Bible Difficulties (77 page)

Acts 1:18 goes on to state: "And he, falling headlong, burst asunder, and all of his inwards gushed out." This indicates that the tree from which Judas suspended himself overhung a precipice. If the branch from which he had hung himself was dead and dry--

and there are many trees that match this description even to this day on the brink of the canyon that tradition identifies as the place where Judas died--it would take only one strong gust of wind to yank the heavy corpse and split the branch to which it was attached and plunge both with great force into the bottom of the chasm below. There is indication that a strong wind arose at the hour Christ died and ripped the great curtain inside the temple from top to bottom (Matt. 27:51). This was accompanied by a rock-splitting earthquake and undoubtedly also by a thunderstorm, which normally follows a prolonged 349

period of cloud gathering and darkness (Matt. 27:45). Conditions were right for what had started out as a mere suicide by hanging to turn into a grisly mutilation of the corpse as the branch gave way to the force of the wind and was hurtled down to the bottom.

Why does Matthew 27:9 attribute to Jeremiah a prophecy from Zechariah?

Matthew 27:9-10 describes the purchase of Potter's Field with Judas Iscariot's money as fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy: "Then that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled, saying, Ànd they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of one whose price had been set by the sons of Israel; and they gave them for the Potter's Field, as the Lord directed me" (NASB). The remarkable thing about this quotation is that the greater portion of it is actually from Zechariah 11:12-13, which reads as follows:

"And I said to them, Ìf it is good in your sight, give me my wages; but if not, never mind!' So they weighed out thirty shekels of silver as my wages. Then Yahweh said to me, `Throw it to the potter, that magnificent price at which I was valued by them'. So I took the thirty shekels of silver and threw them to the potter in the house of Yahweh."

There are significant differences between the Zechariah passage and the quotation in Matthew, which has the prophet paying out--or least giving--the purchase money, and has him turning over the money for a field rather than giving it to the potter personally. Yet the whole point of the quotation in Matthew is directed toward the purchase of the field.

The Zechariah passage says nothing at all about purchasing a field; indeed, it does not even mention a field at all.

But as we turn to Jeremiah 32:6-9, we find the prophet purchasing a field in Anathoth for a certain number of shekels. Jeremiah 18:2 describes the prophet as watching a potter fashioning earthenware vessels in his house. Jeremiah 19:2 indicates that there was a potter near the temple, having his workshop in the Valley of Hinnom. Jeremiah 19:11

reads: "Thus says Yahweh of hosts: Èven so I will break this people and this city as one breaks a potter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again; and they shall bury them in Tophet.'" It would seem, therefore, that Zechariah's casting of his purchase money to the potter dated back to the symbolic actions of Jeremiah. Yet it is only Jeremiah that mentions the "field" of the potter--which is the principal point of Matthew's quotation.

Matthew is therefore combining and summarizing elements of prophetic symbolism both from Zechariah and from Jeremiah. But since Jeremiah is the more prominent of the two prophets, he mentions Jeremiah's name by preference to that of the minor prophet.

A similar procedure is followed by Mark 1:2-3, which attributes only to Isaiah a combined quotation from Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3. In that case also, only the more famous of the two prophets is mentioned by name. Since that was the normal literary practice of the first century A.D., when the Gospels were written, the authors can scarcely be faulted for not following the modern practice of precise identification and footnoting (which could never have become feasible until after the transition had been made from the scroll to the codex and the invention of the printing press).

What was the exact wording of the inscription on the cross?

350

The slight differences between the four Evangelists in the exact wording of the
aitia
, or criminal charge, against Jesus that was composed by Pilate and affixed as a
titulus
over Christ's head on His cross have puzzled Bible students for years, especially since biblical inerrancy has become prominent in recent discussion. The version of each Evangelist is given below, as rendered in the NIV:

Matthew 27:37: "This is Jesus, the King of the Jews."

Mark 15:26: "The written notice of the charge against him read: The King of the Jews."

Luke 23:38: "This is the King of the Jews."

