Peter vrs Judas in the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Luvtosew
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Luvtosew

Guest
So Judas took money to betray Jesus, he also gave the money back when he found out they planned on killing Jesus, he was very remorseful over what he did, and hung himself.

now do you think Jesus would of forgave him if he hadn’t hung himself,

like Peter who denied Jesus three times and wept and was remorseful, but had faith that Jesus would forgive him.

I mean no one of course can ever know, but just wondering what your opinions are of this.

I think I do beleived he could of been saved if he had faith in the forgiveness of Jesus
 
I’m not sure. Jesus said at the table of the Eucharist, that "It would be better for him if he had not been born.” Mark 14:21

I think Judas thought Jesus was indeed the Messiah, but thought him to be a ‘military might’ conqueror who would go to war and free Israel. There are some who surmise that he thought by exposing Jesus to the authorities that he would force Jesus hand, and the war would begin. Then when Jesus died, Judas thought it was over. That he had killed the wrong man, or more so killed the man who would deliver them. Imagine yourself in those shoes?

I dunno if it’s true, or exactly what Judas was thinking. I do know that Jesus has the power to forgive anyone. So if it were in his plan, even Judas would have been forgiven. (I don’t think the church has ever declared Judas in hell for that matter? We simply don’t know.)
 
Both Peter and Judas did not do the same thing. It’s about the covenant. Remember that they were Jews. The Jews were covenant people.

Peter wept bitterly but we find Peter with the disciples and still fishing when Jesus appears on the beach. We hear Peter state his love for Jesus when Jesus tells him to feed his lambs. And we hold that at the end of Peter’s life, when he was running away from certain death, he decided to go back to die for Jesus.

Then Judas, his betrayer, seeing that Jesus had been condemned, deeply regretted what he had done. He returned the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.” They said, “What is that to us? Look to it yourself.” Flinging the money into the temple, he departed and went off and hanged himself. The chief priests gathered up the money, but said, “It is not lawful to deposit this in the temple treasury, for it is the price of blood.” (Matthew 27:3-6)*

Notice how scripture says that Judas “Regretted” what he had done after he had seen that Jesus was condemned. Only after Jesus is sentanced to death does he regret. This is because it is against the mosaic law to cause an innocent person to die and to make money from it. He returns not to Jesus to ask forgiveness but to the chief priests in an effort to remove his own sin according to the law. He does not ask Jesus for forgiveness but states that he has sinned according to the mosaic law by accusing an innocent man. He still lives according to the mosaic law and under the Old Covenant. So much time with Jesus himself, yet he has learned nothing.

Peter on the other hand has confessed Jesus, saying “You have the words of eternal life” and “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Christ, the Son of God.” Peter lives under the New Covenant.

And that’s really the point as far as I see it. It’s a story of covenants, and which one you accept. Remember - always remember - that they were Jews. It about the covenant. Everything is covenant to the Jews. Do you accept the covenant of the Old Testament law with its condemnation and regret or do you accept the New Testament covenant of redemption by the Blood of Christ with its forgiveness and freedom from “the law of sin and death”?

Peter accepted the latter, Judas the former.

-Tim-
 
I think I heard someone (may have been Catholic, may not have been) once say that Judas may have been considered a saint had he not killed himself. Probably because Judas was directly responsible for the events that lead to Christ’s crucifixion - which brought about the salvation of our souls.

I don’t know, the whole idea of that makes me shiver… 🤷
 
If Judas had repented and come to Jesus for Forgiveness, he would have remained one of the Twelve and been one of the greatest saints of the early Church (IMO).
 
I think I heard someone (may have been Catholic, may not have been) once say that Judas may have been considered a saint had he not killed himself. Probably because Judas was directly responsible for the events that lead to Christ’s crucifixion - which brought about the salvation of our souls.

I don’t know, the whole idea of that makes me shiver… 🤷
I disagree. If you read Romans, you’ll find that, in God’s eyes, the ends NEVER justify the means.
 
I disagree. If you read Romans, you’ll find that, in God’s eyes, the ends NEVER justify the means.
I agree with you; but let me offer you a counter point, for argument’s sake:

It was obviously preordained that Christ was going to die on the cross. That was his mission on earth to begin with. Now, assuming Judas did not commit suicide, wouldn’t he only be doing God’s will? After all, how much longer would Christ have lived, not offering our salvation by his death, had Judas not betrayed Christ? Ten, twenty, thirty more years? Judas REDUCED the time that we would wait for our salvation by offering Jesus to the Romans.
The ends (Christ’s death) was going to happen no matter what means (ie. betrayal, civil arrest, Jewish riot, etc). The means of betrayal was the best of all means, as it helped the ends come sooner.

Again, the above is just for argument’s sake. I don’t agree with the above proposal, but I’d like to know the response that may get.
 
