Judas:- A Force for Good or Bad.

[TheEndIsNigh]

This thread is a result of a discussion on Vargev's thread about a new story idea.

It concerns Judas and his role in the beginning of Christianity.

The original contentious point was:-

A little like "Constantine" though it could be made to work.

Some might question your placing Judas on the baddies side.
After all he was only fulfilling the task he was assigned.
Some might say he was in fact the truest disciple.
He followed orders in the face of condemnation of his mates.
Without Judas there would never have been a Christian outcome.
No, I think you have to have him as the surprise good guy.

deaconllq:

Why not have Judas do what Judas does best. Of course he should start on the "bad" side due to the fact that he either A.) threw the 30 pieces of silver back to the priests and committed suicide (a mortal sin). OR B.) used the money to purchase a field and burst asunder his bowels spilling out (the field of Akeldama). Either way, he never asked for forgiveness or redemption. Therefore a "baddie" in hell.

SO, in doing what he does best, Judas should betray the forces of Darkness in order to sway the battle in favor of the "goodies". Perhaps being the only soul to be condemned by both sides!

By the way TheEndIsNigh, I disagree with your concept of Judas. He was not predestined to betray the Lord. Thomas Aquinas addresses the concept and reconciles that an omniscient God may have foreknowledge, yet not necessarily support predestination.

Continuing:-

deaconllq:

quote:www.bible.org/page.php?page id=1136

20 When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve. 21 And while they were eating, he said, “I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me.” 22 They were very sad and began to say to him one after the other, “Surely not I, Lord?” 23 Jesus replied, “The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me. 24 The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born.” 25 Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, “Surely not I, Rabbi?” Jesus answered, “Yes, it is you.”

Now to me this not only suggests pre-knowledge but hints stongly at collusion.

His warning that :-

"It would be better for him if he had not been born."

was perfectly valid logical thinking given how his role has come to be looked upon. It's seems to me that, had the intention not been to get himself betrayed, all Jesus had to do was say.

"I tell you this Judas. DO NOT BETRAY ME!"

 

[Threddy]

Judas is of course the bad guy.

Jesus didn't stop him cos he needed to start Christianity. That doesn't mean that it was predetermined.

 

[Urien]

There is no escape from predetermination in a universe where the God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. In other words he/she/it knows all, is present at all time periods and has infinite power. Under this description the universe as created in the Christian ideal is merely a big clock or if you prefer a more modern analog, a sophisticated computer program all parameters known, defined and non-deviant.

Which of course means that free will is an illusion. Therefore Judas had no choice in what he was doing. Welcome to your role as an unwitting cog.

 

[ManTimeForgot]

The amount of hubris involved in speculation about the qualities of a 100% perfect God astounds me. Considering humans have no experience with any actual infinities (no qualities in nature are eternal or without limit that we are aware of) why exactly are we so apt to say "there is no way this could be true or happen?"


Exactly how the hell are we supposed to know what the consequences of an omniscient God must be? For all you know God may choose not to effect any changes because it is all for the best if God doesn't interfere. For all you know God may choose to limit his knowledge so as to not force predetermination of his "prize experiment." "Can God create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift?" The answer is Yes and No; due to the nature of infinity one infinity can be larger than another and as such God can conceivably create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift at some point and then simply apply an even greater amount of infinite power to lifting it later on.


Of course rectifying the contradictions due to something as assinine as applying temporal and spatial constraints to God is positively ludicrous when even logical constraints need not actually apply. A truly perfect being is possessed of all possible benefits (including contradiction's ability to assert anything and tautology's ability to be categorically true: true and correct regardless of circumstance) and devoid of all possible flaws (being immune to contradiction's flaw of always being false). Such a being in order to be truly perfect must be able to do anything including be wrong and not wrong at the same time without being false but also able to be false if it so desires (assuming that such a being could be said to actually having something as base as a desire).


Long story short a truly perfect being exists entirely within the logical quality (to wit it is rather like a realm or universe of discourse for such a being) known as "indeterminate." Nothing can be said with certainty about a truly perfect being. Nothing is itself the absence of any and all qualities; nothing can be said about nothing as it cannot affect anything including God as part of its pre-requisite of being what it is. Thus we have no way of actually determining anything about God. The only "correct" operation we have is to "add" nothing and that amounts to exactly that: nothing.



Of course this isn't the God of the Bible I am talking about anymore. For such a being predetermination of reality is roughly irrelevant; reality is predetermined, but so what? We have the "illusion" of free will; our actions correspond with our desires; what more do you want? Its not like we can be immune to the laws of the universe or greater reality? Or should you want to be as pure chaos; governed by nothing, an agent of pure chance in every conceivable way?


