All Comments for: 'Dead Sea Scrolls on Stone' | Christianity Today

Free Newsletters:

RSS Feeds |

Audio |

Twitter

Home > 2008 > September

Christianity Today, September, 2008 |

'Dead Sea Scrolls on Stone'

Prof says first-century tablet tells of messiah who will die and rise.

Gordon Govier | posted 8/15/2008 08:47AM

A 2,000-year-old inscription, written in ink on a stone, is being called "a Dead Sea Scroll on stone." But New Testament scholars scoff at the idea that the inscription "should shake our basic view of ...

[Reader Reviews]

Average User Rating:

Rate and Comment on this article

Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 comments.

Page: 1

Show All

Nance

Posted: August 16, 2008 6:48 PM


The actual inscription doesn't reveal much--I read a transcription of the legible parts recently, and you can't make heads or tails of it. The CT poll this week makes it sound as if the one prominent, unlikely reading of the tablet is also the definitive one. It's a bit misleading.

Francis H. Geis

Posted: August 16, 2008 12:14 PM

An interesting article, about an interesting archaeological discovery, that perhaps gives some further insight into the varieties of Jewish messianism? Certainly. But is this artifact a threat to the historicity of the NT, or of the resurrection of Christ? Hardly. After all, Paul makes clear in 1 Cor. 15:1-11 that the resurrection of Christ was a historical event confirmed by a large number of eyewitnesses; it was not an object of mere messianic speculations. And so if the New Testament is historically reliable, and if the Risen Christ is truly dwelling among and in his people, there can be no "historical" discovery that can ever actually unravel our faith in our Living Lord.

John	Posted: August 16, 2008 11:58 AM

A "myth" is not necessarily a false story. In particular, religious "myths" (of all cultures) usually contain truth and insight based upon God's general revelation to Mankind. The historical Jesus fulfilled the pagan "myth" of a savior, born of a virgin, who would resurrect from the dead on the third day. Why, then, would God not also give His chosen people, Israel, prophecies that proclaimed the same truth? Whether the majority believed or understood them is beside the point. Mankind has always known, through revelation, that God would send a Savior, born of a Virgin, to redeem us from sin and the Devil. It's written in the constellations, pagan religions such as Mithraism, and in the Holy Old Testament. Wake up people! Jesus Christ is the universal Savior of Mankind - Jew and Gentile.

FrankWingard

Posted: August 16, 2008 11:25 AM


Items like this give an interesting look into what the spiritual outlook of various groups were in 1st century Israel, but they are not the determiner of faith or lack there of. that is secured by faith in the finished work fo the cross. the record of which we have in the cannon of Scripture.

Ephrem Hagos

Posted: August 16, 2008 2:56 AM

The 'Dead Sea Scrolls on Stone' should contribute nothing new to the already worn-out and second-hand faith called "Christianity". The rarely used name in the Nerw Testament is itself an incorrect designation for the original, firsthand knowledge of and faith on the ever-living and ever-present Christ. Such a prospect was made possible for all times to come through Jesus' step by step, self-initiated, self-determined and self-executed death on the cross demonstrably destroying right there and then the Devil who had the power over death! This is the promise and seal of the "new covenant" (Jer. 31: 31-34; Matt. 26: 26-29). For verification, please visit www.the2keys.com.

Anonymous

Posted: August 15, 2008 6:00 PM

This is much ado about nothing, just like the Gospel of Judas frenzy a few years back. Even according to Knohl's reconstructed readings there is no statement anywhere in the text about any one person dying (you need a single person to _die_ first), and nothing about such a person rising from the dead. The "partially illegible" Hebrew "hayah" in line 80 has been interpreted to mean "rise up" from the dead when in context it appears to mean instead to "rise up" against the 3 days of evil. The 3-day period is already mentioned in lines 19-21, as a period of evil requiring vengeance and slaughter to defeat the evil, not resurrection to life from the dead. The 3 days seems to have no more than numerological significance since the number "3" recurs again and again in this fragmentary text: "Jerusalem…. three" (line 33), "three days" (line 54), "three saints" (line 65), three prophets sent (line 70), "three shepherds" (line 75), "three signs" (line 79), three things or persons (lin

Page: 1

E-mail this page

Write CT

Print this article

Post a comment