This blog will talk about JUDAS, you know, the guy who BETRAYED ‘the Son of God’ into the hands of his government’s executioners. This blog entry follows on the heels of today’s readings we did in John Lightfoot’s Commentaries on Acts 1. He raised a good point about Judas, and referenced two other entries in his commentaries about Judas along these lines. Very informative stuff (and entertaining)! One word of caution: This blog is LONG!
The way I’ll approach this blog is to quote Lightfoot and then offer COMMENTS. Warning: Lightfoot wanders all over the place, and most of my comments are MY PERSONAL OPINION. There’s a LOT more study that needs to go into this discussion, but unfortunately I don’t have the resources available to do it for you. It all comes down to the available historical data, and I just don’t have it at my fingertips. But I can work with what I do have. And please note that my opinions are based on looking at the information from a law and government perspective, not a RELIGIOUS perspective. So, by the end of this blog I hope you get the point about Judas, that he was THE JUDAS GOAT, with a whole lotta DRAMA in his life. I also hope you see how this JUDAS GOAT verifies the “historical Jesus”. When you walk away from this blog I want this thought to stick: “JUDAS … that JUDAS GOAT … that son of the devil!”
So what in the world is a JUDAS GOAT?
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, A Judas goat is a trained goat used in general animal herding. The Judas goat is trained to associate with sheep or cattle, leading them to a specific destination. In stockyards, a Judas goat will lead sheep to slaughter, while its own life is spared. Judas goats are also used to lead other animals to specific pens and onto trucks. They have fallen out of use in recent times, but can still be found in various smaller slaughterhouses in some parts of the world, as well as conservation projects.
Sound familiar? Anybody you know or whom you’ve had dealings with who’s like that?
Here’s what Lightfoot says about JUDAS in Acts:
366 HEBREW AND TALMUDICAL [CH. 1:18.
Ver. 18: “Falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst.”
The Vulgar and Erasmus have it, “Suspensus crepuit medius:” “Being hanged, he cracked asunder in the midst.” So the Italian translation: “Appicato crepo pelmezzo;” rendering St. Matthew rather than St. Luke; and I question, indeed, whether they do rightly take the mind of St. Matthew, while they so strictly confine the word apegxato (Gk) to being hanged. I have produced my conjecture concerning this business at Matt. xxvii; viz. that the devil, immediately after Judas had cast back his money into the temple, caught him up into the air, strangled him, threw him headlong, and dashed him in pieces upon the ground. For,
I. It is questionable enough, whether the word apegxato do, necessarily and singly,· denote “he hanged himself;” and not as well, “he was hanged” or “choked :” — and, indeed, whether the word always supposes the halter: how the learned Heinsius bath defended the negative, we may consult him upon this place, and upon Matt. xxvii.
II. If Judas hanged himself, as is commonly believed, and commonly so painted, — how could it be said of him, that egeneto prenes (Gk), “he fell headlong?” Grant, that, upon the breaking of the halter, he might fall upon the ground; yet what matter is it, whether he fell on his face, or that he fell backward? But if prenes (Gk) be derived apo tou proneuein (Gk), as the grammarians would have it, it may be headlong as well as upon the face; that is, as upon the face is opposed to uptio (Gk) to supine or backward.
III. Histories tell us of persons strangled by the devil. That is a known passage in Tob. iii.8: ” Asmodeus HONeK (so it is in the Heb. of. P. Fagius) strangled Sarah’s seven husbands,” &c; and it may be the less wonder, if the devil, being corporally seated in this wretch, should at last strangle him.
IV. There are also histories of the devil snatching up some into the air, and carrying them away with him. Now, of all mortals, no wretch did ever more deserve so direful a fate than this traitor; nor did any other death become the most impious of all mankind than the dreadfullest the devil (to whom he was entirely given up) could inflict; as what might be of most horror to himself, and terror to others.
CH.1:19.] EXERCITATIONS UPON THE ACTS. 367
V. The words immediately following, “That this was known to all the dwellers at Jerusalem,” ver. 19, argue it was a thing of no common and ordinary event, and must be something more than hanging himself; which was an accident not so very unusual in that nation.
COMMENTS:
First off, let’s recognize that when Lightfoot quotes the ITALIAN version, he’s quoting WORLD AUTHORITY for Bible interpretation. I’m talking about PAPAL ROME. The Italian version is not just another translation of the Bible, it’s not a mere one among many, like we have today. It was THE translation from THE ‘head of the church’ so to speak, during Lightfoot’s time. Same with Erasmus. He was one of the world’s leading scholars of that time, well known by all the scholars, and well respected (even by Martin Luther). So when Lightfoot cites Rome and Erasmus, he’s referencing WORLD AUTHORITY.
