Explain Acts 1:20

[inkaneer]

Has anyone seen an explanation for Acts 1:20. Peter takes two unrelated verses, one from Psalm 69 (verse 25) and one from Psalm 109 (verse 8) and joins them together. Acts 1:20 states:

"For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’ [Acts 1:20 RSV]

While verse 25 of Psalm 69 states:

“May their camp be a desolation, let no one dwell in their tents.” [Psalm 69:25 RSV]

and verse 8 of Psalm 109 states:

“May his days be few; may another seize his goods!” [Psalm 109: 8 RSV]

Other Bible translations have slightly different versions of these verses.

First of all why does Peter do what Bible scholars warn us not to do and that is to take unrelated verses out of context and form a new context?

Secondly, Peter is speaking of Judas here in preparation to electing Matthias as his replacement. So what does verse 25 of Psalm 69 ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’;] refer to?

 

[JM3]

Has anyone seen an explanation for Acts 1:20. Peter takes two unrelated verses, one from Psalm 69 (verse 25) and one from Psalm 109 (verse 8) and joins them together. Acts 1:20 states:

"For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’ [Acts 1:20 RSV]

While verse 25 of Psalm 69 states:

“May their camp be a desolation, let no one dwell in their tents.” [Psalm 69:25 RSV]

and verse 8 of Psalm 109 states:

“May his days be few; may another seize his goods!” [Psalm 109: 8 RSV]

Other Bible translations have slightly different versions of these verses.

First of all why does Peter do what Bible scholars warn us not to do and that is to take unrelated verses out of context and form a new context?

Secondly, Peter is speaking of Judas here in preparation to electing Matthias as his replacement. So what does verse 25 of Psalm 69 ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’;] refer to?

So ‘Bible scholars’ are more authoritative than St Peter?

 

[zarthan]

It may be that St.Peter was told that these Psalms were Messianic, here is Ps.109:

Psalm 109 >>
Douay-Rheims Bible

---

1 Unto the end, a psalm for David.
2 O God, be not thou silent in thy praise: for the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful man is opened against me.

3 They have spoken against with deceitful tongues; and they have compassed me about with words of hatred; and have fought against me without cause.

4 Instead of making me a return of love, they detracted me: but I gave myself to prayer.

5 And they repaid me evil for good: and hatred for my love.

6 Set thou the sinner over him: and may the devil stand at his right hand.

7 When he is judged, may he go out condemned; and may his prayer be turned to sin.

8 May his days be few: and his bishopric let another take.

9 May his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.

10 Let his children be carried about vagabonds, and beg; and let them be cast out of their dwellings.

11 May the userer search all his substance: and let strangers plunder his labours.

12 May there be none to help him: nor none to pity his fatherless offspring.

13 May his posterity be cut off; in one generation may his name be blotted out.

14 May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered in the sight of the Lord: and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.

15 May they be before the lord continually, and let the memory of them perish from the earth:

16 because he remembered not to show mercy,

17 But persecuted the poor man and the beggar; and the broken in heart, to put him to death.

18 And he loved cursing, and it shall come unto him: and he would not have blessing, and it shall be far from him. And he put on cursing, like a garment: and it went in like water into his entrails, and like oil in his bones.

19 May it be unto him like a garment which covereth him; and like a girdle with which he is girded continually.

20 This is the work of them who detract me before the Lord; and who speak evils against my soul.

21 But thou, O Lord, do with for thy names sake: because thy mercy is sweet. Do thou deliver me.

22 for I am poor and needy, and my heart is troubled within me.

23 I am taken away like the shadow when it declineth: and I am shaken off as locusts.

24 My knees are weakened through fasting: and my flesh is changed for oil.

25 And I am become a reproach to them: they saw me and they shaked their heads,

26 Help me, O Lord my God; save me according to thy mercy.

27 And let them know that this is thy hand: and that thou, O Lord, hast done it.

28 They will curse and thou will bless: let them that rise up against me be confounded: but thy servant shall rejoice.

29 Let them that detract me be clothed with shame: and let them be covered with the their confusion as with a double cloak.

