bible-truths.com/forums
=> General Discussions => Topic started by: Paul on May 06, 2008, 06:20:32 PM
-
"And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." Matthew 27:5
"...David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out." Acts 1:16-18
??
-
Hi Paul,
I think this is the same account of the death of Judas. It seems Matthew just gave the method he used to kill himself. But in Acts he has more of a description as to what actually happen. So obviously Judas fell after hanging himself, however that might have happened, with the rope breaking or whatever is not mentioned.
mercy, peace and love
Kat
-
What about the silver? Matthew says he threw the silver on the floor of the temple; Acts says he took the silver and purchased a field with it.
-
Matthew 27:6-8
6The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." 7So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. 8That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
-
Matthew 27:6-8
6The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." 7So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. 8That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
that pretty much nails it!!!
God bless
chuckt
-
What about the silver? Matthew says he threw the silver on the floor of the temple; Acts says he took the silver and purchased a field with it.
Hi Paul,
Here's a theory that sounds reasonable and may help your understanding.
The money itself was profaned by the way it was used in the covenant the priests made with Judas to betray Jesus. The priests considered the money unclean, so they could not allow it back into the treasury. So when they bought the field, in order to avoid any kind of association with the use of unclean or ‘blood money,’ they purchased the field in the name of Judas, whose money it truly was. Any record of the transaction from that point forward would show that Judas had purchased the property. If this is the case, then neither record necessarily contradicts the other. It’s just that we are seeing two different points of view. Matthew knew (somehow) that the Pharisees were the ones who actually used the money to buy the field, while Peter, as written down by Luke in Acts, had common knowledge based on records that bore Judas’s name.
There still may be questions, but does that help?
God Bless, Eric
-
Yeah, wow, thanks. That's an example of the little clues the Bible leaves us.
-
Hi! Paul
Yes I believe Eric could have hit the nail on the head as communication in Peter and Paul's day wasn't quite 21st century style.
God bless
Love in Christ Jesus.
Roy'