I. Next, let’s note that Lightfoot does a mini word study on the Greek word apegxato (to hang). This is a semantics + grammar study, more specifically, the meaning of a verb based on its parsing (tense). Semantical and grammatical studies are very good when used properly. This is an example of the proper use of this kind of study. However, the conclusion Lightfoot arrives at is, in my opinion, questionable. My reason for saying that is he conforms the semantics data to his intended interpretation. In other words, I believe Lightfoot had in his mind the idea of “the devil made me do it”, so he manipulated the textual data to promote that conclusion. The way we would rather like to INTERPRET the Bible (and any other document for that matter) is to LET THE TEXT SPEAK it’s own facts, so that the ideas shake out the way they naturally would. That takes a LOT of work, and even more knowledge and skill! I certainly don’t have that, but I can at least find experts who do, and use common sense in the process. Consider this a mini lesson in HERMENEUTICS. Remember we talked about hermeneutics a number of blogs ago?
II. Again, Lightfoot uses semantics and grammar to make his point. I don’t buy it. When I was in religion, I observed that this method is typically used by Christian religious ministers to ‘prove’ their ideas to their congregation. The thing is, WHO in their congregation has the same skill level which enables them to argue with him if they disagree? That’s why I consider all religion in America a CON JOB. After all, that’s how these guys MAKE THEIR LIVING. ‘Trust us, we’re the experts!’ Is it any wonder I got kicked out of every church I attended? I was always questioning the ‘pastor’ USING COMMON SENSE!
III. & IV. OK, OK, hooooold on a minute! Apparently Lightfoot considered the Apocrypha CANON. The Catholics do today, but the Protestants don’t. I certainly do not. Since it is a valid historical document, it does serve certain hermeneutical purposes. But in order to get any use out of Tobit, you have to be very familiar with it, as well as what it’s purpose was. When you read these Apocryphal books USING COMMON SENSE, you can see that, for the most part, they are STATE PROPAGANDA or POPULAR LITERATURE. As the former, they are CONTROL DEVICES used by the ‘authorities’ to propagate desired social norms through brainwashing (programming), or to issue warnings to the masses, to bureaucrats (viz., the Gospel of Barnabas) or to whomever. Some of these writings appear to be WORKS OF FICTION for entertainment purposes (viz., the Gospel of Judas). That’s another part of applied hermeneutics. But let’s not discuss all that right now.
The point to be had is, Lightfoot used Tobit to justify the idea that THE DEVIL CAN DO PHYSICAL THINGS TO PEOPLE IN THE MATERIAL WORLD. Do you believe that? I don’t. I do, however, believe a real live spirit being called the devil or Satan does exist in reality. But whether or not he/it can actually manually control things in the material world is something that remains to be proven to me. But DECEIVING PEOPLE into COOPERATING with him/it, now that’s a different story! Which brings us to the topic of DEMONS. As far as they’re concerned, that’s a huge subject for a different blog. Let’s just recognize that the ideas of DEMONS and SATAN have a long standing history, as well as lengthy historical developments in the minds of the people of various societies in the world, including Jews (as in this subject about Judas). According to the Gospel writers even Jesus dealt with demons, whether by ‘tradition’ or ‘reality’. Again, DEMONS and SATAN are good subjects for another blog. Many have written about them from various perspectives over the years, spanning the spectrum of ‘scholastic’ to the absurd. But I’ll leave that alone for the time being.
Let’s take a look at Tobit 3:
7 That same day in the city of Ecbatana in Media, it happened that Sarah, the daughter of a man named Raguel, was insulted by one of her father’s servant women. 8 Sarah had been married seven times, but the evil demon, Asmodeus, killed each husband before the marriage could be consummated. The servant woman said to Sarah,
You husband killer! Look at you! You’ve already had seven husbands, but not one of them lived long enough to give you a son. 9 Why should you take it out on us? Why don’t you go and join your dead husbands? I hope we never see a child of yours!
10 Sarah was so depressed that she burst into tears and went upstairs determined to hang herself. But when she thought it over, she said to herself, No, I won’t do it! People would insult my father and say, “You had only one child, a daughter whom you loved dearly, but she hanged herself because she felt so miserable.” Such grief would bring my gray-haired father to his grave, and I would be responsible. I won’t kill myself; I’ll just beg the Lord to let me die. Then I won’t have to listen to those insults any longer! (Tobit 3)
The only thing I can say about this scenario is, if someone wrote a story about it, it must have been popular in the minds of the people who living during those times. But what this was all about, who can tell? I can’t relate it to anything we know about today, that’s for sure. Maybe you have an idea of what it may correlate to in today’s world?
Anyway, have a look at the above historical renditions of ASMODEUS. Pretty skeery, huh?! Look like anybody you know? You can read about Asmodeus on Wiki. There’s also some good info in Eerdman’s “Dictionary of Deities and Demons”, as well as a short blurb in Eerdman’s “International Standard Bible Encyclopedia”. All of the articles give some good info, but no interpretations related to Judas.
The intel on Asmodeus is a mixed bag. Basically, this ‘tradition’ seems to have originated in the Zoroastrian religion as part of their ‘dark arts’, with a whole lotta SUPERSTITION surrounding it. The theory surrounding Tobit is that some of the diaspora Jews living in Persia (or thereabouts) absorbed Zoroastrian superstition and wrote stories about it in their own customary terms. Some of the scholastic authorities say Asmodeus is the demon of DESTRUCTION (re: “Abadon” (Heb.) / Apollyon” (Gk.)). Others say he’s the demon of LUST (one of the ‘7 deadly sins’!). Jewish literature says he’s good (see the Jewish King Solomon tale), but most say he’s bad. Some say he’s ‘the daddy demon’ (like “the prince of demons” of Matthew 9:34). But WHO KNOWS? In any case, whether or not a real live DEVIL (or DEMON) gave Judas the ‘smack-down’ is beside the point. The point is, Judas got HAMMERED for doing wrong.
