Contradiction - How did Judas die?

JackRT said:

2PhiloVoid just rated this post of mine as "funny". I just want to point out that this was an entirely serious post.

Click to expand...

...yes, because it is funny.

2PhiloVoid said:

...yes, because it is funny.

Click to expand...

I must have missed something.

JackRT said:

I must have missed something.

Click to expand...

How would we verify that Judas ever "really" existed as a historical entity, let alone that he specifically betrayed Jesus and then did himself in?

2PhiloVoid said:

How would we verify that Judas ever "really" existed as a historical entity, let alone that he specifically betrayed Jesus and then did himself in?

Click to expand...

Good point. That would be every bit as difficult to prove as it would be to prove that he did not exist. However, there are scriptural hints and context to consider.

JackRT said:

Good point. That would be every bit as difficult to prove as it would be to prove that he did not exist. However, there are scriptural hints and context to consider.

Click to expand...

I couldn't have said it better myself. ...ok. You got me there! It's just that I've never been one to worry about whether or not Judas actually existed.

JackRT said:

Good point. That would be every bit as difficult to prove as it would be to prove that he did not exist. However, there are scriptural hints and context to consider.

Click to expand...

.
That would be a very intriguing thing to study out, why don't you do that, seeing you are so concerned, and then when you find the truth, you can get back with us.

Some aspects of the story of Judas are contradictory. All four evangelists number Judas among "the twelve" apostles. It is astonishing that Paul, the earliest Christian writer, does not mention Judas explicitly but does say in 1 Corinthians 15:5 when speaking of the resurrection of Jesus "that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve." Whenever the phrase "the Twelve" is used in New Testament scripture the meaning is very clear that the reference is to the original twelve apostles of Jesus. Paul implies here that Judas was a witness to the resurrection.

If we turn to the Gospels we quickly discover that in Mark, Luke and John the story of Judas ends with the betrayal and nothing further is mentioned of his fate. It is more explicit in Matthew 27:3-5 "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 and the elders. 'I have sinned,' he said, 'for I have betrayed innocent blood.' 'What is that to us?' they replied. 'That's your responsibility.' So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself." This event clearly took place after Jesus had been seized but before the crucifixion and the resurrection. Acts 1:18 gives a more lurid description of the suicide of Judas but is not helpful in placing the time. The Acts account also provides further contradictions both in the manner of his death and what happened to the money.

Note also in Acts 1:24-26 that Matthias, the replacement for Judas, was elected after the ascension and just before Pentecost and thus could not be counted as among "the twelve" as a resurrection witness. There is a clear contradiction here. Either Paul is wrong or Matthew is wrong. Let me suggest to you that Paul knew nothing of any betrayal by Judas because the story was not developed until after Paul's death. The story itself is a midrashic construction based on a number of Old Testament references. The necessity to develop Judas as a reviled scapegoat was to deflect blame from the Romans to the Jews in order to assist Christian survival in a Roman world, which was already turning a very negative eye on the early Christians. What better way to do so than to choose a character bearing the very name of the nation of the Jews? This aspect of scriptural motivation could be developed much further.

Matthew 19:28 Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Luke 22:28 You are those who have stood by me in my trials. 29 And I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on me, 30 so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

In both citations above Jesus is addressing “the twelve” (including Judas) indicating to them that they (including Judas) would be with him in the kingdom. If Judas did indeed betray Jesus and is condemned then either Jesus was unaware of Judas’ impending betrayal or Jesus lied to Judas (and the other eleven). Everywhere a reference is made to ”the twelve” the roster includes Judas. But then we come to the following citation.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve.

Paul here is telling us that Judas was a witness to the resurrection. No mention is made of the betrayal or the “fact” that Judas committed suicide before the resurrection. It must also be pointed out that Mattias was not chosen to replace Judas until almost two months after the resurrection. There are some serious contradictions in these three sources. We do not have to invent ways to reconcile these problems when there is a single simple explanation --- the betrayal and suicide of Judas are a late developing interpretive mythology that Paul was unaware of.

One further point deserves to be mentioned and that is the historicity of the ‘thirty pieces of silver’. The fact of the matter is that pieces of silver were not used in the Temple in the first century and had not been used for over 200 years. They had been replaced by minted coins thereby avoiding the necessity of weighing on a balance to determine value. It would also appear that Matthew in mentioning this was using the literary technique of haggadic midrash in referencing Zecharia 11:12-13.

Godistruth1 said:

So its fine if there are errors?

Click to expand...

Yes, it is fine if there are inconsistencies between various biblical accounts. Otherwise, we'd only need one divinely official and authorized Gospel and not think there is a need to go ahead and accept the four that we have. Keep in mind that as Christians, we don't typically think of our Bible and the nature of our revelation in the same kind of way that Muslims do with regard to the Koran.

Godistruth1 said:

So its fine if there are errors?

Click to expand...

.
It isn't an error your seeing, nor is it a contradiction of Scripture, it simple is your inability to understand Spiritual things, because you are a natural man.