Here’s one I noticed by accident:
Matthew 27: Judas seems regretful of his betrayal of Jesus, returned his money to the priests, and hung himself in shame
Acts 1: Judas seemed satisfied with his money, bought a field, and tripped and died
That’s not what it says. Not a word about tripping or satisfaction, nor is the “reward of iniquity” specified (Judas was a thief and loaded himself up with lots more “rewards of iniquity” out of the disciples’ money bag).
Here is one good resource (check your apparent contradiction here and see if it is explained satisfactorily):
http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/bible.htm
“Matt 27:5 states that Judas “threw the pieces of silver....and he went away and hanged himself.”
Acts 1:18 states, “and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out.”
It’s rather easy to reconcile these:
1. First, Judas tried to kill himself by hanging himself. And this is not always a successful way. Maybe he tried, and failed (as have many others who have tried to commit suicide by hanging). Then after some time, he threw himself off a cliff and fell upon some jagged rocks. Keep in mind that it is not uncommon for people who commit suicide to have tried it before.
2. Judas could have tied a rope to a tree branch that extended over a cliff (after all, you have to get some space between your feet and the ground to hang yourself). In this situation, the rope/branch could have broke before or after death, and Judas plummeted to the ground and landed on some jagged rocks.
Certainly, these explanations are plausible, thus a contradiction has not been established. More from Frank Decenso below.
One of my favorites. My explanation for atheists and critics...
MAT 27:5-8 Then he threw down the pieces of silver in the temple and departed, and went and hanged himself. But the chief priests took the silver pieces and said, “It is not lawful to put them into the treasury, because they are the price of blood.” And they consulted together and bought with them the potter’s field, to bury strangers in. Therefore that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
First of all, notice that the text does not say that Judas died as a result of hanging. All it says is that he “went and hanged himself.” Luke however, in Acts, tells us that “and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.” This is a pretty clear indication (along with the other details given in Acts - Peter’s speech, the need to pick a new apostle, etc.) that at least after Judas’ fall, he was dead. So the whole concept that Matthew and Luke both recount Judas’ death is highly probable, but not clear cut. Therefore, if I were to take a radical exegetical approach here, I could invalidate your alleged contradiction that there are two different accounts of how Judas died.
Notice verse 5.”Then he...went and hanged himself.” Matthew does not say Judas died, does it? Should we assume he died as a result of the hanging?
What does Acts say? ACT 1:18 (Now this man purchased a field with the wages of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out.
ACT 1:20 “For it is written in the book of Psalms: ‘Let his dwelling place be desolate, And let no one live in it’; and, ‘Let another take his office.’
Here we may have a graphic explanation of Judas’ death. Of course, maybe someone can find some medical source somewhere that discusses the possibility of one having their entrails gush out after being burst open in the middle, and still survive. :)
So, my line of reasoning to dispel the contradiction myth re: the “two” accounts of Judas’ death is this. Matthew doesn’t necessarily explain how Judas died; he does say Judas “hanged himself”, but he didn’t specifically say Judas died in the hanging incident. However, Acts seems to show us his graphic demise. Therefore, there is no contradiction between Matthew and Acts re: Judas’ death.
We do know from Matthew that he did hang himself and Acts probably records his death. It is possible and plausible that he fell from the hanging and hit some rocks, thereby bursting open. However, Matthew did not say Judas died as a result of the hanging, did he? Most scholars believe he probably did, but....
One atheist I debated along these lines said... the Greek word “apagchw” (ie: hang oneself) is translated as a successful hanging. I replied, No you can’t only conclude this, although...this was a highly probable outcome. But Matthew does not state death as being a result. The Greek word is APAGCHO. Matthew 27:5 is it’s only occurrence in the New Testament. In the LXX (the Greek translation of the OT used at the time of Jesus), it’s only used in 2 Samuel 17:23 : “Now when Ahithophel saw that his advice was not followed, he saddled a donkey, and arose and went home to his house, to his city. Then he put his household in order, and hanged himself, and died; and he was buried in his father’s tomb.” Notice that not only is it stated that Ahithophel “hanged himself” [Gr. LXX, APAGCHO], but it explicitly adds, “and died”. Here we have no doubt of the result. In Matthew, we are not explicitly told Judas died. Also, there is nothing in the Greek to suggest success or failure. It simply means “hang oneself”. —Frank
Also to be considered— which Bible translation are you looking at?
The King James or the NIV or some other?
I can’t find anything that says Judas was satisfied with the reward for his treachery. These two examples indicate more of a condensation than a contradiction. Judas returned the money but the priests could not accept it and used it to purchase a field. In effect, the field comes from his perfidy, not because he personally handed the money over to the field’s owner.
In the 1599 Geneva version’s footnotes—”Acts 1:18 Luke considered not Judas’s purpose, but that that followed of it, and so we used to say, that a man hath procured himself harm, not that his will and purpose was so, but in respect of that which followed.”
Not a contradiction at all. First of all, you are misquoting scripture. It is easy breezy to find an apparent contradiction when you misquote scripture. Any version (yours or others) that says Judas was satisfied is 100% incorrect and does not match with the Greek. Second, this is simply a supplement to Matt 27, not a correction. It is very easy to square when you realize two people are telling the same story and one is a historian (Luke). He gives the detail and shows how it is an OT fulfillment. Third, In the Greek, the word "purchased" means to acquire by any means. This Judas did, even though he did not do the purchase. It was his money and due to the law on Blood Money, it had to be used thusly.
Really simple.
Matthew 27: [1] And when morning was come, all the chief priests and ancients of the people took counsel against Jesus, that they might put him to death. [2] And they brought him bound, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor. [3] Then Judas, who betrayed him, seeing that he was condemned, repenting himself, brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and ancients, [4] Saying: I have sinned in betraying innocent blood. But they said: What is that to us? look thou to it. [5] And casting down the pieces of silver in the temple, he departed: and went and hanged himself with an halter.
[6] But the chief priests having taken the pieces of silver, said: It is not lawful to put them into the corbona, because it is the price of blood. [7] And after they had consulted together, they bought with them the potter’s field, to be a burying place for strangers. [8] For this cause the field was called Haceldama, that is, The field of blood, even to this day. [9] Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremias the prophet, saying: And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was prized, whom they prized of the children of Israel. [10] And they gave them unto the potter’s field, as the Lord appointed to me.
And:
Acts 1:[16] Men, brethren, the scripture must needs be fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost spoke before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was the leader of them that apprehended Jesus: [17] Who was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. [18] And he indeed hath possessed a field of the reward of iniquity, and being hanged, burst asunder in the midst: and all his bowels gushed out. [19] And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem: so that the same field was called in their tongue, Haceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. [20] For it is written in the book of Psalms: Let their habitation become desolate, and let there be none to dwell therein. And his bishopric let another take.
>> “Acts 1: Judas seemed satisfied with his money, bought a field, and tripped and died” <<
.
That is what you get from reading from a “modern translation” rather than from the Bible.
Get a KJV, and you will be on the way to clearer understanding. ‘Modern’ bible readers are generally deeply confused, because that is the purpose of the new translations.