Carbon dating the gospels
Fritz acknowledged that he was the fragment’s owner but categorically denied forging it.“I warrant that neither I, nor any third parties have forged, altered, or manipulated the fragment and/or its inscription in any way since it was acquired by me,” he asserted in a statement to the Atlantic.
Handwriting changes over time, and ancient Greek papyri, of which there are hundreds of thousands still in existence, give us plenty of illustrations of these changes.Actual dated papyri give us concrete evidence for when a particular style of writing was used.Of course, the manuscripts do not use our modern dating system.The preponderance of evidence “tips the balance toward forgery,” King said.The Harvard scholar did tell the Atlantic, however, that she would need scientific proof or a confession in order to make a definitive assessment, and she pointed out that it was possible that the papyrus could still be authentic even if the story of its provenance was not.The tests dated the papyrus to the seventh or eighth century A. and revealed the composition of the ink to be consistent with that time period.
A new article written by journalist Ariel Sabar that appears in the latest issue of the Atlantic magazine, however, has exposed the papyrus to be most likely a fabrication.
“I would never agree to do an anonymous thing again.
asked me some questions this week about the recent revelation that the Gospel of Judas had been authenticated by a number of means.
So you put out your best thoughts, and then people…bring in new ideas or evidence.
You go on.” She did tell the newspaper that the experience had taught her one thing.
While King confirmed that she had seen a 1999 bill of sale from the artifact’s owner, who requested anonymity, she did little to further investigate its provenance.