كلنا نعرف ان هناك كل يوم برديات ومخطوطات تكتشف لنص العهد الجديد اقدم بردية اكتشفت الى الان هى بردية بتحمل رقم 64 وهى اجزاء لانجيل متى هذة البردية ليست فقط تثبت رسولية انجيل متى وانه يرجع لعصر الرسل بل انها تثبت ان الكنيسة الاولى والوثائق الاولى للمسيحية الرسولية النقية قدمت صورة يسوع المصلوب هذة الوثيقة تم تأريخها على عدة مراحل يذكرهم لنا العالم كومفورت وبارت فى كتابهم نص اقدم مخطوطات للعهد الجديد وبكل امانة سانقل الدراسات الباليوغرافية التى طبقت على هذة البردية In light of the shared physical characteristics of these manu******s, we can now take up the question of their date. P64 was originally given a third-century date by Charles Huleatt, the one who donated the manu****** to Magdalen College. The papyrologist A. S. Hunt studied the fragments and dated them to the early fourth century. In reaction to this late dating, Colin Roberts published the manu******, dating it to ca. 200.14 Carsten Thiede has dated it to the second half of the first century.15 Thus, the manu****** has been dated progressively earlier. Hunt was too conservative in his dating, as was typical for much of his dating of New Testament papyri. His fourth-century date needed adjustment, and this was done quite thoroughly by Colin Roberts, who noted that the handwriting of P64 is a precursor to the “Biblical Uncial” of the third and fourth centuries. According to Roberts, the lettering in P64 corresponds most closely with that found in P. Oxy. 843, the handwriting of which is clearly a precursor to the Biblical Uncial lettering of the third and fourth centuries. However, P. Oxy. 843 differs from P64 in that the writing is slightly slanted and the omega (ω) is flat,16 as is common in third-century hands. Nonetheless, P. Oxy. 843 was dated by Grenfell and Hunt to ca. 200. Similar hands are exhibited in P. Oxy. 405 (ca. 200), P. Oxy. 1620 (second to third century), and P. Oxy. 1819 (second century). Thus, Roberts dated the manu****** to ca. 200, and this date was confirmed by three eminent papyrologists: Harold Bell, T. C. Skeat, and E. G. Turner.17 However, it would seem justifiable to date it earlier than ca. 200 because its style predates P. Oxy. 843. The question is, how much earlier? Thiede posits a first-century date for P64 based primarily on his observation that some of the lettering is distinctly similar to that found in the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll 8HevXIIgr from Nahal Hever, which has been dated by various scholars between 50 b.c. and a.d. 50. He observed that several of the letters (α, ε, ι, ο, ρ) are identical or nearly identical, whereas others are distinctly dissimilar (η). However, the overall appearance of the lettering in 8HevXIIgr is earlier than that in P64/P67. By comparison, the lettering in P64/P67 is much more nearly identical to that of P. Oxy. 661 (as noted above) than to 8HevXIIgr. Thiede also notes similarities with the papyri in the ****** of Herculaneum (dated no later than a.d. 79) and the Greek Qumran fragment of Leviticus pap4QLXXLeva. The Herculaneum manu******s display an earlier form of calligraphy, and pap4QLXXLeva, though exhibiting similarities in many individual letters, is much earlier in its overall appearance (Roberts dated it to the late second century b.c.). Nevertheless, seeing similarities with earlier manu******s, Thiede suggests an earlier date for P64/P67: The prevailing tendency to date material of a nature comparable to Magdalen Gr. 17 to a period even preceding the earliest possible date of Matthew’s gospel suggests, with all due caution, the possibility of redating the fragments from Oxford and Barcelona—which are, after all, definitely Matthean—to a period somewhat earlier than the late second century previously assigned to them. Certainty will remain elusive, of course.18 In another publication, Thiede posits that the “earlier” date could be as early as the middle of the first century, even a pre–a.d. 66 date.19 But he offers no new or compelling paleographic evidence for this date. (See the discussion below for other paleographic comparisons.) 14 Roberts, “An Early Papyrus,” 233, 237. 15 Carsten Peter Thiede, “Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17 (Gregory-Aland P64): A Reappraisal,” Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 105 (1995): 13–20; reprinted, Tyndale Bulletin 46.1 (1995): 29–42. 16 An analysis of P. Oxy. 843 confirms this. Many of the letters are shaped the same, but this Oxyrhynchus manu****** is not as close in style to P64 or P67 as P. Oxy. 661 is. 17 Roberts, “An Early Papyrus,” 235–37. 18 Thiede, “Papyrus Magdalen Greek 17, ” Tyndale Bulletin 46.1 (1995): 37. 19 Carsten P. Thiede and Matthew d’Ancona, Eyewitness to Jesus: Amazing New Manu****** Evidence about the Origin of the Gospels (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 125. Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manu******s (A corrected, enlarged ed. of The complete text of the earliest New Testament manu******s) (50). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House. العالم كرستن بيتر ثيدا ارجع تاريخ هذة المخطوطة لمنتصف القرن الاول الميلادى وربما قبل عام 66 ميلادية هو قارن شكل الحروف فى هذة البردية بنظيرتها من مخطوطات قمران اليونانية ووجد ان حروف هذة البردية تعود لنفس هذا الزمن وبذلك تعد اقدم وثيقة مسيحية على الاطلاق تعود لكنيسة الرسل انفسهم هذة البردية تحوى اعداد من انجيل متى الاصحاح 26 ما ساركز عليه هو ماورد فى هذة المخطوطة من العدد 31 الى العدد33 وهذة هى نصها من نفس الكتاب αυτοις ο ι̅ς̅❏ π̣αν[τες υμεις σκανδαλισθη[σεσθε❏ εν εμοι εν τ[η νυκτι ταυτη γ̣ε̣γ̣[ραπται [γαρ παταξω τον ποι] [μενα και διασκορπι] [σθησονται τα προβα] [τα της ποιμνης 32μετα] [δε το εγερθηναι με] π̣ρ̣ο̣α̣[ξω❏ υμας εις τη̅ ̅] γαλειλαιαν 33α[ποκρι θεις δε ο πετρος ε[ιπε̅ ̅ ❏ ed pr: ι̅η̅ [̠Indicates conjectural reconstruction of the beginning or ending of a manu******, or, within the tran******ions, letters or words most likely to have been in the original manu******. ❏ ed pr: σκανδα[λισθησεσθε ❏ ed pr: [προαξω Comfort, P. W., & Barrett, D. P. (2001). The text of the earliest New Testament Greek manu******s (A corrected, enlarged ed. of The complete text of the earliest New Testament manu******s) (70). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House. 26: 31 حينئذ قال لهم يسوع كلكم تشكون في في هذه الليلة لانه مكتوب اني اضرب الراعي فتتبدد خراف الرعية 26: 32 و لكن بعد قيامي اسبقكم الى الجليل 26: 33 فاجاب بطرس و قال له و ان شك فيك الجميع فانا لا اشك ابدا هذة هى اقدم وثيقة وصلت لنا كلام يسوع من منتصف القرن الاول يقول فيها يسوع انى فى ذلك اللية سيتم المكتوب وسيضرب الراعى وتبدد خرافى الرعية وبعد قيامته سيسبق تلاميذه الى الجليل فهل اصدق التاريخ والعلم الذى اثبت بان هذة هى تعاليم يسوع من القرن الاول انه سيضرب وسيقوم من بين الاموات ام اصدق رجل بيقول بفكرة الشبيه الغنوصية ؟؟؟؟؟؟؟ والحكم للعقلاء .............

