The Death of Judas Two Versions Matthew 27

The Death of Judas: Two Versions Matthew 27: 3 -8 When Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. He said, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood. ’ But they said, ‘What is that to us? See to it yourself. ’ Throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself. But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, ‘It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money. ’ After conferring together, they used them to buy the potter’s field as a place to bury foreigners. For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Acts 1: 18 -19 Now this man [Judas] acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. This became known to all the residents of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood. Points of agreement: 1) who died, 2) what the money purchased, 3) what people called the field.

When Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. He said, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood. ’ But they said, ‘What is that to us? See to it yourself. ’ Throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself. But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, ‘It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money. ’ After conferring together, they used them to buy the potter’s field as a place to bury foreigners. For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Now this man [Judas] acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. This became known to all the residents of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood. Points of apparent disagreement: 1) What Judas did with the money: Matthew: gave it back before he died Acts: kept it and bought a field 2) Who bought the field: Matthew: the chief priests Acts: Judas 3) When the field was purchased: Matthew: After Judas died Acts: Before Judas died 4) Whether Judas repented: Matthew: yes Acts: no (suggested by his keeping the money to make a purchase) 5) Whether Judas killed himself: Matthew: yes Acts: no (at least it sounds like an accident, especially with no hint of penitence) 6) How Judas died Matthew: he hanged himself Acts: “falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out” 7) Why the field was called the Field of Blood Matthew: it was purchased with “blood money” Acts: Judas died a bloody death there

When Judas, his betrayer, saw that Jesus was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders. He said, ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood. ’ But they said, ‘What is that to us? See to it yourself. ’ Throwing down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed; and he went and hanged himself. But the chief priests, taking the pieces of silver, said, ‘It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, since they are blood money. ’ After conferring together, they used them to buy the potter’s field as a place to bury foreigners. For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Now this man [Judas] acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. This became known to all the residents of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their language Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood. An attempt to reconcile the accounts (www. carm. org/demo 2/bible/difficulties. htm): www. carm. org/demo 2/bible/difficulties. htm “There is no contradiction because both are true. Remember, a contradiction occurs when one statement excludes the possibility of another. What happened is that Judas went and hung himself and then his body later fell down and split open. In other words, the rope or branch of the tree probably broke due to the weight and his body fell down and his bowels spilled out. Also, notice that Matt. 27: 3 -8 tells us specifically how Judas died, by hanging. Acts 1: 16 -19 merely tells us that he fell headlong and his bowels gushed out. Acts does not tell us that this is the means of his death where Matthew does. ” This addresses point 6—how Judas died. It is not logically contradictory, but is it plausible that Luke (the author of Acts) would just forget to mention that Judas hanged himself first? What about the other six points of disagreement? Do these accounts need to be reconciled?