Freethought & Rationalism Archive

vid · 06-11-2008, 02:19 AM

The prophecy about Messiah returning in 3 days, doubtly dated to 1st century BC. Finally I was able to find full text online.

Follow link named "here" in this article:
http://www.hartman.org.il/SHInews_Vi...Article_Id=124

There is PDF copy of article (hosted on FTP server with login provided by link). Not sure how long it will be working, in case you miss it contact me.

This topic was previously discussed here: "Gabriel Revelation"--a new stone 1st cen. BCE stone inscription re: the Messiah?

vid · 06-11-2008, 02:22 AM

Also here is pre-Jewish Ugaritic text from ~1200BC which could mention idea of returning to life on 3rd day:

http://ntwrong.wordpress.com/2008/05...the-third-day/

andrewcriddle · 06-11-2008, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid

This topic was previously discussed here

See also
3 Day prophecy found?

Andrew Criddle

Toto · 11-12-2009, 01:03 PM

Update:

National Geographic has scheduled a TV special

Quote:

He called himself the King of the Jews, likely considered to be a Messiah. Just around Passover, the Romans killed him and crucified many of his followers outside Jerusalem. But his name was not Jesus... it was Simon, a self-proclaimed Messiah who died four years before Christ was born. Now, new analysis of a three-foot-tall stone tablet from the first century B.C., may speak of an early Messiah and his resurrection. We'll go to Israel to assess this unique and mysterious artifact, including comprehensive review of the script and content by a Dead Sea Scroll expert. Then, from Jerusalem to Jericho, we'll investigate key archeological ruins that could help prove Simon was indeed real.

Dismay has been expressed by April DeConick and PaleoBabble.

Toto · 11-12-2009, 01:05 PM

spin has a blog post here on the question.

show_no_mercy · 11-12-2009, 02:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

He called himself the King of the Jews, likely considered to be a Messiah. Just around Passover, the Romans killed him and crucified many of his followers outside Jerusalem. But his name was not Jesus... it was Simon, a self-proclaimed Messiah who died four years before Christ was born. Now, new analysis of a three-foot-tall stone tablet from the first century B.C., may speak of an early Messiah and his resurrection. We'll go to Israel to assess this unique and mysterious artifact, including comprehensive review of the script and content by a Dead Sea Scroll expert. Then, from Jerusalem to Jericho, we'll investigate key archeological ruins that could help prove Simon was indeed real.

Josephus writes about him in "Antiquities" 17.10.6 FWIW. And he doesn't say that he was crucified, but had been behedead.

Quote:

6. There was also Simon, who had been a slave of Herod the king, but in other respects a comely person, of a tall and robust body; he was one that was much superior to others of his order, and had had great things committed to his care. This man was elevated at the disorderly state of things, and was so bold as to put a diadem on his head, while a certain number of the people stood by him, and by them he was declared to be a king, and thought himself more worthy of that dignity than any one else. He burnt down the royal palace at Jericho, and plundered what was left in it. He also set fire to many other of the king's houses in several places of the country, and utterly destroyed them, and permitted those that were with him to take what was left in them for a prey; and he would have done greater things, unless care had been taken to repress him immediately; for Gratus, when he had joined himself to some Roman soldiers, took the forces he had with him, and met Simon, and after a great and a long fight, no small part of those that came from Perea, who were a disordered body of men, and fought rather in a bold than in a skillful manner, were destroyed; and although Simon had saved himself by flying away through a certain valley, yet Gratus overtook him, and cut off his head. The royal palace also at Amathus, by the river Jordan, was burnt down by a party of men that were got together, as were those belonging to Simon. And thus did a great and wild fury spread itself over the nation, because they had no king to keep the multitude in good order, and because those foreigners who came to reduce the seditious to sobriety did, on the contrary, set them more in a flame, because of the injuries they offered them, and the avaricious management of their affairs.

maryhelena · 11-12-2009, 11:17 PM

Posted Thursday, September 3, 2009, on the blog of Dr Victor Sasson

http://victorsasson.blogspot.com/200...essiah-in.html

Quote:

Textual and Philological Comments on the Vision of Gabriel

I shall first discuss the phrase dam tibhei yerushalayim (line 57) and a couple of other significant words and lines, and then delve into other related issues.
The term tebah (from the root tabah – with Het - to slaughter) occurs in Lamentations 2:21. Addressing God, the poet makes a heart-rending complaint, referring to the destruction of Jerusalem with its Temple, and the slaughter perpetrated by the invaders:

In my own overall assessment of the fragmentary text, we can be certain that in the Vision of Gabriel there is not ONE single, clear reference to a dead and risen mashiah (messiah). For in a relatively long epigraphic text like this one, comprising 87 lines, there should be at least ONE single, clear mention of the word ‘mashiah’, if not several mentions of that phantom creature, considering the constant repetition of other words and lines, noted earlier in this essay.

