The Magdalen Fragments

Fragments of what? and why 'Magdalen'? Three fragments of papyrus on which are written in Greek some scattered verses from Matthew chapter 26; and 'Magdalen' because for over ninety years they have been kept in the library of Magdalen College, Oxford, England.

The fragments have attracted great interest since January 1995, when a German specialist in the study of ancient papyrus manuscripts published an article claiming they were the earliest extant manuscript fragments of the New Testament. This papyrology expert, Carsten Peter Thiede, has now published a book called 'Eyewitness to Jesus' in which he develops the case in support of his original supposition.

Until Thiede made this claim the oldest known manuscript fragment of New Testament writings was a small portion from the Gospel by John, discovered in 1934. This is thought to have been written about 120 AD, but Thiede considers that the Magdala Fragments should be dated some fifty years earlier. It has formerly been assumed that they belonged to a later period, towards the end of the second century; and as there were already other New Testament papyrus fragments from that period the Magdalen Fragments were not regarded as exceptional.

If Thiede is proved correct the effects on New Testament scholarship will be far-reaching. For 'liberal' scholars have taken the view that the Gospels were written long after the events they describe, the authors relying on hearsay and unreliable records. Thiede believes that his evidence of earlier dating will compel such scholars to revise their perspectives, and recognize that the Gospels need to be treated as authentic biographies based on eyewitness accounts. Conservative scholarship has of course always maintained this view, in contrast to liberal thought. Their position would be further strengthened by confirmation of Thiede's findings.

Academic research into the dating of the Gospels has generally been based on study of their internal content, a method which allows for widely varying interpretations and theories. In contrast to this, Thiede bases his conclusions on the 'hard external evidence' of handwriting style. The handwriting on the Magdalen Fragments is in the uncial style - 'upright, drawn-out Greek handwriting, in common use in the first century BC, that began to die out soon after the time of Christ'. Thiede admits that manuscript dating is extremely difficult. Carbon-14 dating cannot be used because the process could harm the fragile papyrus. But by comparing the fragments with manuscripts which are dated, and which are written in the same cursive style, the period to which they belong can be fairly closely identified. Some manuscripts comparable to the Magdala Fragments have been identified among first-century Greek texts from the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Study of the uncial handwriting on its own might well justify the conclusion that Matthew's Gospel was written within a few years of Christ's crucifixion under Pontius Pilate, who held power in Judea until AD 36. However, Thiede favours a somewhat later date around AD 66, taking into account that the fragments come from a codex - 'a format that apparently began to supplant the scroll later in the first century'. Thiede submits that codices were commonly used by Christians because they were easier to handle than scrolls. The codex has writing on both sides of the papyrus, whereas only one side is used on a

scroll.

Inevitably there has been strong criticism of Thiede's proposition from opposing schools of thought. 'The problem is' remarked one academic, 'this upsets the whole theological establishment'. Liberal theologians have long dismissed everything which they do not like as a late tradition, 'far removed from Jesus'. Such views are of course completely foreign to the divinely revealed truth that 'all Scripture is given by inspiration of God' (2 Tim. 3~l6 NKJV); and that 'men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit' (2 Pet. 1:21). The believer's confidence that the whole of the Bible is God-breathed, inerrant and reliable does not rest on the shifting sands of academic scholarship.

The apostle John recorded that he was an eyewitness of the crucifixion (John 19:35). Luke's introduction to his Gospel refers to 'matters which have been fully established (RVM) among us, even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses' (Luke 1:1,2). Our interest in Thiede's hook, 'Eyewitness to Jesus', is the extent to which it may help genuine seekers after truth to recognize further evidence in confirmation of conservative views about the dating of the Gospels.

unknown | Aug 1996
Focus