After reading the context of Tobit, I got the idea that this little ditty is about a pampered rich woman who couldn’t keep a husband. Tobit had the hots for her (or for her money!), so he had to come up with a way to get hooked up with her, and STILL STAY ALIVE on their honeymoon (and after)! One has to wonder HOW all her other hubbies ‘expired’ on their wedding night, right? There’s no telling what really went on in that regard! As an aside, here’s something King Solomon says about women, which may or may not apply:
Under three things the earth quakes,
And under four, it cannot bear up:
22 Under a slave when he becomes king,
And a fool when he is satisfied with food,
23 Under an unloved woman when she gets a husband,
And a maidservant when she supplants her mistress. (Proverbs 30)
And …
It is better to live in a corner of a roof Than in a house shared with a contentious woman. (Proverbs 21:9)
It is better to live in a desert land Than with a contentious and vexing woman. (Proverbs 21:19)
It is better to live in a corner of the roof Than in a house shared with a contentious woman. (Proverbs 25:24)
A constant dripping on a day of steady rain And a contentious woman are alike. (Proverbs 27:15)
There appears to be a theme. Do you know anybody like that? To me, this Tobit text reads an awful lot like ADVICE from “Dear Abby”, except from a ‘devout religious’ (superstitious) viewpoint. The give away for me was all the gloppy emotion infused into the message. What do you think? You have to remember that these people lived during times that a woman’s place was in the home, and having SONS was the key to a woman pleasing her husband and having status in society. It all has to do with the STRUCTURE OF SOCIETY back then, which SHOULD BE the way it is today BUT ISN’T in this fantasy-driven world of LUST (ASMODEUS rearing his ugly head!). Back to Judas …
Now, since I have no knowledge of any historical information detailing HOW Judas hanged, I can’t arrive at a factual basis for what actually DID happened. So unless someone has some valid historical information, neither can anybody else. That leaves this whole matter of Judas Hanging to SPECULATION. Note Lightfoot’s word “conjecture”. Whether or not it matters HOW Judas hung, or WHO did it to him, I don’t care at this point, because it really doesn’t change the Bible’s message about Judas. He was a TRAITOR, a TURN COAT, a JUDAS GOAT, and he got what he deserved!
As an aside, one has to recall the level of SUPERSTITION that filled the minds of the people during the ‘dark ages’ when Lightfoot lived. Certainly we don’t have any of that today, do we?! Let me tell you a little story that hit the news about 20 years ago regarding SUPERSTITION. There was this abandoned bank building nearby. It was built sometime during the 1970’s and was small, unlike the banks today. It serviced the local community. During the course of it being daily beaten on by the HOT SUN over the course of decades, the laminated glass began to separate and change color. At one point in the process, the delaminating glass took on the look of a silhouette of THE VIRGIN MADONNA WITH CHILD! OK, so you see where I’m going with this.
It wasn’t but a matter of hours before people began ‘flocking’ to that DELAMINATED GLASS, offering up flowers, kneeling in prayer, etc. The BAD GLASS on that bank building became A CATHOLIC SHRINE, for goodness’ sake! So, can we affirm today, that SUPERSTITION doesn’t exist like it did back in the dark ages?!
Or what about SCIENCE? Have you ever considered some of the ‘theories’ that ‘scientists’ come up with? I’m talking about EVOLUTIONISTS here. Some of the stuff is downright ABSURD! But who can prove them wrong? Isn’t it PURE SPECULATION that NOBODY CAN PROVE either way? Yeah right, there’s no SUPERSTITION in science either!
Or what about modern RELIGIOUS SCHOLARSHIP. Although they sling mud on the idea that a spirit-person called “the devil” (or Satan) exists, their reason for disbelieving is because they’ve never been able to verify ‘his’ existence with empirical data. Kind’a comical either way you look at it. But when you consider the lengths and depths people go today in ‘scholarship’ to prove their absurd, unprovable ideas, you can see a whole new kind of SUPERSTITION. I just call it PROPAGANDA.
Or how about MUSIC and ENTERTAINMENT? Need I say more? They glorify VIOLENCE, RICHES and KNOWLEDGE, but nobody is fulfilled and few are happy. And how many ‘rich’ people do we know? The entertainment media glorifies SEXUAL LUST and SEX OUTSIDE OF MARRIAGE, and everyone sings along, but nobody’s happy. The family is all but eliminated from American society, and free sex is taken for granted. But NO ONE talks about the DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS of this kind of MORAL VIOLENCE and DESTRUCTION on people’s lives and on society. How many ruined lives do we find as a result of LUST, EGO, THEFT, WAR and CORPORATE SLAVERY? And these ‘hedonists’ are rushing headlong to destruction FOR WHAT? Because they don’t feel fulfilled? NO. It’s because they’ve been lied to by commercial marketeers into believing they NEED or SHOULD HAVE something that they don’t really need or want. And if they don’t get it, they’ll MISS OUT. On what? WHO KNOWS?! I call that SUPERSTITION. Get the pic?
