I figured that before I start derailing your thread with my own examples I would address the one you give in the OP.
In terms of whether this was a "bit of relief" and solely an opinion piece, I can't see any reason why a reader should conclude this other than the article's daftness. As Tara Smith's comment pointsout, historical case studies are far from unheard of so I don't see why the editor felt that such a format should be treated as a joke.
Should peer review ... have prevented publication?
Frankly I'm surprised it ever got off the editor's desk. Having said that, a brief google on case studies of fictional characters brought up one for
Anakin Skywalker which is equally short, and I would suggest daft, although arguably it has a more substantial body of evidence to discuss.
As to the authors intent; I don't think one has to look for a creationist agenda, as such, but they certainly seem to be coming to the case from a christian viewpoint, i.e. 'our lord Jesus Christ', and possibly a literalist one, although as I say case studies of fictional characters are not unknown.
*ABE*On the
Retraction watch blog they have a comment from one of the authors who says that it was originally only supposed to be a piece in the debate section, which seems a bit better, but only a bit.*/ABE*
TTFN,
WK
Edited by Wounded King, : No reason given.