Dear John (Whitehorne) and every one else, Thank you to those who on or off list have encouraged me to let the discussion run on and/or to make sure that the 'biblicals' did not take it over completely. I, too, have enjoyed the lively discussion about the authenticity, the language, the translation &c - this is clearly what the PAPY-list is there for and we still have not solved the problem. I should personally like to have more opinions or, even better, fact about the ceramic. Also, some qualified considerations on what the text may mean, since the proposed translation is so clearly impossible. On the other hand, I do not see that the church-fathers or theology in general, can contribute any more than they have already. Adam
Thanks for this, Stephen. This is mainly for Adam as list administrator - hi Adam, could you let discussion of this magical mystery pot run on, please, provided it doesnt get too OTT. I think that this is the most lively I have seen papy-l for many years. Jack and John L. - could you in turn take your discussion of the dating of the gospels off list, please - it seems to be getting personal rather than papyrological.. Thanks John