John 19:19: "Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read: Jesus of Nazareth, the King of the Jews."

The only element common to all four citations is "King of the Jews." How are these to be reconciled? John contributes a valuable clue: "Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek" (John 19:20). If the sign was written in three languages it is quite certain that Pilate himself, however well versed in Latin (his native language) and Greek (the language he used in conversing with all non-Italians in Palestine), would scarcely have been able to write in either Hebrew or Aramaic. (John 19:20 uses for this the adverbial form
Hebraisti
, which in gospel usage did not mean "in Hebrew" but in the Jewish dialect of Aramaic. We know this because wherever
Hebraisti
is used elsewhere, as in John 5:2; 19:13, 17; 20:16, the word is given in its Aramaic form, transcribed into Greek letters.)

It is quite conceivable that Pilate first wrote in Latin in brief form. Then as he wrote beneath in Greek, he may have felt like adding the name of Jesus and the city that He belonged to, since the Greek form would be legible to all bystanders of whatever race.

The Aramaic version may have copied the Greek with the omission of "Nazarene." This could account for the variations reported in the four versions.

I venture to suggest a possible format for the title on the cross as follows: Matthew 27:37 probably contained the Aramaic wording, since Matthew's gospel, according to Papias, was originally composed in Aramaic.

Mark 15:26 seems to be an abridged form of the Latin wording--a reasonable supposition if indeed Mark assisted Peter in Rome and wrote down Peter's oral teaching after Peter was martyred. We cannot be sure how reliable this church tradition may be (especially if Jose O'Callaghan is right in dating 7Q5 as Mark 6:52-53 as
Zierstil
, copied down in the 50s), but at least there is some basis for supposing that Matthew would have inclined to Pilate's original Latin form (dropping the demonstrative pronoun
HIC
;

"This").

351

As for John, his ministry seems to have been confined to a Greek-speaking population, wherever he served. The last decades of his life were almost certainly spent in or around Ephesus. We might therefore expect him to have inclined to the Greek form of the title.

This indicates the following as the exact wording on the cross, following the order in John 19:20: Aramaic, Latin and Greek:

(Aramaic)
dn' yswy` mlk' dyhwdy'

(Latin)
REX IVDAEORVM HIC

(Greek)
ihsous nazoraios o basileues ton

ioudaion
.

What did the centurion really say as he watched Jesus die (Matt. 27:54;
Mark 15:39; Luke 23:47)?

Matthew 27:54 quotes the centurion and the soldiers who were standing guard at the cross of Christ, in the midst of the terrifying darkness, wind, earthquake, and storm that took place at the moment He expired, as remarking, "Truly [
alethos
] this man was a son

[or possibly `the Son'] of God!" The wording in Mark 15:39 is virtually the same (with only the word for "man" [
anthropos
] included in the Greek, though it was already inferred by the masculine singular demonstrative
houtos
["this"]). In Luke 23:47, however, the centurion is quoted as saying, "Truly [
ontos
] this man was righteous."

Are we presented with an irreconcilable contradiction here? Certainly not! Those who express admiration of the performance of some actor, musician, or orator on the stage usually employ more than one laudatory epithet in order to describe their feelings about him--even if they do not resort to the standard promotional hyperbole: "That was terrific!

Stupendous! Colossal! Magnificent!" There is no reason whatever to suppose that the military bystander limited his expressed sentiments to one terse sentence. He must at least have said, "This was truly a righteous man. This was surely a son of God!" Luke found

"righteous man" particularly striking because the words were voiced by the chief executioner of one who had been condemned to death by Hebrew and Roman justice as a blasphemer and a rebel against the authority of Caesar. Matthew and Mark were more impressed by his later expression regarding the divine dimension he had perceived in the expiring Sufferer.

Do not the many discrepancies in the four Resurrection narratives cast doubt on the
historicity of the Resurrection itself?

