Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bumble Bee Tuna · 11-03-2002, 12:58 AM

I don't know the forum policy on bumping, but until someone tells me I'm screwing up...

Bump #2.

Ion · 11-03-2002, 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bumble Bee Tuna:
I don't know the forum policy on bumping, but until someone tells me I'm screwing up...

Bump #2.

Theists like Vanderzyden, Leonarde, they still take their blind faith to another thread, totally immune to learning how logic overtakes faith right here.

[ November 03, 2002: Message edited by: Ion ]

Bumble Bee Tuna · 11-08-2002, 10:53 PM

*tumbleweed*

Douglas J. Bender · 11-15-2002, 05:24 AM

Okay, I waded through the first three pages here, and I don't have the time to read through all the rest, so I'm just going to try to address some of the main points I've come across so far. However, I'll do so by providing a hypothetical narrative of Judas' death as a foundation for trying to determine if the accounts in Matthew and Acts are actually contradictory, or just apparently so. The narrative:

Quote:

Judas goes to the Temple, finds the priests and says that he has sinned by betraying innocent blood. They mock him and tell him to essentially "get lost", and in anger he throws the 30 pieces of silver on the floor in front of them, and departs. The priests consult together and, realizing they can't buy land for themselves, and because the 30 pieces of silver are "blood money" they cannot be put in the treasury, buy some land "on behalf of" the Temple, for the burial of strangers. They do this almost right away, and since the money was "blood money", they do not want to be associated with it, so out of the kindness of their hearts, and since Judas never specifically actually gave them the money (merely throwing it down in front of them), they decide to name Judas as the "benefactor", essentially identifying him as the purchaser of that field, by proxy, without his knowledge. In this sense, then, the field was "purchased" by both the priests and by Judas (though without Judas' knowledge).

Meanwhile, Judas goes home, and in emotional turmoil and guilt, decides to kill himself, taking a rope and heading out to a plot of land he had previously passed by a number of times, and which was known to both him and the priests, from their walks about Jerusalem. This plot of land had been considered a potentially good spot for a future burial place for strangers, but the priests had previously never actually gone ahead with the idea (and Judas was aware of these facts, being privvy to much of the goings-on of the priests). This plot of land happened to have a precipitous cliff of perhaps 30 or more feet (50 or more?), though it was not extensive like a canyon (although perhaps it was part of a "mini-canyon"). On the edge of the cliff was an old, fairly large, dead tree, which had a branch at about head height which extended out over the edge, but which was fairly near to parallel with the edge of the cliff.

Judas ties one end of the rope to the branch which just sticks out over the edge of the cliff (a few degrees out of parallel with the edge of the cliff), and ties the other end around his neck. The rope has maybe a foot of slack at this point. Judas then jumps out over the edge of the cliff (his plan was to make it so no one passing by could suddenly save him, thus his use of this particular tree and branch). Judas is slightly overweight (as a result of all the nutritional "benefits" of the money he had stolen from the disciples' treasury), and the branch, being weakened from having been dead for many years, breaks under the sudden jolt. Judas falls straight down a few feet, slightly cockeyed, until his feet catch a rock jutting out from the cliff. This causes him to do a semi-somersault, and the branch overtakes him (not being temporarily slowed in the fall as he was, since rope is extremely flexible) and leads him, roughly headfirst, towards some jagged rocks below. Judas lands on his belly on a jagged rock, which splits him open in the middle (he "bursts asunder"), and his entrails "gush out".

Not long after Judas' fall to his death, some of the priests come out, along with some laborers and/or architects, to inspect the land they have just purchased for the burial of strangers, and in looking it over, discover Judas' body. Word spreads throughout Jerusalem of the gruesome nature of Judas' death, and where it occurred, and so that field is called by the inhabitants of Jerusalem, "The Field of Blood".

Now, one of the priests who was privvy to Judas' betrayal of Jesus for 30 pieces of silver, and who was present when Judas confronted the priests in the Temple and threw down those pieces of silver in front of them, not long after became a Christian, and shared with other Christians how the priests had purchased the field for the burial of strangers with Judas' "blood money". Within the Christian community, that field becomes known as "The Field of Blood" not only because of Judas' manner of death there, but because of the manner in which it was purchased.

Butters · 11-15-2002, 02:23 PM

Doug,
Your time would have been better spent reading the whole thread instead of reposting the very same drivel that has already been posted and refuted.

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Butters ]

Ion · 11-15-2002, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Butters:
Doug,
Your time would have been better spent reading the whole thread instead of reposting the very same drivel that has already been posted and refuted.

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Butters ]

Yes.

We are on page 11, and Doug starts over again from the beginning, which was discarded as inconsistent.

Doug might reappear in page 25 -if this gets that far-, again with the beginning.

Douglas J. Bender · 11-15-2002, 03:17 PM

Butters,

I prefer to be called "Douglas". Thanks.

Quote:

Your time would have been better spent reading the whole thread instead of reposting the very same drivel that has already been posted and refuted.

Oh? I know that much of what I posted has already been presented, but I don't think, based on the posts at least through page 3, that much of what I said has been suggested before. Particularly, for example, how Judas could hang himself, yet fall "headlong". I'll take a look, but I can tell you with no doubt whatsoever that the scenario I presented is completely plausible, rational, and it reconciles the accounts in Matthew and Acts. If others disagree, that does not mean that they are necessarily correct, mind you. They'd have to prove in what way my scenario breaks down - and they'd have to show that it necessarily breaks down, not merely that they don't think a particular explanation is very likely.

