In Chapter 7 of the book I’m currently working on (Thinking Critically about the Resurrection of Jesus: The Resuscitation of the Swoon Theory), I critically examine some objections against the Swoon Theory by various Christian apologists. The Swoon Theory claims (roughly) that Jesus survived his crucifixion and this led his disciples to mistakenly conclude that God had raised Jesus from the dead.

One of the objections against the Swoon Theory that I examine in Chapter 7 of my book points to alleged ancient historical references to Jesus’ death by crucifixion as evidence for the claim that Jesus died on the cross (which would mean the Swoon Theory is wrong). This objection is presented by the Christian apologists Norman Geisler and Frank Turek in their book I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (see page 306). I call this objection: Objection #13: Non-Christian Writers.

In this post, I will examine one of the examples given by Geisler and Turek of an alleged ancient historical reference to Jesus’ death by crucifixion: a passage from the Jewish Talmud. Here is the relevant premise of their argument:

5a. The Jewish Talmud was produced by non-Christian writers and contains a passage in which a non-Christian writer affirmed that Jesus had died by crucifixion.

I will argue here that premise (5a) is false.

SANHEDRIN 43A DOES NOT STATE OR IMPLY THAT JESUS DIED BY CRUCIFIXION

Although Geisler and Turek don’t bother to actually quote the relevant passage from the Jewish Talmud, it is clear that they are talking about a specific passage from the Babylonian Talmud, specifically a passage from Sanhedrin 43a.

The passage in Sanhedrin 43a states that “On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged.” Some Christian readers might be inclined to take this to mean that “Yeshu was crucified”, but the context of this passage makes that interpretation very implausible. There are at least five good reasons to reject this interpretation:

⦁ The focus of Chapter 6 of Sanhedrin (in which this passage from 43a occurs) is on execution by stoning
⦁ The passage clearly indicates that Yeshu was to be stoned to death
⦁ The Jewish punishment for Yeshu’s alleged crimes of sorcery and enticement of Israel to apostasy was stoning (as is discussed in Chapter 7 of Sanhedrin)
⦁ Crucifixion was not a method of execution approved by Judaism (according to Sanhedrin!)
⦁ Based on the context (i.e. other passages and chapters in Sanhedrin), the term “hanged” does NOT refer to a method of execution

THE FOCUS OF CHAPTER 6 OF SANHEDRIN IS ON STONING

The passage from 43a occurs in Chapter 6 of the Sanhedrin, and that Chapter is focused primarily upon execution by STONING. Furthermore, there is no discussion in Chapter 6 about crucifixion. Here is a key point from a summary of Chapter 6 from an English translation of Sanhedrin:

This chapter discussed capital punishment in general and execution by stoning in particular. [1]

Recall that the Talmud is a commentary on the Mishna. If we look at the quotations of the Mishna that are being commented upon in Chapter 6 of Sanhedrin, it becomes clear that this part of the Sanhedrin is all about execution by STONING (emphasis added):

MISHNAH. WHEN THE TRIAL IS ENDED, HE [THE CONDEMNED] IS LED FORTH TO BE STONED. THE PLACE OF STONING WAS WITHOUT THE COURT, EVEN AS IT IS WRITTEN, BRING FORTH HIM THAT HATH CURSED. [2]

MISHNAH. IF THEN THEY FIND HIM INNOCENT, THEY DISCHARGE HIM; BUT IF NOT, HE GOES FORTH TO BE STONED, AND A HERALD PRECEDES HIM [CRYING]: SO AND SO, THE SON OF SO AND SO, IS GOING FORTH TO BE STONED BECAUSE HE COMMITTED SUCH AND SUCH AN OFFENCE, AND SO AND SO ARE HIS WITNESSES. WHOEVER KNOWS ANYTHING IN HIS FAVOUR, LET HIM COME AND STATE IT. [3]

MISHNAH. WHEN HE IS ABOUT TEN CUBITS AWAY FROM THE PLACE OF STONING, THEY SAY TO HIM, ‘CONFESS’, FOR SUCH IS THE PRACTICE OF ALL WHO ARE EXECUTED, THAT THEY [FIRST] CONFESS, FOR HE WHO CONFESSES HAS A PORTION IN THE WORLD TO COME. … [4]

