Was Judas A Traitor Or An Unfailing Follower Of Christ?

[ImWithStupid]

As Easter approaches, I ask this, was Judas only doing what Christ asked him to do?

 

By Christ's own admission, Judas was one of his closest friends.

 

If Jesus actually needed to be set up, and turned over to the Romans to fullfill his destiny, wouldn't it be prudent to assume that he may have one of his friends to set the wheels in motion.

 

I mean, isn't it odd that if Jesus wanted to keep going around preaching his alternate views that opposed the current powers that be, why would he make the scene he did at the temple by overturning the money changer tables, and riding into Jeruselam, on a donkey like the "Massiah"?

 

Maybe he wanted, or neede to be a martyr, and needed a close friend that he trusted to make sure that this happened.

 

If Jesus was really the son of God and knew his destiny, then it makes sense that he controlled the movements of not only himself but those of the secondary characters in his saga.

[eddo]

I don't like the term "he controlled the movements of not only himself but those of the secondary characters in his saga."

 

Free will and all.

 

 

Judas chose on his own to betray Jesus. The leaders of the time were bent on quieting Jesus, so they would have found another way had Judas not betrayed Him. But, it did lead to the crucifixion of Jesus, and that was part of God's master plan.

 

Just goes to show you that God can take our (read: humanities) screw ups and still use them to His glory.

[Ahhlee]

Well said, eddo.

[ImWithStupid]

I don't like the term "he controlled the movements of not only himself but those of the secondary characters in his saga."

 

Free will and all.

 

 

Judas chose on his own to betray Jesus. The leaders of the time were bent on quieting Jesus, so they would have found another way had Judas not betrayed Him. But, it did lead to the crucifixion of Jesus, and that was part of God's master plan.

 

Just goes to show you that God can take our (read: humanities) screw ups and still use them to His glory.

 

Your right, Judas had free will.

 

My question is, did he really betray Jesus, if Jesus asked Judas to turn him over, and Judas only did what his friend asked of him?

[eddo]

Your right, Judas had free will.

 

My question is, did he really betray Jesus, if Jesus asked Judas to turn him over, and Judas only did what his friend asked of him?

 

Where did Jesus ask Judas to turn him over?

[ImWithStupid]

Where did Jesus ask Judas to turn him over?

 

Where does it say he didn't?

 

Only two people would know for sure.

 

How else did Jesus know, at the last supper, that it was going to happen, and if he knew, and did nothing to avoid being captured, I think he wanted it to happen.

 

I'm just saying that since Jesus knew what had to happen for him to be a martyr, you could infer that it is possible that he set the entire scene.

[eddo]

Where does it say he didn't?

 

Only two people would know for sure.

 

If Jesus told Judas to betray him, I don't think the scriptures would refer to it as a betrayal.

 

 

 

How else did Jesus know, at the last supper, that it was going to happen, and if he knew, and did nothing to avoid being captured, I think he wanted it to happen.

He knew what was gonna happen because of his constant communication with God. He was always off praying somewhere. This goes back to that other post- He was listening for God, and God let him know what needed to happen. He also knew that it needed to happen- that doesn't mean that he wanted to be whipped almost to the point of death, that he wanted to be taunted and ridiculed, or that he wanted to die a criminals death.

 

What he wanted was to do the will of the Father, and the will of the Father was to make salvation available to everyone, since the pharisees had ruined the old system with their corruption of the law.

 

I'm just saying that since Jesus knew what had to happen for him to be a martyr, you could infer that it is possible that he set the entire scene.

You could, but I don't. Again, it goes against the free will of Judas.

 

And if Judas and Jesus were in cahoots over it, why did Judas return to those that paid him to turn over Jesus and throw their money back at them?

[ImWithStupid]

If Jesus told Judas to betray him, I don't think the scriptures would refer to it as a betrayal.

