Reply #26: I'm not sure how your post sheds any light on the issues raised in the OP, which concerns [View All]

[struggle4progress]

the claim that the Gabriel tablet provides evidence that the gospels reflect the older story of a messiah Shimon, killed in 4 AD. In my #14 & 16, I note that the Gabriel tablet, if authentic, must be regarded as looted and hence without usable provenance; in my #15, 17, & 18, I provide the text of the tablet and note the problems of interpretation for illegible lacunae; in my #19 and 20, I note that Shimon of Peraea may never have been regarded as a messiah and that Shimon ben Kosiba occurs too late to fit the bill required by the OP. So the interpretation of the Gabriel tablet, as reflecting a pre-Christian resurrection narrative (based on some Shimon), seems problematic to me

Of course, it is very likely that "Jesus" was a rather common name, since otherwise there would have been no need for the gospel writers to carefully insist they were writing discussing "Jesus of Nazareth"

With respect to "Jesus ben Pandira":


Studia Judaica 11: 2008 nr 2(22), s. 205-213
Edward Lipiński Bruxelles
PANDERA AND STADA

... Origen (A.D. 185/6-254/5) reports that Celsus, an eclectic Platonist of the 2nd century A.D., heard .. that Mary had been divorced by her husband who suspected her of adultery, and that Jesus was born as the result of her secret affair with a Roman soldier, called Πανθηρα. Celsus is the author of the first comprehensive philosophical polemic against Christianity, the ... “The True Word”. On internal evidence the work seems to be of Alexandrian origin and to date from ca. A.D. 178-180. Its greater part is quoted in Origen’s Contra Celsum, that gave it new life by replying to Celsus’ arguments point by point. Origen’s work, composed ca. A.D. 249, survives and thus preserves an opinion of the mid-2nd century A.D., as well as the earliest Greek spelling of the name Pandera ...

<pdf:> http://www.studiajudaica.pl/sj/22/Lipinski22.pdf

In other words, "Jesus ben Pandira" does not date from the second century BCE but from the second century CE, and it is another name for "Jesus of Nazareth," but one that dismisses the virgin birth claim by insisting that Mary did not conceive immaculate but in the ordinary way by a Roman soldier