Overview:
In this episode, Ryan and Brian dive into a recent Christianity Today article by Daniel Silliman that sparked controversy by discussing scholar Jeffrey Paul Garcia’s research suggesting Jesus’ crucifixion may not have involved nails. The hosts explore the article’s implications, the role of biblical scholarship, and the historical and archaeological evidence surrounding crucifixion. They also reflect on the importance of careful scholarship and its presentation to the public.
Key Topics Discussed:
- Introduction to the Christianity Today Article
- Article by Daniel Silliman references Jeffrey Garcia’s research, which proposes that ropes, not nails, may have been used in Jesus’ crucifixion.
- Published around Easter, leading to a firestorm of responses due to its timing and implications.
- Ryan notes he heard Garcia present this paper at the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) meeting in 2006, highlighting the slow dissemination of scholarly work.
- Context of Biblical Scholarship
- Ryan defines a scholar as someone deeply engaged in study, emphasizing that it’s not an elite category but a commitment to rigorous inquiry.
- Describes the SBL as a diverse gathering of scholars, including conservatives, nonbelievers, and others, studying Christian, Hebrew, and intertestamental texts.
- Contrasts how ideas are received in scholarly settings versus congregational ones, noting the skepticism scholars face at SBL.
- The Article’s Claims and Evidence
- Garcia’s argument: Nails are not explicitly mentioned in the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke), and some ancient sources suggest ropes were used in crucifixions.
- Ryan counters with literary evidence:
- John 20 explicitly mentions nail marks in Jesus’ hands (verses 25, 27).
- Luke 24:39-40 implies wounds in Jesus’ hands and feet, supporting the nail narrative.
- Archaeological evidence:
- Yohanan’s skeleton (found in Jerusalem post-Six Days War) with a nail in the heel bone, suggesting nails were used.
- Govello skeleton in Italy, another crucified individual with ankle damage.
- Nails were often reused due to the value of iron, explaining scarce archaeological remains.
- Ancient Roman inscription lists nails as essential for crucifixion, reinforcing their use.
- Response to the Article
- Christianity Today’s evangelical roots (founded with Billy Graham’s involvement) make the article’s publication surprising, as it was perceived to question scriptural inerrancy.
- Silliman issued an apology, admitting he didn’t consider John 20 or the impact on readers’ views of inerrancy.
- Ryan and Brian critique the article’s presentation in a popular outlet, which may lack the scholarly nuance needed for such claims.
- Historical and Archaeological Insights on Crucifixion
- Ryan references Martin Hengel’s book, Crucifixion in the Ancient World and the Folly of the Message of the Cross, which details the widespread use of crucifixion by Romans.
- Crucifixion was not just execution but public humiliation, often near roads for visibility.
- Variations in crucifixion methods:
- Crosses were likely lower than depicted in media.
- Shapes varied (e.g., capital T vs. small t).
- Some were crucified post-mortem for display.
- Example: Peter’s upside-down crucifixion per church tradition.
- Yohanan’s leg fractures were likely post-mortem, not evidence of crurifragium (leg-breaking to hasten death), as initially thought.
- The Role of Scholarship in Faith
