Has history done Judas Iscariot a grave injustice?

[Hellisreal]

Don’t pray for them – according to your religion, they’re back in Heaven. Pray for those who did them in, and ask them to intercede for you and for the abortionists, if you’re so concerned.

While that is very good to do, and of course I do not disagree about praying for those who murdered them., and while I am personally convinced they are in heaven and this would give me moral certainty they will and can intercede in prayer, I am not convinced it is outside of orthodox thought to also pray for them.
Their blood screams out to God.

 

[jonespm]

Pilate was the one who gave Jesus up to be killed. HE DID SO EVEN THOUGH HE HE COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS MAN. His outcome is not really important to the Gospel message, but we could assume that because he was a brutal leader and lived a very pagan lifestyle, he did not get Salvation. What is interesting is the fate of his wife whoi had the dream, if you read Catherine Emmerich visions, she left pilate and joined a Christian community shortly after the cricifixion.

Pinoyjones

 

[jonespm]

I have hought about this topic before an the conclusion is that it is only up to God. Judas betrayed Jesus and gave him up to his enemies. This was a terrible thing that he did but, forgivable. Peter denied Jesus three times which was bad as well, but the difference is that Peter asked forgiveness and picked himself up again. Judas gave in to his despair and committed suicide which is a mortal sin in itself and perhaps flirting with the unforgivable sin (Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit). In Acts when they are chosing the one to take Judas’ place among the twelve we can get a glimpse of his fate as well. Judas did not betray Jesus against his will, he did it with his free choice. So that is my conclusion to the question, looking forward to your response.

Pinoyjones

There will be no peace without justice. There will be no justice without forgiveness. JPII

 

[Mirdath]

While that is very good to do, and of course I do not disagree about praying for those who murdered them., and while I am personally convinced they are in heaven and this would give me moral certainty they will and can intercede in prayer, I am not convinced it is outside of orthodox thought to also pray for them.
Their blood screams out to God.

Thing is, they don’t need it. It’s certainly not outside orthodox thought, but there are people more in need of prayers and good thoughts than those already in paradise.

jonespm:

Pilate was the one who gave Jesus up to be killed. HE DID SO EVEN THOUGH HE HE COULD FIND NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS MAN. His outcome is not really important to the Gospel message, but we could assume that because he was a brutal leader and lived a very pagan lifestyle, he did not get Salvation. What is interesting is the fate of his wife whoi had the dream, if you read Catherine Emmerich visions, she left pilate and joined a Christian community shortly after the cricifixion.

Pilate was doing his job. Ever hear of the Milgram Experiment or the Stanford Prison Experiment? They’re quite telling and rather discouraging in their stark verification of human frailty.

Considering his position, Pilate had no easy way out. Had he pardoned Jesus, there would have been other ramifications, and the possibility of a revolt led by the Sanhedrin. He was serving his country first, offering what mercy he could: he put Jesus and Barabbas on the balcony, and told the people to pick one to be freed. The people chose Barabbas. Pilate even asked them again – but the people just shouted all the louder.

In general, Pilate is shown as trying to be a good steward and serve both the people he ruled and his emperor. It’s a hard job for anyone, and he could have done far worse.

Jesus himself did not exactly object to being martyred – he could have stopped Judas, could have fled, could have done any number of things to avoid being killed. In essence, he was committing suicide by cop. Pilate, just like Judas, was only a pawn.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

From the Gospels we know that Judas betrayed the Lord. But we do not know the extent. Neither do we know what he motivations were.

It is conceivable that he may have been mislead by the leading Jews of his day into betraying Jesus, not knowing that he would be condemned to death. Perhaps he thought the Lord would have been let off with a stern warning. We simply do not know, yet we have condemned him on hear say evidence which is not permissible in any civilised court of law!

What is obvious from the Gospels is that he was so horrified and mortified on learning of the Lord’s fate, that he could not face the consequences, went away and hanged himself.

That does rather suggest he did not expect to the Lord to be so harshly sentenced. It also shows remorse, great grief and tribulation for what he had done.

