THE MESSIAH STONE:
Gabriels Revelation, also called Hazon Gabriel (the Vision of Gabriel) or the Jeselsohn Stone, is a stone tablet with 87 lines of Hebrew text written in ink, containing a collection of short prophecies written in the first person. The artifact is relatively rare in its use of ink on stone. It is dated to the late 1st century BCE or early first century CE and is considered important for understanding Jewish messianic expectations in the Second Temple Period.
If anything this stone shows that Jesus’s death and resurrection was not unique in Jewish culture and tradition! It shows a Jewish sect had prophesied a suffering messiah who would show signs after three days dead!
Around 10 BCE to 10 AD there was some Hebrew “scripture” inscribed on a tablet called “Gabriel’s Revelation” in which the angel Gabriel is talking to a messiah claimant, saying that even though he died, he would show signs in three days. Some scholars think that the messiah claimant referred to here is a Jew named Simon, who was one of Herod’s slaves who revolted (the Jewish historian Josephus writes about him in his work “Antiquities of the Jews”.
“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” Ant17.10.6).
The latest on the translation of line 80 of the Gabriel stone is Ronald Hendel’s (2009) reading of “In three days, signs, I Gabriel command you” and has gained widespread support. The stone is authentic and is messianic. It says that a sign would come after 3 days of Simons death.
Simon of Peraea was called the King of the Jews, believed to be a Messiah. (see line 72 and its mention of “David the servant of YHWH). Just like in the gospel of Mark, this messiah was a suffering messiah (messiah Ben Yosef is known as a suffering messiah). This Messiah comes from Ephraim, or the “ Messiah son of Joseph”. (line 16). Just before Passover, the Romans beheaded 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 Jesus was born.
The text of the stone seems to draw heavily upon the Book of Daniel. Scholars know from the work of Josephus that many Jews immediately before and during the time of Jesus focused on the Book of Daniel because of his prophecies related to a messiah coming to usher in a Kingdom of God.
Knohl now views Simon’s death, according to the inscription, as “an essential part of the redemptive process. The blood of the slain messiah paves the way for the final salvation”. ~Isreal Knohl, The Messiah before Jesus.
Knohl also believes to shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.
Ephraim, or the Messiah son of Joseph, is a very different kind of messiah and reflects a new kind of messianism. This kind of messianism involves suffering and death.
It is believed it was created by followers of the Messianic leader, a group of people who followed him and he was killed during his war against the Romans.
Mr. Knohl is part of a larger scholarly movement that focuses on the political atmosphere in Jesus’ day as an important explanation of that era’s messianic spirit. As he notes, after the death of Herod, Jewish rebels sought to throw off the yoke of the Rome-supported monarchy, so the rise of a major Jewish independence fighter could take on messianic overtones.
——————————————————
Apocalyptic leaders were a dime a dozen in first century Judea and environs. In Antiquities17.10.8 any one of the unnamed rebels (religious leaders) were just like Jesus. The amount of apocalyptic literature from the period is insane. Judas the Zealot (Ant17.10.5), Simon of Pereae a slave of Herod the Great (Ant17.10.6) and Athronges the shepherd (Ant17.10.7 ) were all supported by multitudes, both Simon and Anthronges were declared King at a drop of a hat, by the rebels just like it was suggested that Jesus was ‘King of the Jews’. ( no royal blood necessary.) As shown from book 17 and 18 of Josephus Antiquities it was extremely dangerous for messianic types to gather a crowd. They usually got easily squashed by the Romans. Jesus was no exception, the Romans crucified Jesus for being ‘King of the Jews’. To be accused of being a King meant you were an insurrectionist. (Mark15:2).
“I should point out that there are aspects of the crucifixion narratives that stand up to historical scrutiny, as embodying historical fact rather than Christian theology. As one salient example: all of our accounts agree that Jesus was crucified on the order of the Roman governor Pontius Pilate, and that the death sentence was imposed because Jesus claimed to be the “king of the Jews,” a political charge of treason against the state (thus, independently, write Mark and John; see also the Gospel of Peter). Moreover, this charge was inscribed on a placard over Jesus’ head on the cross. This information is attested in a range of independent sources and accords perfectly well with what we know about the Roman administration of justice in first-century Palestine.”~Peter,Paul and Mary Magdalene,Ehrman,p.222-3.