30 I will give great thanks to the Lord with my mouth: and in the midst of many I will praise him.

31 Because he hath stood at the right hand of the poor, to save my soul from persecutors

---

 

[JM3]

Luke 24:45

 

[zarthan]

And of course, Ps. 69 is Messianic:

(68-1) <Unto the end, for them that shall be changed; for David.> (68-2) Save me, O God: for the waters are come in even unto my soul. 2 (68-3) I stick fast in the mire of the deep and there is no sure standing. I am come into the depth of the sea, and a tempest hath overwhelmed me. 3 (68-4) I have laboured with crying; my jaws are become hoarse, my eyes have failed, whilst I hope in my God. 4 (68-5) They are multiplied above the hairs of my head, who hate me without cause. My enemies are grown strong who have wrongfully persecuted me: then did I pay that which I took not away. 5 (68-6) O God, thou knowest my foolishness; and my offences are not hidden from thee: 6 (68-7) Let not them be ashamed for me, who look for thee, O Lord, the Lord of hosts. Let them not be confounded on my account, who seek thee, O God of Israel. 7 (68-8) Because for thy sake I have borne reproach; shame hath covered my face. 8 (68-9) I am become a stranger to my brethren, and an alien to the sons of my mother. 9 (68-10) For the zeal of thy house hath eaten me up: and the reproaches of them that reproached thee are fallen upon me. 10 (68-11) And I covered my soul in fasting: and it was made a reproach to me. 11 (68-12) And I made haircloth my garment: and I became a byword to them. 12 (68-13) They that sat in the gate spoke against me: and they that drank wine made me their song.

13 (68-14) But as for me, my prayer is to thee, O Lord; for the time of thy good pleasure, O God. In the multitude of thy mercy hear me, in the truth of thy salvation. 14 (68-15) Draw me out of the mire, that I may not stick fast: deliver me from them that hate me, and out of the deep waters. 15 (68-16) Let not the tempest of water drown me, nor the deep water swallow me up: and let not the pit shut her mouth upon me. 16 (68-17) Hear me, O Lord, for thy mercy is kind; look upon me according to the multitude of thy tender mercies. 17 (68-18) And turn not away thy face from thy servant: for I am in trouble, hear me speedily. 18 (68-19) Attend to my soul, and deliver it: save me because of my enemies. 19 (68-20) Thou knowest my reproach, and my confusion, and my shame. 20 (68-21) In thy sight are all they that afflict me; my heart hath expected reproach and misery. And I looked for one that would grieve together with me, but there was none: and for one that would comfort me, and I found none. 21 (68-22) **And they gave me gall for my food, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink. **22 (68-23) Let their table become as a snare before them, and a recompense, and a stumblingblock. 23 (68-24) Let their eyes be darkened that they see not; and their back bend thou down always. 24 (68-25) Pour out thy indignation upon them: and let thy wrathful anger take hold of them. 25 (68-26) Let their habitation be made desolate: and let there be none to dwell in their tabernacles. 26 (68-27) Because they have persecuted him whom thou hast smitten; and they have added to the grief of my wounds. 27 (68-28) Add thou iniquity upon their iniquity: and let them not come into thy justice. 28 (68-29) Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; and with the just let them not be written. 29 (68-30) But I am poor and sorrowful: thy salvation, O God, hath set me up.

30 (68-31) I will praise the name of God with a canticle: and I will magnify him with praise. 31 (68-32) And it shall please God better than a young calf, that bringeth forth horns and hoofs. 32 (68-33) Let the poor see and rejoice: seek ye God, and your soul shall live. 33 (68-34) For the Lord hath heard the poor: and hath not despised his prisoners. 34 (68-35) Let the heavens and the earth praise him; the sea, and every thing that creepeth therein. 35 (68-36) For God will save Sion, and the cities of Juda shall be built up. And they shall dwell there, and acquire it by inheritance. 36 (68-37) And the seed of his servants shall possess it; and they that love his name shall dwell therein.

 

[Mintaka]

Juxtaposing two verses to create greater understanding is an ancient poetic technique of Biblical teaching, as you can tell from it being in the Bible (and not just here, but also in things Jesus says and in things said by various prophets and wisdom books, as well as in the psalms and in other apostles, including Paul). The Magnificat and most of the other canticles in the Bible are made up out of quotes and references to all kinds of other parts of the Bible. This is how the Jews instinctively sang.