Have we been a bit harsh in judging him when we know neither the facts or the mitigating circumstances?

Do we have a duty of care to pray for him?

Even before the betrayal Judas is cast in a bad light in Scripture. Specifically in the Gospel of St John in the story of Mary annoints our Lord at Behany.

Joh 12:1 Jesus therefore, six days before the pasch, came to Bethania, where Lazarus had been dead, whom Jesus raised to life.
Joh 12:2 And they made him a supper there: and Martha served. But Lazarus was one of them that were at table with him.
Joh 12:3 Mary therefore took a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.
Joh 12:4 Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said:
Joh 12:5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given to the poor?
Joh 12:6 Now he said this not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief and, having the purse, carried the things that were put therein.
Joh 12:7 Jesus therefore said: Let her alone, that she may keep it against the day of my burial.

 

[Mirdath]

Even before the betrayal Judas is cast in a bad light in Scripture. Specifically in the Gospel of St John in the story of Mary annoints our Lord at Behany.

Keep in mind that account was written well after everything else had happened. History is written by the winners and the survivors; Judas was neither. If he were a thief, why did Jesus not reprimand him or cast him out? Either would have been a momentous enough thing to have been recorded in the gospel.

 

[deb1]

Sometimes I love you.

I know the conversation you spoke of, but I’m not sure it was in the gospels.

It is.

But that does not make the portrayal of Pilate more sympathetic. If anything-as I put in another posts on this thread-this makes him less sympathetic.

He was warned by his wife’s dream and knew that Jesus was not guilty, yet he still had him executed.

Now I am depressed. Nobody loves me.:crying:

 

[Hellisreal]

Keep in mind that account was written well after everything else had happened. History is written by the winners and the survivors; Judas was neither. If he were a thief, why did Jesus not reprimand him or cast him out? Either would have been a momentous enough thing to have been recorded in the gospel.

Judas was a thief. He stole the community purse. He paid from that the silver- to …

You know, that is mentioned in the bible.

 

[deb1]

Keep in mind that account was written well after everything else had happened. History is written by the winners and the survivors; Judas was neither. If he were a thief, why did Jesus not reprimand him or cast him out? Either would have been a momentous enough thing to have been recorded in the gospel.

You have a point, but that same point could be made about any part of either the Old or New Testament. In fact, it makes it pretty impossible to discuss history at all.

The fact that many people still have pity on Judas means that the writers of the New Testament weren’t very successful in demonizing him, if that was their intenet.

Surprisingly, many of the hero’s in the bible are depicted as very flawed individuals. Peter isn’t always presented in the best light. If the writers were trying to change history, why not make Peter less emotional and more like a mythological hero?

This thread has gotten me thinking. What would have happened if Judas has simply waited and thrown himself at Jesus feet, begging forgiveness? I think that he would have been forgiven and we would have a very wonderful story of God’s love. Judas didn’t do that though.

 

[Mirdath]

He was warned by his wife’s dream and knew that Jesus was not guilty, yet he still had him executed.

Now I am depressed. Nobody loves me.:crying:

And Julius Caesar ignored the soothsayer and went to the Senate anyway.

Pilate tried as best he could to free Jesus, offering the crowd a choice between him or Barabbas. They chose Barabbas. He could have freed Jesus by mandate, but it would have turned all Judea against him; as a ruler, he could not afford to do that. Judea could have revolted, Rome could have recalled and executed him; he really was stuck between a rock and a hard place. In his shoes, could anyone really have done better? I don’t think so. If you say ‘yes’, well, I guess it’s an easy thing to say from the comfort of your chair without the weight of the entire Roman Empire breathing down your neck; it’s less easy to do.

Hellisreal:

Judas was a thief. He stole the community purse. He paid from that the silver- to …

You know, that is mentioned in the bible.

And the New Testament was written by… dingdingding! People who had reason to hate Judas! Jesus did not hate him; the apostles were, apparently, less able to drop their grudges.

