Did Judas REALLY hang himself?

Question

The New Testament contradicts itself regarding this occurrence.

According to the Gospel of Matthew, [Matthew 27:5]"So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself." This indicates that he returned the money to the temple and then committed suicide.

However, according to Luke in Acts 1:18, "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." This implies a more guiltless Judas.

Often, I have heard it argued that this is not a contradiction - just two different accounts of how he died....he was hanged, and then fell from the rope and burst asunder. Ok, lets run with that....

How then, exactly, does one NOT see the glaring contradiction as to what Judas did with the money he received for betraying Jesus? This is a clear contradiction. Either he gave the money back, or he used it for a field.

How do you justify THAT contradiction?

Ah Schneb - that is exactly how one who cannot answer the quesiton would answer the quesiton. Not dodge there... Had you made some effort, I might have awarded you the best answer. As I see it, you dont have an answer - there isnt one. This is a glaring contradiction and you know it.

Answer 1

You need to keep reading on in Matthew and then you will get the full story.

Acts 1:18 Ac 1:18


Verse 18. Now this man, etc. The money which was given for betraying the Lord Jesus was thrown down in the temple, and the field was purchased with it by the Jewish priests. See Matthew 27:5,10, A man is said often to do a thing, when he furnished means for doing it.

Purchased a field with the reward of iniquity-Probably Judas did not purchase the field himself, but the money for which he sold his Lord was thus applied, see Mt 27:6-8. It is possible, however, that he might have designed to purchase a field or piece of ground with this reward of his iniquity, and might have been in treaty far it, though he did not close the bargain, as his bringing the money to the treasury proves: the priests, knowing his intentions, might have completed the purchase, and, as Judas was now dead, applied the field thus bought for the burial of strangers. Jews from foreign parts, or others who, visiting Jerusalem, had died there.

Answer 2

Yes, he hung himself, then he fell headlong (the rope broke)and his body burst open (he was bloated) & intestines spilled out in the field that was purchased with the money he received for turning on Jesus.

My understanding is that when Judas bought the field, it was from the Pharasees of the temple. He was possessed of Satan, so felt awful. He threw the money into the temple, then hung himself.

Judas was guilty. There isn't a contradiction except for those just looking for contradictions.

Answer 3

There is no contradiction...we all know that Judas betrayed Jesus by taking money and turning him over to be crucified, but this isn't the only wickedness Judas had done.

John 12:4-6 But one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, who was later to betray him, objected. "Why wasn't this perfume sold and the money given to the poor? It was worth a year's wages." He did not say this because he cared about the poor but because he was a thief; as keeper of the money bag, he used to help himself to what was put into it.

So not only was he a betrayer, he was also a thief. Yeah, he bought a field but not with the money he threw back to the pharaisees. Second, if you hang yourself in a desert, you're eventually going to swell and burst open. That part is common sense.

Answer 4

There is no justification for those that believe that the bible is the literal word of God.

If the bible is the literal word of God - then there should be no contridictions. Especially since Christians believe God is perfect.

Another interesting thing is that the supposed prophecy in the OT for the 30 peices of silver isn't a prophecy at all. It's about a payment. Simple and literal.

This just shows that the two books were written independent of each other - and that this was over looked when the bible was compiled. Maybe that also means that those who first peiced the bible together didn't believe it was the literal word of God himself - but instead just historical recordings to help give insight into Jesus, their savior.

Answer 5

well it's certainly not lies---the author of neither intended it for harm- i think it's proves the validity of the bible being truthful why? b/c both accounts are given and are seen as contradictory- scribes could have changed it over the centuries but decided no to b/c the problem lies in the verb that is used to state exactly how judas obtained the field- it could be translated many ways- one states judas purchased the field- and others say it was bought with the money he threw in the temple- either way it was judas's field- alot of times what people see as contradictions are simply matters of alternate meanings for words

Answer 6

There is another account of this story titled: The Gospel of Judas. It was not included in the Bible because it contradicts the other gospels.

Answer 7

well,i heard that sometimes when the pharisees visit his body to the field,and the pharisees cannot use the silver for any cost coz thats a blood money,thats why the pharisees bought the field and named it(something like blood of field)coz its was so the field was washed by traitors blood,and the traitors money is the payment for the field.

Answer 8

Or you could go the Hollywood way, and say he(Judas) actually lived (as a Catholic priest!) as punishment for his sins, and went and harassed poor pregnant Demi Moore later on...LMAO

Answer 9

when it says he "bought" a feild, what this actaully means is that when he threw the coins back at the pharasees' feet, they could not keep it because it was blood-money. so they bought a field to compensate for their ways before the Sabbath which was only a day away

Answer 10

Hey dude, it was interpreted from like 2-3 different languages into English by scholars, their terminology and interpretation is never going to be right on the money. All you need to know is that he died and most likely in an unpleasant way.