From: Michael Roberts (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Dec 10 2002 - 17:58:07 EST
Surely the best historical response is that the ossuary is good
circumstantial evidence but not proof.
It does upset minimalists who want to discredit any history in the bible.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ted Davis" <TDavis@messiah.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 2:02 PM
> My brother, an ancient historian and archaeologist specializing in the
> Middle East, saw the "James" ossuary in Toronto last month. He believes
> "the same hand did the inscription. Not based on letter forms, but on the
> tool used to carve it and the depth of the letters. If it is a fake, who
> benefits? if it was an ancient fake, then it would have been placed in a
> reliquary and a church built over it. If a modern fake, it would have sold
> for more than $300!"
> This hardly proves that it came from the tomb of the biblical James, but
> the possibility is an obvious one.
> Ted Davis
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Dec 11 2002 - 00:14:35 EST