Or how about the GARMENT and MODELING industries. Ever see what passes for “beautiful” in a woman today? These females look like TOOTHPICKS for cryin’ out loud! It sure can’t be HEALTHY to live like that! I wonder how they’d do keeping a home or working on a farm? LOL!
Or what about LITIGATION and LAW? Have you ever read the CONFUSING NONSENSE and STUPID GIBBERISH that comes from the pens and lips of LAWYERS, especially GOVERNMENT lawyers? And how about the LAWS that ‘our’ faithful and righteous legislators CONSTANTLY ‘make’? Ever hear of “composting humans“? It’s all absolutely SUPERSTITIOUS!
Dark ages?? We seriously need to rethink that today! Let’s move on ….
In the final analysis, what actually happened to Judas is hard to say. Suffice to say that UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLICAL TEXT is not as simple as may seem, considering the HISTORICAL TRADITIONS involved. That’s really the main point to be had here, because the LEGAL TRADITIONS and SOCIAL CUSTOMS are what drive the meaning of the Biblical text. I’m not talking about Lightfoot’s 17th century traditions and customs which need to be STRIPPED from the discussion. Rather, I’m talking about the 2nd Temple (1st century AD) traditions and customs. That’s what you gotta know to gain understanding of the NT Biblical text. And that stuff is not so easy to come by! But sometimes we can ‘glean’ some of those tidbits out of scholars like Lightfoot. Hence his commentary here.
The other glaring point to be had here is the fact that these non-Biblical historical traditions from the ancients are PROOF POSITIVE that the writers of the NT accurately REPORTED ON persons, events and things that occurred during their lifetimes. They merely said it in words and phrases that were familiar to the people living during those days. So, every time we find some ancient text that correlates with the Biblical text, we can get a glimpse of ANCIENT REALITY. We may not know how to understand it, or we may be able to understand it in degrees, but the fact remains we are seeing ANCIENT REALITY in the Biblical texts. That’s what we can get from Lightfoot’s quotes of some crazy rabbinic sayings or some of their wild superstitions. Now, in Lightfoot’s above number “V.”, he makes another good point along these lines, as we shall now see.
“And all his bowels gushed out.”
“A certain Syrian saw a man, who fell from the roof of his house upon the ground; PKAIH CRSIH WNPWK MAIINI (Heb.) his belly burst, and his bowels gushed out. The Syrian brought the son of him, that had thus fallen, and slew him before him, BAHIZT AINIIM but at length it seemed so.” The gloss telleth us, he did not strangle or hurt the boy; But made as if he would have killed him: Because he, loath to meddle with the man’s bowels himself, for fear lest he should any way displace them, seemed as if he had killed the boy; that so the father, upon the sight of it, groaning and fetching strong and deep sighs, might draw in his bowels into their proper place again.
COMMENTS:
Another colorful rabbinic tradition! I consider it story telling at it’s best (or worst!). I consider this a LEGAL TRADITION, the WHY of which I’ll now explain. Some guy falls off his roof. His bulging gut explodes, and all his inners blow out all over the place. But the guy isn’t dead. Some other guy shows up with the fallen man’s son (the plot thickens!). BUT BECAUSE OF LEGAL LIABILITY (don’t touch an injured person if you’re not ‘licensed and bonded’ and a ‘trained expert, paramedic’, etc.) the guy who ‘appears on the scene’ doesn’t want to touch the injured guy. In other words, he refuses to get involved and help the hurt guy for legal liability reasons. Instead, he schemes a way to motivate the injured man to stay alive. How’s he do that? He shows up with the guy’s son, and then pretends to attack the kid, which apparently acts as a ‘motivation’ for the injured man to summons his strength, gather up his guts and stuff them back into his body cavity.
For goodness sake! What a story! Now let’s think about it. Would you want to stuff your guts back into your gaping body cavity when they’re all messed up with dirt and God knows what that was all over the ground? I mean, really! For cryin’ out loud, WAIT FOR THE PARAMEDICS! Can these rabbis tell stories, OR WHAT?! I’m guessing that Lightfoot shared this little ditty to show us that the ancients well knew about people losing their guts like Judas did. In other words, losing your guts like that was a well known historical phenomena during Judas’ life time.
The devil had dwelt in this wretch for three days, or thereabout, from the time that he had entered him upon his receiving the sop, John xiii; and now, by a horrid eruption tearing out his bowels, he goes out again.
COMMENTS:
First off, let’s consider “The devil had dwelt in this wretch for three days”. There’s a lotta religious tradition surrounding “the devil” and “demons” influencing or interfering in people’s lives. They even go so far as to claim a person can be POSSESSED BY the devil or demons. You see it a LOT of this type of ideology in the emotional branches of churchianity. Much of it comes from the WOMAN. I’m sure their pastors exploit this ‘feeling’ to keep them coming on Sunday and plunking money into the church coffers. But what level of REALITY is involved with this superstition? Is it like in the Hollywood movies “The Exorcist” or “Poltergeist”? Or how about giving birth to an “Alien”? Is it like the dark ages superstitions? Or what?
