaurus, but could it be a more recent attempt at depicting a dinosaur? Indeed, it is quite possible that this carving has been fabricated. There are many sculptures at the temple, and the origin of the carving in question is unknown. There are rumors that it was created recently, perhaps by a visiting movie crew (the temple is a favorite locale for filmmakers), and it is possible that someone created something Stegosaurus-like during the past few years as a joke.
            Either way, the temple carving can in no way be used as evidence that humans and non-avian dinosaurs coexisted. Fossils have inspired some myths (see Adrienne Mayor’s excellent book The First Fossil Hunters), but close scrutiny of geological layers, reliable radiometric dating techniques, the lack of dinosaur fossils in strata younger than the Cretaceous, and other lines of evidence all confirm that non-avian dinosaurs became extinct tens of millions of years before there was any type of culture that could have recorded what they looked like. As scientist Carl Sagan said, “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, and in the case of modern dinosaurs the evidence just isn’t there.”

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Sorry…. you fail miserably.
            from icr.org
            “Ta Prohm is increasingly famous for its bas-relief of what appears to be a stegosaur, expertly carved into the temple stone many centuries ago—long before paleontological dinosaur reconstructions. Ta Prohm’s central stele carving shows a date, translated onto the A.D. calendar, as 1186.2 Parrot, swan, water buffalo, and monkey carvings adorn the same structure, showing the ancient artist’s expertise at reproducing known animals.

            The nearest stegosaur fossils come from faraway China. It is therefore very unlikely that the ancients carved a stegosaur likeness based on fossils.

            Dinosaur carvings, sculptures, and paintings within ancient ruins confront the view that dinosaurs lived and died millions of years before man.3 But they are just what one would expect within the context of biblical history. Genesis says that God created man and animals, including dinosaurs, on the same day of creation week.4”
            http://www.icr.org/article/jungle-covered-ruins-may-hold-surprising

          • Craig R

            So icr claims the carving is “…what appears to be a stegosaur, expertly carved… ”
            That’s it. It “appears” to be so, thus it is so. And “expertly carved.” LMAO. Yes, perhaps to the mind of a six-year old child, or to the mind of a non-critically thinking adult.
            It looks nothing like a stegosaur. What follows is a mere snippet that obliterates icr’s claim.

            Let’s hear YOU refute THIS:

            “Another significant problem for the stegosaur adherents is the lack of tail spikes on the carving. These menacing weapons, often called “thagomizers” after a Gary Larson cartoon, are among the most unique and stunning features of stegosaurs, and not something an artist would easily overlook. The carving also shows front and hind legs of similar size, even though stegosaurs had rear legs far larger than the front legs. Moreover, two large projections are seen at the back of the head on the carved creature. No such features would be expected on a stegosaur. However, they could readily represent ears on a rhino (Figs. 7 & 8), or the folds or furrows of a chameleon neck frill (Fig 4a), or as noted earlier, the spikes on the head of a horned lizard (Fig. 4b). It seems unlikely that a carver familiar with living stegosaurs would neglect striking features such as long tail spikes, but add prominent features on the head that did not exist. If one argues that the image might be so stylized that this is possible, then no anatomic features of the creature can be trusted to be very realistic or meaningful. Indeed, as one blogger (Rogue, 2009) observed, if the carving is really supposed to be a Stegosaurus, it gets things remarkably wrong at both ends.”

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Lack of tail spikes does not negate the fact that it most closely resembles a stegosaurus than any other known creature. This was not an necessarily supposed to be an anatomically correct depiction so much as artistic design. The other carvings at Ta Prohm of other known animals are also not anatomically correct. Furthermore, the claims of this rebuttal more easily refute their own claims, that is to say,the animal looks nothing like a rhino or a chameleon! Moreover, saying that the image is stylized does not mean that no anatomic features can be trusted, that is a leap of logic that does not follow. If it gets things wrong for a stegosaurus on both ends, then it gets things wrong for a rhino or chameleon on both ends, the top, and the bottom! Finally, the fact that this rebuttal cannot even discern whether it is a rhino, a chameleon (or a horse for that matter), means that this rebuttal falls conspicuously short of refuting anything.

