Myths about carbon dating Free online webcamming no credit cards or sign ups
In articles that I have authored I have stated that the NHC have been C14 dated to 348 CE plus or minus 60 years.
This may be an error on my part after a very hasty reading and notes on R Lane Fox’s “Pagans and Christians”.
Brown, with the help of a few friends, can even show us charts with the and therefore needed to be calibrated by him), complete with some very specific numbers.
The Coptic manuscript of the Gospel of Thomas (and its codex in the Nag Hammadi Library), however, has not been carbon dated by any lab, anywhere, at this time. Brown had come to realize the likelihood that he had made an error (perhaps on his own, or perhaps with someone else pointing it out to him).
For Brown, this was a citation regarding the C-14 dating of the bindings of a codex of the Nag Hammadi Library.
Brown would go on believing this (and repeating this) for several years.
For a moment, I almost believed it, in the conversations taking place on the Biblical Criticism & History forum.
However, I did not take years to figure out that it was completely false.
There was some pushback at first, but apparently the repetition of the legend, along with increasing amounts of detail and certainty expressed, helped the myth to survive so long.Notice that here, in this more formal presentation, just a hint of uncertainty (in the word “reportedly”) remains: A lot of what follows regards the Gospel of Judas find (but also the Nag Hammadi Library) and a particular thread in which Brown, as a layman, reached out for help with the science and the math (keeping that which was most useful to him), a discussion that ran from November 22, 2010 to March 3, 2011: There may indeed be some merit to the discussion of the Gospel of Judas manuscript and of Codex Tchacos, to which it belongs.A lot of the issues raised hinge on the difference between uncalibrated C-14 results and calibrated C-14 results, which ones have actually been published regarding the Gospel of Judas, how they should be interpreted, and how one should go from the uncalibrated to the calibrated results in the case of the Gospel of Judas, all of which is best left for another time.These appear to be the following: 1) Binding on the text – gospel of Thomas (to 350 CE) 2) Binding on the recent gospel Judas (to 280 CE /- 60 years) I am interested to determine whether there are any other carbon dating citations to new testament texts other than the above two. and finally has a citation to support his belief in the existence of a citation, which supports his belief in a C-14 dating of a codex of the Nag Hammadi Library, a belief which was held already as early as June/July of 2006, prior to reading this book.Brown makes the note (on August 3, 2007 or before): The reference to “materials” (interpreted as physical materials by Brown and thus supporting his belief in a C-14 dating), “bindings,” “padding,” and dating sufficed.