 

Assuming that what we now call the scriptures were acurate. It's well established that there were writings from that time that the first book of the apostles to be written down, didn't happen for about 30 years after the death of Jesus. It is also known that there are other writings accounts of Jesus' life and teachings that are from the same period that were discounted at some time. Who knows what some of these said. Writings like the Gospel of Judas, that has surfaced and was spoken about way back in 180 a.d.

 

He knew what was gonna happen because of his constant communication with God. He was always off praying somewhere. This goes back to that other post- He was listening for God, and God let him know what needed to happen. He also knew that it needed to happen- that doesn't mean that he wanted to be whipped almost to the point of death, that he wanted to be taunted and ridiculed, or that he wanted to die a criminals death.

 

What he wanted was to do the will of the Father, and the will of the Father was to make salvation available to everyone, since the pharisees had ruined the old system with their corruption of the law.

 

The will of the Father intailed being turned over. Isn't it plausible that Jesus may ask his best friend to help him with this?

 

You could, but I don't. Again, it goes against the free will of Judas.

 

And if Judas and Jesus were in cahoots over it, why did Judas return to those that paid him to turn over Jesus and throw their money back at them?

 

I'm sure anyone who did something of this kind to a good friend, even if it was what the friend wanted, would have regrets and guilt. Like a soldier who may put his buddy out of his misery when asked to prevent unneeded suffering. He did what his buddy wanted, and probably for the best, but guilt and regret would still come into play.

 

13.26 Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 13.27 Then after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, "What you are going to do, do quickly." 13.28 Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him.

 

I see this from the Gospel of John as possibly eluding to the fact that Jesus and Judas may have had this conversation as obviously Judas knew why he said this to him.

[eddo]

If Jesus told Judas to betray him, I don't think the scriptures would refer to it as a betrayal.

Assuming that what we now call the scriptures were acurate. It's well established that there were writings from that time that the first book of the apostles to be written down, didn't happen for about 30 years after the death of Jesus. It is also known that there are other writings accounts of Jesus' life and teachings that are from the same period that were discounted at some time. Who knows what some of these said. Writings like the Gospel of Judas, that has surfaced and was spoken about way back in 180 a.d.

But in an odd way this backs up my point:

#1- the gospels were written by eyewitnesses. By people that saw the events that took place. This adds to their credibility immensely.

 

#2- they were written some time after the events- so those very witness would have already seen and known about the resurrection, so why would they consider the actions of Judas a "betrayal" unless they thought it was bad? They know it led to good things when they wrote it, so why not sugar coat it and make Judas seem all happy and cheerful?

 

 

 

 

 

The will of the Father intailed being turned over. Isn't it plausible that Jesus may ask his best friend to help him with this?

Plausible, I guess. But I don't buy it.

 

 

I'm sure anyone who did something of this kind to a good friend, even if it was what the friend wanted, would have regrets and guilt. Like a soldier who may put his buddy out of his misery when asked to prevent unneeded suffering. He did what his buddy wanted, and probably for the best, but guilt and regret would still come into play.

but guilt to the point of throwing money away and then committing suicide? For actions leading up to the resurrection of the savior of the world? Sorry, I don't buy it. Just felt guilty about what he did, and IMO, that shows his feelings about what he did- he knew it was wrong.

 

 

 

13.26 Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. 13.27 Then after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, "What you are going to do, do quickly." 13.28 Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him.

I see this from the Gospel of John as possibly eluding to the fact that Jesus and Judas may have had this conversation as obviously Judas knew why he said this to him.

Sorry, but I don't buy it. Why the need for a traitor- if Jesus wanted that? Why one of his closest 12? If Jesus orchestrated this like you suggest, what purpose would it serve for Judas to turn him over, instead of Jesus just walking out and saying "Here I am." ?

[ImWithStupid]

But in an odd way this backs up my point:

#1- the gospels were written by eyewitnesses. By people that saw the events that took place. This adds to their credibility immensely.