          • Craig R

            I’ll put in in caps so you can read again and try to understand:

            ICR WRITER BRIAN THOMPSON CALLS THE STATUE AN ANATOMICALLY CORRECT STEGOSAUR”

            It more CLOSELY resembles a RHINOCEROS than it does a stegosaurus.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            it looks nothing like a rhino. Brian Thompson might call it anatomically correct but I did not. The lobes are not decorative, no other carving has decorative lobes. Furthermore, the rebuttal you presented did not insist that they were decorative, they speculated that it could have been a chameleon.

          • Craig R

            The BIRD in Fig. 6 has DECORATIVE LOBES. If you can’t see them you’re BLIND.

            Look at figure 8 and tell me that the head “looks nothing like a rhino’s.”

            http://paleo.cc/paluxy/stegosaur-claim.htm

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            The bird in Fig 6 does not have anything that resembles the other creature nor does any animal have decorations. Fig 8 does somewhat resemble a rhino but they cherry picked a picture of a rhino to get that. The carving in question has a large tail and no horns on its nose. By your own rebuttals standards it could not possibly be a rhino (rhino’s have tiny tails and multiple horns on their heads)! Its doubtful an artist would overlook a weapoN as frightening as a rhino’s horns. Rhino’s have flat backs with slight dips downward, the carving in question has an arched back, like a stegosaurus. If you want to insist those lobes are decorative then maybe the carving is a bagaceratops. Looks more like a bagaceratops than a rhino.

          • Craig R

            Yes, you truly are blind. You are unable to see the lobes in the bird carving. Where are the tail spikes? The most DISTINCTIVE feature of a stegosaurus and they aren’t there. You’re clueless.
            You said “rhinos’s(sic) have tiny tails.” Well, yes, and the TAIL in the carving is TINY in comparison to the body! And the hind legs are TINY compared to that of a stegosaurus.
            OH, so now it’s a bagaceratops? Then ICR EXPERT BRIAN THOMPSON must be WRONG and YOU are RIGHT!
            LMAO.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            The tiny spikes at the bottom of the tail are not the most distinctive feature of a stegosaurus, the armor plates are. The tail in the carving is about 10 times larger than a rhino’s. The hind legs do resemble a bagaceratops or a montanaceratops, and that explains the anomally on the head. Brian Thompson might be wrong, if the lobes are decorative which I’ll concede for the sake of argument. But the carving looks nothing like a rhino apart from the head, which I’ve just posited a viable alternative to. The back is arched, a rhino’s is not (it actually dips down slightly). The most distinctive feature of a rhino is the horns, amd your rebuttal showed a newborn rhino to try to compare to. The tail on the carving is close to the size of the leg like a bagaceratops or a montanaceratops, whereas a rhino has a tail about 1/10th the size of its legs. The rhino argument fails miserably by the standards which you use to refute the stegosaurus.

          • Craig R

            Uh, the spikes on the Stegosaurus tail were not “tiny.”

            Still waiting to hear about the “thousands” of other dinosaur depictions you claims to exist.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Go ahead and google the thousands of other dinosaur carvings and drawings. the spiked were tiny compared to any other feature on the stegosaurus. They certainly are not the most distinctive. I can’t go back to the cambodians who carved the one they saw in 1186 AD but i bet they would agrre with me. That last quip is a joke of you couldn’t tell. Have a good night Craig. I’ll let you get the last word but i appreciated your time and effort in this discussion.

          • Craig R

            Google? LMAO. You’re hilarious. You refuse to show me because they DON’T EXIST. You fail.

          • Craig R
          • Craig R

            And since you believe that dinosaurs existed with humans, where are all the OTHER depictions of dinosaurs besides this woefully misguided one?

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            There are thousands of them.

          • Craig R

            Show me.

          • Craig R

            The BIRD has LOBES. IF you CANNOT SEE THEM, you are BLIND.