This is too big a subject to get into, so I’ll pass on it here and let you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. My view on Lightfoot is, he was merely peddling contemporary superstitions (of the dark ages), and may even have been superstitious himself. Now, as for what the 2nd Temple people ‘believed’, and what their social traditions were, that’s the subject of a different blog. It has a long-standing tradition that took a long time to develop before reaching the days of Jesus. You can bet it’s all wrapped up in POLITICS too, not RELIGION. So let’s just forget about that discussion for a while and not make any more out of it than we need to.
How the gutless man’s story relates to Judas I can’t say , except that Lightfoot shows that the NT phrase about GUTS EXPLODING occurs in the rabbis (= NT contemporary traditions). That means it’s a KNOWN PHRASE among these middle easterners, which also may mean it’s a KNOWN PHENOMENA, and probably has some kind of LEGAL TRADITION involved with it (as I hinted at above). Based on that idea, I conclude that these Israelis knew what it meant to have your belly explode and all your guts expelled post haste.
And there you have another small piece of history that brings the Bible into reality for modern readers. That’s the point of these historical tidbits. They correlate to the Biblical text such that you add one upon another to arrive at a “preponderance of evidence” for the historical reliability and meaning of the NT text. Additionally, by such information you (as a modern reader) begin to find new meaning in the Bible that more probably reflects THEIR REALITY instead of ours. So instead of the Bible being a CLOSED BOOK to us modern people, it becomes RELEVANT TO US TODAY. It stops being about RELIGIOUS myths and legends, amounting to irrelevant and frivolous fantasies, but instead becomes about real life happenings of hard-core reality.
Now consider the STENCH and how DISTENDED the guy’s gut had to be in the first place to have EXPLODED like that? He must’ve guzzled his fair share of beers over the years! Another thing: Usually when someone smacks down on the pavement, their guts blow out their butt or whatever other opening is most readily available. It’s a simple matter of your innards taking the path of least resistance. It’s pure physics at that point. So imagine how STRETCHED this man’s belly was to have offered itself as the most readily available exit for his guts!
At this point, the only thing I can say about this NT Judas story is, the Gospel writers want to DRAMATIZE this man’s TREACHERY so the reader gets an idea of how BAD the act of BETRAYAL was.
Ver. 19: “Aceldama.”
HKL DMA “A field of blood:” so called, both as it had been purchased with the price of blood, and as it had been watered with the blood of this traitor; for hither I presume the devil had thrown him headlong: and upon this event it was, that the priests were moved to purchase this very field; and so, in a twofold sense, it might be said of this traitor, that ektasato to xorion (Gk) “he purchased a field,” both as it was bought with his money, and sealed with his blood. If Aceldama was in that quarter of the city that it is now shown in to strangers, that is, between the east and the south, as Borchard tells us; then it was in the valley of Hinnom, or thereabout.
COMMENTS:
Hinnom is the place where they used to DUMP and BURN garbage. It’s a DUMP, basically. Only they BURN their trash instead of piling it up in GIGANTIC MOUNDS (mountains) like they do here in America. There’s something to be said for that method being better than the ‘American way’. “Hinnom” is where the phrase GEHENNA comes from. Ge = Valley & Hinnom = the name of it. Ge+Hinnom = “Gehenna”. The study of GEHENNA is an interesting inquiry into ‘the place of the dead’. It has a long history of development from BC times to AD times preceding Jesus. There’s a bit of superstition involved too, but that’ll have to be discussed in another blog. Note that GEHENNA has to do with THE PUNISHMENT OF SINNERS.
Curious: “it was bought with his money, and sealed with his blood”. The thing that gets me about this is the response of the government officials. You know, the guys who SET UP this JUDAS GOAT. When Judas remorsed and returned the cash, these buggers had a LEGAL ANSWER for his returned BLOOD MONEY that they paid him. They even had the audacity to LAUNDER that money back into the government’s possession in the form of a LAND ACQUISITION. Sound familiar? Yeah, that’s typical EXPROPRIATION PROCESS adapted to this scenario. Pretty creative of them, eh?
But you have to ask: When has “the law” ever sanctioned “breaking the law”?! One has to wonder how SINISTER those 2nd Temple public officials were who did such wicked deeds IN THE NAME OF THE LAW! Aren’t they supposed to be GOD’S CHOSEN LEADERS for “God’s chosen people”?? Or what about the law they created for that very purpose? Like Marc Stevens says, “in legal land, fantasy is reality!”
368 HEBREW AND TALMUDICAL [CH. 1: 25. 23.
Ver. 25: “That he might go to his own place.”
Balaam (j) “went to his own place, that is, into hell.” — “It is not said of the friends of Job, that they, each of them, came from his own house, or his own city, or his own country, but from his own place, MMKOM SNTVQR LO BNHINM (Heb) that is, from a place cut out for them in hell.” — The gloss is, “from his own place, that is, from hell, appointed for idolaters.” — “Whosoever betrays (l) an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, hath no part in the world to come (m).” If so, then where must he have his place, that betrayed the very Messiah of Israel?
