Tell you what, why don't you fetch both passages and post them both here in it's entirety, full context and we can analyse it together?

Matthew 27
Judas Hangs Himself
1. Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death.
2. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor.
3. When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders.
4. "I have sinned," he said, "for I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility."
5. So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself.
6. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money."
7. So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners.
8. That is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day.
9. Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel,
10. and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me."

Acts 1
Matthias Chosen to Replace Judas
12 Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk from the city.
13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James.
14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.
15 In those days Peter stood up among the believers (a group numbering about a hundred and twenty)
16 and said, “Brothers and sisters, the Scripture had to be fulfilled in which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through David concerning Judas, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus.
17 He was one of our number and shared in our ministry.”
18 (With the payment he received for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out.
19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
20 “For,” said Peter, “it is written in the Book of Psalms: “ ‘May his place be deserted; let there be no one to dwell in it,’and, “ ‘May another take his place of leadership.’
21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us,
22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”
23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias.
24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen
25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.”
26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles


Knock yourself out.

it’s impressive how many logical fallacies you managed to fit into one post. you’re arguing against a cartoon version of Christianity that no one actually believes.

if you genuinely want answers or want to know I can answer, but this gigantic insulting strawman is absurd and you aren't genuinely trying learn you're trying to insult something you don't understand for some reason. It's a weird pride.

God the Father and God the Son have the exact same nature shared, it's not "some of his magic power". There was never a time where the Father existed without the Son, or the Holy Spirit. One being, three distinct persons.

It does not use the Father and Son interchangeably, the word God has different referents.

There are not two "Gods" One God, the Father. God has many referents, you can say Christ is God because he fully shares the divine essence with the Father but Christ is not the source or the monarch, that is the Father. The divine "essence" is the "what" of God, what makes God such as uncreated, omnipotent, etc. Christ is not subordenient in terms of ontology, but he is relationally subordinate to His Father.

The Nicene creed you just read speaks of the incarnation and says nothing like you just said, I would re-read it. In the incarnation the Son assumed humanity, not the divine essence. The Son always has the divine essence. Sin was not invented by God. The Son did not "wipe away" sin. Again, sin has no ontology and was not created by the Father. The Son is not his "proxy". I can explain to you Christus Victor and the entire purpose of the healing of humanity by Christ and His victory on the cross & how he defeated death by death, but you have a lot of other things completely wrong here and that would require getting the basics in order first. Christ did not "pretend to die" God truly died. The divine person, the Son, died in his humanity the same death all humans experience. When Christ died he went to hades and defeated death and freed us from the consequences of our choices, he went to save humanity not to punish us. He never sent us to sheol, He never created sin, but he took on the consequences of our actions in order to save us.

I don't think you'll ever read it or listen to it, but for anyone else reading you can find "On The Incarnation By St. Athanasius" even on youtube as an audiobook, it explains this in great detail from a patristic writer.

"Your theology is illogical according to this strawman version I just made using the rules of logic that I don't actually believe are real or universal." I guess when we disregard logic as a real thing and universal everything just becomes a joke.

you find this weird strawman hilarious or something, Lord have mercy on us.

This post was edited by majorblood on Apr 15 2026 04:21am

Interesting, so there are two parts to this event. Let's go through them one step at a time.

First the hanging. Judas went away and hanged himself. So he is on the ropes. I don't know if he died at this point. At this point the main focus is Jesus getting arrested and the trial.

Then the next part picks up in Acts when the topic of Judas' replacement comes up. So at some point after Judas hung himself he fell headlong and his body burst open. Maybe he rushed the hanging or the rope was weak, or the branch broke, or his body decomposed. Whether he died while he hung or whether he died when he fell, I don't know yet.

As for the field Judas threw the money at the Chief Priests and they used it to buy the potter's field. Judas supplied the money and the Chief Priests completed the purchase.

So let's do a timeline of events and see if we can work this out.

1. Judas throws the money to the Chief Priests and goes to hang himself in a field. (Matthew 27:5)
2. The Chief Priests mention that this is Blood Money so Judas has likely hanged himself at this point. (Matthew 27:6)
3. The Chief Priests decide to buy the Potter's field where Judas had hung himself using the money that Judas provided. (Matthew 27:7)
4. Since Judas provided the money he had "acquired" the field but it was the Chief Priests who completed the transaction. (Matthew 27:7 and Acts 1:18A)
5. Judas' body likely hung there for a long time and eventually his body fell and burst open. (Acts 1:18B)

So after careful analysis it seems like Judas died when he hung himself, the Chief Priests bought the field where Judas was hung by using the money he threw at them and eventually his body fell from the ropes and burst open.

None of this is in scripture and is not an accurate representation of the gospel that occurred and being preached today.

going to answer this for the readers your lying to
it will also make it clear what your about

John 10:30 KJV, "I and my Father are one,"

The idiom "of one mind" means to have the same opinion or to agree on something. It signifies a collective agreement or unity in thought among individuals or groups. For example, if a group of people is "of one mind" about a decision, it indicates that they all share the same viewpoint or belief. This idiom is often used to describe situations where everyone is on the same page, fostering cooperation and collaboration.
The Free Dictionary
+2

John 10:30 KJV, "I and my Father are one," affirms the divine unity and equality of Jesus with God the Father, while also preserving the distinction between the persons of the Trinity. It underscores both His divinity and His role as the Son sent into the world, providing eternal life and protection to His followers.
www.kingjamesbible.me
+1

So if 2 people are of one mind or share same opinions on something they are not one person they are 2 people with a common opinions. Just because we are made of flesh and blood like a person next to us or are related by birth, opinions or hairstyles doesn't make us into 1 person at the end of the day we are separate people.

If jesus and father have a shared essense or have same opinions it means they are 2 separate gods. Christianity is a polytheistic religion

Can't cherrypick terms and only apply them exclusively to make your argument work. This is called special pleading. If you going to make special rules for god you can justify literally anything. When you don't have hard proof for your god your claims become meaningless.

So either he is one god that shapeshifts into other people having multiple personalities or there are multiple gods with shared commonality (insert fancy buzz word). Pick one.

please explain the logic in the bold

"share essence" isn't identical to "same opinions" I don't know how you got that from what I just said.

how does 3 distinct persons sharing one essence mean two separate gods?

you already argued that 2+2=5 is possible and that truth is just a social vote. if logic isn't universal, then you can't use the law of non-contradiction to call Christianity a contradiction.

This post was edited by majorblood on Apr 16 2026 01:09am

I did in first two sentences. Also keep in mind I don't believe in these so called essences or spirits or whatever hippy buzzwords you like to throw around. The holy ghost is nothing more than a cartoon or an episode of ghost busters to me. I can't take anything you say seriously without producing the required proof.

Anyway getting back to this tripple essence or whatever you claim to believe. When you brought up father and son that makes 2 gods now you want to bring a third. How many gods are there?

your first two sentences about the same mind or same opinions is completely irrelevant to anything I said, are you keeping track?

you don't believe in an essence? what do you think I mean when I say essence? would the word "nature" help? these aren't hippy buzzwords, these are basic philosophical terms... you're the hippy who denies universal logic and thinks it's just a social vote and 2+2=5 if we feel like it bro.

is your debate tactic just pretending to be stupid?

by your own standards, if it's beneficial to our survival for us to agree that there is one God, then it's true. you can't demand a universal standard of proof in a world where you've already thrown away universal truth, reason and the laws of logic.

your position that logic, truth, and reason aren't universal and are just tools we made up for survival utility is the biggest joke of this thread, are you ready to change your position on this yet?