 

#2- they were written some time after the events- so those very witness would have already seen and known about the resurrection, so why would they consider the actions of Judas a "betrayal" unless they thought it was bad? They know it led to good things when they wrote it, so why not sugar coat it and make Judas seem all happy and cheerful?

 

Actually the Gospels were written by people who heard the preachings of the decipals. The Gospel of John wasn't put in writing until 50 to 70 years after Christ died. They are word of mouth.

 

Judas "betrayal" is in the words of 4 of the deciples (5 if you include the Gospel of Thomas, which isn't in the Canonical version) who may not have been aware of what was asked of Judas.

 

Have you checked into the Gospel of Judas? Like Thomas, It too was left out of the Canonical version. It really makes you wonder.

 

Plausible, I guess. But I don't buy it.

 

I find it as plausible as the traditional version.

 

but guilt to the point of throwing money away and then committing suicide? For actions leading up to the resurrection of the savior of the world? Sorry, I don't buy it. Just felt guilty about what he did, and IMO, that shows his feelings about what he did- he knew it was wrong.

 

Maybe he didn't realize what the outcome would be. Maybe he didn't know that it would lead to the torture and crusafixtion.

 

Sorry, but I don't buy it. Why the need for a traitor- if Jesus wanted that? Why one of his closest 12? If Jesus orchestrated this like you suggest, what purpose would it serve for Judas to turn him over, instead of Jesus just walking out and saying "Here I am." ?

 

Who would he trust to do such an important task for him? A stranger, a casual follower or a best friend. I think an argument for best friend could be made.

 

In order to be martyred it would be best if he didn't turn himself in, it would have to look as if it was something cast upon him, not a suicide mission.

[wez]

Jesus prolly knew his motivations much the same way as he told Peter he would deny him three times before he actually did it.. He was very perceptive of his surroundings and people.. and could see the events before they unfolded.. He knew what was likely to happen.

[eddo]

Actually the Gospels were written by people who heard the preachings of the decipals. The Gospel of John wasn't put in writing until 50 to 70 years after Christ died. They are word of mouth.

In is pretty well accepted that Matthew, Mak, Luke, and John wrote their respective Gospels. Maybe not with their own hands, but certainly by transcribing to someone. They are first hand accounts from eye-witnesses.

 

And if you argue they didn't- In a society where pretty much everything was "word of mouth, this doesn't discredit what was said. much more attention was paid to details, so as to not loose meaning after multiple re-tellings.

It is this disciple who testifies to these things and has written them, and we know that his testimony is true.? - John 21:24

 

 

Judas "betrayal" is in the words of 4 of the deciples (5 if you include the Gospel of Thomas, which isn't in the Canonical version) who may not have been aware of what was asked of Judas.

 

Have you checked into the Gospel of Judas? Like Thomas, It too was left out of the Canonical version. It really makes you wonder.

I really haven't looked much into the Gospel of Judas, as it was written so much later (250+ a.d.) than things happened. Like I said earlier, word of mouth was given much more emphasis back then, but this doesn't date back to any eye-witnesses- whereas the other gospels do. There weren't any eye-witnesses to dispute anything written by that point, so credibility is lacking.

 

 

In order to be martyred it would be best if he didn't turn himself in, it would have to look as if it was something cast upon him, not a suicide mission.

lol, I got some Islamic fundies in mind that could do well to learn that lesson.

[ImWithStupid]

In is pretty well accepted that Matthew, Mak, Luke, and John wrote their respective Gospels. Maybe not with their own hands, but certainly by transcribing to someone. They are first hand accounts from eye-witnesses.

 

This isn't an absolute. Many scholars question that Matthew, Mark and Luke were the word of each individual deciple. There is alot of speculation that these were possibly copies of one version. There is so much similarity, including the near exact phrasing of events and even including non-events in all three that aren't necessary for the story.

