Divinity of Jesus

Begging your pardon, but how does a fragment that is dated via the style of writing , arbitrarily dated to 135 c.e. (but the methodology has an error factor of +- 100 years ) show that John was written in the first century?I would like to see the reasoning there. It is quite feasible that the Ryland fragment is even 3rd century, not first , because of the margin of error of the analysis. It COULD be first century too. But, you can't demonstrate it at all.

Point in case. The word translated as 'virgin' here is 'Almah' in the Hebrew. The word as translated into the Greek, which Matthew used, was 'parthenos' which often meant virgin,but was not exclusively virgin.
The Hebrew term means 'young maiden'.And, if you read Isaiah on context, Isaiah is talking about his wife, since it says in Isaiah 8:4 "I went to the prophetess and insured she conceived'". Now.. even if she WAS a virgin in 7:14, there is only one way I know of back then a man could 'insure' a young lady conceived.That doesn't keep her virginity intact.