Post by ResLight on Mar 30, 2014 20:22:47 GMT -5
One of the ways trinitarians try to gain support for the trinity doctrine is by quoting various writings attributed to have been written sometime before the fourth century. One such is what is being referred to as "The Huleatt Manuscript". Evidently, "The Huleatt Manuscipt" is actually three fragments that are usually referred to as Papyrus 64. These fragments are also called the "Magadaline Papyrus".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalen_papyrus
The statement that is being spread is quoted below:
<<50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript "She poured it [the perfume] over his [Jesus'] hair when he sat at the table. But, when the disciples saw it, they were indignant. . . . God, aware of this, said to them: 'Why do you trouble this woman? She has done . . . Then one of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priest and said, 'What will you give me for my work?' [Matt. 26:7-15]" (Huleatt fragments 1-3).>>
If one does a search with Google for "Huleatt Manuscript", one will find this quote appearing over and over, usually by trinitarians in forums and on various websites, etc. According to this "quotation", Matthew 26:10 would have Matthew writing, "God, aware of this", instead of "Jesus, knowing this" (World English). Thus, the trinitarian claim this is proof that first century Christians recognized that Jesus is God Almighty.
Like several other documents, trinitarians have endeavored to date these fragments as being in the first century. More than likely, however, these fragments were actually written about the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century.
www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/P64TB.htm
The problem is, however, that the Greek word for "God" does not actually appear in the P64 fragments. What is being quoted is evidently Carsten Peter Thiede's reconstruction of what he thought it to be saying, wherein Thiede (believing that Jesus is God Almighty) simply supplied the word "God" in his reconstruction of the sentence.
See "Fragment Three" at:
www.lavia.org/english/archivo/MagdalenEN.htm
Thus, in reality, there is no testimony from the so-called "Huleatt Manuscript" that offers any proof that Matthew referred to Jesus as "God".
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalen_papyrus
The statement that is being spread is quoted below:
<<50 AD The Huleatt Manuscript "She poured it [the perfume] over his [Jesus'] hair when he sat at the table. But, when the disciples saw it, they were indignant. . . . God, aware of this, said to them: 'Why do you trouble this woman? She has done . . . Then one of the Twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went to the chief priest and said, 'What will you give me for my work?' [Matt. 26:7-15]" (Huleatt fragments 1-3).>>
If one does a search with Google for "Huleatt Manuscript", one will find this quote appearing over and over, usually by trinitarians in forums and on various websites, etc. According to this "quotation", Matthew 26:10 would have Matthew writing, "God, aware of this", instead of "Jesus, knowing this" (World English). Thus, the trinitarian claim this is proof that first century Christians recognized that Jesus is God Almighty.
Like several other documents, trinitarians have endeavored to date these fragments as being in the first century. More than likely, however, these fragments were actually written about the end of the second century or the beginning of the third century.
www.tyndale.cam.ac.uk/Tyndale/staff/Head/P64TB.htm
The problem is, however, that the Greek word for "God" does not actually appear in the P64 fragments. What is being quoted is evidently Carsten Peter Thiede's reconstruction of what he thought it to be saying, wherein Thiede (believing that Jesus is God Almighty) simply supplied the word "God" in his reconstruction of the sentence.
See "Fragment Three" at:
www.lavia.org/english/archivo/MagdalenEN.htm
Thus, in reality, there is no testimony from the so-called "Huleatt Manuscript" that offers any proof that Matthew referred to Jesus as "God".