 

I really haven't looked much into the Gospel of Judas, as it was written so much later (250+ a.d.) than things happened. Like I said earlier, word of mouth was given much more emphasis back then, but this doesn't date back to any eye-witnesses- whereas the other gospels do. There weren't any eye-witnesses to dispute anything written by that point, so credibility is lacking.

 

I'm not saying that it did happen that Judas was doing what was asked of him by Jesus, I just think that it's possible.

 

lol, I got some Islamic fundies in mind that could do well to learn that lesson.

 

LMAO. They're a different type of wacko.

[snafu]

Judas was a traitor. But Jesus for saw this and forgave him even before he was about to do it. Pretty good insight I would say.

[eddo]

But Jesus for saw this and forgave him even before he was about to do it. Pretty good insight I would say.

 

How can you be forgiven BEFORE you do something?

[snafu]

How can you be forgiven BEFORE you do something?

 

He did from what I saw on one of dem Der movies. He told Judas he was going to forsake him three times. Then told him to go and do his deed and kissed him on the head. Of course that was a movie. I don't read the bible so you tell me.

[eddo]

He did from what I saw on one of dem Der movies. He told Judas he was going to forsake him three times. Then told him to go and do his deed and kissed him on the head. Of course that was a movie. I don't read the bible so you tell me.

 

Jesus told Peter that Peter was going to forsake Him "three times before the rooster crows" not Judas.

[ImWithStupid]

He did from what I saw on one of dem Der movies. He told Judas he was going to forsake him three times.

 

That was Simon Peter that would deny Jesus three times before the crowed.

 

Then told him to go and do his deed and kissed him on the head. Of course that was a movie. I don't read the bible so you tell me.

 

This was Judas but like I was saying the Roman word that was translated into betray, is disputed by scholars. Many say it would be a closer translation to "hand over". Possibly as planned, by Judas and Jesus ahead of time?

[snafu]

Jesus told Peter that Peter was going to forsake Him "three times before the rooster crows" not Judas.

 

My bad. But didn't he confront Judas before Judas gave him up and told him to go and do his deed? And wouldn't that make Peter just as a traitor as Judas?

[eddo]

And wouldn't that make Peter just as a traitor as Judas?

 

Judas's betrayal led to Jesus being turned over to the Romans.

 

Peter's betrayal, while still wrong, only led to Peter not being caught that night as one of Jesus' followers.

[wez]

Judas's betrayal led to Jesus being turned over to the Romans.

 

Peter's betrayal, while still wrong, only led to Peter not being caught that night as one of Jesus' followers.

 

 

 

I've seen you say before that you believe that sin, is sin, is sin. You have said you believe this through your religious teachings. Seems you are judging the severity of those sins from those comments of yours above. I thought only God was judge?

 

 

 

How can you be forgiven BEFORE you do something?

 

For those who have, and find forgiveness, they understand it is an all or nothing affair. One cannot pick and choose who and what to forgive. All or nothing. To not forgive is to judge. "Judge not lest ye be judged and the measure you give is the measure you will receive". This is how you may be forgiven before you do something. By practicing what one claims to believe and following the words and teaching of Jesus Christ.

[Guest sheik-yerbouti]

As Easter approaches, I ask this, was Judas only doing what Christ asked him to do?

 

By Christ's own admission, Judas was one of his closest friends.

 

If Jesus actually needed to be set up, and turned over to the Romans to fullfill his destiny, wouldn't it be prudent to assume that he may have one of his friends to set the wheels in motion.

 

I mean, isn't it odd that if Jesus wanted to keep going around preaching his alternate views that opposed the current powers that be, why would he make the scene he did at the temple by overturning the money changer tables, and riding into Jeruselam, on a donkey like the "Massiah"?

 

Maybe he wanted, or neede to be a martyr, and needed a close friend that he trusted to make sure that this happened.

 

If Jesus was really the son of God and knew his destiny, then it makes sense that he controlled the movements of not only himself but those of the secondary characters in his saga.