You’re worried that they are being pulled out of context. Among Jews and Christians of that time, it was assumed that you knew huge chunks of the Bible by heart, and definitely all the Psalms. Every single one. You sang them morning and evening, you sang them back and forth with your wife and kids. It’s hard to take things out of context if everybody knows the context, and if you’re depending on them to add that context to give what you’re saying more depth!

This is part of why reading the Bible more, and internalizing it, helps you read the Bible more fully. The more we steep in it, the more we pick up on this stuff too. It’s hard to appreciate the geeky Star Trek jokes if you’ve never seen more than one episode, one time.

Now, that doesn’t mean I am any good at this. Maybe most people today aren’t. But you don’t see me writing poems like “The Lord is my shepherd”, either.

Another thing to know here is that the early Christians (based on Jesus’ use of the Psalms during His life on earth, and most likely based on His teaching after the Resurrection as well) strongly regarded all the Psalms as best understood as prayers where Jesus was speaking, either for Himself or praying for us, or speaking about Himself prophetically. (They understood the historical and other meanings, but they were more interested in exploring the Christological dimensions that God had just revealed.)

So preaching the Gospel meant also preaching the Psalms. (Though of course that was true of the whole OT, it being the Word of God. But the Psalms were such favorites that it sticks out.) So yeah, these are messianic psalms, but Peter probably would have said that all the Psalms were messianic psalms.

 

[po18guy]

First, Peter was not a scholar, but an Apostle. He did not take scripture out of context, but was in the process of speaking scripture, since we read these words and their relationship to the Church, in scripture. He placed its prophecy in context, and demonstrated its fulfillment. He spoke only of the one whom Jesus prophesied would betray Him. “Let another take his office” is how some translations have it. That office was Judas’ Bishopric, which was not to go unfilled. God’s ways are inscrutable, and this is but one example of how He works, no matter how difficult it is for us to understand.

Prophecy is principle, not precision.

 

[Mintaka]

It’s not that inscrutable. “Don’t try this at home” doesn’t mean “Don’t try this if you’re a trained chemist in a lab with tons of good vents and safety equipment.” It means that if Little Bobby and Jade want to try this, they first need to become scientists or special effects makers or professional stuntpeople. You can do it - if you know how to do it correctly and you have the authority to do it, and if you won’t do it in such a way as to blow up other people.

An apostle sent and taught by God, a very learned and holy preacher, they’ve got the know how and the safety equipment. (One hopes.)

Being put in the Bible’s a good sign that it was done right. Those of us not in the Bible need to worry about safety goggles and standing well away.

 

[inkaneer]

po18guy wrote: “’…Let another take his office’ is how some translations have it. That office was Judas’ Bishopric, which was not to go unfilled.”

The psalms may be Messianic but Peter is not applying them to Jesus rather he is applying them to Judas. Big difference there. Judas was no Messiah. And if Psalm 109:8 refers to someone taking over Judas’ office of bishop then what does the verse from Psalm 69 refer to? It obviously cannot be Judas’ bishopric. That cannot be desolate when someone takes it over.

 

[zarthan]

po18guy wrote: “’…Let another take his office’ is how some translations have it. That office was Judas’ Bishopric, which was not to go unfilled.”

The psalms may be Messianic but Peter is not applying them to Jesus rather he is applying them to Judas. Big difference there. Judas was no Messiah. And if Psalm 109:8 refers to someone taking over Judas’ office of bishop then what does the verse from Psalm 69 refer to? It obviously cannot be Judas’ bishopric. That cannot be desolate when someone takes it over.

To answer your question, a Messianic Psalm does not mean that all the verses in that Psalm are applicable to Jesus Christ. The antagonist(s) are also included. In Ps. 109:8 the antagonist is Judas. In Ps.69 the antagonists are Judas and the Jewish spiritual authorites.

