37 After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the enrollment, and drew away some people after him. He also perished, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered abroad.
*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.
Judas of Galilee - Josephus has given an account of this man (Antiq., xvii. 10, section 5), and calls him a "Galilean." He afterward calls him a "Gaulonite," and says he was of the city of "Gamala" (Antiq., 18:1:1). He says that the revolt took place under "Cyrenius," a Roman senator, who came into "Syria to be judge of that nation, and to take account of their substance." "Moreover," says he, "Cyrenius came himself into Judea, which was now added to the province of Syria, to take an account of their substance, and to dispose of Archelaus' money." "Yet Judas, taking with him Saddouk, a Pharisee, became zealous to draw them to a revolt, who both said that this taxation was no better than an introduction to slavery, and exhorted the nation to assert their liberty, etc." "This" revolt, he says, was the commencement of the series of revolts and calamities that terminated in the destruction of the city, temple, and nation.
In the days of the taxing - Or, rather, the "enrolling," or "the census." Josephus says it was designed to take an account of their substance. Compare Luke 2:1-2.
Judas of Galilee - Concerning Judas of Galilee, Rabbi Abraham, in Jucasin, fol. 139, writes thus: "In this time there were three sects: for, besides the Pharisees and Sadducees, Judas of Galilee began another sect, which was called Essenes. They caused the Jews to rebel against the Romans, by asserting that they should not obey strangers; nor call any one Lord (or Governor) but the holy blessed God above." Rabbi Abraham makes a mistake here: the Essenes existed long before the days of Judas of Galilee; but it is very possible that he might have been one of that sect. Josephus mentions the insurrection made by Judas of Galilee, Ant. lib. xviii. cap. 1, and says it was when Cyrenius was governor of Syria: see the note on Luke 2:2. Bp. Pearce supposes that there were two απογραφαι, taxations or enrolments; and that the one mentioned here took place ten years after that mentioned in Luke 2:1-5. He observes also, in conformity with the note on the preceding verse, that the Judas mentioned here, was not only different from that Judas or Theudas spoken of before, but that his pretense for rebellion was different; the former wished to have the empire of Judea; the latter only maintained that it was base and sinful to obey a heathen governor.
After this man rose up, Judas of Galilee,.... Of whom Josephus thus says (k):
"there was a man of Galilee, by name Judas, who led his countrymen into rebellion, declaring it an evil, should they suffer tribute to be paid to the Romans, and introduce mortal rulers after God.''
And not unlike this is what another Jewish writer says (l) of Judas the Galilean, and his party:
"these were the cause of the Jews rebelling against the Romans, for they said, it was not fit that any should rule over men but God alone; and that no one should be called Lord, but the blessed God.''
And this insurrection was "in the days of the taxing"; which was made when Cyrenius was governor of Syria; and the reason of it was, because he and his party would not pay that tax, for the reasons suggested in the above citations: and this is what Josephus refers to, when he says (m),
"Cyrenius came to Syria, sent from Caesar as judge of the nation, and appraiser of their estates; upon which Judas, the Gaulonite, (the same with Judas of Galilee,) rebelled, and Saddochus with him; saying, that this appraisment brought nothing else but servitude upon them; and therefore exhorted the nation to vindicate their liberty.''
And his exhortations and arguments prevailed with the people: wherefore it follows here,
and drew away much people after him; perhaps a much larger number than Theudas did, since they are not expressly mentioned how many they were:
he also perished; being killed in the insurrection, or taken and put to death by the Romans. So Origen says (n), that he was punished, and his doctrine was destroyed, and remained only among a few contemptible persons:
and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed; were forced to fly, some one way, and some another, and could make nothing of it: and as this instance was after the other before mentioned; and was so early as under the government of Cyrenius, and at the time of the taxing under him; it shows that Theudas could not be the Theudas of Josephus, unless the words should be rendered as see choose to do, "besides this man rose up Judas", &c. And others observe, that "after him", is the same as "before him"; and which, however, at first hearing, may seem very absurd, yet is justified by instances, as being a very proper way of speaking, seeing, when an account proceeds from the last as nearest, the first must be last, and the last first. Some, in order to reconcile this passage, think, that there is a transposition in the words of Luke, and that they should be read thus, "for before those days rose up Judas of Galilee", &c. and then, "after this man rose up Theudas", &c. so making Judas of Galilee more ancient than Theudas, as he must be, if he is the same Theudas Josephus speaks of: but still it is a difficulty how he could be the same, when that fact of his, the above historian speaks of, was seven, or eight, or ten, and, as some say, twelve years after this speech of Gamaliel's. To remove this, it is proposed, that what is said concerning Theudas is to be put into a parenthesis, and to be considered not as the words of Gamaliel saying them in the sanhedrim, but as the words of Luke the historian, who wrote after this fact was done; and because of the agreement of it with that of Judas, mentioned by Gamaliel, he inserts it; here, and joins it with it (o). And yet, after all, it looks as if it was another Theudas that is here spoken of, who was before Judas; and that he that Josephus speaks of, might be, as Dr. Lightfoot conjectures, one of his posterity, who was of, the same name, and trod in his steps, and. was guilty of sedition as his ancestor was, and as the sons of Judas were, mentioned by the same historian in the same place.
(k) De Bello Jude. l. 2. c. 8. sect. 1. (l) Juchasin, fol. 139. 1. (m) Antiqu. l. 18. c. 1. sect. 1. Vid. l. 20. c. 4. sect. 2. (n) L. 1. contr. Cels. p. 44. (o) Vid. Vales. Not. in Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 2. c. 11. & Capelli Spicileg. in loc.
*More commentary available at chapter level.