Dead Sea Tablet Said to Cast Doubt on Jesus' Death and Resurrection

[John317]

From Times Online

July 8, 2008

Dead Sea tablet 'casts doubt on death and resurrection of Jesus'

Opinions of what the tablet’s writing means are deeply divided

Sheera Frenkel in Jerusalem

One of Christianity’s most central tenets, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, has been called into question by a radical new interpretation of a mysterious tablet found on the banks of the Dead Sea.

The three-foot stone tablet appears to refer to a messiah who rose from the grave three days after his death despite the fact it was created decades before Jesus' birth.

Known as Gabriel’s Vision of Revelation, the tablet imparts an apocalyptic vision of the archangel Gabriel but archaeologists and biblical scholars are divided over the text.

The ink is badly faded on much of the stone, which was written, rather than engraved on the tablet in the first century BC. The illegibility of much of the text has led some to assert that more is being interpreted from the stone than is reasonable.

RELATED LINKS

Vatican expresses 'regret' over women bishops

Church of England votes to ordain women bishops

A previous paper published by Ada Yardeni and Binyamin Elitzur concluded that the most controversial lines were indecipherable. But Israel Knohl, a biblical studies professor at Jerusalem's Hebrew University, now argues that line 80 of the text reveals Gabriel telling a historic Jewish rebel named Simon, who was killed by the Romans in 4 BC: "In three days you shall live, I Gabriel, command you."

Knohl contends that the tablet demonstrates that long before Jesus of Nazareth was born, messianic followers possessed the paradigm of their leader rising from the grave again.

The tablet could "overturn the vision we have of the historic personality of Jesus", said Professor Knohl, who added that the text "could be the missing link between Judaism and Christianity in so far as it roots the Christian belief in the resurrection of the messiah in Jewish tradition".

Professor Knohl defended his theory at a conference at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem today marking 60 years since the discovery of another controversial archaeological find, the Dead Sea scrolls.

He told international scholars that New Testament writers could have adapted a widely-held messianic story in Judaism to Jesus and his followers.

"Resurrection after three days becomes a motif developed before Jesus, which runs contrary to nearly all scholarship. What happens in the New Testament was adopted by Jesus and his followers based on an earlier messiah story."

Several attendees in the conference said that there was too much speculation in Knohl’s work and suggested he was using the tablet to reinforce a theory that he already presented in his 2002 book, "The Messiah before Jesus".

Moshe Bar-Asher, president of the Israeli Academy of Hebrew Language, said that he would publish his own paper on the tablet in coming months that took into account possible variations in the text.

Professor Knohl said that he was aware that the tablet could upset Christian devotees. For some, the stone confirms Christianity’s roots in Jewish tradition, while others feel that the tablet discredits the resurrection as a reproduction of an ancient fable.

The owner of the tablet, Swiss-Israeli David Jeselsohn, said that he was not entirely convinced of Knohl’s interpretation of the text, but was excited about the discovery nonetheless.

"I am more cautious than Knohl. He has his idea that the Messiah and Judaism predated Christianity. The whole thing is fascinating. Some people say it may take away from the uniqueness of Jesus’ resurrected but I believe it gives credibility to the story that the followers were expecting a messiah," he said.

Jeselsohn, who bought the tablet form a respected antiquities dealer in London, said he stored it in his private collection for nearly a decade before its significance was realized.

"It is really my fault that it took so long to be discovered," said Jeselsohn, who focused on other items on his collection for years before another archaeological expert took notice of the tablet.

"I showed it to Ada Yardeni, who said that the script looked like biblical text and that it could be an important find," said Jeselsohn.

Many of the details of the tablet’s origins are unknown, but it probably came from a religious site or public place along Jordan’s eastern coast of the Dead Sea. The stone is extremely well preserved because it was kept in a dry place, strengthening the theory, say experts, that it was originally kept not far from the site of Wadi Qumran where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found.

The tablets are one of several archaeological discoveries made around the Dead Sea region in recent years that challenge commonly held notions of the Judeo-Christian faiths.

[phkrause]

I didn't get that from the article. It seemed more to validate Jesus than not.