Thiede posits a first-century date for P64 based primarily on his observation that some of the lettering is distinctly similar to that found in the Greek Minor Prophets Scroll 8HevXIIgr from Nahal Hever, which has been dated by various scholars between 50 b.c. and a.d. 50. He observed that several of the letters (α, ε, ι, ο, ρ) are identical or nearly identical, whereas others are distinctly dissimilar (η). However, the overall appearance of the lettering in 8HevXIIgr is earlier than that in P64/P67. By comparison, the lettering in P64/P67 is much more nearly identical to that of P. Oxy. 661 (as noted above) than to 8HevXIIgr. Thiede also notes similarities with the papyri in the ****** of Herculaneum (dated no later than a.d. 79) and the Greek Qumran fragment of Leviticus pap4QLXXLeva. The Herculaneum manu******s display an earlier form of calligraphy, and pap4QLXXLeva, though exhibiting similarities in many individual letters, is much earlier in its overall appearance (Roberts dated it to the late second century b.c.). Nevertheless, seeing similarities with earlier manu******s, Thiede suggests an earlier date for P64/P67: The prevailing tendency to date material of a nature comparable to Magdalen Gr. 17 to a period even preceding the earliest possible date of Matthew’s gospel suggests, with all due caution, the possibility of redating the fragments from Oxford and Barcelona—which are, after all, definitely Matthean—to a period somewhat earlier than the late second century previously assigned to them. Certainty will remain elusive, of course.18 In another publication, Thiede posits that the “earlier” date could be as early as the middle of the first century, even a pre–a.d. 66 date.19

و هو ما يفيد ترجيح أحد العلماء لأن الوثيقة ربما تعود لمنتصف القرن الأول ربما قبل سنة 66
و لكن الجهال تركوا الجملة التى تليها ملونة بالأسود

الترجمة
و لكنه لا يقدم أى أدلة جديدة أو باليوجرافية تثبت هذا التاريخ

سبحان الله على تدليسهم !!!!!!