          • Craig R

            OR…..REFUTE THIS:

            “ICR writer Brian Thompson calls the statue an “anatomically correct” stegosaur. However, this is far from the case, and ignores several glaring differences between the carving and a real stegosaur. As further discussed below, these include the lack of tail spikes, the size and shape of the head, the apparent presence of horns (or external ears?), and the proportions of the body and legs, Indeed, the only features that could be argued to be significantly stegosaur-like are the lobes along the back, but even these have anatomic problems, and a more likely explanation. On actual stegosaur skeletons, the plates are typically more numerous, in double rows, more pointed and triangular, and larger toward the middle of the back than the head or tail. One might argue that the plates could have been stylized or simplified by the artist, but this does not go far, since a larger problem exists. That is, similar lobes (evidently representing decorative, floral flourishes) occur on many other animal carvings at the temple, including a bird and an apparent water buffaly, where they are virtually identical to the “plates” on the carving in question, but are clearly not back plates.”

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            No other animal at Ta Proh. Has decorative plates on its back like this carving. Go look.

          • Craig R
          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            That bird carving does not have anything even remotely similar to the spikes on the back of the other creature.

          • Craig R

            Since when are round lobes “spikes?” A SPIKE is POINTED. NONE of the ROUND LOBES on your “stegosaurus” are POINTED. Unbelievable.
            There is a ROUND LOBE on top of the bird’s beak. There are THREE LOBES under it’s back feathers on the left. There are THREE LOBES in front of the bird’s breast, on the right. You must be blind.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Some stegosaurus spikes were more rounded. They actually have a remarkably similar spade shape. Even if we call those decorative, the carving looks more like a bagaceratops or a montanaceratops than a rhino.
            http://www.deviantart.com/morelikethis/72607531?view_mode=2

          • Craig R

            Oh, I see. You think a website of drawings by “artists” is scientific. Okay, right. Uh -huh. Sure. Fail.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            None of the lobes are ROUND either. I’ll concede its probably a bagaceratops or montanaceratops And the lobes are decorative.

          • Craig R

            Yes, some are.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            Which lobes are round start from left to right and tell me the number. The are six, which one is round? Maybe you are the blind one. Shall I send you a link to a google image of a circle so you can compare?

    • Death defeater

      There is a difference in the dating methods as Mrs. Barrett points out. Further carbon dating in dating the earth always assumes millions and even billions of years now. Which explains why it is wrong in dating the earth. When you start with an assumption. How is that helpful in determining age of the earth? True science although assumptions and prejudices may be there should never start with assumptions.

  • Fundisi

    For the average Christian, I don’t know how this changes anything, why it is particularly important to their every day lives as Christians. Do they have faith or do they need constant reassurances?

    • Robin Ingles-Barrett

      Its a valuable resource for combating naysayers who claim the Gospels were written long after Jesus lived.

      • Fundisi

        It is a tool for apologists, for those defending the Truth to be sure, my question is why or how will it impact the lives of believers, it should not, we should have faith that the Bible is true and that the New Testament was written by the Apostles and Doctor Luke, the former eyewitnesses to the life of Christ and the latter have investigated and confirmed those facts.

        • WorldGoneCrazy

          Yes, I agree with you here. However, apologetics and stuff like this brought me to Jesus and the foot of the Cross, when attending a church or being asked to read the Bible never would have, nor would I have agreed to either in the first place. This shores up the reliability of God’s Word, places a pebble in the shoe of the unbeliever, but also provides ammunition for the believer when dealing with the overwhelming onslaught of anti-Christ worldliness. Keep in mind that we are always in enemy territory – no matter where we are in this world, and it is nice to find ammunition in enemy territory, right? God bless!

          • Fundisi

            I have absolutely nothing against any new evidence of the reliability of the Bible, it is very interesting, I welcome it, it may well help many people for all the reasons you indicate and so, please understand I offer no arguments against it here. If some see it as of real benefit, whom am I to speak against it?

