The day after Easter, Christianity Today published an article questioning if Christ was crucified using nails. In his article "Was Jesus Crucified with Nails?" CT senior news editor Daniel Silliman appears to have been misled by an associate professor of biblical studies at Gordon College in New York, Dr. Jeffrey García, who wondered if Christ perhaps had been tied with ropes to the cross.
"I don't stand and say this, definitively, is how it happened," the professor told CT. "I basically find it interesting. It could be there were nails, or it could be that there weren't nails."
In contrast, the Gospel of John describes Thomas the disciple saying: "Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finger where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe." (John 20:25, NIV)
Megan Basham, author of "Shepherds for Sale," says when one plays fast and loose with one biblical claim, it tends to taint one's view of the rest of the Holy Writ. "[Silliman is] saying that maybe we shouldn't believe scripture and maybe the historicity of scripture is not reliable," she tells AFN.
A related article by Blaze Media documents criticisms of CT from several pastors and theologians – and even from atheist James Lindsay, who said on X: "Christianity Today could have avoided this embarrassment by reading their Bibles."
In need of a scapegoat?
Silliman has since issued an apology and a retraction of sorts, in which he admits he "didn't think about John 20:25" in his "eagerness to explore the historical context of Christ's death."
Basham's reaction? Too little, too late.
"It doesn't really look like Christianity Today understood what the big deal was, given that it took them almost 10 days, over a week, to realize, 'Oh gosh, we better make a statement and retract some of the claims that we've made in this article,'" she offers.
In Basham's view, it was cowardly of CT editor-in-chief Russell Moore to throw Silliman under the bus without admitting any responsibility for the article that appeared on CT's website.
"I have never seen an apology or a retraction like that from a publication where the editors didn't address it," says the author and journalist. "All they did was send the author out to take the fall for this. It appears to be par for the course for … Russell Moore."
The online version of the article now carries a correction note, stating it has been revised to clarify that the Bible "indicates that Jesus was crucified with nails" – and that CT, along with Christian scholars and theologians throughout church history, "affirms" that account. It is unclear in the revised article if García's comments to CT appeared in the original version.
