Now, I get that, if the Bible isn’t reliable, then what we can know about God becomes suspect but I hardly see that as proof that God isn’t real, that Jesus didn’t rise from the dead, and that our sins can’t be forgiven! Of course, I am of the opinion that the Bible is 100% accurate and that all criticisms directed at the Bible will disappear with a fair reading of the text. I was just pointing out that an alleged contradiction, even one which is not easily explained, isn’t proof of anything!
Many examples of alleged contradictions surround the Passion and Resurrection of Jesus: things like, how many women went to the tomb? What time did they arrive? How many angels were there? What did Judas do with the 30 pieces of silver? How did Judas die? This Easter season, I thought I’d make a series of posts dealing with the most often used criticisms of the events, and conclude the series with a day by day discussion of what Jesus may have been doing each day during the Passion Week.
Please keep checking back!
How did Judas die?
There are two passages that mention the death of Judas:
Matthew 27:3-5, Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
Acts 1:15-18, And in those days Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said, (the number of names together were about an hundred and twenty,) Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.
One issue often raised by critics of the Bible is the question, “How did Judas die?” We know that after the arrest of Jesus, Judas, in a fit of remorse, ended his own life. However, at first reading, the two accounts we have of the event seem to contradict each other. Matthew says simply, “[He] went and hanged himself,” while Acts says, “and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”
Perhaps one reason this criticism is so enduring is because, unlike so many other criticisms, this one is not as easily rebutted. It doesn't necessarily mean that this is a valid criticism of the Bible; the fact of the matter is that the two passages are so scarce in detail that it's not obvious how to reconcile them. Actually, multiple explanations exist and we're just not sure which might be the correct solution.
It must be remembered that different people will describe the same event differently. Consider this analogy: police are called to a crime scene and find a dead man. They ask witnesses what happened. One witness says the victim was killed in a fight with another man. A second witness says the victim fell and hit his head. Using only these details, it seems like the witnesses have contradicted each other. However, the simple solution could be that two men were fighting when one fell, struck his head, and died. If we had more details, the passages from Matthew and Acts might be that simple to reconcile. Alas, we only have these two, short descriptions. There are at least 3 ways these events might be reconciled:
A SPIRITUAL FALL
I once read an intriguing possibility that Peter (Luke 1) was not describing the physical death of Judas but was merely describing his spiritual fall. This would be a fall in the same sense that Adam “fell” and died. Regarding the reference to “bowels,” there are multiple passages (especially in the KJV) where the “bowels” are a reference to mercy or compassion (Colossians 3:12, Philemon 1:7, 1 John 3:17, etc). So according to this theory, Judas may have died physically but he also “fell” spiritually and his bowels bursting is a reference to his act of betrayal.
I am a little skeptical of this as a possible solution but it could have merit. I've already mentioned that different people might describe the same event differently so Peter may have been speaking of his spiritual fall. Consider also that Peter is introducing the need to replace Judas among the apostles. We have no reason to believe the act of replacing the apostles was continued after subsequent deaths of the apostles – those apostles who remained faithful unto death. It could be then that Peter is introducing a doctrinal need to replace him, namely that he not only died but that he fell from grace.
A GRUESOME HANGING
I've heard various scenarios that attempt to explain how the hanging of Judas might have been especially gruesome and could fit the description in both passages.
The first is a rather mundane explanation that the rope Judas used was too long and rather than hanging, he fell to the ground. Alternatively, the rope simply broke during the attempt causing Judas to fall. These are hardly plausible. A fall from a tree might be sufficient to kill a person but it would have to be an especially high tree for the body to break open. This is the least likely explanation that I've heard.
A second possibility is that Judas wasn't “hanged” in the ordinary sense of the word but instead impaled himself – perhaps on a spear. The word “hanged” is also used in reference to the death of Jesus (Acts 5:30, Acts 10:39) who we certainly know wasn't hanged by the neck. Besides Jesus, the thieves crucified with him are also described as being “hanged” (Luke 23:39). If a person were impaled through the belly with a spear, it might be described that his bowels burst open and spilled out. I once considered this an extremely possible explanation but I later learned that the Greek word in Matthew 27:5 (apagcho, ἀπάγχω, Strong’s word 519) quite literally means “to choke.” It is a different word than what is translated as “hanged” in Acts 5:30. This may still be a possible explanation but I feel it is less likely.
Yet another possibility occurred to me many years ago when I heard a radio news bite of a US state that was trying to hire an executioner. In that state (I believe it was Washington), the proscribed method of execution was still hanging even though no one had been hanged there for many years. In the sound bite it was mentioned how much is actually involved in a hanging. The rope should be the right length for the sentenced man's weight so that his neck will break and he will die quickly. If it is too short, he will die slowly by strangulation. However, if it is too long, the man could be decapitated! Please excuse the gore but if a person were decapitated and his stomach contents were regurgitated out of his esophagus, it might fit the description given by Peter.
POST MORTEM
When Peter spoke before the other apostles, it might have already been understood by all that Judas had already died. So rather than telling everyone that Judas had died (or how he died), Peter might be adding some information about an event that happened post mortem. As mentioned above, a body falling from a tree will not likely “burst open.” However, after death, the skin and tissues begin to decompose. The body also begins to bloat. Answers in Genesis gives this very graphic description:
Gruesome as it is, Judas’ dead body hung in the hot sun of Jerusalem, and the bacteria inside his body would have been actively breaking down tissues and cells. A byproduct of bacterial metabolism is often gas. The pressure created by the gas forces fluid out of the cells and tissues and into the body cavities. The body becomes bloated as a result. In addition, tissue decomposition occurs compromising the integrity of the skin. Judas’ body was similar to an overinflated balloon: as he hit the ground (due to the branch he hung on or the rope itself breaking), the skin easily broke, and he burst open with his internal organs spilling out.
In conclusion, let me remind my readers that we cannot know which of these possible scenarios might be the correct one. There could still be other explanations I have not discussed or even considered. But just these few possible scenarios clearly demonstrate that the passages in question need not be contradictory.
No comments:
Post a Comment