So not only has Philip been misquoted, but Margaret Barker has also been misquoted. I wrote her an email last night and she responded promptly, giving me permission to repost here:
Alas, I was not quoted correctly. I am discovering all sorts of things that I am supposed to have said.
My points are that they are codices and not scrolls, and ‘what are they forgeries of’ if they are forgeries.
Everything else is media generated.
No known Xn (Christian – ed.) iconography from the first generation, code was used in some Dead Sea Scrolls, also the old script.
General answer is ‘nobody knows yet what they are’.
On top of that Daniel O. McClellan has informed us that the email from Peter Thonemann, posted over at Daniel O. McClellan’s blog, is indeed authentic. This severely hurts the case for the tablets authenticity and makes Elkington look even more suspect. So there you have it. The news media cannot be trusted and unfortunately those who don’t have access to the information are the ones suffering most. See the other updates as well as the rest of the roundup here.
Filed under: Biblioblogging, Blog Memes, Scholarship, Society | Tagged: christianity, curse tablets, Daniel O. McClellan, David Elkington, Dilettante, jesus, Jesus tablets, Jordan, Judaism, lead tablets, Margaret Barker, messianic tablets, Paul Elkington, pseudo-archaeology, pseudo-christianity, pseudo-scholarship |