What Really Happened to Judas Iscariot?
The recorded suicide of Judas seems to have several contradictions and
problems.
Contents
1. THE DEATH OF JUDAS ISCARIOT
2.2. Who Purchased the Potter’s Field?
3. Quoting
from the Old Testament
Prolegomenon
It’s not surprising that critics of the Bible like to point out alleged contradictions or presumed errors of fact. Books and websites love to charge that the Bible is full of mistakes. So we should also not be surprised that they raise issues about the biblical record of the suicide of Judas. In Matthew’s account (Matt. 27:3-10), Judas is recorded as committing suicide by hanging himself (27:5).
But
according to Luke in the book of Acts, Judas fell headlong and his guts
spilled out (Acts 1:18). Another apparent contradiction is when Matthew says
the chief priests bought a potter's field (Matt. 27:6-7), but Luke says it was
Judas who purchased the field (Acts 1:18). Finally, Matthew says the actions of
Judas fulfilled Jeremiah’s prophecy (Matt. 27:9-10) but then he quotes from
Zechariah 11:12-13, not from the book of Jeremiah. But, in Matthew 27:3-10, as
in other passages which critics use to challenge biblical accuracy, there are
fairly simple explanations that will both address the problems and (more
importantly) give us confidence in Scripture. Let's take a look at how to
unravel these alleged problems about the death of Judas.
1.
THE DEATH OF JUDAS ISCARIOT
Matthew presents the account of the
death of Judas Iscariot, who betrayed the Lord Jesus, in a straightforward way.
He writes, “And he [Judas] threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary
and departed; and he went away and hanged himself” (Matt. 27:5). Then, in Luke’s
account in Acts, when the apostles were explaining the need to name a twelfth
apostle to replace Judas, Peter says, “Now this man [Judas] acquired a field
with the price of his wickedness, and falling headlong, he burst open in the
middle and all his intestines gushed out” (Acts 1:18).
2. HARMONIZING THE ACCOUNTS
2.1.
How
Did Judas Die?
The first element that needs to be
harmonized relates to how Judas died. The story in Matthew records Judas
hanging himself (Matt. 27:5) but Acts 1:18 says he fell headlong and his guts
spilled out. Although the text doesn't state where Judas carried out his
suicide, we can imagine him attaching a rope to a branch of a dead tree in an
isolated area. Why does the account in Acts 1:18 seem to differ? It would be
reasonable to understand that, as Judas’s body hung from the tree, a gust of
wind or some sort of earthly upheaval caused the branch to break. In fact, at
the moment when Jesus died, be-sides the veil of the temple tearing, “the earth
shook and the rocks were split” (Matt. 27:51). Many things could easily have caused
the breaking of the branch from which Judas hung. When the swollen corpse fell,
it burst open and its intestines poured out. When understood in this way, the
two accounts are easily harmonized.
2.2. Who Purchased the Potter’s Field?
The second apparent contradiction
relates to the account of what Judas did with the money he received for
betraying Jesus. According to Matthew, Judas “threw the pieces of silver into
the temple sanctuary” (Matt. 27:5). The temple authorities, not wanting to put
the money into the temple treasury, used it to buy a potter’s field (vv. 6-7).
But, according to Luke’s record, Judas acquired the field with that money (Acts
1:18). Which account is true? The answer is both are true. The authorities
didn’t want the money back in the temple treasury, so they used the betrayal
money to purchase the field in the name of Judas. The reason that the Acts
record identifies Judas as the purchaser is because the temple leadership
bought the potter's field in Judas’s name and with his money.
2.3.
Explaining
the Accounts
The harmonization of these two
accounts is actually secondary to the real question: Why did the two biblical
authors report the accounts differently? The simple reason is that the authors
each wanted to communicate distinctive ideas to their respective audiences.
Matthew was writing to a Jewish audience and Luke was writing Acts to a
Greco-Roman audience.
So, with respect to the chief
priests not allowing the blood money paid to Judas to be returned to the temple
and purchasing a potter’s field in the name of Judas, Matthew wanted to
emphasize the guilt and hypocrisy of these leaders. They were willing to pay
blood money but not willing to receive it back.
