Recently there was an ancient tablet discovered that dates to the late first century B.C.  It is a supposed message given by Gabriel to what is believed to be the followers of a Jewish rebel named Simon.  Possibly the same Simon that Josephus mentions in his Antiquities.  Some have claimed it to disprove the uniqueness of Christianity and show it was common to make this assumption on people at that time[1].  Does it really mean that?  And if not, what significance does it have on Christianity as a whole?

It’s interesting to note that most of the material in the Gabriel’s Revelation tablet comes from Daniel , Zechariah and Haggai .  However, what has the anti-theists in an uproar is that this tablet may prophesy the death and resurrection, of a savior, after 3 days.  They then use this to make the claim that the concept of a messiah being dead for 3 days and being resurrected was not a new claim.

My response to this is: duh.

Biblical prophecy predicted the resurrection centuries beforehand.  Isaiah 53 and Psalm 22 have the most detailed accounts.  In this, the anti-theists are correct, a resurrected messiah was not a new story.  It was prophesied about centuries before it happened.

Now let’s talk about the tablet itself for a moment.  The specific line in question says “In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you.”  I, personally, have not read the tablet.  I’m hoping to see if I can get a decent translation of the whole thing.  However, it is important to note that the word “live” is smudged out and is ,according to more than one scholar, unreadable.  However, if it does say “live,” it is followed by a line that says he is talking to the “prince of princes”.  One scholar says it is debatable on whether the “prince of princes” it mentions is even referencing Simon.  So this supposed prophecy of a resurrection, if it were authentic (though I have my doubts) could simply be a more specific prophecy about Jesus or the Messiah to come.

Aside from those uncertainties, let’s say this prophecy is about Simon, the Jewish rebel.  I still do not see how this affects Christianity.  Perhaps they hoped Simon was the messiah; however, no one ever claimed that Simon came back to life.  Even Josephus does not say that anyone made this claim; however, when he mentioned Jesus, he acknowledged that some thought he was the Messiah.  Two times Josephus affirms that people at least thought Jesus was the Messiah.  Never does he claim this about Simon.

So even if this random, unpopular Jewish Sect thought Simon might be resurrected they never claimed it after he died. If they did it certainly did not catch the attention of any significant amount of people.

Israel Knohl, an iconoclastic professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, said this:

This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.

Mr. Knohl is wrong in this statement.  He wants to take the concept of Gabriel’s Revelation and apply it to the meaning of the theology of Christianity.  However, these two people, Simon and Jesus, were two very different people.  Simon did rebel in a violent way.  He tried to lead a rebellion against Rome with force.  Jesus did no such thing.  He turned down his followers when they offered to make him king, and he told the Jews to pay their taxes and obey the government.  That does not sound like the words of a military rebel to me.

Mr. Knohl’s theory of blood shed for the redemption of Israel and not for salvation from sins cannot be applied to Christianity.  Even the 12 disciples initially expected Jesus to reign as king of Israel freeing them from Roman rule, but Jesus specifically taught different.  It is only in Jewish tradition that the Messiah will come and conquer in God’s name.  It is not presented in the prophecies.

What this tablet does, is confirm what we already knew through the Gospels.  That people thought the Messiah would be a military leader, like Simon.  However, Jesus did something totally unexpected, yet written about long before.  He came to save the world not with violence, but with love and compassion.

If a three day resurrection of the Messiah was a popular idea at the time it is significant to note that in every single case, except for Jesus, the followers of what they thought was the messiah dispersed after that person died.  No claims of a resurrection followed their death.

It would have happened to Jesus’ followers too.  After Jesus crucifixion they were ready to go their own way.  To go home and hide, and forget all about Jesus.  They were distraught, and some lost all hope.  I imagine that it is what happened to the followers of Simon, they were given no sign or hope and their sect faded into time as the illusion that it always was.  But, not Jesus’ followers.  On that third day Jesus did rise again and renew their hope.  There was no more despair, they knew then that they were following the true Messiah.

These disciples would then go on, every single one of them, to be persecuted to the highest degree and all but one martyred in horrible ways because of their steadfast hope in the leader that really did come back from the grave.

Simon’s followers did not.  It is not recorded that anyone after his death claimed that he rose again. Nor were they persecuted for this belief because they simply saw that Simon did not come back.  He was dead, and so was his rebellion.

Who would die for something they claimed to have seen but did not?  If-as the anti-theists claim-the three day resurrection prophecy was common to most Jewish rebels leading their cause, why didn’t any of those other followers die for what they thought was the messiah after their death?  I mean any of them at all?  The pattern of every one of the false messiah’s was that they died and their followers no longer had faith in them.  In Jesus Christ alone we find that after Jesus’ death his followers did not abandon their faith, and they even claimed to have seen his resurrected body with their own eyes.  Not one single person left that saw the resurrection for themselves, and all of them were martyred except John who was exiled.  No other messiah figure can make that claim, so Gabriel’s Revelation doesn’t even dent any of the claims of Christianity, if anything it supports and verifies them.

Update 7/23/08

On reading more on this topic, Joel Rosenberg mentions that this finding does fly in the face of both secular and Jewish ideas that the three day resurrection was a later Greek/Gentile addition[2].  They once felt it was added later because no concept of it was ever found specifically in Jewish tradition.  Those theorists have to take a step back now and accept that a three day death and resurrection was what was expected from the coming Messiah.

On further examination of its contents, the three day resurrection was not all that is given in the tablet.  It also is clear that Jewish tradition of the time was that the bloodshed of the Messiah would bring redemption[3].  Though the tablet itself may speak of only the redemption of Israel, the concept of the blood of the Messiah offering redemption was also what was expect from the coming Christ.

Though I have read some arguments that the tablet is not authentic, I have not read any thing credible against its authenticity.  The amount of scrutiny put on it to determine it is a fake could extend to the majority of finds ever made.  Such as the idea that not being able to carbon date the ink or not know its specific place of origin.  Not knowing something in archaeology does not disprove it.  There is room for doubt in absolutely any archaeological find.  Historical Science works off of Plato’s philosophy that it is given the benefit of the doubt until it is disqualified or disqualifies itself.

Christians responding with “It’s a fake and you can’t prove other wise!” are ignoring the evidence for the authenticity.  The stone and writing is consistent with the time period and will be considered authentic until proven otherwise.  Room for doubt is not evidence it is a fake.

1. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss , visited 7/6/08
2. Joel Rosenburg, MISSILES & THE MESSIAH MAKING NEWS, Thursday, July 10, 2008, http://joelrosenberg.blogspot.com/
3. http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=128&view=item&idx=1790

Tags: Ancient Tablet, Antiquities, Assumption, Biblical Prophecy, Centuries, death and resurrection, doubts, Followers, Haggai, Isaiah 53, Jesus, Josephus, messiah, Prince Of Princes, psalm 22, Revelation, Savior, Scholar, Theists, Uncertainties, Uniqueness Of Christianity, uproar, Zechariah