Now for the God of the Bible I guess predetermination can be a bit of a problem; a benevolent omniscient deity would know that quite a few people would simply not believe in his existence and to create a vast majority of them predestined to be so when not believing in him is met with hell fire for eternity certainly undermines a claim to being "good" as most people understand the term to mean.



But more on topic: Judas as a force for good? Definitely. Guy made one of the largest sacrifices possible. He was told/made to betray his teacher, and even if you don't count Jesus as the son of God, he is certainly one of the most inspiring individuals in human history, and by doing so Judas became a kind of "anti-role model" against which people of immorality were to be compared and judged. That's quite a sacrifice; going down in history as one of the most reviled individuals in history so that your mentor could "fulfill his destiny." It would certainly take a man of exceptional moral character and fortitude to be able to pull it off without backing out at some point.


MTF

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Judas is of course the bad guy.

Jesus didn't stop him cos he needed to start Christianity. That doesn't mean that it was predetermined.

Surely as MTF points out he was just following orders.

I can imagine it now back then in the garden after the big feed, burps and sighs of satiated appetites. Strolling around in small groups Jesus seeks out Judas and says:-

"Judas, I meant every word. I want you to sneak out and tell the romans where to find me. Bring them hear at daybreak. I've arranged a signal that will tell you when to kiss me. It'll be Mark over there in the bushes. He'll make a sound like a cockerel crowing."

"I can't Master, I just cant"

"I need you to do this for me Judas. I know it will look bad but if everything goes to plan when the truth comes out you'll be a hero. Trust me"

"Mas..."

"DO IT"

"OK... You will tell the others wont you"

"Yes of course. Now go, you don't have much time"

Urien:

Well yes, though surely an omniwhatsit wouldn't need to stoop to such low methods to achieve his ends. If he's supposed to be expecting such high standards from us then why does he so often resort to double dealing, betrayal, lying, and underhanded tactics.


MTF welcome to this side of the fence

 

[deaconllq]

I don't believe that Judas was compelled or predetermined to do anything. So Jesus told Judas "Yes, it is you.". Big deal. If this were a courtroom we could only accuse Jesus of foreknowledge (and possibly accessory to his own murder).

Did Jesus force Judas to comply? It is a question of free will. THOSE OF YOU NOW READING THIS ... SMASH YOUR FACE INTO YOUR KEYBOARD! Ok. Now the few of you that are under my spell go check your face in the mirror. The rest must not have obeyed. Free will. You were free to do so. Then again, you don't look upon me as an all powerful being and a teacher/master.

You might argue that the Christ needed his betrayal to take place so he used his position of authority and sway over Judas to coerce him in these actions. However, bottom line those actions were executed by Judas, maybe under duress and intense pressure, but completely Judas's actions nonetheless.

Therefore, his damnation is valid, although definitely tainted. Also, Christ's foreknowledge is completely separate from the action.

 

[Urien]

No I think not. Under the Christian ideas of God's infinite power and knowledge God must always have known what Judas would do. God created Judas... Judas did his role as an automaton that doesn't know it's an automaton. Perceived free will for a human might as well be free will, in that he or she doesn't know any better. So Judas despising himself is understandable (but also part of the plan).

However, God wound up his toys at the beginning of creation and no action of those toys can ever be a surprise to him. So condemnation of Judas for following through (if unwittingly) on God's predetermined plan might be wrong... on the other hand in the wind up or program universe of christianity then that condemnation is also part of the ineffable plan.

 

[Interference]

Let's take God out of this for a minute and look at the people involved.

Jesus, son of a carpenter, goes around being nice to people, telling them to be nice to the Romans and doing nice stuff for the sick and that. He gets a gang around him, most of whom are poor and illiterate, some of whom are pretty well off and smart. Given who he drew his followers from, there's at least one revolutionary in the pack who wants Jesus to get an army together, but that doesn't happen.

So Judas: Follower of Jesus, but a guy who knows who the bosses are. Is there a single word in the reports saying how Judas came to be a betrayer? Is there one mention of the Romans or the Pharisees or anyone holding his wife and family hostage unless he does the dirty deed? No. Why? Because the story didn't get written till long after anyone could remember what Judas' background was.

Now, what about this betrayal? So you have this trouble maker, this guy who's going around undermining the Synagogue and you have a Roman occupying force and everyone knows everyone else and, if they can think of a way to get him they'll get him. Already they have a case against him for blasphemy. It's what they based the trial on, after all. So, what else do they need to pick him up? I'll bet you anything you like no one else in history ever thought a kiss would be cause for arrest and crucifixion. And yet, Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss. Excuse me?

