The Judas Incident: Take Your Pick

[DavidFirth]

It matters because of how much I value your insight and opinions. Think of me as a student at your feet. But it is pretty troublesome isn't it. And I can understand your quandary and why you prefer to shove it aside, but how about making a stab at it: Which of these do you feel is correct and why?

.

First of all, it doesn't matter.

Second of all, if all of the authors of the gospels said exactly the same things, you would say that they just copied each other or there was really only one author.

Third, I have the same view as Socratic Berean.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I have not mentioned my beliefs at all. I have pointed out how the question reflects inexperience in weighing different human accounts of a single event. Ask a detective. Ask an intelligence officer. This one example is not unique. You are trying to create an issue out of nothing.

& @DavidFirth
Except that there are those who claim the text was inspired by God. Is this not a piece of evidence that contradicts that claim? Or perhaps God enjoys confusion, contradiction and making people question the validity of the texts? I suppose that could be. I suppose watching people fall into hell could be somewhat amusing to a certain, sadistic type of mind.

 

[columbus]

The part of the Judas thing I find perplexing is not the differing accounts of his demise. Humans were writing this up decades later.

It's the vilification of Judas that is irrational. Jesus personally picked him to play a crucial role in Salvation and he did what God needed done. If he hadn't set the ball rolling towards the Death and Resurrection somebody else would have had to do so. But Jesus picked him to play that part.
Now, I could understand why a batch of limited humans, like the Apostles, who be horrified and angry. Judas took away their Leader. Of course they would think him a villain. And they would have had no reasons to rethink that if they'd not had Divine Guidance in the immediate aftermath. But according to the Gospels, Jesus was around personally for 40 days thereafter. He had plenty of opportunity to explain that, next to Mary perhaps, Judas was the most important human player in the Passion. Without him, there would be no Salvation. Judas wasn't sent by Satan to the authorities, Jesus Himself sent him.

The fact that Judas is still roundly condemned for doing what God wanted done is strong evidence that Jesus didn't Rise from the dead, and His followers mostly made it all up themselves.
Tom

 

[Thief]

As the story is told, Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples, was a major player in Jesus' mission to become the savior of mankind. But even more so, he betrayed Jesus to the chief priests for thirty pieces of silver. For sure a pretty underhanded thing to do, and one which he may have regretted. From this point in the story things get real puzzling. In Matthew 27:5 it's said that Judas returned the money to the priests after which he then went out and hanged himself.

Matthew 27:5
So he threw the money into the temple, went away, and hanged himself.​

However, in the account given in Acts 1:18 it's said Judas used the money to buy a piece of land where he fell to his death.

Acts 1:18
With the money he received from the wrong he had done, he bought a piece of land where he fell headfirst to his death. His body split open, and all his internal organs came out. ​

My question is: Which of these do you feel is correct and why?

.

i would lean to the gospel of Matthew....
seems Judas did regret his deed
and had no one but himself to pass judgement

 

[Aupmanyav]

Acts 1:18

With the money he received from the wrong he had done, he bought a piece of land where he fell headfirst to his death. His body split open, and all his internal organs came out. ​

My question is: Which of these do you feel is correct and why?

Acts 1:18. Very satisfying to Christians. God's revenge in life. Of course, he goes to eternal hell too.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I have not mentioned my beliefs at all. I have pointed out how the question reflects inexperience in weighing different human accounts of a single event. Ask a detective. Ask an intelligence officer. This one example is not unique. You are trying to create an issue out of nothing.

We don't usually assume crime witnesses are going to write an "inerrant" Word of "God", though.

Anyway, here's my two cents:

Jesus kept bragging about causing such a scene that he would get arrested and killed. Nothing says 3rd act motivation speech like martyrdom syndrome. Now, he didn't WANT to die, because all throughout the stories, he runs away from attempts on his life. What he wanted was to make a scene and troll the authorities. He got Judas in on it. Peter, meanwhile, assumed his leadership position (all throughout the stories, he's either overestimating his talent or brown-nosing Jesus) was in the bag and if Jesus causes a scene, the Romans might come over and then his gig would be gone. Jesus, irked that Peter could threaten his "great plan, the bestest plan ever", called him SATAN and ignored him. Well, the "bestest plan ever" didn't go according to plan because as it turns out, the Romans couldn't be trolled. Peter, the ACTUAL traitor, deflected the news he went and denied Jesus THREE WHOLE TIMES in just a few hours by spouting fake news about Judas, hence the inconsistencies. The gospels themselves don't really even care about Judas, because it's like he only shows up for his betrayal scene and then dies. In this way, the scapegoat is sacrificed and Pete can keep the job he told everyone Jesus gave him: to be leader.

 

[blü 2]

It seems likely that the Judas story is an add-on, a bit of dramatic coloration.

The evidence for this is not confined to the contradiction set out in the OP.

Significantly, Paul had never heard of the betrayal story. In 1 Corinthians 15:5, he says the resurrected Jesus "appeared to Cephas then to the twelve". (He never mentions Judas by name.)

Contrast this with Luke 24:9: Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James, and Joanna went to the tomb "and returning from the tomb they told all this to the eleven and to all the rest".

1 Corinthians is written around 53-54 CE, so more than 20 years after the usual date of the crucifixion.

The earliest mention of Judas is in the first gospel, Mark, written in or shortly after 75 CE ─ 14:18 leading to 14:43 ─ some 45 years after the usual date of the crucifixion.

(Matthew and Luke get much of their material from Mark, including the basics of Judas. They were written maybe in the 80s CE.)

So it's arguable that the Judas story didn't exist in Paul's day.

