How do we reconcile the viper bite in Acts 28:3 with the claim that Malta has no venomous snakes? Historical and Geographic Context Acts 28:3 states: “Paul gathered a bundle of sticks and, as he laid them on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand.” This event is tied to the aftermath of Paul’s shipwreck on the island referred to in Acts 28:1 as Melita (commonly identified as Malta). The question arises because modern Malta is widely reported to have no venomous snakes. Below is a thorough exploration of historical, geographical, and textual considerations to address this concern. 1. Understanding the Passage in Acts 28 Acts 28:1–6 recounts that, after the shipwreck, the survivors learned they were on Melita (v. 1). While gathering wood, Paul was bitten by a creature described as a viper (Greek: ἐχίδνα, echídna). The locals expected dire consequences, yet Paul suffered no harm. • Acts 28:3: “Paul gathered a bundle of sticks and, as he laid them on the fire, a viper, driven out by the heat, fastened itself on his hand.” • Acts 28:4: “When the islanders saw the creature hanging from his hand, they said to one another, ‘Surely this man is a murderer. Although he has escaped the sea, Justice has not allowed him to live.’” • Acts 28:5: “But Paul shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no ill effects.” The entire episode emphasizes both the hospitality of the islanders (v. 2) and the miraculous protection of Paul (vv. 5–6). 2. Potential Identifications of the Island Some have proposed that the shipwreck took place on a different location called “Melita,” not modern Malta. However, historical and archaeological evidence strongly points to the well-known Mediterranean island of Malta: • Luke’s details about the voyage (Acts 27) match with navigation patterns in the central Mediterranean Sea. • Archaeological and local traditions place the wreck around St. Paul’s Bay in Malta. • Maritime studies on prevailing winds and sea currents also align with the narrative pointing to modern Malta. 3. The Claim of ‘No Venomous Snakes’ on Malta Today Modern travelers and local sources often report that Malta has no indigenous venomous snakes. Current Maltese snake species—such as the Leopard Snake (Zamenis situla), the Cat Snake (Telescopus fallax), and the Algerian Whip Snake (Hemorrhois algirus)—are generally non-lethal. Yet several factors could account for the presence of a harmful snake or “viper” in the first century: 1. Extinction or Ecological Changes: Over centuries, reptiles in confined island habitats can become extinct or drastically reduced in number. Human activity, changes in agriculture, or the introduction of predators often alter local fauna. Such extinctions are well-documented on Mediterranean islands. 2. Introduction of a Snake from Another Region: Ships traveling from diverse regions (including North Africa or the Middle East) sometimes carried stowaway reptiles. A single or temporary population could have existed without establishing a permanent breeding population. 3. Possible Misidentification by Observers: The Greek term ἐχίδνα (echídna) does typically describe a poisonous serpent, but in some contexts, it can refer more broadly to a snake known for dangerous qualities (whether real or perceived). The islanders might have recognized it as venomous (or believed it to be so) based on local lore or an observed pattern of bites. 4. Textual Evidence Supporting the Event From a manuscript standpoint, the account in Acts 28 is well-attested in the earliest Greek manuscripts (such as Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus). There is no notable variant reading in these passages that calls into question the mention of a “viper.” Textual critics, including those who have studied the Alexandrian and Byzantine families of manuscripts, find strong consistency: • The mention of “viper” (ἐχίδνα) is uniformly present across the best textual witnesses. • Variations in minor details do not affect the narrative’s substance. These manuscript findings align with Luke’s accuracy in naming details of Paul’s travels (confirmed by numerous archaeological and historical corroborations throughout Acts). 5. Historical Corroborations Ancient writers and historians frequently note that island ecosystems can change over time, especially when more inhabitants arrive or resources are exploited. Moreover, classical authors like Pliny the Elder (Natural History) acknowledged the presence of various serpents throughout the Mediterranean. While specifics about Malta are not extensively documented in surviving classical texts, the general principle remains that a species present in the first century could have vanished. 6. Possible Explanations for the Bite and Paul’s Survival 1. Miraculous Protection: The text highlights a supernatural intervention where Paul “suffered no ill effects” (Acts 28:5). This aligns with themes in Scripture that God protected Paul to continue his mission (cf. Mark 16:18, though whether it references these specific events is debated). 2. Immediate Reaction: Paul shook the serpent into the fire, which may have prevented significant envenomation. Even if the snake was venomous, incomplete envenomation or a “dry bite” can occur. The local population’s reaction indicates they were expecting a typical outcome—implying that similar incidents had been fatal in the past. 3. Species Observations: If the local Maltese recognized this serpent as deadly, it suggests that venomous snakes were at least possible on the island in that era, whether native or introduced. 7. Theological and Spiritual Relevance While the zoological specifics are worthy of investigation, the passage in Acts underscores greater truths: - Test of Character: The islanders initially believed Paul doomed (Acts 28:4). When he remained unharmed, they changed their perspective (Acts 28:6). Such a shift underscores how momentary events can shape public opinion. - Divine Mission: Paul’s protection served as a sign of the ongoing purpose that he was to fulfill (Acts 23:11). This resonates with similar moments in Scripture where divine safeguarding affirms a call or mission (Daniel 6; Exodus 3–4). - Power of God over Creation: Biblical accounts often highlight God’s sovereignty over all natural forces (Psalm 95:4–5). The incident with the viper in Acts 28 fits into the wider biblical theme that God can preserve individuals supernaturally, for His greater purposes. 8. Summary of Reconciliation The concern about venomous snakes on Malta and the biblical narrative can be reconciled through several convergent explanations: - Historical Changes in Fauna: Even if modern Malta has no widely recognized venomous snake, ecological shifts and human impact can lead to extirpation (local extinction) of a species. - Possibility of Introduction: A snake could have arrived or been introduced by trade ships. - Close Parallel to Underlying Local Assumptions: The locals’ fear and expectation of Paul’s demise suggest they had observed or believed in the danger of this serpent—likely indicating a perilous snake did exist at that time. - Supernatural Preservation: Above all, the faithful reading of Acts highlights the miraculous nature of Paul’s survival, which would stand regardless of current reptile populations on Malta. Conclusion The episode in Acts 28 signifies more than a simple snakebite story. It is a testament to historical detail, the changing nature of island ecosystems, and a demonstration of divine providence. Extant manuscript evidence supports the authenticity of the account. Historical considerations about local reptile populations—whether through extinction or outside introduction—bolster the plausibility that a venomous serpent once existed on the island. Coupled with the theological emphasis on Paul’s mission, this provides a comprehensive reconciliation of how a “viper” incident could occur in a place now reported to be free of poisonous snakes. The narrative thus remains consistent with both Scripture and historical realities, inviting deeper appreciation for the reliability of the biblical record and the power of God in preserving His servants. |
    |