Let's have another look at this. Is Jesus The Masked Healer or something? No. His name is Yeshua Ben Yosef and we know where he lives. Is he hiding? No, he's having supper with his mates then going on a picnic. Is he hard to recognise at all? Hardly, he'll be the one in the middle of the group telling the bedtime stories. So what function did Judas play in this "betrayal" that was worth 30 silver coins? What did he do that he felt he had to top himself?

Clearly, nothing. He kissed his boss, but we've all done that So where do the story-tellers get this idea from? Is Judas a fabrication for dramatic effect? Hardly. His role is full of holes. So is there something we aren't being told in the book?

Yes.

Judas was a good man who found out about Jesus and followed him around. He found himself drawn to him physically and emotionally and when Jesus was arrested (coincidentally after Judas got up the nerve to kiss him for the first time) Judas was distraught. He ran away. He tried to secure his friend's release, but the Romans paid him to go away and not make waves. To his shame, Judas accepted the money, but he couldn't live knowing that the only man he ever loved would be dead by Friday.

He hanged himself out of grief, heartbreak and lost love. He betrayed no one but himself. He is one of history's tragic figures, not its best-known villain.

 

[katiafish]

There is of course a Gospel of Judas that has caused and continues to cause a lot of controversy in Catholic church. In it the author not only claims to be the favorite and the most trusted disciple of Jesus, but also suggests vaguely that Jesus was in fact not a human at all.
And as being the favorite and most trusted disciple he is not "made" to "betray" Jesus, he does it whilst understanding what is it he is doing and the great importance of his actions. I am not sure about killing himself, I suppose once his master was not there the doubt has set in, resulting in him taking his own life.

 

[nixie]

Maybe neither, just a normal man who was pre ordained to betray.

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Interference:

Did I roll on the floor laughing my socks of at the bedtime stories :-

Do popes pooh in the forest?

Urien:

Ahhhh, but we are led to believe that Jesus is one of the three. As such he might not be subject to the pre-destinations set down by his dad.

Lets face it why would the he or the devil - and old hand in these affairs - bother with the temptations if he knew it was a waste of time. He's never painted as a diligent hard working type and doesn't seem the kind to spend 40 days messing about with someone who's always going to turn him down.

So it could be that events and actions of the son were able to skew the things, giving those around him an opt out too - otherwise jesus would have been wasting his time.

:-

"Son I want you to go down to the world and get yourself killed"

"Oh what, Oh come on dad I'm watching this supernova. Can't Gabriel go. It's his turn. And anyway you said I would get hurt. Don't want to get hurt, and it's boring down there just acting out your lines."

 

[dustinzgirl]

Judas is of course the bad guy.

Jesus didn't stop him cos he needed to start Christianity. That doesn't mean that it was predetermined.

No, he was just a guy.

Jesus said at the last supper; My betrayer is sitting at the table with me. The Son of man must keep going to meet his destiny, but woe to that man who betrays him.

So, Jesus does not condemn Judas to sin, nor intervene because such was their preordained destiny, but that Judas would suffer great sadness (woe) and Judas did suffer so much guilt, that he killed himself.

Jesus already knew that Judas would betray him, and did nothing, not even a little side comment, to stop him. Jesus told him that he would suffer if he did it, but not the suffering of death or sin, the suffering of woe (guilt, sadness).

While dying, Jesus said Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.

Jesus does not specify to forgive only the Romans (tho this is assumed by a lot of people).

Jesus also says that the 12 disciples, and Judas was one of the 12, "I am giving you the right to rule, just as my Father gave me the right to rule. You will eat and drink from my table in my kingdom and you will sit on twelvethrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel"

No where is there an indication that there will be only 11 after Judas has committed his act of betrayal.

A bad man...nah, Judas was just a man confused by greed and afraid of the Romans, just a man trying to survive. In any case, since it was all preordained, Jesus would have died whether Judas betrayed him or not.

 

[deaconllq]

I think the original discussion was whether Judas was a preordained agent for the betrayal and crucifiction of Jesus Christ. OR an independent entity whose action/betrayal was the catalyst toward Christ's crucifiction.

Interference, although your version is amusing, it really doesn't address the question. Actually, you seem to believe that there was an unrequited love that motivated Judas. You choose the kiss as a significant sexual signal. (I disagree. In many cultures a kiss need not be sexual.)

However

If we choose to go down your path, the question then becomes: Did Jesus preordain people(Judas) to love him? (Choose any type of love you want)

If that is the case, then the Almighty is a very sad being indeed. As Urien commented earlier. The program is set and he has pushed the "execute" button. "Please me puppets!"

