Replies

This scrap of paper is not worth wiping your butt with as long as its provenance is unknown.

This is crap in terms of scholarship. Could be a papyrus from Gnostic circles, if it’s not entirely forged.

The stupid professor says its provenance is a mystery. How convenient. How convenient that it comes from a private collector. The great papyri collections all document where the fragments were found. If this is a great collector of papyri, he wasted his money buying something with no known provenance. Or, if he knows the provenance but won’t say, that’s the smoking gun proof that the provenance, if made public would discredit the piece of (s)crap entirely.

And the idiot fools at the NYTimes and the Harvard PR clowns eat it up.

Journalists are crap-eaters.

Agree. This is an interesting fragment of something, but to call it "a new gospel" and even give it a tendentious name, is absurd publicity-seeking and a disgrace to serious scholarship. That it is shamelessly perpetrated by a Harvard "professor" is no surprise, really, given the degeneration of their academic integrity over the last generation.

“This is crap in terms of scholarship. “

Exactly, from an archeaological point of view this is worthless.