            Forgive my old age and foolishness (senility, I guess), I have been around many, to some here I suspect, far too many decades of life and would do better to be silent and to step off the stage, worse I am accused of being a most damnable Fundamentalist. Yet, I have seen the organized Christian Church increasingly use so many tools to attract adherents and to argue on behalf of the faith, most quite sincerely so; but, I have always wondered why Jesus is not enough, why lifting up Christ alone seems to so many to be so woefully insufficient in advancing the faith. We seem to have a plethora of books, movies, music, programs and so many different ways to proclaim the Gospel, so many ways to make Jesus more attractive to the lost, dying and average Christians, poor fellow this Jesus, as if these things are so needful, then Jesus by contrast seems so inadequate to the task of drawing souls to salvation. So many Christians argue, debate, strive and engage in such hard effort to make themselves into good Christians and defend their faith, but to them Jesus seems to have so little real part to play, poor fellow this Jesus, to hear others tell it, Jesus seems so inadequate as a Savior, as I see all we do to add to Him, He seems to miss the mark in our lives, He seems to fall so short of the goal.

            Then I recall that Jesus said not if such proofs were lifted up, but if He alone was lifted up, if He was made the sole focus, that He alone would draw all men unto Himself and His salvation. Further, I seem to remember reading where He said in the lives of Christians, He was supposed to be everything from first to last, beginning to end, Alpha to Omega, that He was to have absolute, sole preeminence in every part of our lives to meet our every need, every exigency of life and eternity. Alas, what do I know, I am no longer young and know nothing really? Nothing! To me, we look at the need for so many things in the Christian faith but Jesus alone to save souls and rule our lives, that it would seem Jesus did not know very much either. That was my only cause for caution, that to this poor old, worn out Christian, I think we should be wary of needing any proofs, when we are supposed to have Jesus Himself within.

            So forgive me for daring to raise a word of caution.

            Anyway, please count me as being completely wrong and a damned fool as well, because I only seem to need Jesus and nothing more.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            I agree 100% – not disagreeing. And, certainly not calling you a fool – I LOVE your postings! Just pointing out that we are commanded to defend the faith from and for the unrepentant: “But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect,” 1 Peter 3:15 and others as well.

            We need to acknowledge that 3 out of 4 youthful evangelicals leave the church after leaving home. Many of these are pastors’ kids who knew a ton of Bible verses but could not stand some basic questions from silly a-theists. They were not trained to defend the faith, but to memorize tons of Bible verses (I love doing this too!) without being able to apply them, sing 7-11 songs and “get a feeling,” and to treat Jesus as their cosmic butler instead of their Rescuer and Savior. It is “what can Jesus do for me,” instead of “what can I do to serve the One Who created and sustains everything?”

            So, I agree with you 100% that all of these programs and pizza and “feelings of happiness” instead of joy under suffering are not only unneeded but are apostasy. But, I know a girl who was number 1 in a Bible Church in regional Bible quizzing competitions, who became a stripper. Fragments like this are the reply to the skeptic when he says “The Bible was not written until hundreds of years after Jesus, so it is all myth.” If we didn’t have early manuscriptal evidence, well, we would be no different from Mormons, who have no archaeological basis whatsoever for their “book.”

            Paul defended the faith – using all of God’s Truth, both Scripture and general revelation. Same with Peter and with Jesus Himself, who appealed to the evidences of His miracles and logic as well. The reason that many of our children are leaving the faith is that they were taught what to think but not how to think in a Christian sense – and certainly not how to defend the faith from the not-very-good arguments they are hearing from the skeptics.

            Many blessings, Fundisi, and keep up the great comments!

      • jmichael39

        There was a very good movie that showed this past Monday in some theatres called Patterns of Evidence. It was very well done. Afterwards there was a panel discussion about the movie. One of the members of the panel was asked if a movie like that would changes the minds of skeptics. While he said that some who are already on the fence would most definitely find it helpful there are some who will never change their minds. He said, if God were to write in the clouds “Here I am. I’m real” in every language known to man, some people would still not believe and would likely just blame Israel.

        • Pax Humana

          We should pimp smack the morons that do not believe because they are the ones that are also going to lead the charge to slaughter the REAL Christians and the REAL Jews, so if you eliminate them as a threat to the world, then the Gospel can be preached to the lost people that truly want to get right in their lives, period, full stop.