Each of the four Evangelists contributes valuable details concerning the events of the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ. Not all these distinctive items of information are contained in all four Gospels; some are contained only in one or two. But nothing could be clearer than that all four were testifying to the same epoch-making event, that the same Jesus who was crucified on Good Friday rose again in His crucified body on Easter Sunday morning. The very fact that each of the four writers contributed individual details from his own perspective and emphasis furnishes the most compelling type of evidence possible for the historicity of Christ's conquest over death and the grave. A careful examination of these four records in comparison with one another demonstrates that they 352

are not in any way contradictory, despite the charges leveled by some critics. It is helpful to synthesize all four accounts in order to arrive at a full picture of what took place on Easter itself and during the weeks that intervened until the ascension of Christ.

The Women's First Visit to the Tomb

On Saturday evening three of the women decided to go back to the tomb belonging to Joseph of Arimathea, where they had seen Christ's body laid away on Friday at sundown.

They wanted to rewrap His corpse with additional spices, beyond those which Nicodemus and Joseph had already used on Friday. There were three women involved (Mark 16:1): Mary Magdalene, Mary the wife (or mother) of James, and Salome (Luke does not give their names; Matthew refers only to the two Marys); and they had bought the additional spices with their own means (Mark 16:1). They apparently started their journey from the house in Jerusalem while it was still dark (
skotias eti ouses
), even though it was already early morning (
proi
) (John 20:1). But by the time they arrived, dawn was glimmering in the east (
te epiphoskouse
) that Sunday morning (
eis mian
sabbaton
) (Matt. 28:1). (Mark 16:2, Luke 24:1, John 20:1 all use the dative:
te mia ton
sabbaton
.) Mark 16:2 adds that the tip of the sun had actually appeared above the horizon (
anateilantos tou heliou
--aorist participle; the Beza codex uses the present participle,
anatellontos
, implying "while the sun was rising").

It may have been while they were on their way to the tomb outside the city wall that the earthquake took place, by means of which the angel of the Lord rolled away the great circular stone that had sealed the entrance of the tomb. So blinding was his glorious appearance that the guards specially assigned to the tomb were completely terrified and swooned away, losing all consciousness (Matt. 28:2-4). The earthquake could hardly have been very extensive; the women seemed to be unaware of its occurrence, whether it happened before they left Jerusalem or while they were walking toward their destination.

There is no evidence that it damaged anything it the city itself. But it was sufficient to break the seal placed over the circular stone at the time of interment and roll the stone itself away from its settled position in the downward slanting groove along which it rolled.

The three women were delightfully surprised to find their problem of access to the tomb solved; the stone had already been rolled away (Mark 16:3-4)! They then entered the tomb, side-stepping the unconscious soldiers. In the tomb they made out the form of the leading angel, appearing as a young man with blazing white garments (Mark 16:5), who, however, may not have shown himself to them until they first discovered that the corpse was gone (Luke 24:2-3). But then it became apparent that this angel had a companion, for there were two of them in the tomb. The leading angel spoke to them with words of encouragement, "Don't be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus who was crucified" (Matt. 28:5). Nevertheless they were quite terrified at the splendor of these heavenly visitors and by the amazing disappearance of the body they had expected to find in the tomb.

353

The angel went on: "Why do you seek the living among [lit., `with'--
meta
with the genitive] those who are dead? He is not here, but He has risen [Luke 24:5-6], just as He said [Matt. 28:6]. Look at the place where they laid Him [Mark 16:6], the place where He was lying [Matt. 28:6]. Remember how He told you when He was still in Galilee, saying that the Son of Man had to be betrayed into the hands of sinful men, crucified, and rise again on the third day" (Luke 24:6-7).

After the angel had said this, the women in fact did remember Christ's prediction (especially at Caesarea Philippi); and they were greatly encouraged. Then the angel concluded with this command: "Go quickly and tell His disciples that He has risen from the dead!" Then he added: "Behold, He goes before you into Galilee; there you will see Him. Lo, I have told you" (Matt. 28:7). Upon receiving these wonderful tidings, the three delighted messengers set out in haste to rejoin the group of sorrowing believers back in the city (possibly in the home of John Mark) and pass on to them the electrifying news.