“Crucifixion was a punishment that Rome reserved almost exclusively for the crime of sedition. The plaque the Romans placed above Jesus’s head as he writhed in pain—“King of the Jews”—was called a titulus and, despite common perception, was not meant to be sarcastic. Every criminal who hung on a cross received a plaque declaring the specific crime for which he was being executed. Jesus’s crime, in the eyes of Rome, was striving for kingly rule (i.e., treason), the same crime for which nearlyevery other messianic aspirant of the time was killed. Nor did Jesus die alone. The gospels claim that oneither side of Jesus hung men who in Greek are called lestai, a word often rendered into English as ‘thieves’ but which actually means ‘bandits’ and was the most common Roman designation for an insurrectionist or rebel.”~MK Abassi,Reza Aslan Jesus of Nazarath.
Cf John6:15. “Jesus, knowing that they intended to come and make him king by force, withdrew again to a mountain by himself.”
Cf Ant17.10.8 “And now Judea was full of robberies. And as the several companies of the seditious light upon any one to head them, he was created a King immediately, in order to do mischief to the publick.”
“The accounts which Josephus gives of these years [From Judas the Galilean to 70CE]tell only of Roman maladministration and the reaction, often violent, of the Jews. Moving in and out of this sorry tale are those whom he calls ‘brigands’, but who were in fact…patriots who conducted resistance operations from strongholds in the mountainous desert country”~SFG Brandon,Jesus and the Zealots,107.
Another example of Zealot resistance leaders operating in the mountains:
“Cumanus to avenge those that were killed; they would not hearken to them; but took their weapons, and intreated the assistance of Eleazar, the son of Dineus, a robber, who had many years made his abode in the mountains.”~Ant20.6.1
Cf John19:12 Upon this Pilate sought to release him, but the Jews cried out, “If you release this man, you are not Caesar’s friend; everyone who makes himself a king sets himself against Caesar.” 13 When Pilate heard these words, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judgment seat at a place called The Pavement, and in Hebrew, Gabbatha. 14 Now it was the day of Preparation of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour. He said to the Jews, “Behold your King!” 15 They cried out, “Away with him, away with him, crucify him!” Pilate said to them, “Shall I crucify your King?” The chief priests answered, “We have no king but Caesar.
Cross reference this with a delegation of Jews coming to Augustus trying to “obtain a dissolution of kingly government”. (AJ 17.11.2). and ask yourself, what do they want instead? Are they of the opinion that “We have no King but Caesar”? (John19:15).
——————————————————-
“As we (depending on our sympathies) spoke of ‘freedom fighters’, ‘brothers’, ‘communists’, ‘rabble rousers’, and so on, men of first century Palestine (depending on their sympathies) spoke of ‘messiahs’ ‘prophets’, ‘deceivers’, ‘brigands’, ‘charlatans’. Jesus was located in these two ranges of variation- he won attention as a miracle worker, and was executed as a messiah, a would-be ‘King of the Jews’”~Morton, Jesus the Magician,19.
In Acts5:34, (story of Gamaliel’s speech) the Christian propaganda compared the Jesus movement to that of Judas and Theudas, whereas their movements broke up, it was unlikely the Jesus movements would not as God was on their side. What is really significant about this passage is not that Luke got his history wrong ( again putting Theudas before Judas) but that even Christians themselves expected Jesus to be seen as the same social type as Judas and Theudas.
There is real life and the there is gospel life, Jesus could very well be a sanitized version of real life leader of the down trodden, burdened conquered people.
——————————————————-
Compare the following passages in Antiquities to see the reason I’ve become neutral on historicity.
