Köln 255, the original editors' proposal of a mid second century date for the Egerton Papyrus accords better with the paleographic evidence of dated comparator documentary and literary hands for both On the one hand, some scholars have maintained that Egerton's unknown author composed by borrowing from the canonical gospels.
This solution has not proved satisfactory for several reasons: The Egerton Gospel's parallels to the synoptic gospels lack editorial language peculiar to the synoptic authors, Matthew, Mark, and Luke.
He also finds words such as the plural "priests" that show lack of knowledge of Jewish customs.
I have included the links to the entire question explanation, along with the first paragraph of each answer. This is not an issue of chauvinism or discrimination.
The work cannot be dismissed as "apocrypha" or "heretical" without compromising the orthodoxy of the Gospel of John.Because this papyrus presents traditions in a less developed form than John does, it was probably composed in the second half of the first century, in Syria, shortly before the Gospel of John was written." François Bovon observes that the Egerton fragments "sound very Johannine" but also includes a number of terms characteristic of the Gospel of Luke, Helmut Koester and J. Crossan have argued that despite its apparent historical importance, the text is not well known.It is a mere fragment, and does not bear a clear relationship to any of the four canonical gospels.He finds many parallels between the Egerton Gospel and the canonical Gospels that include editorial language particular to Matthew and Luke.While Koester argues that these show a tradition before the other gospels, Craig Evans sees these as drawing from the other Gospels just as Justin Martyr did.