In Christ,

Douglas

Ion · 11-15-2002, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Douglas J. Bender:

...
Particularly, for example, how Judas could hang himself, yet fall "headlong".
...
Douglas

This had been answered, re-answered, and re-re-re...re-answered, in this thread:

look for the posts that label as inconsistent every explanation of Judas' death not focusing on the cause of death, but focusing instead on additional to the Bible 'adventures' of Judas' dead body.

Mageth · 11-15-2002, 04:09 PM

Congratulations, Douglas! The contradiction still stands; you've posted yet again an extrabiblical, fabricated, fictional story in an attempt to reconcile the contradiction.

If others disagree, that does not mean that they are necessarily correct, mind you. They'd have to prove in what way my scenario breaks down - and they'd have to show that it necessarily breaks down, not merely that they don't think a particular explanation is very likely.

It would seem that your story is what should be considered not necessarily correct. The proof requirement is in your court. Your attempt at reconciliation leaves the BIG question - why did not at least one or the two authors get the story straight? Neither version indicates that Judas attempted to hang himself and, instead, fell headlong.

Douglas J. Bender · 11-15-2002, 04:16 PM

Butters and Ion,

I just finished carefully reviewing EVERY post in this thread which dealt with the issue of Judas' death, beginning with page 4 (having already read each of the posts in the first 3 pages). I did not see at all where my narrative would have been refuted in any way in any of those posts, nor even shown to be highly improbable. I also noticed that Vanderzyden was very thoughtful and logical in his posts, and showed tremendous restraint in responding to the chorus of mockery and taunts and illogic directed his way.

And I also noticed that you two yourselves seem to be unable to refrain from trying to mock your opponents into submission, as you both have shown here in your two posts to me - my post contained no ad hominem and no mockery or insults, yet the two of you showed no hesitation whatsoever to jump right in with insults at the ready. I thank you for that, because it sets me up as the rational and reasonable side in this debate. You can still perhaps even the scales, by engaging in a reasoned, civil discussion about the issues, but I somehow doubt that either of you will.

I predict you will immediately produce some caustic mockery, and will include some unsupported general statements like, "Your scenario is complete hooey - anyone with half a mind could see that. Besides, all your explanations have already been re-re-re- and re-futed already - if you've read all the posts, and still think they haven't been, then you're obviously just another irrational cretinist enslaved by fanatical fundamentalism." I hope you prove me wrong in this.

Oh, and I noticed that my narrative did explain at least one puzzle that I don't think Vanderzyden addressed or explained, and that is the issue of the reason for naming the field "The Field of Blood". Also, I think it gives a reasonable variation on why Judas' body could fall "headlong" even though he had hung himself.

I could also point out that if one wanted to argue that the account in Matthew would almost certainly suggest that Judas died by hanging, and thus not by a fall, that I could reasonably change the narrative to say something like:

Quote:

And Judas jumped off the edge of the cliff, and hung himself. Not long after [however long it takes a person to die by suffocation from hanging], Judas died. A few hours to a day or so later, the branch, being a weak branch in the first place, gave out under the weight of Judas' dead body, and broke off. [Or, the rope broke; or, if Judas had used a robe as a makeshift rope, maybe the robe had broken, or had slipped off the branch or Judas' neck.] Judas' body fell straight for a few feet, then his feet hit a rock that jutted out some from the cliff, and this impact twisted his body so that it was now falling "headlong", with his body inclined like a skydiver who is looking to slightly increase his downward speed.

Oh, and I just thought of another, even simpler, explanation for how Judas could have died from hanging, yet have fallen "headlong" and "burst open" in the middle: It's essentially the same as the above, but the rope Judas used is assumed to have been a bit longer, perhaps the length of a hangman's rope (the kind where the condemned person is dropped through a scaffolding). When Judas jumps over the cliff, the rope breaks his neck, killing him instantly (by hanging). But the same stress that breaks Judas' neck also breaks the tree branch, and Judas falls roughly straight down. His feet then hit a rock,...etcetera.[/Quote]

In Christ,

Douglas

11-15-2002, 02:23 PM	#275
Butters Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Houston Texas Posts: 444	Doug, Your time would have been better spent reading the whole thread instead of reposting the very same drivel that has already been posted and refuted. [ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Butters ]</p>

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-03-2002, 12:58 AM	#271
Bumble Bee Tuna Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Middletown, CT Posts: 7,333	I don't know the forum policy on bumping, but until someone tells me I'm screwing up... Bump #2.

11-08-2002, 10:53 PM	#273
Bumble Bee Tuna Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Middletown, CT Posts: 7,333	tumbleweed

11-15-2002, 04:09 PM	#279
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Congratulations, Douglas! The contradiction still stands; you've posted yet again an extrabiblical, fabricated, fictional story in an attempt to reconcile the contradiction. If others disagree, that does not mean that they are necessarily correct, mind you. They'd have to prove in what way my scenario breaks down - and they'd have to show that it necessarily breaks down, not merely that they don't think a particular explanation is very likely. It would seem that your story is what should be considered not necessarily correct. The proof requirement is in your court. Your attempt at reconciliation leaves the BIG question - why did not at least one or the two authors get the story straight? Neither version indicates that Judas attempted to hang himself and, instead, fell headlong.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.