And Judas threw the silver back at the feet of the Sanhedrin. Not the mark of a thief.

 

[Hellisreal]

And the New Testament was written by… dingdingding! People who had reason to hate Judas! Jesus did not hate him; the apostles were, apparently, less able to drop their grudges.

And Judas threw the silver back at the feet of the Sanhedrin. Not the mark of a thief.

Having a “reason to hate Judas” is not going to discount anything.

You can not prove that they actually did still carry hate for him, or even admit they did hate him- when they wrote the scriptures. (or at any other time) let alone the many years that passed before the scriprures were written after this event.

As for your last comment, may I say it lacks logic to a fatal degree.

Someone steals my family car.

They drop it off at the police station because they cant accept the stolen goods on their conscience anymore.

This makes them NOT a theif?

I disagree with your logic, and playing loose with facts.

 

[deb1]

And Julius Caesar ignored the soothsayer and went to the Senate anyway.

Pilate tried as best he could to free Jesus, offering the crowd a choice between him or Barabbas. They chose Barabbas. He could have freed Jesus by mandate, but it would have turned all Judea against him; as a ruler, he could not afford to do that. Judea could have revolted, Rome could have recalled and executed him; he really was stuck between a rock and a hard place. In his shoes, could anyone really have done better? I don’t think so. If you say ‘yes’, well, I guess it’s an easy thing to say from the comfort of your chair without the weight of the entire Roman Empire breathing down your neck; it’s less easy to do.

.

I think that you and I might be accidentally argueing two different things.

I’m simply saying that the gospels don’t present Pilate in a positive or negative light.The bible doesn’t make any moral comment on his actions at all.

You’re arguing that he was a sympathatic figure. Your opinion is as valid as anyone’s but that has not bearing on the gospels’ portrayal of Pilate. You can certainly use the scripture to bolster either for or against Pilate. But the reason that you can do that is because the scripture doesn’t pass any sort of judgement on his actions at all.

 

[Mirdath]

Having a “reason to hate Judas” is not going to discount anything.

You can not prove that they actually did still carry hate for him, or even admit they did hate him- when they wrote the scriptures. (or at any other time) let alone the many years that passed before the scriprures were written after this event.

I’d say it’s fairly obvious they cast him as the villain in the gospels.

As for your last comment, may I say it lacks logic to a fatal degree.

Someone steals my family car.

They drop it off at the police station because they cant accept the stolen goods on their conscience anymore.

This makes them NOT a theif?

I disagree with your logic, and playing loose with facts.

It removes their moral culpability; a thief, yes, but a penitent one. One gets the idea from the passages in the gospels that Judas was a chronic thief, not a one-off carjacker who dropped it off at the station afterwards. For him to repent of his betrayal so soon and so drastically rather indicates he wasn’t the black-hearted villain the gospels attempt to paint him as.

Like I said, Jesus did not hate Judas. He welcomed him into his followers and kept him on throughout his ministry. Were he truly so evil, would not Jesus have said ‘get thee behind me’ to him rather than to Peter? Would not he have at least rebuked him for his misdeeds? Nowhere in the gospels do we see that; and it isn’t possible for a Christian to claim Jesus would have been ignorant of them. Instead we see that Judas, like all the apostles, was well-beloved of Jesus. Is it your place to hate or condemn one whom Jesus loved?

I’m not saying that Judas’ betrayal of Jesus was a good thing (although Christians should feel free to disagree with me; without him, they wouldn’t be here), but is it worthy of eternal damnation? If there is a heaven, you may yet find him sitting pretty on a cloud.

 

[deb1]

And the New Testament was written by… dingdingding! People who had reason to hate Judas! Jesus did not hate him; the apostles were, apparently, less able to drop their grudges.

And Judas threw the silver back at the feet of the Sanhedrin. Not the mark of a thief.

Then they could have easily left out the part of Judas throwing the money back at the Sanhedrin. The writers of the gospels would have understood as well as we do, how contradictory that was.

You have to admit that there is a wide gap between taking money from a purse that you are carrying for a group and accepting payment to see your friend murdered.