In light of the shared physical characteristics of these manu******s, we can now take up the question of their date. P64 was originally given a third-century date by Charles Huleatt, the one who donated the manu****** to Magdalen College. The papyrologist A. S. Hunt studied the fragments and dated them to the early fourth century. In reaction to this late dating, Colin Roberts published the manu******, dating it to ca. 200.14 Carsten Thiede has dated it to the second half of the first century.15 Thus, the manu****** has been dated progressively earlier. Hunt was too conservative in his dating, as was typical for much of his dating of New Testament papyri. His fourth-century date needed adjustment, and this was done quite thoroughly by Colin Roberts, who noted that the handwriting of P64 is a precursor to the “Biblical Uncial” of the third and fourth centuries. According to Roberts, the lettering in P64 corresponds most closely with that found in P. Oxy. 843, the handwriting of which is clearly a precursor to the Biblical Uncial lettering of the third and fourth centuries. However, P. Oxy. 843 differs from P64 in that the writing is slightly slanted and the omega (ω) is flat,16 as is common in third-century hands. Nonetheless, P. Oxy. 843 was dated by Grenfell and Hunt to ca. 200. Similar hands are exhibited in P. Oxy. 405 (ca. 200), P. Oxy. 1620 (second to third century), and P. Oxy. 1819 (second century). Thus, Roberts dated the manu****** to ca. 200, and this date was confirmed by three eminent papyrologists: Harold Bell, T. C. Skeat, and E. G. Turner.17 However, it would seem justifiable to date it earlier than ca. 200 because its style predates P. Oxy. 843. The question is, how much earlier?

كاتب إنجيل متى غير معروف ...

دليل الى قراءة الكتاب المقدس - صفحة 183

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1279282901


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1300165632


قد يكون متى وقد يكون غيره

المدخل الى العهد الجديد - صفحة 245

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1297160643


الانجيل لا يذكر عنه شيئا ...ولا نعرف أسم المؤلف على الوجة الدقيق

الترجمة اليسوعية

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1297160643

لم يذكر لنا التاريخ الكاتب الحقيقى ... ولكننا ندعوه متى ...!!


المدخل الى الكتاب المقدس - حبيب سعيد

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1268503169


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1297160802


ويقول وليام ولكر (5)

كل الأناجيل الآربعة وأعمال الرسل والأعمال ............
الأسماء " متى ومرقس ولوقا ويوحنا " ...ظهرت فقط كعناوين للأناجيل .....لكن هذة العناوين تم أضافتها مؤخراً ....من المحتمل فى القرن الثانى ...
معظم العلماء يتفقون أن أعمال الرسل تم كتابتها بواسطة نفس كاتب إنجيل لوقا ...ولكن كما وضحنا ...هوية المؤلف غير مؤكدة


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1300165632





ويؤكد لنا ايضا قاموس الكتاب المُقدس ...ان عناوين الأناجيل تم اضافتها فى القرن الثانى ....

" نسب الكتاب المسيحيون في القرن الثاني الميلادي، الأربعة الأناجيل إلى متى ومرقس ولوقا ويوحنا. وقد تسلمت الكنيسة هذه الكتابات كسجلات يوثق بها وذات سلطان إذ تحتوي على شهادة الرسل عن حياة المسيح وتعاليمه "

ويقول شارن وارنر (6)

معظم العلماء يتفقون ان إنجيل متى ولوقا تم كتابة كل منهما بمعزل عن الأخر ...كل من كاتب متى لوقا ( نكرر أن المؤلفين الحقيقيين غير معلومين ) ...استخدم إنجيل مرقس كواحد من مصادره الأساسية .



http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/attachme...1&d=1300161819