          • jmichael39

            that’s the stupidest and least biblical idea I’ve heard in a long time.

          • James Grimes

            Yes, the comment lacked any intelligent thinking. Period. Full stop.

    • Douglas

      Do you think we shouldn’t tell anyone when we find something new or exciting? I like hearing about new archaeological finds and was happy to have read this article; I find it very interesting. It’s not about needing constant reassurances, it’s about finding something amazing and sharing it with others. I’m actually surprised at your comment.

      • Fundisi

        I am pleased that such new information is available and shared. I have nothing against what you have said, yet, I think it more important that we keep our eyes upon Christ, on our intimate relationship with a risen Lord, than being excited about such proofs.

        • Robin Ingles-Barrett

          We are called to worship God with our minds, and understanding the evidence is part of that.

          • Fundisi

            First, I agreed it was interesting and valuable for apologetics. Yet, I am always shocked and amazed that when I try and call for Christian people to keep their eyes only upon Jesus as the sole Author and Finisher of their faith and not depend on material evidences, that Christians are among the first to be offended and get defensive. Jesus is truly the rock of offense.

            This is not worth my arguing about, do with it what you will.

          • Robin Ingles-Barrett

            I am not offended by anything you said, nor do I disagree with anything you said. I am in complete agreement. I am merely expounding on the point of focusing on Jesus. Jesus said to worship God with your mind, and that is what we are doing when we equip ourselves with apologetic tools.

          • Douglas

            I believe you are missing the mark on this one and drawing some unfounded conclusions. It’s just an interesting article that relates to Christianity. Some of us here appreciate articles such as these and that may not have anything to do with needing reassurances.

            You spend a lot of time online and you encounter a lot of difficult people. Those interactions may be putting you on the defense. It really does seem that you were the first and probably only one here to be “offended and get defensive.” If this isn’t your field of interest that’s fine, but there’s no need to come down on Christians who like this type of information.

            We are just looking at the issue from two different angles.

          • Fundisi

            Whatever!

          • Pax Humana

            Fundisi, know your role and shut your pie hole, you servant of Lucifer!

  • Sabrina Thornton

    I think it’s a great new tool to share the gospel, my son thinks man wrote it so the story gets blown out of proportion. this way he can see for himself how it has stayed the same all these centuries

  • Death defeater

    Amazing how the reliability of the Bible again. God is good.

  • Jim Deferio

    Bad news for the cult known as KJV Onlyism…

    • Douglas

      I am missing your point. Why is it bad news?

      • Robin Ingles-Barrett

        I agree. KJV onlyism fails on several points but i fail to see how a fragment of papyrus is one of them. This is not the first papyrus fragment from the Gospels that we’ve found.

      • Jim Deferio

        It’s bad news because it provides more evidence and further strengthens the case that the New Testament has a strong manuscript line going back to the first century which KJV Onlyists disparage and claim that all of these manuscripts are corrupt, especially the ones from Egypt.

        KJV Onlyists hate when people use the manuscript evidence for the Bible and this discovery will strengthen the manuscript evidence.