MISHNAH. WHEN HE IS ABOUT FOUR CUBITS DISTANT FROM THE PLACE OF STONING, HE IS STRIPPED OF HIS GARMENTS. A MAN IS COVERED IN FRONT AND A WOMAN BOTH IN FRONT AND BEHIND: THIS IS R. JUDAH’S VIEW. BUT THE SAGES SAY: A MAN IS TO BE STONED NAKED BUT A WOMAN IS NOT TO BE STONED NAKED. [5]

MISHNAH. THE PLACE OF STONING WAS TWICE A MAN’S HEIGHT. ONE OF THE WITNESSES PUSHED HIM BY THE HIPS, [SO THAT] HE WAS OVERTURNED ON HIS HEART. HE WAS THEN TURNED ON HIS BACK. IF THAT CAUSED HIS DEATH, HE HAD FULFILLED [HIS DUTY]; BUT IF NOT, THE SECOND WITNESS TOOK THE STONE AND THREW IT ON HIS CHEST. IF HE DIED THEREBY, HE HAD DONE [HIS DUTY]; BUT IF NOT, HE [THE CRIMINAL] WAS STONED BY ALL ISRAEL, FOR IT IS WRITTEN: THE HAND OF THE WITNESSES SHALL BE FIRST UPON HIM TO PUT HIM TO DEATH, AND AFTERWARDS THE HAND OF ALL THE PEOPLE. [6]

The quotes from the Mishna that are commented on in Chapter 6 of Sanhedrin are almost all about STONING. In Chapter 6, there are no quotes from the Mishna about crucifixion. It is in that context that the commentary in Chapter 6 about the Mishna mentions the trial and execution of “Yeshu”. The execution of Yeshu is relevant to the discussion in Chapter 6 because Yeshu was executed by being stoned to death.

SANHEDRIN 43A CLEARLY INDICATES THAT YESHU WAS STONED

According to the relevant passage from Sanhedrin 43a:

For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, ‘He is going forth to be stoned…[7]

The “herald” is not just a paperboy or town gossip; the herald is functioning here as an agent of the Jewish court. This announcement is part of the legal process, to help ensure that innocent people were not executed, by making a serious effort to find any witnesses who might help to show the innocence of the accused person.

It is obviously important that the herald be correctly informed by the Jewish court about what the specific charges are against the accused and what the punishment would be if the accused was convicted of those alleged crimes. So, it is implied that the herald’s claims on those matters are correct: Yeshu was to be executed by being stoned, and Yeshu was accused of the crimes of sorcery and enticement of Israel to apostasy. So, it is reasonable to conclude that Yeshu was executed by being stoned, not by being crucified.

THE PUNISHMENT FOR SORCERY AND ENTICEMENT WAS STONING

Because it is implied that the herald’s claims about Yeshu were correct, we should conclude that the Jewish court was in fact considering the accusation that Yeshu “practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy.” Based on this conclusion we may further infer that Yeshu would, if convicted of these alleged crimes, be executed by being stoned. Stoning was the method of execution used to punish those specific crimes, according to Sanhedrin. [8]

CRUCIFIXION NOT AN APPROVED METHOD OF EXECUTION IN JUDAISM

Chapter 7 of Sanhedrin points to just four methods of execution approved of by Judaism. Chapter 7 opens with this quote from the Mishna:

MISHNAH. FOUR DEATHS HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO BETH DIN: STONING, BURNING, SLAYING [BY THE SWORD] AND STRANGULATION. R. SIMEON ENUMERATED THEM THUS: BURNING, STONING, STRANGULATION AND SLAYING. THAT IS THE MANNER OF STONING. [9]

Obviously, executing someone by “stoning” is different than executing someone by crucifixion, and the same is the case with executing someone by “burning” or by “slaying [by the sword]”. Neither “burning” nor “slaying [by the sword]” constitutes execution by crucifixion.

One might suspect that “strangulation” was another term for “hanging”, that is, killing a person by hanging them with a rope or noose around their neck. In that case, the statement that “Yeshu was hanged.” might mean that Yeshu was hanged with a rope or noose around his neck. But “strangulation” here means strangling a person by tightening a cloth around their neck:

R. Huna said: It is obvious to me that the stone with which one is stoned, …the sword with which one is decapitated, and the cloth with which one is strangled, are all provided by the Community. And why so? Because we could not tell a man to go and fetch his own property to kill himself. [10]

Here is a clarification of “strangulation” from a translation of Sanhedrin:

Strangulation is the least severe of the four types of capital punishment administered by the court. It was performed by wrapping a scarf around the violator’s neck and then pulling simultaneously at both ends until he expired. [11]

Neither execution by crucifixion nor execution by hanging (i.e. hanging a person by a rope or noose around their neck) were forms of execution approved of by ancient Judaism.