Ant18.85-87(Ant18.4.1):
85But the nation of the Samaritans did not escape without tumults. The man who excited them to it was one who thought lying a thing of little consequence, and who contrived every thing so that the multitude might be pleased; so he bid them to get together upon Mount Gerizzim, which is by them looked upon as the most holy of all mountains, and assured them, that when they were come thither, he would show them those sacred vessels which were laid under that place, because Moses put them there. 86So they came thither armed, and thought the discourse of the man probable; and as they abode at a certain village, which was called Tirathaba, they got the rest together to them, and desired to go up the mountain in a great multitude together; 87but Pilate prevented their going up, by seizing upon file roads with a great band of horsemen and foot-men, who fell upon those that were gotten together in the village; and when it came to an action, some of them they slew, and others of them they put to flight, and took a great many alive, the principal of which, and also the most potent of those that fled away, Pilate ordered to be slain.
Right throw a similar passage in the washing machine, what do you get:
Ant18.64-65 ( Ant18.3.3 AKA TF)
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
———————————————————
Eusibius did the washing. I believe it is a FULL REWRITE, not partial authentic.
“The passage remains controversial for several reasons, including the following: all extant Greek manuscripts are preserved by the church, and the earliest dates to the eleventh century (did pious monks add to a less “Christian” original?); Arabic versions lack this passage (did pious Muslim scribes remove it?); although Josephus sometimes is cited by Patristic writers, this particular passage is not attested in the Patristic corpus prior to the fourth century; Josephus does not in any other writing, including his autobiography, attest to Christian belief himself; his accounting of the death of James, whom he describes as “the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ” (Ant. 20.9.1), still does not indicate that Josephus had become a member of the movement.”~The Historical Jesus in Context, Edited by Amy-Jill Levine, Dale Allison and JDCrossan, p20 [This passage comes from the Introduction written by Amy-Jill].
———————————————————
Eusebius quotes the Testimonium in three of his extant works: the Demonstration of the Gospel 3.5.106, the Ecclesiastical History1.11.8, and the Theophany 5.44. Eusebius rewrote it so thoroughly that was thought impossible to recover a Josephan original.
The passage fits much better into the larger literary context it occupies in Eusebius’ work. Eusebius uses the passage as part of an extended argument that he makes in the Demonstration and later reproduces in Theophany. He had to defend the incarnation and answer the charges of critics of Christianity, such as Porphyry’s argument against the divinity of Jesus calling him the wise man of the Hebrews and also that Christians had mistakenly taken him to be divine.
The phrase kata touton ton chronon (“around this time”) appears nowhere else in Josephus’s writings and is Eusibean. Josephus repeatedly, thus normally, uses the phrase kata touton ton kairon (“about this time”).
Other Eusibean phrases used but nowhere else in Josephus include:
“wise man”
“teacher of human beings”
“worker of amazing deeds”
“Christian…tribe”
receiving godly things “with pleasure”
“the truth” in the plural to mean the truth of God
and the exact phrase “and myriads of other things”
and the exact phrase “to this very day”
—————————————————-
What do you get? A sanitized Jesus. All over book17 and book18 of Josephus Antiquities you get apocalyptic leaders that are referred to as ‘deceivers’ ‘innovators’ of the people. Ant18.3.3 is a very cleaned up.
Mandaeans and Nazoreans were baptizing sects that started near the Jordan. Those groups had to have cult leaders, perhaps the legends are based on them, the gospels just inverses their stories, therefore a sanitized Jesus.
Also the gospels which are similar to the passage above (Ant18.3.3) and are also of a glorified sanitized religious apocalyptic leader.
Once you cut out the fake Christian history, it becomes plausible such a character as Jesus could have existed, hidden behind rewrites.
——————————————————
In 1971, a 10th-century Arabic version of the Testimonium from the chronicle of Agapius of Hierapolis was presented by Shlomo Pines, who also discovered a 12th-century Syriac version of the Testimonium in the chronicle of Michael the Syrian. These additional manuscript sources have furnished additional ways to evaluate Josephus’ mention of Jesus in the Antiquities, principally through a close textual comparison between the Arabic, Syriac and Greek versions to the Testimonium.
