Judas Contradictions

[JoeMama]

Matthew 27 NIV
The chief priests schemed to arrest Jesus and kill him. Judas Iscariot went to the chief priests and asked, “What are you willing to give me if I deliver him over to you?” So they counted out for him thirty pieces of silver. From then on Judas watched for an opportunity to hand him over.

Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people made their plans how to have Jesus executed.
When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests. Then he went away and hanged himself.

Acts 1:15-18
With the “blood money” he received for his betrayal, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.

The two accounts above contradict each other in a couple of ways.

1. Matthew says Judas died by hanging, while Acts says Judas died in a fall.
2. Matthew says Judas gave the blood money back, while Acts says he spent it.

These two contradictions show that the Bible falsely teaches in some places, contrary to what is claimed in 2 Timothy 3:16:

“All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching.”

[Falling Light 101]

.
That to me is beautiful, that you being an unbeliever and you not regarding the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts as trustworthy and accurate I do appreciate the honestly

that's all anyone can do, just be ourselves. honesty.

I do my best to demonstrate that the Trinitarian Translation deviates and alters and navigates away from the original message of the Manuscript.

waiting for nearly 2000 years just to translate an ancient book into a modern language while developing the entire religious system as a Government mandate - this has a very potential for manipulation.

I love in humanity - and care about and respect and would protect and cherish all people - Triitarians just as much as any human being, there are good in all races, cultures, religions and in atheist communities, however just because we disagree or have detailed discussions about disproving things does not mean that we are intending maliciousness and hurt to anyone.

[TRANSPONDER]

.
That to me is beautiful, that you being an unbeliever and you not regarding the Hebrew and Greek manuscripts as trustworthy and accurate I do appreciate the honestly

that's all anyone can do, just be ourselves. honesty.

I do my best to demonstrate that the Trinitarian Translation deviates and alters and navigates away from the original message of the Manuscript.

waiting for nearly 2000 years just to translate an ancient book into a modern language while developing the entire religious system as a Government mandate - this has a very potential for manipulation.

I love in humanity - and care about and respect and would protect and cherish all people - Triitarians just as much as any human being, there are good in all races, cultures, religions and in atheist communities, however just because we disagree or have detailed discussions about disproving things does not mean that we are intending maliciousness and hurt to anyone.

The only thing that anyone, theist, atheist, can do is approach the apologetics and questions honestly and of course honestly ask whether they will follow the evidence (what the Bible says) or Belief (what they believe the Bible says), and translations, though not, I think, terribly essential as we do have a raft of the best available, is a part of that. I do not myself go translation -shopping, but sometimes it is needful to look, like when some apologist argues that 'pro' means 'before', not 'when' in the context of the registration of Quirinus.

[Falling Light 101]

.


IF YOU HAVE NO MANUSCIPTS FOR YOUR FAITH

WHY PRESENT CONTINUAL SELF INJECTION THAT ARE NOTHING BUT CONTRADICTION UPON YOUR FALSE TRANSLATION

[TRANSPONDER]

They say the Bible is not a history book. The OT is, somewhat. But the NT is more like a witness statement. But we can't cross examine them. We have to go by what is handed down, and deal with contradictions such as Judas in various ways. Either accept that two different stories were written, or argue that they are really the same. The thing is that it isn't just one problem with hanging or bursting open, or the priests buying the field or Judas buying it, but also those messed up prophecies. There is no way Peter knowing the scriptures could have mistranslated that prophecy so badly.

The believer may dismiss that, ignore it or otherwise maintain the faith.

They will have to find something that they can't dismiss as a problem. With Ehrman just now in a vid it was David and the Shewbread - not that it is a rotten teaching example and the Pharisees should have said so, which is my problem with it, but there is confusion about who was High priest, which I could excuse wearing my Apologist hat. Though Jesus should have known better. But different people find their different contradictions they can't ignore.

I just supply a decent collection of them

[The Nice Centurion]

Money contradiction possible explanation:
Judas threw the money back at the sanhedrin Inc., but he came to regret it. So he ran back and recollected his reward.

[TRANSPONDER]

"My son, the church takes in gold, it does not give it out" (Allo, Allo)

[The Nice Centurion]

The (high) priests were in no haste to put up the coins from the floor, not knowing how greedy Judas was. So he found his money where he left it.

Double (Triple > Papias) Death contradiction explanation
Someone !?!?!? cut him down before choking.
https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/200 ... -laodicea/

[TRANSPONDER]

The (high) priests were in no haste to put up the coins from the floor, not knowing how greedy Judas was. So he found his money where he left it.

Double (Triple > Papias) Death contradiction explanation
Someone !?!?!? cut him down before choking.
https://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/200 ... -laodicea/

Nice one but Matthew tells us what happened. The priests could not have the Temple silver (1) in the Treasury of the temple as it was blood - money, so they picked it up, dusted it off and used the money to buy a field.

Thus Acts is wrong when peter says that Judas used it to buy himself a field - which of course could only have happened after he was pain the money and before the last supper.

The problem of the two methods of death is well known for the implausible explanation. Mins, most shrink from the implausible idea that Matthew says Judas hanged himself, when he survived. Or that Acts would say he fell and burst open without mentioning the hanging. Denial side, it looks contradictory - and there are many other contradiction that mean we can't give it the benefit of the doubt, d'ye see?

There IS a scenario where they could be reconciles Judas transacted to buy a field, but hadn't paid it over by the time of the trial. He threw the money back at the priests, and they let the transaction go through (the vendor of land asked their advice about the deal) and used the field to bury strangers in. There are still problems, like how Peter knew that Judas had even taken a bribe to shop Jesus, let alone what he'd spent the money on, but I still think that one is worth a Templeton Foundation award.

(1) if it was not Temple silver, there would be no question of whether it could go back in the treasury at all.

[Falling Light 101]

.

Act 1:18
ουτος This - μεν truly / indeed - ουν therefore - εκτησατο acquired - χωριον the field / land - εκ out of - του the - μισθου wages - της of his - αδικιας unrighteousness - και and - πρηνης headlong - γενομενος when he was - ελακησεν burst asunder - μεσος in the midst - και and - εξεχυθη poured out - παντα all - τα his - σπλαγχνα bowels - αυτου  himself

:18
This truly / indeed therefore acquired the field / land out of the wages of the unrighteousness and headlong he was burst asunder in the midst and poured out all his bowels himself.


Mat 27:3  Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, 
:4  Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. 
:5  And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself. 
7:6  And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood. 
:7  And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in. 
:8  Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day. 
:9  Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value; 


Act 1:17  For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. 

This truly / indeed therefore acquired the field / land out of the wages of the unrighteousness and headlong he was burst asunder in the midst and poured out all his bowels himself.

[Falling Light 101]

the authors were trinitarians ?

or the authors - knew basic Greek and knew how to communicate without using a King James Translation ?