 

It all depends upon whether you believe the jesus tale.

 

Personally I dont. No offence meant, to any who do.

 

But consider this, why was Jesus not written about in his own time ? I have read that mention of the guy is first made a few centuries after his supposed death. Is this likely ?

 

This is someone who made water into wine, who made the lame walk, and who walked on water. Come on. This guy would have been the talk of his age. Their would have been lots written about him in his lifetime, instead, there is nothing at all. Its all made up retrospectively.

 

Jesus never existed. The real visionary of the time was a guy called Apolonius. I can post a link if you like. He lived some time before the imaginary Jesus.

 

Jesus was made in the image of Apolonius. They are almost identical in belief and deed- excepting the phoney Jesus miracles of course. Their lives were similar too. In fact I think Apolonius was betrayed and murdered.

 

Oh yes, and vast amounts were written about Apolonius in his lifetime, not centuries afterwards.

 

So why you may ask was this phoney visionary Jesus invented ?

 

It was ,I have read an attempt by a Roman Emperor to stabilise the people at a time of great social unrest. It slowly brought them together. Over time people stopped fighting over their idol gods, and became a mono theist people.

 

And of course, with Apolonius safely dead already, he could never challenge the authority of Rome or the Emperor. Who presumably, became someone of importance in the new religion

[eddo]

I've seen you say before that you believe that sin, is sin, is sin. You have said you believe this through your religious teachings. Seems you are judging the severity of those sins from those comments of yours above. I thought only God was judge?

 

I didn't judge the severity of their sin, just compared the severity of the earthly consequences of those sins. In fact, I even said that what Peter did was wrong as well.

 

 

For those who have, and find forgiveness, they understand it is an all or nothing affair. One cannot pick and choose who and what to forgive. All or nothing. To not forgive is to judge. "Judge not lest ye be judged and the measure you give is the measure you will receive". This is how you may be forgiven before you do something. By practicing what one claims to believe and following the words and teaching of Jesus Christ.

Wow, that sounds great. It also sounds extraordinarily wrong. What wrong deed do you ask forgiveness for BEFORE you do it? And if your seeking of forgiveness at that point is genuine, why would you still go through with the offending wrong deed?

 

Asking for forgiveness before you do something is, in my opinion, a slap in the face to Jesus and his sacrifice. It's like saying "I know you are gonna forgive me anyway, so I'm gonna go ahead and kill this person."

 

That is totally the wrong attitude towards forgiveness.

 

Forgiveness is there, and available to all- but to accept the gift of that forgiveness you have to be sincere in seeking it. You can't be sincere about forgiveness if you then follow through with the wrong deed.

[snafu]

Why are you so worried if he forgave him before or after? He was the son of God. He should've had the power to know Judas was going to turn him in to fulfill the prophecy. I guess like the rest of the stories no one can be sure either way. But if it's in your heart to forgive no matter what it would only be logical that he forgave him before the act accured.

[eddo]

Why are you so worried if he forgave him before or after? He was the son of God. He should've had the power to know Judas was going to turn him in to fulfill the prophecy. I guess like the rest of the stories no one can be sure either way. But if it's in your heart to forgive no matter what it would only be logical that he forgave him before the act accured.

 

lol, Snafu. I'm not worried about it at all- ultimately it is between God and Judas. But it's fun to discuss these things.

 

 

for?give /fərˈgɪv/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fer-giv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation verb, -gave, -giv?en, -giv?ing.

?verb (used with object)

1. to grant pardon for or remission of (an offense, debt, etc.); absolve.

2. to give up all claim on account of; remit (a debt, obligation, etc.).

3. to grant pardon to (a person).

4. to cease to feel resentment against: to forgive one's enemies.

5. to cancel an indebtedness or liability of: to forgive the interest owed on a loan.

?verb (used without object)

6. to pardon an offense or an offender.

 

 

Each of these definition shows that forgiveness occurs after the deed. Am I missing something here?