 

[Skwim]

I have not mentioned my beliefs at all. I have pointed out how the question reflects inexperience in weighing different human accounts of a single event. Ask a detective. Ask an intelligence officer. This one example is not unique. You are trying to create an issue out of nothing.

Do you not see that the singular written historical source upon which Christians base the truth of their beliefs, the Bible, presents two contradictory accounts of the same event? Of course you do. So this irrelevant silliness is just that, and hardly worth my time.

Have a good day.

.

 

[Skwim]

Second of all, if all of the authors of the gospels said exactly the same things, you would say that they just copied each other or there was really only one author.

It's not that they would be expected to say the same thing, but that they aren't expected to contradict each other. Or is this how you regard the Bible; a book that no doubt gets some things right and a book that no doubt gets some things wrong?

In any case, how have you decided to regard the Judas incident as presented in the Bible?

Third, I have the same view as Socratic Berean.

But I wouldn't go around bragging about this if I was you.

.

 

[BilliardsBall]

As the story is told, Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve disciples, was a major player in Jesus' mission to become the savior of mankind. But even more so, he betrayed Jesus to the chief priests for thirty pieces of silver. For sure a pretty underhanded thing to do, and one which he may have regretted. From this point in the story things get real puzzling. In Matthew 27:5 it's said that Judas returned the money to the priests after which he then went out and hanged himself.

Matthew 27:5
So he threw the money into the temple, went away, and hanged himself.​

However, in the account given in Acts 1:18 it's said Judas used the money to buy a piece of land where he fell to his death.

Acts 1:18
With the money he received from the wrong he had done, he bought a piece of land where he fell headfirst to his death. His body split open, and all his internal organs came out. ​

My question is: Which of these do you feel is correct and why?

.

Both. He threw away the 30 pieces of silver but had other money he stole (as recorded in the gospels).

He hanged himself, died. Scripture forbids touching a dead body to create ritual uncleanliness on a holy day, so he may have been allowed as a corpse to crash to the ground, bursting open and/or bursting open from heat and swelling being ignored over the holidays where he hanged and/or hanged himself on the cliff of Akeldama (one hangs oneself off of a height of some kind) and the rope broke or was cut and he burst open.

 

[Skwim]

i would lean to the gospel of Matthew....
seems Judas did regret his deed
and had no one but himself to pass judgement

Thank you. A refreshingly frank and to the point reply.


.

 

[Skwim]

Both. He threw away the 30 pieces of silver but had other money he stole (as recorded in the gospels).

Nope. It says "With the money he received from the wrong he had done, he bought a piece of land"

.

 

[DavidFirth]

It's not that they would be expected to say the same thing, but that they aren't expected to contradict each other. Or is this how you regard the Bible; a book that no doubt gets some things right and a book that no doubt gets some things wrong?

In any case, how have you decided to regard the Judas incident as presented in the Bible?


But I wouldn't go around bragging about this if I was you.

.

The Judas incident doesn't matter very much and I don't concern myself with it. The important thing to know about him is that he betrayed Christ, just as had been prophesied.

 

[Skwim]

The Judas incident doesn't matter very much and I don't concern myself with it. The important thing to know about him is that he betrayed Christ, just as had been prophesied.

And, of course, it isn't the incident itself that's important here, but the contradictory accounts of the truth in the Bible. But I understand your reticence in considering it and picking the right one.

Have a good day.

.
.

 

[columbus]

The important thing to know about him is that he betrayed Christ, just as had been prophesied.

Jesus picked him to do it and then told him to.
If I had been around God and He had told me to do something, I'd do it too. What is wrong with that?
Tom

 

[DavidFirth]

And, of course, it isn't the incident itself that's important here, but the contradictory accounts of the truth in the Bible. But I understand your reticence in considering it and picking the right one.

Have a good day.

.
.

Already addressed and explained by me and other posters. You're just blowing your normal hot air of hatred for anything godly or scriptural at this point. You done yet? Probably not. Hatred seems to always just breed more hatred.

 

[DavidFirth]

Jesus picked him to do it and then told him to.
If I had been around God and He had told me to do something, I'd do it too. What is wrong with that?
Tom

You're being an idiot, not sure if you're doing it on purpose or not. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and just assume you're doing it on purpose in order to show your hatred for scripture. You and Skwim ought to start up a club, you'd have plenty of God haters on here to join up with you. You could have cookouts and have a grand ole time cursing the scriptures you hate so much while you munch down on yummy BBQ and drink beer.

 

[Skwim]

Jesus picked him to do it and then told him to.
If I had been around God and He had told me to do something, I'd do it too. What is wrong with that?
Tom

Oh, oh, David isn't going to like this one. He's already got himself backed into a corner with me and only has ad homs left in his quiver. Mark my word, pretty soon you too will be a "god hater"---it seems to be his favorite epithet of late. Well, that and be labeled with a some kind of disparaging moniker like "moron," "jerk," or "ignoramus." My advice, is to do what I do, smile and sympathize with his plight.

.

 

[columbus]

u're being an idiot,

I can back up my understanding with Scripture.
Tell me how that's being an idiot.
Tom

 

[DavidFirth]

Oh, oh, David isn't going to like this one. He's already got himself backed into a corner with me and only has ad homs left in his quiver. Mark my word, pretty soon you too will be a "god hater"---it seems to be his favorite epithet of late. Well, that and be labeled with a some kind of disparaging moniker like "moron," "jerk," or "ignoramus." My advice, is to do what I do, smile and sympathize with his plight.

.

Talk to a detective about it some time like Socratic Berean suggested.

No? Yeah, you're right, if you do that you can't go around with your chest out and pretend you're all that. Got ya loud and clear on that. Yup, you showed them Christyens aplenty. Pride satisfied, you can go on to your next hatefest.