[Amelia]

I guess y'all didn't notice I posted this yesterday here

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthrea...BATE#Post175973

[LifeHiscost]

I guess y'all didn't notice I posted this yesterday here

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthrea...BATE#Post175973

I should have let you know, Amelia, that I was wondering why I should be concerned about a negative report concerning Jesus found in an archaelogical find, when I can find innumerable books from present day authors who wish to promote disbelief in Him. That is not meant as a criticism of your post, but as the subsequent post alludes, one can find whatever he/she wishes to find about the veracity of the record of Jesus' Divine origins.

My continueing faith in Him is dependent upon what He has done and is continueing to do upon my heart, which judging from your posts, is probably the way you think also.

"....that you may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us, the apostles of the Lord and Savior, knowing this first: that scoffers will come in the last days, walking according to their own lusts, and saying, “Where is the promise of His coming? For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.”" 2 Peter 3:2-4 NKJV.

God's blessings!

[Kevin H]

If true this should not attack our faith in Jesus. It may attack our faith in fundamentalism, but not in Jesus.

The idea of the great hero dieing and raising in 3 days is ancient and in most cultures, probably comes from the knowldge that Noah carried from the flood and became corupted in the different cultures. For example in the Canaanite religion Baal fights the leviathan (the 7 headed sea monster that was the ancient word's understanding of the devil) who wounds Baal's heal draging Baal under the waters tearing Baal appart killing Baal. On the third day Anat, Baal's sister and wife asks God for Baal to resurect from the dead. God gives permission, Anat gathers together the parts of Baal's body, puts them together and says "Baal, son of God, come forth, your Father calls you."

Baal raises from the dead, goes back to leviathan giving him a deadly wound in the 6th of his 7 heads, and assends to heaven. As Baal and Anat approach heaven they see the gods, sitting in their position of judgment at the gates, with their heads between their knees crying because Baal died and they did not hear about the resurection. Anat cries to them "Lift up your heads all ye gods and be lifted up ye ancient ones so the king of glory may pass in!" Astonished the gods ask "Who is this king of glory?" Anat replys "Baal strong and mighty, Baal mighty in battle. Lift up your heads all ye gods and be lifted up ye ancient ones that the king of glory may pass in." Being excited about the good news the god's long to have the good news told again "Baal, he is the king of glory."

[John317]

I didn't get that from the article. It seemed more to validate Jesus than not.

I don't disagree with you, but the title of the newspaper article is that the "tablet casts doubt on Jesus death and resurrection." I actually don't think it does, but then the article also goes on to mention the fact that it is being understood in different ways.

I don't think the truth has anything to fear from close scrutiny and examination. It is time that we know if what we believe is true or not. I do not know how this could change anything because the authorities are not yet even certain if it is genuine or not. Nor are they all in agreement on what it says, let alone what it signifies. Nor is there agreement on exactly when it was written, whether before Christ or after Christ.

But given what we know about Jesus' times, it shouldn't come as a surprise if there were others in that period who spoke of rising from the dead in 3 days. We know that there was a lot of talk in that period about the Messiah and what they should expect.

[John317]

I guess y'all didn't notice I posted this yesterday here

http://adventistforum.com/forum/ubbthrea...BATE#Post175973

Actually, yes, I do remember. You will find that I wrote a response to it right after you posted it. I only posted something about it again because the article I saw gave a different slant to it, to the effect that the stone casts doubt on Christ's death and resurrection. I hadn't noticed this emphasis before, so it caught my attention.

[John317]

If true this should not attack our faith in Jesus. It may attack our faith in fundamentalism, but not in Jesus...

I would like to read more of your thinking about this, how it could attack faith in fundamentalism. What exactly do you mean by fundamentalism? It is used in different ways and does not always mean the same thing, of course.

[phkrause]

Yes I did. That's how how found out about the story. Since I didn't say it than let me say it now, Thanks for the link.

pkrause

[Gerr]

The idea of a dying & resurrected messiah is NOT a second century notion. Nay, it goes back to the OT. Isaiah, Daniel, and the Psalms proclaimed it. And Gen 3:15 alludes to it. Skeptics' attack seem to always create quite a sensation.

Gerry