A Further Thought on the ‘King Papyrus’ (Or Jesus’ Wife Snippet or Whatever)

Lest we forget, scholars have been duped a number of times – falling for clever forgeries foisted off on them through ‘anonymous’ donors and ‘antiquities dealers’.  Remember the ‘Ivory Pomegranate’?  The ‘James Ossuary Inscription’?  The ‘Jehoash Inscription’?  The ‘Lead Codices’?  The ‘Secret Gospel of Mark’?

It’s past time, again, I would insist, for us to accept as legitimate anything, anything at all, that doesn’t come from a controlled dig.  I think, further, that ASOR is right, as a matter of policy, to refuse to publish such things.  Harvard should refuse to as well.  As should the Biblical Archaeology Review (but of course that won’t happen).

Every time an unprovenanced artifact is published, an angel loses its wings and becomes a homeless beggar on the streets of Calcutta.  If the present trend continues, heaven will be emptied of those poor benighted creatures due to the human quest for novelty and notoriety.

Now if Dr. King has an artifact from a controlled dig, cool.  If not, then why has it become public?

About Jim

I am a Pastor, and Lecturer in Church History and Biblical Studies at Ming Hua Theological College.
This entry was posted in pseudo-archaeology, pseudo-scholarship and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.