Stephen C. Carlson ( see link at end of post) has followed up a curious footnote in Meiers book “A Marginal Jew” Vol 1 page 101, footnote 12, where it has been studied ( by Franz Dornsieff, “Lukas der Schriftsteller. Mit einem Anhang: Josephus und Tacitus,” ZNW 35 (1936): 148-55.), that Tacitus has used Josephus as one of his sources. Because of this he may have preserved the original TF. ( before Eusibius got his dirty hands on it)!
Here is what the reconstruction may have looked like:
TESTIMONIAN FLAVIAN RECONSTRUCTION FROM TACITUS
>>>Now there was about this time a man, an innovator and deceiver of the people. Through his sorcery and innovations he drew over to him many Galileans and by them he was seen to be a King: For fear of the influence of a great many people, he suffered the extreme penalty at the hands of governor (ἡγεμών), Pilate who condemned him to be crucified. Many of his followers, the Galileans were slain and thus checked for the moment. The movement again broke out with wild fury and mischievous superstition not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.<<<
———————————————
As can be seen from Annals15:44, the entirety of Tacitus’s information about Jesus is paralleled in Josephus, AJ 18, if not in the Testimonium, then nearby in the book. Even more significant, the use of Josephus explains the erroneous title for Pontius Pilate as a governor (ήγεμών) whereas his actual title was procurator (επίτροπος). The Greek term Josephus uses for Pilate elsewhere (ἡγεμών) Ant18.3.1 was non-specific, and Tacitus had to guess (and guess incorrectly) what Pilate’s Latin title would have been. (This would argue against Tacitus having a Roman source and would argue in favor of Josephus being his source).
—————————————————–
I’ve built on top of Carlson’s reconstruction with the following reasons:
• On one of the four points where the TF meets the Annals, it uses the phrase “mischievous superstition”. I thought that was rather Tacitean and replaced it with ‘innovator’ and ‘deceiver’ which is more Josephean.
• I replaced the line, “He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles.” With “ He drew over to him many Galileans” as the original line sounds Paulinist. Also the early followers of Jesus were known as Galileans, as attested by Epitetus, Diss.4.7.6. Circa110-115AD (Cf Luke13.1-2; Mark14:70).
Diss. 4.7.6: “Well then, if madness can cause people to adopt such as attitude towards these things [not being scared at the swords of tyrants] and habit too, as in the case of the Galileans, can’t reason and demonstration teach people that God ha made all that is in the universe, and the universe itself as a whole, to be free…”
This passage shows that Christians were known to be persecuted by the Emperor Nero, and Epictetus had been within close proximity to the Emperor’s household.
• As with many messianic figure followers reported in Josephus works, they usually declared the would be leader a King, this is reflected in the reconstruction.
• The Arabic version does not blame the Jews for the death of Jesus. Instead of “he was Christ”, the Syriac version has the phrase “he was believed to be Christ”.
The key phrase “at the suggestion of the principal men among us” reads instead “Pilate condemned him to be crucified”. This phrase is reflected in the reconstruction. Origen attested that Josephus did not like the term “Christ” so I left that out (Contra Celsus I.47).
• The TF could not have been neutral because of what was written before and after it. I stated the Galileans were slain because of the opening line of this Ant 18.3.4
“About the same time also another sad calamity put the Jews into disorder: ~Ant18.3.4 and also see what was written before it:- “Who laid upon them much greater blows than Pilate had commanded them; and equally punished those that were tumultuous, and those that were not. Nor did they spare them in the least.“~ Ant18.3.2
• The interpolation of the TF into Slavonic Josephus Wars also does not name Jesus in the passage but refers to him as “there appeared a certain man”~Slavonic Wars2.9.3/4. This could have been a more primitive interpolation than Eusibius’ interpolation. I have gone for this in the reconstruction above. This could explain why Origen never cited this passage in all his works.