Summary
The Vision of Gabriel contains a text that is similar to other earlier biblical prophetic texts that speak of apocalyptic visions and of dire consequences. The language used is more akin to later Hebrew, reminiscent of Mishnaic. While certain words and phrases are repeated in the text, there is not one single mention of the word mashiah.
Based on the Hebrew Scriptures, the mashiah that the Jews have always hoped for and waited for cannot be a dead and risen individual. He is an anointed one, divinely ordained for a mission – a mission to herald peace, justice and universal good to His people and to the world. From the point of view of the Hebrew canonical sacred writings – the Hebrew Scriptures - and authoritative, mainstream Jewish traditions, the messiah is not a personal saviour. The sole personal and universal Saviour is God himself, and He is so proclaimed in the Pentateuch and in the Hebrew Prophets. “I am, I am the Lord, and there is no other Saviour besides me” (Isa. 43:11), and “I am the First and I am the Last and besides me there is no other God” (Isa. 44:6). The concept of a resurrected messiah is a thoroughly foreign/Hellenized/Greek concept, patently spurious and has no place in the culture of the Hebrew Bible and normative Judaism (7).

dog-on · 11-13-2009, 04:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Update:

National Geographic has scheduled a TV special

Quote:

He called himself the King of the Jews, likely considered to be a Messiah. Just around Passover, the Romans killed him and crucified many of his followers outside Jerusalem. But his name was not Jesus... it was Simon, a self-proclaimed Messiah who died four years before Christ was born. Now, new analysis of a three-foot-tall stone tablet from the first century B.C., may speak of an early Messiah and his resurrection. We'll go to Israel to assess this unique and mysterious artifact, including comprehensive review of the script and content by a Dead Sea Scroll expert. Then, from Jerusalem to Jericho, we'll investigate key archeological ruins that could help prove Simon was indeed real.

Dismay has been expressed by April DeConick and PaleoBabble.

Not sure of this stone, myself, but once again I am amazed by DeConick.

She, perhaps rightfully excoriates the media for sensationalism, but seems oblivious to the fact that the gospel authors did, indeed, have a source for the idea of the 3 day motif even though she specifically mentions it.

Quote:

1 "Come, let us return to the LORD.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will restore us,
that we may live in his presence.

And if the gospel writers used this in the first or second century AD, why is it so impossible that someone writing in the first century BC couldn't have done the same.

The only reason I can think of is bcause Mrs. DeConick has a certain preconception that she would rather not abandon.

dog-on · 11-13-2009, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Update:

National Geographic has scheduled a TV special

Dismay has been expressed by April DeConick and PaleoBabble.

Not sure of this stone, myself, but once again I am amazed by DeConick.

She, perhaps rightfully excoriates the media for sensationalism, but seems oblivious to the fact that the gospel authors did, indeed, have a source for the idea of the 3 day motif even though she specifically mentions it.

Quote:

1 "Come, let us return to the LORD.
He has torn us to pieces
but he will heal us;
he has injured us
but he will bind up our wounds.
2 After two days he will revive us;
on the third day he will restore us,
that we may live in his presence.

And if the gospel writers used this in the first or second century AD, why is it so impossible that someone writing in the first century BC couldn't have done the same.

The only reason I can think of is bcause Mrs. DeConick has a certain preconception that she would rather not abandon.

On reading the Paleobabble post, perhaps I am mistaken regarding DeConick's intentions, but I remain skeptical.

avi · 11-13-2009, 05:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paleobabble

The same people (ask April) who screwed up the Gospel of Judas.

How did National Geographic "screw up" the report on the discovery of the Gospel according to Judas?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dog-on

Not sure of this stone, myself, but once again I am amazed by DeConick.

She, perhaps rightfully excoriates the media for sensationalism, but seems oblivious to the fact that the gospel authors did, indeed, have a source for the idea of the 3 day motif even though she specifically mentions it.
...
And if the gospel writers used this in the first or second century AD, why is it so impossible that someone writing in the first century BC couldn't have done the same.

The only reason I can think of is bcause Mrs. DeConick has a certain preconception that she would rather not abandon.

I perhaps misunderstand, entirely, what is going on, for I have no idea about Ms. DeConick, and have never before encountered paleobabble, so I am quite perplexed. I have the National Geographic article, somewhere, I think, about Judas, but I don't recall what it states, so, I am confused about the arguments.

I thought that Ms. DeConick explained that the Jewish professor who examined the stone refuted, entirely, the notion that the word "messiah" existed on the Gabriel Stone. Further, I thought that she or someone else had explained the old testament tradition of three days to receive some sort of benefit from yahweh, so that there was nothing new or original about this Gabriel stone, and very little of any substance to refute the myth of Christianity.

What are the issues being debated?
What is her preconception or bias that derails her attempt to perform an objective analysis?
:huh:

avi

06-11-2008, 02:19 AM	#1
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Gabriel Revelation / Prophecy of Gabriel The prophecy about Messiah returning in 3 days, doubtly dated to 1st century BC. Finally I was able to find full text online. Follow link named "here" in this article: http://www.hartman.org.il/SHInews_Vi...Article_Id=124 There is PDF copy of article (hosted on FTP server with login provided by link). Not sure how long it will be working, in case you miss it contact me. This topic was previously discussed here: "Gabriel Revelation"--a new stone 1st cen. BCE stone inscription re: the Messiah?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-11-2008, 02:22 AM	#2
vid Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Myjava, Slovakia Posts: 384	Also here is pre-Jewish Ugaritic text from ~1200BC which could mention idea of returning to life on 3rd day: http://ntwrong.wordpress.com/2008/05...the-third-day/

11-12-2009, 01:05 PM	#5
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	spin has a blog post here on the question.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.