(j) j Baalturim, in Num. xxiv. 25.
(k) Midras Coheleth, fol. 100. 4.
(m) Maimon. in Covel umazzi. cap. 8.
COMMENTS:
Pretty straight forward here. The only thing I can think of, to make sense out of “Balaam” being “from hell”, is that this little ditty shows how the rabbis DERIVED their CURSE against everybody who attacks their nation. So, ‘betraying a fellow Israelite’ is equivalent to attacking their nation. But it’s not on the same level as what Balaam did to ancient Israel. Essentially, “Balaam” gave instructions to Balak on how to DESTROY the ancient Israel. It’s found in Numbers 22-24. There’s no speculation about what happened. It’s a simple matter of DILUTING THEIR CUSTOMS (the laws and social process of the nation) through INTERMARRIAGE with FOREIGNERS who have different social customs. It’s also a simple matter of INTRODUCING COMMERCE INTO THE NATION. In the NT the apostles call this “the lusts of the flesh and of the mind”.
So this Balaam guy was a bad guy, a really bad guy. Today he would be considered a foreign operative who commits SEDITION. That’s how we look at it today. And all the public officials who follow along with him, taking his bribes and giving into his threats, would be considered TREASONOUS against their own nation. And all the ‘great industrialists’ who paid for the expertise of the seditioners for silently setting up social schemes in the nation that work towards its destruction are equally to blame. So that’s probably why these rabbis spewed this ‘hate speech’ against Balaam.
The key to this rabbinic CURSE is the fact that Balaam was a NON-Israelite. He was a GENTILE. And as we’ve seen, the rabbis considered ALL non-Israelites to be PERPETUALLY UNCLEAN. That means, they consider all non-Israelites BANNED from God’s blessing and BANNED from God’s future kingdom. That’s what this rabbinic rant is all about. You can see the explanation in the GLOSS. The key term here is IDOLATERS. According to the rabbis, ALL idolaters will be cut-off from God “in the next life”.
So, these rabbis peddled this little ditty to PUT FEAR IN THE MASSES so they would NEVER “betray a fellow Israelite”. This is PURE STATE PROPAGANDA. Why do I say that? Because the law of Moses dictates that you SUE your neighbor when he violates your rights by violating God’s law against you. You do that ONLY IF he refuses to repent and make restitution. And IF he WILLFULLY violates God’s law, he’s to be either PUT TO DEATH or EXPATRIATED from the nation. HOW MUCH MORE SEVERE a punishment does someone deserve under Moses who commits Treason and Sedition? I think that’s the point these rabbis are making here.
Sedition occurs when people set up social systems and legal process that tear a nation apart INTERNALLY. A prime example of this in modern times is TAKING WOMEN OUT OF THE HOME, so the “idle rich” men, who created legal fictions called CORPORATIONS, can harvest their labor through those corporations, and so their THUG, the government, can take their labor through taxation. And what happens to the nation’s precious children? They grow up NOT LEARNING MORALS and NOT LEARNING ALLEGIANCE TO THEIR FAMILY. When that happens, they learn SELF-PRESERVATION AT ALL COSTS and ALLEGIANCE TO THE STATE instead of their family and community.
All that is done so these “idle rich” men can control EVERYTHING in that nation, BY CONTROLLING THE MINDS AND LABOR OF THEIR PEOPLE. The end result is, the “idle rich” men have available to themselves all the resources that the masses produce, which they utilize to steer the nation politically wherever they want. Today’s “idle rich” men are in the process of creating a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT today. That’s what they use the labor of the populace to fund and construct. And make sure you realize this: COMMERCE is the system used to accomplish this today. COMMERCE always has been the system used by seditious and treasonous persons to accomplish their goals. The reason is because COMMERCE ejects morals from a society and trains t its citizens to chase after money and pleasure to the exclusion of all else. Is it any wonder why the early rabbis hated these types of persons? Do you see any RELIGION in that?
That is just one example of MANY. It should be enough for you to see WHY the rabbis spewed their verbal venom against Balaam. You can also see WHY they eventually created a sanction against “betraying a fellow Israelite”. The original rabbinic hatred of Balaam was justified. But the latter hatred for “betraying” is propaganda. The reason: It keeps everybody in the nation obeying ‘authority’ WITHOUT questioning authority. THAT is THE MOST DANGEROUS THING any reasoning adult can do! Why? Because people in power are NOT to be TRUSTED!
The power forum is a WAR ZONE of intrigue and every evil thing. That’s what the Apostle James was referring to when he said, “For where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every evil thing.” (James 3:16) Jesus put it like this, “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence.” (Matthew 23:25) The public officials of his day were MODEL CITIZENS, yet they were corrupt to the core! The Bible has many more condemnations like that against those government officials. Nothing has changed from that day till this. Here in America, George Washington’s State of the Union Address and Farewell Speech talks about all this. America’s founding fathers created this nation BECAUSE they did NOT trust people in power.