Here is one way to look at the intent of Ps.69:25.
The spiritual authorities of the Jewish people lost their tabernacles. The High Priest, the Sanhedrin, the scribes and Pharisees lost their places of spiritual authority when they wrongfully participated in the sentencing of Jesus Christ to death. The stark reality of this loss of spiritual authority occurred when the Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Judas also lost his position as an apostle of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Christ instituted a new priesthood. The church, the body of Christ is the new priesthood of believers with Jesus Christ being the high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

His peace be with you.

 

[James224]

Has anyone seen an explanation for Acts 1:20. Peter takes two unrelated verses, one from Psalm 69 (verse 25) and one from Psalm 109 (verse 8) and joins them together. Acts 1:20 states:

"For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’; and ‘His office let another take.’ [Acts 1:20 RSV]

While verse 25 of Psalm 69 states:

“May their camp be a desolation, let no one dwell in their tents.” [Psalm 69:25 RSV]

and verse 8 of Psalm 109 states:

“May his days be few; may another seize his goods!” [Psalm 109: 8 RSV]

Other Bible translations have slightly different versions of these verses.

First of all why does Peter do what Bible scholars warn us not to do and that is to take unrelated verses out of context and form a new context?

Secondly, Peter is speaking of Judas here in preparation to electing Matthias as his replacement. So what does verse 25 of Psalm 69 ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’;] refer to?

Answer 1: They are related. Peter is speaking of the fulfillment of prophecy after Judas’ betraying of Christ and showing that the result will be the destruction of the temple and the jewish nation.

Answer 2: Psalm 69 refers historically to the fall of Babylon and, prophetically (from Psalm 69), to the fall of Jerusalem 40 years after Christ’s death and ressurrection. Why? Because, it points to Judas’ fall which signifies the fall of the Jews in general for denying Christ. What Judas did was what the Jewish nation did. Psalm 109 seems to refer to the Faith being taken away from the Jews and given to the New Testament Church which included, not only Jews, but gentiles.

 

[inkaneer]

Answer 1: They are related. Peter is speaking of the fulfillment of prophecy after Judas’ betraying of Christ and showing that the result will be the destruction of the temple and the jewish nation.

Answer 2: Psalm 69 refers historically to the fall of Babylon and, prophetically (from Psalm 69), to the fall of Jerusalem 40 years after Christ’s death and ressurrection. Why? Because, it points to Judas’ fall which signifies the fall of the Jews in general for denying Christ. What Judas did was what the Jewish nation did. Psalm 109 seems to refer to the Faith being taken away from the Jews and given to the New Testament Church which included, not only Jews, but gentiles.

Wow! I’m sorry but I can’t accept that. Peter is applying these verses to Judas specifically even changing the wording in Ps 69:25 from the plural, ‘their’ to the singular, ‘his’. I can’t see how the Temple is involved at all.

 

[inkaneer]

It appears that I am getting individual opinions on this which is fine but I’m looking for some Bible commentary or study notes that deal specifically on why Peter uses these two verses from two different psalms. I have searched available sources online which admittedly are mostly protestant without success. They do not give any answer as to why Peter uses these two verses. Instead they speak in generalities and never state exactly what is ‘desolate.’ Now I firmly believe that the Holy Spirit inspired Peter to quote these verses and therefore there has to be a logical reason behind the Holy Spirit’s inspiration.

 

[po18guy]

Applying Ockham’s razor to this conundrum, let’s postulate that Peter’s reference to “habitation” means the home of Judas. He had to live somewhere. With his suicide, it was left desolate. But, his office is something else entirely - it had to be filled, as even Judas was given power over demons, and to heal. Once he “went to his own place”, the office had to be filled.

As to a commentary, you might contact Fr. Mitch Pacwa on his radio show.

 

[COPLAND_3]

CHRYS this is said of the field and the dwelling: And his bishopric let another take; that is, his office, his priesthood. So that this, he says, is not my counsel, but His who has foretold these things. For, that he may not seem to be undertaking a great thing, and just such as Christ had done, he adduces the Prophet as a witness. BEDE Indeed these verses are clear and plainly set forth by the blessed Peter’s interpretation. On the one hand Judas received a deserved penalty for his double-dealing, on the otherhand, by St. Matthias’s acceptance of the place of Judas’s ministry and apostolate, the most sacred fullness of apostolic perfection was restored.

