The disputed text has several parallels to the "Gospel of Jesus Wife."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Codex_Escalada
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Jesus%27_Wife
(1) Both were privately tendered directly to a scholar who was calculated to be sympathetic (Father Escalada, Karen King).
(2) Both addressed relevant current-day concerns (existence of Juan Diego, Jesus' wife speculations) and are otherwise nothing new.
(3) Both are on a single page of material that is demonstrably old
(3)(a) It's easier to get hold of a single page to use as a canvas
(3)(b) It takes less work to finish the fraud
(3)(c) There is less chance of making an inadvertent error in a smaller text
(4) Both have implausibilities and unlikely coincidences for authenticity (of a non-physical-test sort)
Given that the review process for authenticating finds is well-known, to the extent that some characteristic signs of authenticity can be faked (like using an old parchment), many tests may only prove consistency either with authenticity or with fraud. I wonder how many other frauds like this are out there.
Codex Escalada
- Peter Kirby
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8027
- Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
- Location: Santa Clara
- Contact:
Codex Escalada
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown
Re: Codex Escalada
I remember reading on Bart Ehrman's blog about the Gospel of Jesus' wife a few days later. It was amazing how quickly the were able to date when it was forged, based upon the exact copy of a critical text.
-
- Posts: 2817
- Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am
Re: Codex Escalada
It is possible that the 1548 date on the manuscript is a later addition. The manuscript may be authentic in the sense of a genuine 16th century witness to the Marian apparitions, but date from the late 16th century rather than the mid 16th century.
Andrew Criddle
Andrew Criddle