Judas' Death

JBlack · Post by **JBlack** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:45 am

Matthew 27:5-10 wrote:5So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.

6The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." 7So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. 8That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. 9Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, 10and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me."

Acts 1:18-19 wrote:18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

1. How do Christians explain this clear contradiction between Matthew and Acts concerning the manner of Judas' death?

2. How did Judas die?

Miles · Post by **Miles** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:47 pm

JBlack wrote:Acts 1:18-19 wrote:
18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

"Bought a field" means to hang oneself. Just as "bought the farm" today means to die. The phrase, "there he fell headlong" refers to what happened when he was cut down; his body bursting open because it was so weakened and distended by the inner decomposition.

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:55 pm

Miles wrote:"Bought a field" means to hang oneself. Just as "bought the farm" today means to die.

Is there any evidence that bought a field was a first century Hebrew or Greek metaphor for hanging oneself as bought the farm is a twentieth century English metaphor for death?

McCulloch · Post by **McCulloch** » Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:02 pm

Some of this has been covered back in December 2006 in Who purchased the Field of Blood? I don't think that this has been adequately answered.

JBlack · Post by **JBlack** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:17 am

Miles wrote:
JBlack wrote:Acts 1:18-19 wrote:
18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

"Bought a field" means to hang oneself. Just as "bought the farm" today means to die. The phrase, "there he fell headlong" refers to what happened when he was cut down; his body bursting open because it was so weakened and distended by the inner decomposition.

This explanation doesn't make sense.

If "bought a field" is metaphorical then why does verse 19 say "Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood."?

Matthew 27:6-8 says "The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day."

When read in context, "bought a field" is clearly literal.

McCulloch wrote:Some of this has been covered back in December 2006 in Who purchased the Field of Blood? I don't think that this has been adequately answered.

I don't think so either.

Thanks for the link.

Maybe 3 years will make a difference.

Miles · Post by **Miles** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 2:16 am

JBlack wrote:
Miles wrote:
JBlack wrote:Acts 1:18-19 wrote:
18(With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

"Bought a field" means to hang oneself. Just as "bought the farm" today means to die. The phrase, "there he fell headlong" refers to what happened when he was cut down; his body bursting open because it was so weakened and distended by the inner decomposition.
This explanation doesn't make sense.

If "bought a field" is metaphorical then why does verse 19 say "Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood."?

Because when Judas' body hit the ground and "his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out," the accompanying spilled blood, which came to be seen as an embodiment of his wickedness, was considered to render the field unfit for further agriculture; in effect it became Judas' field. He had "bought" it with his blood. And because the cause of all this was his hanging, hanging became known as buying the field.

Matthew 27:6-8 says "The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day."

When read in context, "bought a field" is clearly literal.

It was called blood money because Judas had chosen to spill his wicked blood on the field for it, making the money available for little else other than buying the field. BUT, the field wasn't named after the money, although this might seem a reasonable inference. There is no reason to make the connection between the notion of "blood money" and "Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood" In fact, just on the face of it alone, considering the reason it came to be called "blood money" is a far more compelling reason to call it the Field of Blood.

JBlack · Post by **JBlack** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:36 am

Matthew 27:7 - So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

So "buying the field" is literal for the chief priests... but metaphorical for Judas?

Miles wrote:He had "bought" it with his blood.

Acts 1:18 says he bought it "with the reward he got for his wickedness". The "reward" for his "wickedness" was thirty pieces of silver.

Miles · Post by **Miles** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:17 pm

JBlack wrote:Matthew 27:7 - So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

So "buying the field" is literal for the chief priests... but metaphorical for Judas?

Miles wrote:He had "bought" it with his blood.
Acts 1:18 says he bought it "with the reward he got for his wickedness". The "reward" for his "wickedness" was thirty pieces of silver.

I wouldn't be so quick to bring up Act 1:18 if you want to hold to your argument. Note how it contradicts Matthew 27:7

Matthew 27:7 - So they [the priests] decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

Acts 1:18 Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

So, who bought the the field, the priests or Judas?

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:44 pm

Miles wrote:
JBlack wrote:Matthew 27:7 - So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

So "buying the field" is literal for the chief priests... but metaphorical for Judas?

Miles wrote:He had "bought" it with his blood.
Acts 1:18 says he bought it "with the reward he got for his wickedness". The "reward" for his "wickedness" was thirty pieces of silver.
I wouldn't be so quick to bring up Act 1:18 if you want to hold to your argument. Note how it contradicts Matthew 27:7

Matthew 27:7 - So they [the priests] decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.

Acts 1:18 Now this man [Judas] purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

So, who bought the the field, the priests or Judas?

[tongue in cheek sarcasm]

Obviously, the priests bought the field with the money Judas gave them, so there is no contradiction

[/tongue in cheeksarcasm]

JBlack · Post by **JBlack** » Sat Nov 28, 2009 5:31 pm

Miles wrote:I wouldn't be so quick to bring up Act 1:18 if you want to hold to your argument. Note how it contradicts Matthew 27:7

I'm aware that it contradicts Matthew 27:7. This is my point.

Note question 1 of my OP.

JBlack wrote:1. How do Christians explain this clear contradiction between Matthew and Acts concerning the manner of Judas' death?

You say "bought a field" means Judas hung himself, and that he "bought" it with his blood. But Acts 1:18 says Judas bought it with his reward for his wickedness. How can "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field" mean that Judas bought it metaphorically?

Are you going to say that Acts is wrong and Matthew is right? How can you know that? Where is the evidence for such a claim?

Note how it contradicts Matthew 27:7

Ok, so we agree... there's a clear contradiction here.

So, will someone who believes the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God please explain this contradiction?