The Judas We Never Knew

Christianity Today ^ | 04/06/2006 | Collin Hansen

[Dog Gone]

In Matthew 27:5 he hangs himself. In Acts 1:18 he apparently throws himself off a cliff because he lands headfirst and his guts come out.

In Matthew, he throws down the coins and runs. The priests use it to buy a graveyard. In Acts, he buys the real estate and takes a diving leap on it.

They're not consistent. You can argue that it doesn't matter, but you can't argue that they tell the same story.

[irish guard]

Ahhhhh, the MSM gets to report on something that is anti established religion?....

In poker parlance, they're "all-in"

[randog]

Yeah--Judas Kozlowski.

[Dog Gone]

Read post 21, and read the Bible before you insult me again.

I never attended public schools, except for summer school electives. If I didn't learn anything about the Bible in 16 years of parochial school training, then Joe Sixpack is a lot better read than I thought.

[kenth]

Yep, amazing isn't it?

[Dog Gone]

And when would he have had time to write his Gospel?

He couldn't have been the author.

[rbg81]

they have produced a new generation of Christians who now regard the Bible not as the literal word of God, but as a product of historical and political forces that determined which texts should be included in the canon, and which edited out. For that reason, the discoveries have proved deeply troubling for many believers."

Well,...duh? Is this a surprise to anyone? The simple fact is that much of what we have been told is the word of G-d is the product of political vetting. I always get a chuckle when I here some politician say: "this isn't political." Guess what folks? Everything is political--especially religion.

[The_Reader_David]

Hmmm. . .I'd not heard of the 'Cainite Gnostics' before, but it fits with the general thrust of gnosticism.

Since many gnostics regarded the God of the Old Covenant as the demiurge, who made only the material world, those who fell under His wrath, would, in their eyes, be precursors to the 'gnosis' which reveals the supposed 'true God.'

Of course, regarding matter itself as an evil prison, the gnostics couldn't accept a Savior who deliberately became material, so the whole Passion and Death of Christ was for the gnostic a sham, a play which was supposed to lead mankind to 'gnosis'.

[LucyJo]

;-)

[The_Reader_David]

I have proposed a variant of Santayan's dictum about those who cannot remember the past.

As regards Church history: those who cannot remember the past are condemned to make it up.

The only believers troubled by this discovery

1. have weak faith; and

2. don't know the history of the gnostic heresies, the local councils which fought gnosticism, the Holy Ecumenical Councils, or the formation of the canon of Scripture.

[RenegadeNC]

“Turns out Judas wasn't the renegade disciple who betrayed Jesus and committed suicide after remorse overwhelmed him. No, this Judas was just doing what Jesus told him to do. Jesus explained to Judas that he would "exceed all of [the disciples]" by getting Jesus crucified.”

Not very likely that Judas was working with Jesus based on what is revealed in the gospels that have been recognized as inspired and authoritative for so many centuries now(Matthew, Mark, Luke, John).
Satan prompted Judas to betray Christ (John 13:2).
Satan possessed Judas right before the betrayal (Luke 22:3, John 13:27).
Jesus refers to Judas as a devil (John 6:70,71).
Jesus proclaims "Woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed." (Mark 14:21, Matt 26:24)
Jesus prays to the Father "Those whom you gave Me I have kept, and none is lost (also translated 'destroyed') except the son of destruction, that the scripture might be fulfilled". (John 17:12)

According to these verses, if Jesus was working together with Judas, then He was also working together with Satan...not a concept that can be supported by Scripture. These verses also indicate that Judas did not have a happy ending. Jesus said Judas was 'lost' or 'destroyed'...and proclaiming "woe" against someone is never a good thing.
Then there are the Gospel verses referring to Judas as a thief and a betrayer.

This so-called Gospel of Judas is incapatible with the Biblical Gospels. They do not present the same person by the name of Judas Isacriot.

[Dog Gone]

Your silence is deafening. Perhaps you're composing a very lengthy reply.

[SkyDancer]

Get the book "Alleged Contradictions In (Of) The Bible" I don't have the author handy but it compares various so-called discrepancies between verses and other things.

R
J

[sirchtruth]

Read post 21, and read the Bible before you insult me again.

Those are your supposed contradictions? First of all, what version of scripture are you reading from?

It's not a contradiction, it is just a continuation of the what happened to him after he hanged himself. Nothing says he bought the field with the thirty pieces of silver...it was a reward for his iniquity probably along with the 30 pieces of silver, infact if I searched for it I believe it might have been foretold. You're assuming things about scripture that don't exist.

