Did Christians "borrow" the resurrection?

Some of you may have read the July 6, 2008 article in the New York Times "Ancient Tablet Ignites Debate On Messiah and Resurrection."

Apparently, a stone tablet from the latter part of the first century B.C. with Hebrew writing on it is beginning to get some attention due to some of its suggested translations. The dating and authenticity of the stone and the writing is generally uncontested – its translation is not.

One scholar, Mr. Israel Knohl, the Yehezkel Kaufman Professor of Biblical Studies at Hebrew University, believes that the stone's writings demonstrate that there was a tradition within Jewish thought in the years leading up to the birth and ministry of Christ about a suffering messiah who would die for the liberation of Israel and come to life again after three days. From the article in the New York Times:

To make his case about the importance of the stone, Mr. Knohl focuses especially on line 80, which begins clearly with the words "L'shloshet yamin," meaning "in three days." The next word of the line was deemed partially illegible by Ms. [Ada] Yardeni and Mr. [Binyamin] Elitzur, but Mr. Knohl, who is an expert on the language of the Bible and Talmud, says the word is "hayeh," or "live" in the imperative. It has an unusual spelling, but it is one in keeping with the era.

Two more hard-to-read words come later, and Mr. Knohl said he believed that he had deciphered them as well, so that the line reads, "In three days you shall live, I, Gabriel, command you."

Mr. Knohl's take on his own theory? "This should shake our basic view of Christianity," he says. He argues that if his interpretation is true, it is evidence that the followers of Christ simply adopted an older Jewish idea of a resurrection after three days and adapted it for their own "messiah fantasy" they were crafting about the life of Jesus Christ.

Other scholars are more reserved – among them, Mr. Moshe Bar-Asher, president of the Israeli Academy of Hebrew Language and professor emeritus of Hebrew and Aramaic at Hebrew University, who is publishing his own 25-page paper about the tablet in the months ahead. Again, from the article:

"There is one problem," [Mr. Bar-Asher] said. "In crucial places of the text there is lack of text. I understand Knohl's tendency to find there keys to the pre-Christian period, but in two to three crucial lines of text there are a lot of missing words."

"One problem," indeed. And perhaps more.

To think that findings such as this – even if Mr. Knohl's translations and interpolations are accurate, which is a far-from-solid conclusion at this point – are enough to somehow fundamentally shake Christianity is to misunderstand the foundations of true Christianity.

Mr. Knohl may strive and struggle to "prove" that the tale of Jesus Christ is one of fantasy and imagination, but it is far from being so. As the Apostle Peter reassures us, speaking of himself and his fellow apostles, "For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty" (2 Peter 1:16). The Apostle John chimes in, too, speaking of Jesus Christ and describing Him as "that which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled..." (1 John 1:1).

The scriptures warn of rampant skepticism in the last days before Christ's return (2 Peter 3:3), and if you have never actually proven the truth for yourself, you absolutely must do so! Please consider reading our online Tomorrow's World article, The Real God, or ordering a copy of our free booklet, The Bible: Fact or Fiction? Don't just guess about the truth of Christ's resurrection and message – prove it for yourself.