…He returns not to Jesus to ask forgiveness but to the chief priests in an effort to remove his own sin according to the law. He does not ask Jesus for forgiveness but states that he has sinned according to the mosaic law by accusing an innocent man. He still lives according to the mosaic law and under the Old Covenant. So much time with Jesus himself, yet he has learned nothing.
Peter on the other hand has confessed Jesus, saying “You have the words of eternal life” and “We have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Christ, the Son of God.” Peter lives under the New Covenant.
And that’s really the point as far as I see it. It’s a story of covenants, and which one you accept. Remember - always remember - that they were Jews. It about the covenant. Everything is covenant to the Jews. Do you accept the covenant of the Old Testament law with its condemnation and regret or do you accept the New Testament covenant of redemption by the Blood of Christ with its forgiveness and freedom from “the law of sin and death”?
Peter accepted the latter, Judas the former.
-Tim-
Well said and I agree.
 
All is possible." It is possible for you to reach it,but you will grieve a great deal".
 
I agree with you; but let me offer you a counter point, for argument’s sake:

It was obviously preordained that Christ was going to die on the cross. That was his mission on earth to begin with. Now, assuming Judas did not commit suicide, wouldn’t he only be doing God’s will? After all, how much longer would Christ have lived, not offering our salvation by his death, had Judas not betrayed Christ? Ten, twenty, thirty more years? Judas REDUCED the time that we would wait for our salvation by offering Jesus to the Romans.
The ends (Christ’s death) was going to happen no matter what means (ie. betrayal, civil arrest, Jewish riot, etc). The means of betrayal was the best of all means, as it helped the ends come sooner.

Again, the above is just for argument’s sake. I don’t agree with the above proposal, but I’d like to know the response that may get.
Jesus was destined to die on the cross. I don’t think he was destined to die in a riot or any other way other than what the Jews would have seen as a passover sacrifice of an unblemished lamb. Remember that crucifixion was an execution. How did the Jews know that it was a Passover sacrifice and not just a routine execution by the Romans?

The Law
God gave the law of sacrifice to the Jews. The Jews were told to sacrifice animals as a sin offering in specific ways using specific rituals. One of the things they used to do was that the priest and sinner would lay hands on the animal and transfer the sin to the animal, then the animal would be slaughtered. This prefigured God’s plan for Jesus to take the sins of the world upon himself.

The Lambs Entered Jerusalem
At the time of Jesus, they used to herd tens of thousands of lambs up to Jerusalem to be slaughtered at the fest of Passover. Jesus rode into Jerusalem on the 10th of the month, the very day when the animals were herded in. He rode the donkey amidst the herds of lambs being brought into Jerusalem for slaughter.

Inspecting the Lambs
The lambs were purchased and then inspected for blemishes for four days. This corresponds to the time Jesus was in Jerusalem, inspected with questions such as “By what authority are you doing these things?”, scourged and interrogated by Pilate.

When the Lambs Were Slaughtered
The lambs were slaughtered on the evening of passover in the temple. Jesus was crucified at this exact time, while the passover lambs were being slaughtered. Some estimate a quarter million animals may have been slaughtered on the evening before passover. Imagine the blood!

How the Lambs Were Prepared for Passover
After slaughter, the lambs were prepared for roasting by the thousands. Skewers were used so that one went from the buttocks up through the mouth and another went through the front legs from one hoof to the other so that the skewers formed the shape of a cross. The scene would have been thousands of lambs appearing to be crucified. Stop and think about that for a moment… thousands of crucified lambs being skinned and gutted. Just think about that for a moment.

The Fourth Cup of Wine
The passover meal consists of four cups of wine. Jesus never drank the fourth cup of wine at the passover meal but simply left saying, “Come, let us be going.” and ‘I will not drink of the fruit of the vine again until I drink it new in my father’s kingdom." But he did drink the fourth cup on the cross. He drank the fourth cup right before he said, “It is finished” and died. The Jews would have seen this as an extension of the passover ritual which was never completed with the fourth cup of wine. The passover ritual was effectively extended to the crucifixion when Jesus’ own body - the unblemished lamb - was given up in sacrifice (for his flesh is true food!). The passover concluded when Christ drank the fourth cup on the cross.

The idea of the fourth cup is not universally accepted but it makes sense. These similarities and many more illustrate how the Jews would have known that Jesus’ death was a passover sacrifice of a spotless lamb and not just some routine Roman execution of a guy who claimed he was King and had appointed some fisherman as his Prime Minister. And remember that it was God who gave the Law of how to sacrifice animals, and it is that same God who knew he would become man to be sacrificed in that same way. The God on the Cross and the God who gave the law of sacrifice to Moses are the same God and they were sacrificed the same way.