I do apologize for my apparent insult. There was no excuse for it, it was just plain mean, and I'm sorry.

Go here and read this.

[SkyDancer]

He hung himself, there was an earthquake when Jesus was on the cross and the tree fell over the cliff .... best I could come up with ... saw it in an old movie once ....but a good explanation nonetheless

[micho]

And it's not written by Judas. But it's still important, if not the most important nonbiblical text discovered during the last 60 years, as a National Geographic Society executive told The New York Times.

And to think that I thought the National Geographic Society was an intellectual organization! They are nothing but a bunch of fools to try and peddle this obvious HOAX as truth or of any importance. Anyone who believes this crap is really naive and ignorant of Christian beliefs and the Bible.

[Dog Gone]

Your apology is accepted. I was reading from the KJV.

But common sense tells you that the two stories are inconsistent. What did he do with his 30 pieces of silver?

In Matthew, he throws them down and leaves. The priests spend it. Matthew 27:3-7

Acts 1:18 says that he did buy real estate with the blood money. I don't know how you can argue that it doesn't say that. There is not another interpretation that I've ever heard.

Now as far as the two descriptions of the death occur, there is no way that a hanged person falls headfirst if the branch breaks. And it would be quite odd for Acts to describe what happened after Judas's death without mentioning what caused it.

It's just one of those biblical contradictions that drive literalists nuts.

Who bought the land? It doesn't matter to me. But both accounts can not be true.

[GarySpFc]

In Matthew 27:5 he hangs himself. In Acts 1:18 he apparently throws himself off a cliff because he lands headfirst and his guts come out.
In Matthew, he throws down the coins and runs. The priests use it to buy a graveyard. In Acts, he buys the real estate and takes a diving leap on it.
They're not consistent. You can argue that it doesn't matter, but you can't argue that they tell the same story.

Quite frankly skeptics bore me with their unbelief and shallowness in finding a contradiction where none exists.

In the Gospel accounts, Judas, one of the twelve disciples, goes to the chief priests and asks them what they will pay him if he identifies Jesus for them. They give him 30 pieces of silver (Matthew 26:14–16; Mark 14:10–11; Luke 22:3–6). Not long afterward, Judas fulfills his part of the bargain in Gethsemane, where he identifies Jesus with a kiss (Matthew 26:49; Mark 14:45; Luke 22:48). Jesus is immediately arrested.

According to an episode that appears only in Matthew, after Jesus is delivered to Pilate, Judas repents. He decides to return the blood money he has received. He brings the 30 pieces of silver back to the priests at the Temple. They refuse to take the money, however, whereupon Judas throws the 30 pieces of silver on the floor, departs and hangs himself. Since it is blood money, the priests do not put it in the Temple treasury, but use it to buy a field where strangers can be buried. It had been a potter’s field, where pottery had been manufactured. But now it is called the “Field of Blood”—Akeldama—a name that, according to the text, has survived “to this day”:

“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 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 strangers [or foreigners]. For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day.” (Matthew 27:3–9).
In the Book of Acts, the apostle Peter recounts the story after Jesus has been crucified and the disciples gather in Jerusalem, where they are joined by many of the “brethren”: “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 Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood” (Acts 1:18–19).
Christians do not believe that Scripture contradicts itself, and we understand this passage to mean that the priests used the money of Judas to acquire the field. Judas had hanged himself out of remorse (either in this field or elsewhere). Part of the structure on which he was hanging (perhaps the branch of a tree) must have broken, resulting in his falling headlong and his insides spilling out.

[KarinG1]

I know it's true that Judas didn't betray Jesus but only did what he had to in order to fulfill prophecy, but I can't say how I know this or you'll all think I am a nut.

[Dog Gone]

I'm sorry it bores you.

But either he acquired it, or the priests did. It's not really possible to read a joint venture acquisition there.

And then he either hung himself or fell HEADFIRST splitting open his guts. Give me a scenario where a hanged man falls headfirst either before or after death.

It's not shallow. What's shallow is pretending that the two accounts are consistent.

But I know you're too bored to explain how and why he delayed his suicidal tendencies, picked up the coins, went out and made a real estate transaction in the name of himself and the priests before figuring out a way to hang himself and then fall headfirst while hanging by the neck so hard and so fast that he split his guts open.

Heck, that happens all the time.