That one fact, his tossing the money back in theri faces, does sort of rip your heart our for him, doesn’t it. He is so close to understanding. If he had just held out a little while longer, I think that he would have asked for forgiveness.

 

[Hellisreal]

I’d say it’s fairly obvious they cast him as the villain in the gospels.

I will take this to be an admission on your part that you have falsely accused the writers of the Gospels of hate, and now you are retracting and redirecting a new charge. Could it be they were simply telling the events as they recalled them without any such bias you have alleged?
Villian, well yes some do think this is the case. Some also think he was a part of the plan that had to happen. Others have even more ideas. But, by saying “they cast him” this is a baseless accusation. You can not prove they did not simply record the events that took place.

---

It removes their moral culpability; a thief, yes, but a penitent one

Can I ask you why you care where Judas is right now?
Is it because he was a Jew? Are you Jewish?

 

[Hellisreal]

I caught myself, little mistake- Judas never did return the money he stole to the rightful owners of it.

 

[mark_a]

Pilate was one of the most vicious, violent men to rule. One really has to turn a historic blind eye to accept the Pilate portrayed in the Gospels. He’s given a “reluctant player” role in the Gospels, IMO, because the christians who wrote them were trying not to insult Rome.

PP, along with his wife, is considered a saint by Ethiopian Orthodox. I may be mistaken, but I think I read that they are saints in the Coptic Orthodox Church too.

 

[deb1]

I’d say it’s fairly obvious they cast him as the villain in the gospels.

It removes their moral culpability; a thief, yes, but a penitent one. One gets the idea from the passages in the gospels that Judas was a chronic thief, not a one-off carjacker who dropped it off at the station afterwords. For him to repent of his betrayal so soon and so drastically rather indicates he wasn’t the black-hearted villain the gospels attempt to paint him as.

You can’t have it both ways. Either you believe the gospels or you don’t. If you believe them then you have to believe their account of Judas. If you think the gospel writers were fibbing then you can’t argue just the parts that suit your theory.

Humans are complex. Judas was complex. The gospel writers depict him as a real human with faults, just like Peter.

I am not certain why the writers of the gospels needed any moral culpability removed. How ever would presenting Judas in first a negative light and then a penitent light have any bearing on others viewpoint of them?

By the way, Luke and Mark were not of the twelve disciples and they wrote two of the gospels.

Like I said, Jesus did not hate Judas. He welcomed him into his followers and kept him on throughout his ministry. Were he truly so evil, would not Jesus have said ‘get thee behind me’ to him rather than to Peter? Would not he have at least rebuked him for his misdeeds? Nowhere in the gospels do we see that; and it isn’t possible for a Christian to claim Jesus would have been ignorant of them. Instead we see that Judas, like all the apostles, was well-beloved of Jesus. Is it your place to hate or condemn one whom Jesus loved?

I agree in that I have often thought that Jesus probably saw something good in Judas. Perhaps there was a possibility that Judas would have sought forgiveness instead of hanging himself. In which case, Jesus would have forgiven him.

Here is my theory-and it is just my own thought- maybe we don’t have just one outcome for our lives. Maybe God sees several different possible realities based on our individual choices. So perhaps Jesus could hope that Judas would have asked forgiveness after his betrayal .

 

[mark_a]

No we have not done Judas an injustice.

Jesus himself basically spelled out the fate of Judas.

Matthew 26: 24-25

The Son of Man indeed goes, as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born."

Then Judas, his betrayer, said in reply, “Surely it is not I, Rabbi?” He answered, “You have said so.”

The context of Matthew 26: 24-25 does not seem exactly airtight to me.

Surely Judas must have felt “it would be better . . . . if he had never been born” when he decided to kill himself.

Or maybe I don’t have a true understanding of “woe”.

 

[deb1]

Can I ask you why you care where Judas is right now?
Is it because he was a Jew? Are you Jewish?

Midrath is agnostic-I think and Valke is Jewish. I enjoy having them both on this thread.