This morning I found one article (in the Times UK) on this subject but it was so one-sided it could have been written by Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens (it offered elaboration of only Israel Knohl’s theory). Here’s its thrust…
The death and resurrection of Christ has been called into question by a radical new interpretation of a tablet found on the eastern bank of the Dead Sea.
After a little bit of digging, I came across an article that presents both Professor Knohl’s point of view and the opposing POV–that the information so far provided by the “tablet” is supportive of and consistent with the Christian view of the Resurrection. The Christian point of view is presented by Dr Timothy Gray, a professor of Biblical Studies at the Augustine Institute in Denver.
Here’s a link to that article (in the Catholic News Agency)…
The interpretations of scholars reported in the International Herald Tribune, Gray said, was “very striking” for its insistence that any evidence must undermine Christianity.
“On the one hand, scholars argue no Jewish tradition about a messiah suffering shows that the Church added this idea. And once you show a document, an ancient document to point to, showing that they did interpret a prophet like Daniel to expect a suffering messiah, well then people say ‘Well this proves Christianity can’t be true.’”
“You can’t have it both ways,” Gray said.