I realize now that this discussion can simply evolve into "what side of the fence are you on?", but from a literary or stroytelling standpoint, it makes no sense to have an all powerful being standing behind a predestined universe because the reader will eventually walk away extremely unfulfilled. ie: "Why the hell did I just read that if the god character could have simply wished all the bad away?!"

The fact that he can but doesn't out of love for his creations is the key to keeping the story interesting. Additionally, the fact that the god character is gambling the outcome keeps the tension alive.

 

[Interference]

Sorry, Deacon, but however amusing you found my submission, the exclusion of any kind of god in the equation was fundamental.

And the question remains: Why did Jesus need to be betrayed at all, since the events that followed his handing over would have been the same if they'd just picked him up for sedition or blasphemy.

If anyone was betrayed, it was a disciple name of Judas.

 

[deaconllq]

Interference, I guess what I'm saying is that Jesus didn't "need" to be betrayed, he simply "was" betrayed. The fact that he knew it was coming(omniscient) can be mutually exclusive from the notion of predetermination.

Judas had a choice. Yes he was in an extremely difficult situation (although I might argue he could have packed his bags, walked away and since he was knowledgeable with finances had a fine job elsewhere) but he still had a choice.

 

[Interference]

You're missing the part I'm having the hard time with, Deac, and jumping on a word that can be read in too many ways to be the valid basis for an argument.

In what was did Judas "betray" anyone? How was the betrayal enacted and in what way was it a necessary act in order to fulfill the requirements of Roman law? Why was Jesus not simply arrested and tried without involving Judas, or any other disciple, at all?

The story as it stands: Judas gives the Christ to the Romans. Was this a legal pre-requisite of arrest?

Forget about predetermination, destiny, holy writ, let's get down to the facts.

 

[Parson]

This is a very interesting theological discussion. The previous question you are all skirting around is: "How true is the Biblical narrative?" If you put the Bible in the category of ancient morality tale then there is nothing of literal substance to the story and you are free to speculate whether Judas was coerced, predestined, or betrayer. Each of these would have the ability to yield some insight into how humans interact with God.

On the other hand, if you believe that the Bible is an inspired book whose design is to teach humans about their relationships with God and others, then you can only see Judas as betrayer. A betrayer which was known. John 17:12 has Jesus saying "While I was with them, I protected them and kept them safe by that name you gave me. None has been lost except the one doomed to destruction so that Scripture would be fulfilled."

If you take the latter view of the Bible, then the only question that remains is what is meant by the concept of predestination. For me the answer is found in God's foreknowledge. At the time of creation God already knew each choice and each consequence which would follow, leaving free will to be truly free, while predestination becomes a verb of understanding rather than acting.

I know many Biblical scholars would be aghast at such a statement but I call to my defense Romans 8:29 " For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers." Perhaps the distinction between the idea of foreknowledge and predestination is not quite as clear in the Greek but I believe that it remains.

 

[Teresa Edgerton]

But in all sincerity, I've always wondered, ever since I was a little girl going to Sunday school, why it would be necessary for the Romans to hire someone to identify Jesus for them.

Pointing him out to people who already have his description is the best Judas can do to earn his thirty pieces of silver? Pointing him out when tomorrow he'll probably be out there preaching in public again? When every money lender in the Temple (and they're all feeling angry) would probably identify him without the bribe? When the Roman's could probably just come into the garden and say, "Which one of you is Jesus son of Joseph" and Jesus would give himself up?

And besides, doesn't the Judas story only come in with some of the later Gospels?

***

And as a side note, please let's all be careful that our attempts at humor don't slip into mockery of the religious beliefs of others who are posting here. Avoid, in short, what we in the US call "fighting words" (that is, clear provocation).

 

[Brian G Turner]

I'm not sure what a religious discussion thread is doing in the SFF Lounge.

I don't mean to sound the spoilsport, but as religious discussions can become very divisive to a community, we don't encourage them here, so I'm afraid I'll be closing the thread.

However, you're welcome to take up the discussion at our sister site, Interfaith forums - Powered by vBulletin

 

[Interference]

But in all sincerity, I've always wondered, ever since I was a little girl going to Sunday school, why it would be necessary for the Romans to hire someone to identify Jesus for them.

That's all I was saying - why am I so useless with words?

My apologies to anyone I may have offended or whose beliefs I may have accidentally maligned. That was not my intention, believe it or not. I was just trying to get down to the human side of the issue, and perhaps I allowed my rampant imagination too much free rein.