—————————————————
Here is the original TF:
Ant18.64-65 ( Ant18.3.3 AKA TF)
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
———————————————————
http://hypotyposeis.org/weblog/2004/08/a-pre-eusebian-witness-to-the-testimonium.html
———————————————————
Read the following to give you an idea of Apocalyptic leaders.
Antiquities17.10.4-8:
4. Now at this time there were ten thousand other disorders in Judea, which were like tumults, because a great number put themselves into a warlike posture, either out of hopes of gain to themselves, or out of enmity to the Jews. In particular, two thousand of Herod’s old soldiers, who had been already disbanded, got together in Judea itself, and fought against the king’s troops, although Achiabus, Herod’s first cousin, opposed them; but as he was driven out of the plains into the mountainous parts by the military skill of those men, he kept himself in the fastnesses that were there, and saved what he could.
5. There was also Judas, the son of that Ezekias who had been head of the robbers; which Ezekias was a very strong man, and had with great dificulty been caught by Herod. This Judas, having gotten together a multitude of men of a profligate character about Sepphoris in Galilee, made an assault upon the palace [there,] and seized upon all the weapons that were laid up in it, and with them armed every one of those that were with him, and carried away what money was left there; and he became terrible to all men, by tearing and rending those that came near him; and all this in order to raise himself, and out of an ambitious desire of the royal dignity; and he hoped to obtain that as the reward not of his virtuous skill in war, but of his extravagance in doing injuries.
6. There was also Simon, who had been a slave of Herod the King’s, 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 countrey; 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 PERAEA, who were a disordered body of men, and fought rather in a bold than in a skilful 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.
7. But because Athronges, a person neither eminent by the dignity of his progenitors; nor for any great wealth he was possessed of; but one that had in all respects been a shepherd only, and was not known by any body: yet because he was a tall man, and excelled others in the strength of his hands, he was so bold as to set up for King. This man thought it so sweet a thing to do more than ordinary injuries to others, that although he should be killed, he did not much care if he lost his life in so great a design. He had also four brethren,20 who were tall men themselves, and were believed to be superior to others in the strength of their hands; and thereby were encouraged to aim at great things, and thought that strength of theirs would support them in retaining the Kingdom. Each of these ruled over a band of men of their own. For those that got together to them were very numerous. They were every one of them also commanders. But when they came to fight, they were subordinate to him, and fought for him. While he put a diadem about his head, and assembled a council to debate about what things should be done, and all things were done according to his pleasure. And this man retained his power a great while: he was also called King; and had nothing to hinder him from doing what he pleased. He also, as well as his brethren, slew a great many both of the Romans, and of the King’s forces; and managed matters with the like hatred to each of them. The King’s forces they fell upon, because of the licentious conduct they had been allowed under Herod’s government: and they fell upon the Romans, because of the injuries they had so lately received from them. But in process of time they grew more cruel to all sorts of men. Nor could any one escape from one or other of these seditions. Since they slew some out of the hopes of gain; and others from a mere custom of slaying men. They once attacked a company of Romans at Emmaus; who were bringing corn and weapons to the army: and fell upon Arius, the centurion, who commanded the company, and shot forty of the best of his foot soldiers. But the rest of them were affrighted at their slaughter, and left their dead behind them, but saved themselves by the means of Gratus; who came with the King’s troops that were about him to their assistance. Now these four brethren continued the war a long while, by such sort of expeditions: and much grieved the Romans; but did their own nation also a great deal of mischief. Yet were they afterwards subdued. One of them in a fight with Gratus: another with Ptolemy. Archelaus also took the eldest of them prisoner; while the last of them was so dejected at the others misfortune, and saw so plainly that he had no way now left to save himself, his army being worn away with sickness; and continual labours; that he also delivered himself up to Archelaus, upon his promise and oath to God [to preserve his life.] But these things came to pass a good while afterward.
8. And now Judea was full of robberies. And as the several companies of the seditious light upon any one to head them, he was created a King immediately, in order to do mischief to the publick. They were in some small measure indeed, and in small matters, hurtful to the Romans: but the murders they committed upon their own people lasted a long while.
Dave Allens blog 