what i dont get is that the article says
"The manuscript was mentioned around AD 180 by Bishop Irenaeus of Lyon, who called it fictitious."
Yet it also says
"The University of Arizona carbon-dated five tiny samples of papyrus and leather binding to between AD 220 and AD 340, and other tests backed up that conclusion."
i dont get it?
Also i didnt know how to put the pic in the article so here it is...