Although this should not be
misconstrued as supporting the anti-Jewish Christ-killer accusation that has
been the basis of so much persecution of the Jewish people, it does recognize
that the chief priests were conscious of their wrongdoing.
On the other hand, in Acts 1:18,
Luke’s quotation of Peter was designed to emphasize the guilt of Judas in
purchasing a field. When discussing that Judas acquired the plot of land with
the money received from wrongdoing, Gleason Archer suggests that Peter’s words
are to be taken ironically: “Judas acquired a piece of real estate all right,
but it was only a burial plot.’?
This emphasized, in a sarcastic
way, the culpability of Judas. Despite his hollow remorse, he was still the son
of perdition (John 17:12). As for Matthew stating that Judas hanged himself
and Luke recording that he fell headlong and burst open, both accounts
emphasize that Judas was accursed for his behavior.
Matthew was writing to a Jewish
audience who would have been aware of the Torah’s statement, “He who is hanged
is accursed of God” (Deut. 21:23). They would have understood Judas hanging
himself was a sign that God had condemned him. This recognition would not have
been so clear to Luke’s Greco-Roman audience. In that culture, someone who was guilty
of wrongdoing was thought to redeem themselves by committing suicide.
Thus, Judas hanging himself would
have led Luke’s audience to conclude that he had undone his evil and thus
expunged his guilt. On the other hand, the Hellenistic world had adopted a
great adoration of the human body. By saying that Judas had fallen headlong,
bursting his body and spilling his intestines, the Greco-Roman audience would
have seen that defacing of the body as a sign of Judas being cursed. Luke
emphasized this aspect of the death of Judas to make clear to his readers that
Judas was the son of perdition. The two accounts of the death of Judas can be
easily harmonized but, more importantly, they can be shown to emphasize the
message of each individual author.
3. Quoting from the Old Testament
The second major issue in the
account of the death of Judas is found in Matthew’s quotation from the Old
Testament. Matthew states that these events fulfilled the words of Jeremiah.
The problem is that the quotation that Matthew gives is actually from Zechariah
11:12-13. This alleged error has been explained a number of ways.
Some critics say that Matthew may
have had a memory lapse and confused Jeremiah with Zechariah. However, that
explanation would contradict the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. Some
say it was an oral statement by Jeremiah not recorded in Scripture.
While this may seem plausible, it
cannot be proven. Others say these verses were removed from Jeremiah by Jewish
scribes. But, again, that is highly unlikely for two reasons: (1) Jewish
veneration of the Bible preserved the text of Scripture; and (2) these very
same verses were kept in Zechariah, showing that Jewish scribes had no
objection to the passage—we have to ask why would scribes take it out of
Jeremiah and leave it in Zechariah?
Another common explanation given
involves finding passages in Jeremiah using similar words (Jer. 18:2; 19:1, 11)
and alleging that Matthew is conflating them with Zechariah and saying it is a
quotation from Jeremiah, the more significant prophet. The problem with this
solution is that the verses in Jeremiah do not contain a prophecy of Judas and
the potter’s field as do the verses in Zechariah.
The simplest and most reasonable
explanation is that in ancient times, Jeremiah was at the head of the Prophets
section of the Bible and it was a common Jewish practice to cite the entire
section with the name of the first book. Similarly, the Lord Jesus cited the
Law, the Prophets, and “the Psalms,” citing the first book to represent the
whole section.
The ancient book of Jewish wisdom
and law, the Talmud, notes the order of the latter Prophets as “Jeremiah,
Ezekiel, Isaiah, and the Twelve” (Bava Batra 14b). This is evidence that
ancient Jews ordered the latter Prophets with Jeremiah at the head. Therefore,
Matthew quoted the passage from the scroll of the Prophets, citing it by its
first book, Jeremiah.
4. FINAL THOUGHTS
We can conclude that the two
passages recording the death of Judas (Matt. 27:3-10; Acts 1:18-19) are not
filled with contradictions and errors. In actuality, they focus their attention
on those who were truly guilty for the travesty that led to the death of Jesus.
Moreover, it shows that all of these details were always part of the plan of
God. The actions of the chief priests and Judas were predicted in Zechariah
11:12-13. A careful reading of these texts leads us not to doubt, but to greater
confidence in Scripture with regard to both history and prophecy.
.jpg)
