A fragmentary single leaf of Jeremiah, with parts of chapters IV and V, IX and X.
Originally treated as two MSS, it later became clear that these were parts of one.
Only in the fourth century, with the acceptance of Christianity by Constantine, did the New Testament as we know it take form in a single volume.
(For more on the evolution of the Bible, see the online exhibit, From Papyri to King James). The results of comparisons were that the characteristics of P 46 were slightly more similar to the earlier papyri. Comfort refuted Kim's arguments and presented their own proposed dates, but without full agreement among themselves; Metzger dated P46 to about A. The comparable papyri were categorized in five half-century time periods from the second half of the first century to the second half of the third century.Contains parts of Numbers and Deuteronomy, part of which is at Ann Arbor, Michigan.It has no notable new readings but is significant because of its early date. The paleographical characteristics of P46 were investigated and evaluated against 310 comparable manuscripts divided into three bookhand types: 154 documentary papyri, 108 literary papyri, and 48 reformed documentary papyri. 175-225, Pickering to the late second century, and Comfort to the middle to late second century (about A. The goal of this dissertation was to examine afresh the paleographical data for comparison purposes in dating P46 and thereby to determine the most probable date of the papyrus.These documents, part of a considerable stream of newer textual evidence, must be evaluated in the exegesis of particular passages. However, it is now fragmentary, large parts of Mark and Luke and less of the others remaining. The text of Mark here found confirmed the existence in Egypt in the 3rd cent. Its text agrees closely with that of B and the important Athos MS 1739 which give a good text with a low proportion of corruptions, the product of Christian scholarship.of a text-type already known from Origen’s quotations. Contains , with rather less loss by accidental mutilation than in MS IV. Based on the results of the research, the probable date of P 46 is A. 75-200, with even a third century date not being out of the question. That view was shattered by Young Kyu Kim's assertion that the date of P46 was the late first century. In addition, their assertions on such matters as nomina sacra and the formation, collection, and circulation of the Pauline Epistles were not decisive for dating P 46.