---

نقلا عن
http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t183923.html

من قالوا بعقيدة “شُبِّه لَهُم” قبل الإسلام:
·باسيليدس:
نظرة شاملة لعلم الباترولوجي في الستة قرون الأولى: [باسيليدس (حوالي 120 - 125م) المسيح لم يمت على الصليب بل مات عليه سمعان القيرواني.][[2]]
الصَّلِيب والصَّلْب قبل الميلاد وبعده: [الفداء يتم إذاً بمعرفة الوحي الإلهي معرفةً داخليةً. وفي الطريق إلى الجلجثة, خرج يسوع عن جسده الشبحيّ وألقى شكله على سمعان القيرينيّ الذي ساعده في حمل صليبه. وعادت كلمة الله إلى السماء, وصلب سمعان مكانها. فالغنوصيُّون البازيليديّون لا يقبلون بأن اليهود صلبوا كلمة الله المتجسِّد, ويقولون إنه شُبِّه لهم ذلك.][[3]]
Irenaeus Against Heresies- Book 1, Chap 24, Verse 4: [But the father without birth and without name, perceiving that they would be destroyed, sent his own first-begotten Nous (he it is who is called Christ) to bestow deliverance on them that believe in him, from the power of those who made the world. He appeared, then, on earth as a man, to the nations of these powers, and wrought miracles. Wherefore he did not himself suffer death, but Simon, a certain man of Cyrene, being compelled, bore the cross in his stead; so that this latter being transfigured by him, that he might be thought to be Jesus, was crucified, through ignorance and error, while Jesus himself received the form of Simon, and, standing by, laughed at them. For since he was an incorporeal power, and the Nous (mind) of the unborn father, he transfigured himself as he pleased, and thus ascended to him who had sent him, deriding them, inasmuch as he could not be laid hold of, and was invisible to all. Those, then, who know these things have been freed from the principalities who formed the world; so that it is not incumbent on us to confess him who was crucified, but him who came in the form of a man, and was thought to be crucified, and was called Jesus, and was sent by the father, that by this dispensation he might destroy the works of the makers of the world. If anyone, therefore, he declares, confesses the crucified, that man is still a slave, and under the power of those who formed our bodies; but he who denies him has been freed from these beings, and is acquainted with the dispensation of the unborn father.][[4]]
ترجمة الفقرة الـمُلَوَّنة: وهكذا هو بنفسه لم يُعاني الموت، ولكن سمعان، وهو رجل قيروانيّ، أُجْبِرَ على حمل الصليب بدلاً من المسيح؛ بحيث تم تحويل هذا الأخير من قبل المسيح، حتى أصبح يُعتقد أنه يسوع، وتم صلبه عن طريق الجهل والخطأ، في حين أن يسوع نفسه أخذ شكل سمعان، و وقف بجانبهم، يسخر منهم.
·رسالة شيت الأكبر الثانية:
Bart D. Ehrman: Lost Scriptures:[Like other gnostic teachers, such as Basilides, the unknown author of this book thinks that Simon of Cyrene, who bore Jesus’ cross, was mistakenly crucified in his place, while Jesus looked on and laughed. (…) This book, which was discovered at Nag Hammadi, probably dates from the third century.][[5]]
The Second Treatise of the Great Seth: [As for me, on the one hand they saw me; they punished me. Another, their father, was the one who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I. They were hitting me with the reed; another was the one who lifted up the cross on his shoulder, who was Simon. Another was the one on whom they put the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the riches of the archons and the offspring of their error and their conceit, and I was laughing at their ignorance. And all their powers I brought into subjection. For when I came down no one saw me. For I kept changing my forms above, transforming from appearance to appearance. And on account of this, when I was at their gates I kept taking their likeness. For I passed them by quietly, and I was viewing the places, and I did not fear nor was I ashamed, for I was undefiled.][[6]]
·رؤيا بطرس القبطي:
Bart D. Ehrman: Lost Scriptures: [For this author, the true significance of Jesus’ death goes much deeper. Even though Jesus’ flesh was killed, Christ himself was far removed from suffering; those who beheld the cross with full knowledge (gnosis) did not see the suffering Jesus but the living Christ, who was himself laughing at the entire proceeding. Jesus was merely his outward appearance, just as simple-minded Christians are nothing but the outward appearance of the living ones who have been fully enlightened by the spiritual truth of the immortal Christ. Most scholars have dated this gnostic treatise to the third century.][[7]]
The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter: [When he had said those things, I saw him apparently being seized by them. And I said, “What am I seeing, O Lord? Is it you yourself whom they take? And are you holding on to me? Who is this one above the cross, who is glad and laughing? And is it another person whose feet and hands they are hammering?” The Savior said to me, “He whom you see above the cross, glad and laughing, is the living Jesus. But he into whose hands and feet they are driving the nails is his physical part, which is the substitute. They are putting to shame that which is in his likeness. But look at him and me.”][[8]]

ملاحظة : نقلا عن الأخ الحبيب التاعب
http://alta3b.wordpress.com/blog/lect/moqarana/salib-2/