That is why I believe Jesus was destined to die on a cross and not some other way.

Much of this post is not my own but comes from the book, “Jesus and the Jewish Roots of the Eucharist”. Every Catholic should read that book. Every Christian should read that book.

-Tim-
 
The means of betrayal was the best of all means, as it helped the ends come sooner.
This reminds me of the sequence chanted at the easter vigil.

"O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer!"

That is chanted as part of the sequence at the start of the Easter Vigil Mass. There are at least two threads about it here on CAF.

How can it be happy that adam and eve sinned? How can Judas’ betrayal be the “Best of all means?” as you put so perfectly?

It all shows God’s love for us in spite of ourselves.

-Tim-
 
It is all about doubt, the devil’s greatest weapon. Jesus gave Judas three chances to repent of his betrayal (Matthew 26:21,23,25; Mark 14:18,20-21; Luke 22:21,22,48), yet he persisted. Only after failing to repent three times did Judas fall into despair, doubting the Lord’s mercy. Of course, we know that after denying Jesus three times, Peter did not doubt, and went on three times to reaffirm his love of Christ (John 21:15-17). Even though Peter’s behavior was still impetuous, he had learned from sinking in the water, that it had occurred because he doubted (Matthew 14:31).
 
now do you think Jesus would of forgave him if he hadn’t hung himself
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve,
and one of you is a devil?
He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: Joh 6:70-71

I don’t exactly know what Judas ‘is a devil’ means, his soul
was a devil? seems more than just having a demon…
anyway, in the Gospels Jesus never forgives demons
or unclean spirits or the devil (afaik). I think Judas was
in a spritually worse condition than the man who was host
to Legion. If Judas’ soul itself was a devil then how could
Jesus cast out Judas’ soul…wouldn’t he fall over dead if
that happened?
🤷
 
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve,
and one of you is a devil?
He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: Joh 6:70-71

I don’t exactly know what Judas ‘is a devil’ means, his soul
was a devil? seems more than just having a demon…
anyway, in the Gospels Jesus never forgives demons
or unclean spirits or the devil (afaik). I think Judas was
in a spritually worse condition than the man who was host
to Legion. If Judas’ soul itself was a devil then how could
Jesus cast out Judas’ soul…wouldn’t he fall over dead if
that happened?
🤷
"a devil’ is a spirit that does the bidding of the prince of devils. Yet, Judas retained his free will, whereas all pure-spirit devils have no such free will - having made their choice once for all time.
 
I agree with you; but let me offer you a counter point, for argument’s sake:

It was obviously preordained that Christ was going to die on the cross. That was his mission on earth to begin with. Now, assuming Judas did not commit suicide, wouldn’t he only be doing God’s will? After all, how much longer would Christ have lived, not offering our salvation by his death, had Judas not betrayed Christ? Ten, twenty, thirty more years? Judas REDUCED the time that we would wait for our salvation by offering Jesus to the Romans.
The ends (Christ’s death) was going to happen no matter what means (ie. betrayal, civil arrest, Jewish riot, etc). The means of betrayal was the best of all means, as it helped the ends come sooner.

Again, the above is just for argument’s sake. I don’t agree with the above proposal, but I’d like to know the response that may get.
Then, for argument’s sake, I’d quote St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans - 5 But if our wickedness provides proof of God’s righteousness, what can we say? Is God unjust, humanly speaking, to inflict his wrath? 6 Of course not! For how else is God to judge the world? 7 But if God’s truth redounds to his glory through my falsehood, why am I still being condemned as a sinner? 8 And why not say—as we are accused and as some claim we say—that we should do evil that good may come of it? Their penalty is what they deserve.
 
I agree with you; but let me offer you a counter point, for argument’s sake:

It was obviously preordained that Christ was going to die on the cross. That was his mission on earth to begin with. Now, assuming Judas did not commit suicide, wouldn’t he only be doing God’s will? After all, how much longer would Christ have lived, not offering our salvation by his death, had Judas not betrayed Christ? Ten, twenty, thirty more years? Judas REDUCED the time that we would wait for our salvation by offering Jesus to the Romans.
The ends (Christ’s death) was going to happen no matter what means (ie. betrayal, civil arrest, Jewish riot, etc). The means of betrayal was the best of all means, as it helped the ends come sooner.

Again, the above is just for argument’s sake. I don’t agree with the above proposal, but I’d like to know the response that may get.
Incidentally, Zwingli and Calvin used this argument (the underlined part above) claiming that God causes us to sin in order for God to show His Great Glory in Sanctifying us.
 
Incidentally, Zwingli and Calvin used this argument (the underlined part above) claiming that God causes us to sin in order for God to show His Great Glory in Sanctifying us.
Really? Hmm, I didn’t know that. Thanks for the information. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top