Acts 1:18 - Matthew 27:5 - Contradiction on Judas death & who purchased the field (silver coins) [duplicate]

Question

Acts 1:18-19

18 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.
19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

Matthew 27:5–10

5 And he threw the pieces of silver into the temple sanctuary and departed; and he went away and hanged himself.
7 And they [v8 - chief priests] conferred together and with the money bought the Potter’s Field as a burial place for strangers.
8 For this reason that field has been called the Field of Blood to this day.

Judas's death and who bought the field, both differ; Matthew records Judas hanged himself and the Chief Priests bought the field.
Whereas Peter's words (recorded by Luke) mentions Judas's death (falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out) & buying of the field (Judas bought the field) in a different manner.

Commentaries: Luke is recording (Peter's words) the after effects of Judas death (which is approx. 40 days) that his body has fallen after getting rotten and his intestines are visible after it fell down. Peter even doesn’t mention, on what Judas fell that his bowls/intestines burst open.

Concern here is why is Peter mentioning that Judas bought the field, when Matthew mentions the chief priests did it.

---

Ref: answersingenesis.org

“when people suffer bad falls, they do not usually burst open and have their internal organs spill out. Skin is very tough, and even when it is cut in the abdominal area, internals do not usually spill out. Thus, it is unlikely that Judas could die in this manner merely from falling.”

“bacteria inside his body would have been actively breaking down tissues and cells. A byproduct of bacterial metabolism is often gas. The pressure created by the gas forces fluid out of the cells and tissues and into the body cavities. The body becomes bloated as a result. In addition, tissue decomposition occurs compromising the integrity of the skin. Judas’ body was similar to an overinflated balloon: as he hit the ground (due to the branch he hung on or the rope itself breaking) the skin easily broke, and he burst open with his internal organs spilling out.”

Science Support: sciencefocus.com

Answer 1

There are two matters here - one about the manner of death and the other about who bought the field. Let us take these one at a time.

Manner of Judas' death

The operative word in Acts 1:18, πρηνής, is a hapax legomenon. The meaning not totally certain but often translated as "headlong". BDAG offers this:

• forward, prostrate, head first, headlong, ... but prostrate and silent makes good sense in this [Acts 1:18] passage

Thus, all that is really required was that Judas, having hung himself, died and fell, and ended up falling flat on his face, possibly when either the rope snapped or a branch broke.

I think the main point of the story is the ignominy that he suffered at the end. Thus, there is real contradiction between Acts 1:18 and Matt 27:5.

Who Bought the Field?

This matter is trickier. First, we do not know how much he field cost - was it more or less than the 30 pieces of silver? We are not told but that detail does not matter for the question at hand.

So who bought the field - was it Judas or the Priests? The answer, assuming both accounts to be correct, is BOTH! The events were possibly like this:

• Judas agrees to betray Jesus for 30 pieces of silver
• Judas then sees a plot of land, the potters field for sale and agrees to but the filed but does not hand over money that is not yet his.
• Judas betrays Jesus and collects the money
• Judas is seized with remorse and returns the money to the priests
• Judas hangs himself on the plot of land he had agreed to buy
• The priests purchase the same land

Gill reaches a similar conclusion:

It is somewhat difficult, that Judas should be said to purchase it, when Matthew says the chief priests bought it, Matthew 27:7. Both are true; Judas having received his money of the chief priests two days ago, might not only intend to purchase, but might really strike a bargain with the potter for his field; but repenting of his sin, instead of carrying the money to make good the agreement, went and threw it to the chief priests, and then hanged himself; when they, by a secret providence, might be directed to make a purchase of the same field with his money; or he may be said to purchase it, because it was purchased with his money. The Vulgate Latin, and Arabic versions render it, "he possessed" it; not in person, unless he was buried there, as he might be; and so all that he got by his wretched bargain, was only so much ground as to be buried in; or the sense may be, "he caused it to be possessed"; by returning the money which the chief priests used this way, with the reward of his iniquity; that is, with the thirty pieces of silver, given him as a reward for that vile action of his betraying of his Lord and master:

Similarly, the Cambridge commentary says this:

Now this man purchased a field Rather, acquired, which probably was the sense intended by the A. V., as it was an old sense of the English word purchase. This may be said not only of him who buys, but of him who becomes the occasion of another’s buying. The field was bought by the chief priests (Matthew 27:5-8) with the money which Judas returned, but as they could not take that money for the treasury, they were likely to look upon what was purchased with it as still the property of the traitor. St Luke’s employment of the unusual word “acquire” in a narrative where he calls the price of the land “the reward of iniquity,” and speaks of the immediate death of Judas, makes it clear that he views (and that the people of Jerusalem did the same) the field Akeldama as the field which Judas acquired, though it became, from the circumstances, a public possession for a burial ground.