“HANGED” DOES NOT REFER TO A METHOD OF EXECUTION

But then why does the passage from 43a say that “Yeshu was hanged.”? This would seem to involve the Jewish court completely ignoring the fact that Judaism (at that time) only approved of four modes of execution and that Judaism did NOT approve of crucifixion or hanging (by the neck from a rope or noose) as modes of execution.

The solution to this puzzle is simple and easy: “hanging” in the sense intended in 43a (and other passages in the Sanhedrin) was NOT a form of execution. This point is made clear in Sanhedrin:

MISHNAH. ALL WHO ARE STONED ARE [AFTERWARDS] HANGED: THIS IS R. ELIEZER’S VIEW… [12]

Therefore Scripture says, And he be put to death, then thou shalt hang him — he is first put to death and afterwards hanged. And how is this done? — It [the verdict] is delayed until just before sunset. Then they pronounce judgment and put him [immediately] to death, after which they hang him; One ties him up and another unties [him], in order to full the precept of hanging. [13]

First you execute the condemned person, THEN you hang their body up in public. The “hanging” happens AFTER the person has been killed, so “hanging” in Sanhedrin is not a form of execution.

Such “hanging” is mentioned in the Jewish scriptures (the Old Testament in Christian Bibles):

22 “When someone is convicted of a crime punishable by death and is executed and you hang him on a tree, 23 his corpse must not remain all night upon the tree; you must bury him that same day, for anyone hung on a tree is under God’s curse.

(Deuteronomy 21:22-23, NRSV Updated Edition)

Here is some Evangelical Christian commentary on that passage:

Very few narratives describe the practice of exposing a body (Josh 8:29; 10:26-27; 2 Sam 4:12; 21:8-13). It is unlikely that hanging was the form of execution used here. Rather, a tree or pole was used to impale the bodies for public display. [14]

Here is an explanation of the above Deuteronomy passage from another Evangelical Christian commentary:

The final section of the chapter continues the theme of not defiling the land, by ordering that the bodies of executed criminals should be displayed (hung on a tree) for no more than a day. Presumably, the purpose of such a display was to act as a warning against wrongdoing; but it was also the exhibition of a person and deed that had violated a divine law, and as such its open display needed to be limited. …the verses do not refer to crucifixion… [15]

The words “hang,” “hanged,” and “hanging” in Sanhedrin do NOT refer to a method of execution. They do not refer to execution by crucifixion. Thus, the phrase “Yeshu was hanged.” in Sanhedrin 43a does NOT mean that Yeshu was crucified. It means that Yeshu was first executed by being stoned to death, and then his dead body was put on public display.

CONCLUSION

Based on the five reasons presented above, this passage in Sanhedrin does NOT assert that “Yeshu was crucified.” Thus, this passage in Sanhedrin does NOT constitute an affirmation of the Christian belief that “Jesus died by crucifixion.” Therefore, premise (5a) is FALSE.

=================

END NOTES

1. “Summary of Perek VI” in The Noé Edition Koren Talmud Bavli,
Volume 29: Tractate Sanhedrin, Part One, p.329.

2. This is from Sanhedrin 42b: https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_42.html#PARTb

3. This is the immediate context of the passage about “Yeshu” in Sanhedrin 43a:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html

4. This is from Sanhedrin 43b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html#PARTb

5. This is from Sanhedrin 44b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_44.html#PARTb

6. This is from Sanhedrin 45a:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_45.html

7. Translation by Jacob Shachter, edited by Rabbi Isidore Epstein. Here is the
high-level web page: https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/index.html

Here is the web page for Sanhedrin 43a & 43b: https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html

8. See Sanhedrin 67a & 67b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_67.html

9. This is from Sanhedrin 49b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_49.html#PARTb

10. This is from Sanhedrin 43a:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html

11. The Noé Edition Koren Talmud Bavli, Volume 29: Tractate Sanhedrin, Part One, p.80.

12. This is from Sanhedrin 45b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_45.html#PARTb

13. This is from Sanhedrin 46b:
https://halakhah.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_46.html#PARTb

14. The IVP Bible Background Commentary: Old Testament, p.194.

15. Eerdman’s Commentary on the Bible, “Deuteronomy” by John W. Rogerson,
p.165.