At this point in this lengthy blog, you should be getting the idea that there’s NOTHING SIMPLE about rabbinic ‘interpretation’ of the OT, and interpreting the NT is even LESS SIMPLE! And there certainly is nothing RELIGIOUS about it either. It’s ALL POLITICAL. And it’s political using THE LAW. In other words, the rabbis accomplished their political agendas using the law. Do you think politics and law are any different today in America? Haven’t the “idle rich” men utilized the LEGISLATORS, LAWYERS and COURTS to accomplish their political agendas over the past 2 centuries right there in America? When observed without ‘rose colored glasses’, it’s obvious that not much has changed between the days of Jesus and today.
Matthew 27:5. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
[Hanged himself.] Strangulatus est, was strangled: namely, by the devil, who had now been in him three days together. The words of Peter, Acts 1:18, do not suffer me to understand this of hanging himself. Falling headlong he burst asunder in the midst. Interpreters take a great deal of pains to make these words agree with his hanging himself; but indeed all will not do. I know the word is commonly applied to a man’s hanging himself, but not to exclude some other way of strangling. And I cannot but take the story (with good leave of antiquity) in this sense: After Judas had thrown down the money, the price of his treason, in the Temple, and was now returning again to his mates, the devil, who dwelt in him, caught him up on high, strangled him, and threw him down headlong; so that dashing upon the ground, he burst in the midst, and his guts issued out, and the devil went out in so horrid an exit. This certainly agrees very well with the words of Peter now mentioned, and also with those that follow, “This was known to all that dwelt at Jerusalem.” It agrees also very well with the deserts of the wicked wretch, and with the title of Iscariot. The wickedness he had committed was above all example, and the punishment he suffered was beyond all precedent. There had been many instances of persons who had hanged themselves; this would not so much have stirred up the people of Jerusalem to take notice of it, as such a strangling and throwing down headlong, which we suppose horrible above measure, and singular beyond example. See what we have said at the tenth chapter concerning the word Iscariot.
COMMENTS:
“The words of Peter, Acts 1:18”, I take to be first hand knowledge testimony on Peter’s part. True, Luke recorded this. But I’m betting Peter knew this from seeing it himself, or at least seeing the results of it. After all, Judas was one of the twelve disciples. Imagine how well they got to know each other! As far as HOW Judas lost his guts, there’s no telling, because Peter doesn’t say (nor does anybody else that we know of).
“This was known to all that dwelt at Jerusalem.” Let me quote the entire context: “And it became known to all who were living in Jerusalem; so that in their own language that field was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood. “For it is written in the book of Psalms,
‘Let his homestead be made desolate,
And let no one dwell in it’;
and, ‘Let another man take his office.’ (Acts 1:19-20)
I already commented above about the popularity of this act among 2nd Temple Israelites. Suicide was an unpardonable sin for them. But there’s more proof of Judas’ heinous act in the words “in their own language that field was called Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.” Who would name a PIECE OF PROPERTY after a traitor, murderer, criminal, if it wasn’t important. By important, I mean the person that made Judas important: Jesus. Betraying JESUS was what made Judas important, just in a not so nice way! In this you have evidence of Jesus’ fame, as well as his historical existence. Imagine that!
Notice also how the apostles utilized the OT texts to justify what they believed to be true, “For it is written in the book of Psalms,
‘Let his homestead be made desolate,
And let no one dwell in it’;”
This is a lot like how the later rabbis quoted the OT, except not as bad as they did. Those rabbis take any word or phrase and use it to JUSTIFY and INVENT all kinds of LAW they use to OPPRESS their own people. They also OPPRESS THE GENTILE NATIONS too, with their FINANCIAL VOODOO, but that’s the topic of another blog.
Here’s another OT quote they use to JUSTIFY their next move in this new kingdom building endeavor: ‘Let another man take his office.’ Whether or not that’s ‘good hermeneutics’ is beside the point. The point is, THIS IS HOW THEY UTILIZED THE BIBLE (they didn’t have the NT during their life time, b/c it was created by THEM!). So we have to accept that as a fact of history and learn to work with it in our modern, ‘scientific’, industrial age.
Lightfoot has more to say about this in his commentaries: “See what we have said at the tenth chapter concerning the word Iscariot.” OK, so let’s have a look, shall we?
Matthew 10:4. Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him.
[Simon the Canaanite.] In Luke it is Zealot. See who are called Zealots in Josephus. Of whose sect, if you should say this Simon was before his conversion, perhaps you would do him no more wrong than you would do his brother Matthew, when you should say that he was a publican.
[Iscariot.] It may be inquired whether this name was given him while he was alive, or not till after his death. If while he was alive, one may not improperly derive it from Skortja, which is written also Iskortja: where, while the discourse is of a man vowing that he would not use this or that garment, we are taught these things;…”These are garments, some, of leather, and some of a certain kind of clothing.” The Gemara asketh, “What is Iskortja? Bar Bar Channah answered, A Tanner’s garment” The Gloss is, “A leathern apron that tanners put on over their clothes.” So that Judas Iscariot may perhaps signify as much as Judas with the apron. But now in such aprons they had purses sewn, in which they were wont to carry their money, as you may see in Aruch…which we shall also observe presently. And hence, it may be, Judas had that title of the purse-bearer, as he was called Judas with the apron.
