Does Ancient Stone Predict a Risen Messiah? “Gabriel’s Revelation,”

Indiana Jones, move aside. An ancient Hebrew stone dated a few decades prior to Jesus’ birth has suddenly become the hottest topic among archaeologists. On the three-foot tall stone are 87 lines of Hebrew words, some of which may refer to a messiah who would die and rise again three days later. The stone labeled “Gabriel’s Revelation,” has been coined by one expert as a “Dead Sea Scroll on stone.”

Scholars have begun the tedious process of verifying the dating and authenticity of the stone. In the past, some scholars and conspiracy theorists have jumped to conclusions that finds such as the “James Ossuary” and the “Jesus Family Tomb” were authentic, only to discover later that they were forgeries or of dubious historical value (See, “The Jesus Family Tomb”)

Thus far no scholar is arguing that the stone is a forgery. Yuval Goren, a professor of archaeology at Tel Aviv University, who has submitted his chemical investigation of the stone to a peer-review journal, presumes the stone is authentic.1 If proven to be authentic, the stone may actually shed light on the historical setting for Jesus’ resurrection.

Was there during Jesus’ time the belief among Jews that the Messiah would die and rise from the dead three days later? If so, how would this prophetic detail be different from the hundreds of other Hebrew prophecies regarding the Messiah? Christians point to Jesus’ fulfillment of these ancient prophecies as evidence of his messiahship (See, “Was Jesus the Messiah?”)

But skeptics argue that Jewish expectations of a messiah who would die and rise again may have provided a motive for Jesus and his disciples to invent the story of his death and resurrection. In fact, some non-Christian scholars hope the stone will actually expose Jesus’ resurrection as a hoax.

Israel Knohl, a professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, is leading the charge to prove that Jesus was a fraudulent messiah. Knoll interprets line 80 of the text as prophetic about a “suffering Messiah who would rise from the dead.2 Thus, according to Knohl, the concept of a risen Messiah would not be unique to Christian thinking.

“Daniel Boyarin, a professor of Talmudic culture at the University of California at Berkeley, said that the stone was part of a growing body of evidence suggesting that Jesus could be best understood through a close reading of the Jewish history of his day.

Some Christians will find it shocking - a challenge to the uniqueness of their theology -3 while others will be comforted by the idea of it being a traditional part of Judaism,’ he said.”4

But before we evaluate whether or not the stone sheds any light on the Christian claim that Jesus rose from the dead, let’s look at the facts regarding this ancient find.