This is taken from a catena I made on Acts 1-5 catenas.wetpaint.com/

 

[zarthan]

Wow! I’m sorry but I can’t accept that. Peter is applying these verses to Judas specifically even changing the wording in Ps 69:25 from the plural, ‘their’ to the singular, ‘his’. I can’t see how the Temple is involved at all.

Well, you are correct. Peter quotes Ps.69:25 in the singular, in Acts 2:20, rather than in the plural. We do not know whether Peter had a translation which was in the singular. Or perhaps, there is another Psalm which relates this fact concerning Judas with similar wording, but in the singular.

However, it should be noted, that the apostolic office of Judas was taken by another, but the physical inheritance of Judas remained desolate.

The physical inheritance of Judas was the ‘field of blood’ that was purchased by the chief priests with the thirty pieces of silver that Judas threw in the temple after his betrayal of innocent blood (Matt.27:3-10) referencing Zech.11:12-13 and Jeremiah 32:6-8. This land was to be used for the burial of foreigners.

Here too, we have two accounts of why the piece of land bought with the thirty pieces of silver is called the field of blood. In Matthew’s account it is called that because it was purchased with ‘blood money’. In Acts it is called that, because it is the land on which the blood of Judas was poured out. It is also possible, that Judas hung himself on this land that was purchased for the burial of foreigners.

The ‘field of blood’ is what remains desolate, and no one dwells in it, except as a burial ground. It is not referring to the apostolic office of Judas remaining desolate.

Nevertheless, you have asked a question that deserves further study in the word of God.

His peace be with you.

 

[James224]

Wow! I’m sorry but I can’t accept that. Peter is applying these verses to Judas specifically even changing the wording in Ps 69:25 from the plural, ‘their’ to the singular, ‘his’. I can’t see how the Temple is involved at all.

I took it from Haydock’s Commentary. It makes perfect sense to me. The commentary doesn’t mention the temple but it refers to the Fall of Jerusalem. See the haydock note in verse 26:

haydock1859.tripod.com/id793.html

 

[zarthan]

I took it from Haydock’s Commentary. It makes perfect sense to me. The commentary doesn’t mention the temple but it refers to the Fall of Jerusalem. See the haydock note in verse 26:

haydock1859.tripod.com/id793.html

Good. The note does explain it in the terms of the fall of Jerusalem forty years later.

And Acts 1:16 says, “concerning Judas, who was the guide for those who arrested Jesus”

And Jesus does say, “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how many times I yearned to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her young under her wings, but you were unwilling!Behold your house will be abandoned,desolate(same Greek word) I tell you, you will not see me again until you say, Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.”

 

[James224]

It appears that I am getting individual opinions on this which is fine but I’m looking for some Bible commentary or study notes that deal specifically on why Peter uses these two verses from two different psalms. I have searched available sources online which admittedly are mostly protestant without success. They do not give any answer as to why Peter uses these two verses. Instead they speak in generalities and never state exactly what is ‘desolate.’ Now I firmly believe that the Holy Spirit inspired Peter to quote these verses and therefore there has to be a logical reason behind the Holy Spirit’s inspiration.

I mentioned Haydock’s Commentary. Also, another good commentary on the internet is Cornelius Lapide’s Commentary. Only a few books of Lapide’s of the New Testament have been translated from the Latin but it is the best I’ve seen. Here are both of them:

Haydock’s haydock1859.tripod.com/

Lapide’s
catholicapologetics.info/scripture/newtestament/Lapide.htm

 

[inkaneer]

Applying Ockham’s razor to this conundrum, let’s postulate that Peter’s reference to “habitation” means the home of Judas. He had to live somewhere. With his suicide, it was left desolate. But, his office is something else entirely - it had to be filled, as even Judas was given power over demons, and to heal. Once he “went to his own place”, the office had to be filled.

As to a commentary, you might contact Fr. Mitch Pacwa on his radio show.

Yes the office was to be filled, but what office? The office of bishop or the office of Apostle? Is there such an office as Apostle? I think you hit on something when you said that “‘habitation’ means the home of Judas” But I need to do some more research first.