Or what if he used the art of a tanner before he was chose into discipleship? Certainly we read of one Simon a tanner, Acts 9:43; and that this Judas was the son of Simon, John 12:4.
But if he were not branded with this title till after his death, I should suppose it derived from Iscara: which word what it signifies, let the Gemarists speak: “Nine hundred and three kinds of death were created in the world, as it is said, and the issues of death, Psalm 68:21. The word issues arithmetically ariseth to that number. Among all those kinds, Iscara is the roughest death…” Where the Gloss is, ‘Iscara’ in the mother-tongue is estrangulament. By learned men for the most part it is rendered angina, the quinsy. The Gemara sets out the roughness of it by this simile, “The Iscara is like to branches of thorns in a fleece of wool; which if a man shake violently behind, it is impossible but the wool will be pulled off by them.” It is thus defined in the Gloss, ‘The Iscara’ begins in the bowels, and ends in the throat. See the Gemara there.
When Judas therefore perished by a most miserable strangling, being strangled by the devil (which we observe in its place), no wonder if this infamous death be branded upon his name, to be commonly styled Judas Iscariot, or ‘that Judas that perished by strangling.’
[Who also betrayed him.] Let that of Maimonides be observed: “It (a) is forbidden to betray an Israelite into the hands of the heathen, either as to his person, or as to his goods,” &c. “And whosoever shall so betray an Israelite shall have no part in the world to come.” Peter spake agreeably to the opinion of the nation, when he said concerning Judas, “He went unto his own place,” Acts 1:25. And so doth Baal Turim concerning Balaam; “‘Balaam went to his place,’ Numbers 24:25; that is (saith he), he went down to hell.”
(a) In HoVeL UMaZiK (Heb), cap. 1.
And John Gill’s Exposition of the Bible:
Jesus said unto them, the son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:
Some copies read, “sinful men”; and so the angels report the words, in (Luke 24:7) by whom may be meant the Gentiles, who, by the Jews, were reckoned very wicked men, and called sinners of the Gentiles. Now Christ intimates, that the son of man, meaning himself, should be betrayed by the Jews, into the hands of the Gentiles; than which, with the Jews, nothing was reckoned a fouler action, or a viler crime; their canons run thus F8:
It is forbidden to betray an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, whether in his body or in his substance; and though he may be a wicked man, and a ringleader in sin, and though he may have oppressed and afflicted him; and everyone that betrays an Israelite into the hands of the Gentiles, whether in his body, or in his substance, has no part in the world to come.
They forgot this rule, when they delivered Christ to Pontius Pilate. They go on to observe, that
it is lawful to kill a betrayer in any place, even at this time, in which they do not judge capital crimes; and it is lawful to kill him before he betrays; but when he says, lo! I am about to betray such an one in his body, or in his substance, though his substance is small, he exposes himself to death; and they admonish him and say to him, do not betray: if he is obstinate, and says I will betray him, it is commanded to kill him; and he that is first to kill him, is a worthy man,
FOOTNOTES:
F8 Maimon. Hilch. Chobel Umazzik, c. 8. sect. 9, 10.
COMMENTS:
Look! There’s SO MUCH to comment on in the above 2 quotes, I don’t if I should even begin! Well, maybe not … haha. There’s two notables in the above quotes:
1. The origin of Judas’ NAME, and
2. The national legal custom of NOT BETRAYING a fellow Israelite citizen.
On #1 I have this to say: Lightfoot’s REASONING may seem complicated, but it really isn’t. He does an excellent job of finding and sorting out all the juicy historical facts on record, and assembling them into a meaningful expression. I don’t know what he knew, nor am I any kind of expert in the matters of philology and literary analysis. But Lightfoot’s explanation sounds good to me.
The idea of Judas being the son of a TANNER is possible, but there’s really no direct evidence of that historical fact. Same with the fancy idea of the worst kind of death in the world: “estrangulament”. Whatever the truth is on this, we know we have the historical record by the men who experienced it and wrote about it. Maybe one day the Vatican or some other source (e.g., the “idle rich”) will release the ancient texts in their possession which contain the historical information we seek, if such texts do in fact exist? Maybe then we will be able to lay these matters to rest?
Far as “not betraying a fellow Israelite”, I have this summary statement on it. It is “Jewish” STATE PROPAGANDA authored by the rabbis to keep the nation together even though they have no land or seat of government. Notice it says, “though he may be a wicked man, and a ringleader in sin, and though he may have oppressed and afflicted him [that is, the guy who will ‘betray’ him to the gentile authorities]”. That’s my clue to the nature and character of this legal maxim. It has to do with PROTECTING THOSE WHO DISOBEY God’s law! You gotta wonder WWJD??
To wrap it up, let’s acknowledge that JUDAS GOAT is a HISTORICAL LANDMARK for the life and times of JESUS THE MESSIAH (as Alfred Edersheim would say it). This is just one more piece of ancient evidence to add to our PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE for the existence of JESUS by way of JUDAS THE BETRAYER. After all, if Jesus was just a myth, JUDAS GOAT would not exist!
I guess I’ve run out of words at this point (not really!), so that’ll be all for now. See you in the next blog. And thanks for stopping by!
Reality Bible 