Author Nina Burleigh has penned an excellent, must-read Op-Ed in the Los Angeles Times entitled, “Faith, forgery, science — and the James Ossuary.”
Burleigh not only summarizes the case, but describes the growing problem stemming from scholars attempting to be truthful in the sensationalistic popular and legal environments to which they may not be accustomed. She also laments the problem of religions zealots appealing directly to the public to combat inconvenient scientific facts that undermine their faith claims:
The particulars of science matter little to zealots defending a creed…Attacking scientists is increasingly common as religious and ideological zealots flatly reject data that offend their creeds.
It is a very well written piece about an unfortunate problem in archaeology.
She also highlights a point that many supporters conveniently overlook: the judge specifically did not rule on the authenticity of the ossuary.
“This is not to say that the inscription on the ossuary is true and authentic and was written 2,000 years ago….
Rather, the prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Golan forged the ossuary.
“The prosecution failed to prove beyond all reasonable doubt what was stated in the indictment: that the ossuary is a forgery and that Mr. Golan or someone acting on his behalf forged it,” the judge stated.
There is a big difference between “it’s authentic” and “we can’t prove that he faked it beyond all reasonable doubt.”
Give it a read.
HT: Jim West.