Between WWN, Sun, and Earth

Opposing Voices II

[Ebal, twenty-two of thirty]

The last post sets up tension in our Curse Tablet story. Stripling alleges that his artifact challenges world history. Haughwout counters that he has disproved such.

Henceforth, Haughwout suggests that Stripling’s positions qualify only for grocery-aisle tabloid offerings. In essence, they are like Bigfoot and Freddie Mercury sightings.

Note

This is the twenty-second post of my memorandum on the Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet. It is also the second to assess opposing voices.

If you have accessed this post from other than captivatingtwists.com and wish to start the journey from the beginning, click here.

Otherwise, continue below.

In other words, Haughwout contends that he has nullified Stripling’s arguments. They are unfit for further serious consideration.

With Haughwout, a sizable contingent of authors and professional commentators agree.

This, a quick online search confirms. Google “Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet”. There you soon encounter offerings such as these:

• “New Studies Debunk Controversial Biblical ‘Curse Tablet’ from Mt. Ebal”;1
• “New academic articles heap fresh doubt on Mount Ebal ‘curse tablet’ interpretation;”2
• “Academic article on controversial 3,200-year-old ‘curse tablet fails to sway experts’ “3
• “Hook, Line, and Sinker: Mt. Ebal Curse Tablet Debunked?;”4
• “Don’t Be Fooled by the Mount Ebal Curse Tablet.” 5
• “The Mt. Ebal “inscription” is actually a Folding Lead Clasp.”6

Delve deeper into these, and you encounter statements from professionals like these:

• “This article is basically a textbook case of the Rorschach Test, and the authors of this article have projected upon a piece of lead the things they want it to say.” So advises Professor Christopher Rollston, an expert in Northwest Semitic languages. Dr Rollston is also the chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at George Washington University 1.
• “The images made it clear that there are no discernible letters on this piece of crumpled lead,” said Rollston. “And again, the authors’ drawing of the letters bears no real similarity to what is present in the images; “2
• “One big nothingburger”, says Dr. Robert Cargill, a professor at the University of Iowa. 3

Articles and opinions pro and con are, of course, appropriate. The scholarly process thrives on such.

But in this case, are there consequences of Haughwout declaring a refutation?

And if so, how might we best discern who has the better argument, Haughwout or Stripling?

These questions the next post addresses.

But for now, here is a question. What wild stories have you heard about Bigfoot, Freddie Mercury, or Leonardo da Vinci? Do you agree that archaeology is fertile ground for such?

Let me know in the comment section below.

Thank you for engaging this topic with me thus far!

The next post, I entitle: “A Plan”.

I hope that you will continue with me there.

If you appreciate this type of analysis, please “subscribe”, “like”, and “share”.

To support this work, you can donate below. If so, thank you for the encouragement.

Next post: “A Plan“