  • John Mark IB

    funny too,only because the corrupted texts all came and do come form Alexandria and the Egyptian areas versus the Preserved and accurate Words of GOD from the byzantine Syria areas passed on from the apostles and disciples etc., so I’m definitely gonna be attacked here by the haters of truth but here goes my 2 cents, there are sadly too many, lot’s of today’s Christians are also very ignorant to the sad fact of denying critics and attackers of the Word, the amazing amount of professing so called Christians and critics of the Preserved Words of GOD, and here are just a few good sites to help and to enlighten you, but we modern anything goes for me tickle my ears easy latest version Christians! all want the newer latest and easier so called versions, which are really nothing more than denying PERversions etc., based all upon the false texts and few men who decided to get together (for a period of years to pervert the greek texts and attack the KJV which is and are GOD’S Preserved Words in the English for us today,) in the 1800s namely Westcott and hort and today most Christians just don’t get it and actually deny GOD’S True and Preserved Words in His English KJV which is the standard it doesn’t take much to see but the critics will always deny it and attack the Verbal Plenary Preservation of GOD’S Words in the English KJV, here’s some helps for those who really care and trust Him, and I’m not A ruckman no way but do Hold to The KJV for it’s accuracy and beauty and so many other reasons which are all sound and based on GOD’S promises to preserve His Words to us, so not gonna argue with the haters and deniers who critcise and attack I have my final Authority and am 100% sure of it even though in the past I used to think these KJV only people were crazy nutty loons, well I’ve always known there seemed to be huge differences in the NIV vs the KJV just not the same no comparison also see the chick tract publications books by David Daniels he does a very great job at simplifying the issue and just lays it down so well, as does the great D. A. Waite of Biblefortoday.org absolutely used of GOD at his 90 something yrs what an awesome giant who is standing up for and against the liberals of our time GOD bless this man!! here you go folks please learn and be wiser and blessed for it it took me awhile to finally accept it and realize yes it’s true the KJV is for those of us in the English language truly His GOD’S Words Preserved for us what and amazing blessing to have in my hands!!amen May The LORD GOD bless you all with love joy and peace in Jesus name amen! also just to give an example of the way the denying false corrupted texts are in their attacks upon Our LORD see the NiV in this verse and compare it to the KJV (it makes Jesus look like a complete liar this is just a small example the new corrupt texts of Westcott/hort attack and deny the fundamentals of the virgin birth, His Deity, His being GOD, and too many others to mention, John 7:8 Jesus says I go not up yet but In the perversions they manke Him to say I’m not going all based upon the false greek texts of the Bible haters and deniers of His Preserved Words and the KJV haters of truth, that have no final authority to stand upon !!1

    enjoy and passs it on it’s not that difficult but it’s utterly important, the only bibles to have Lucifer in them are of course the KJV GOD’S Preserved Word’s and the NKJV which itself is based upon the corrupt texts of the westcott and hort heretics,
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/CriticalTexts/dbs2695.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_categories.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_preservation.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_versions.htm
    http://www.chick.com/catalog/books/1271.asp
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/vpp_course.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/pdf_VPP_Course/lesson_1.pdf
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_dean_burgon.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_critical_texts.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_king_james.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_history.htm
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_articles.htm
    http://www.tbsbibles.org/articles/what-todays-christian-needs-to-know-about-the-greek-new-testament
    http://www.tbsbibles.org/pdf_information/127-1.pdf
    http://www.deanburgonsociety.org/idx_Pages/idx_insights.htm

    see the articles here from Brandenburg and or type in the search bar KJV issue etc., GOD bless this man for his love of GOD’S truth and Words!!

    Kent knows the originals and is very well qualified here!! which is why I push him

    http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/search?q=preservation
    http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/search?q=KJV
    http://bbc-cromwell.org/lectures2011_Spring.shtml

    sermonaudio.com has good stuff here by the dean burgon society or also the semons by D A Waite on the gnostics corrupted texts and perversions of our times today very important to know and informative to pass on

    see the traditional texts and the superiority sermons and learn very good stuff the crtics hate him but those of us who love His truth and His Words love these guys for their faithful stand in spite of the venomous haters of GOD’S Preserved Words!! amen!!

    http://www.sermonaudio.com/source_detail.asp?sourceid=deanburgonsociety

    http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/

    http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Trivia-Questions/

    lastly folks did you know even the false cults such as the jehovahs witnesses also use the corrupted texts and are closer to the modern perversions and they also attack the KJV ? even the Adventists have their own perversion, so learn and sorry fo so many sites but it’s to inform….have a blessed dy and weekend

    • Robin Ingles-Barrett

      And cults like mormonism use the KJV. Whats your point. If you think the KJV is the only inspired by God for English speakers them you are ignorant.you should spend your time spreading the Gospel to unbelievers instead of trying to convert Christians over to your version of the Bible.

  • John Mark IB

    sorry forgot one very important to this subject for those wanting info. GOD bless and thanks for allowing this forum and sites etc., have a blessed day and weekend
    http://faithsaves.net/bibliology/

  • John Mark IB
  • John Mark IB