The Judas conundrum

[Davi323]

As a Christian, especially this week, and even more especially, today, being Easter, the concepts of Christ's passion week is heavily in my mind. But, this thread isn't necessarily about Jesus, but rather his betrayer, Judas Iscariot. Judas's reputation among most Christians is VERY bad, and understandably so. It would seem hard to forgive the man that betrayed Jesus, leading to his arrest and eventual crucifixion.

However, I want to play devil's advocate here, and explain why it is possible that Judas Iscariot, the betrayer of Jesus Christ, is sharing glory with Him in heaven, not suffering the torments of hell. I am only playing devil's advocate, and do not offer up my own opinions on the subject, as I truly don't know the answer to this question. It was something a friend of mine brought up, and I was unable to come up with a definitive theological argument against the view, so I list it here...

It could be argued that Judas' betrayal was an absolutely necessary part of the salvation story. Jesus had to be betrayed, to be arrested, and to be crucified and resurrected.

21 After he had said this, Jesus was troubled in spirit and testified, "I tell you the truth, one of you is going to betray me."
26 Jesus answered, "It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish." Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon.
27 As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. "What you are about to do, do quickly," Jesus told him
31 When he was gone, Jesus said, "Now is the Son of Man glorified and God is glorified in him.

According to the gospel of John, Jesus has pre-knowledge of his betrayal, and knew exactly who it would be that did it. But what is really fascinating to me is verse 27. First, we have Satan entering into Judas. It is possible, then that Judas was not in full command of his own actions. Further, Jesus doesn't rebuke Judas, he tells him essentially, get it over with. Then after Judas leaves, Jesus understands that the time has arrived, that it is his time to fulfill his role as the Christ. Jesus understands the importance of the act of Judas betrayal in fulfilling his own destiny. There is no anger directed at Judas, even though Jesus already knows what is coming. It could even be argued that in a way, Jesus gave Judas his consent to betray him.

You could also argue that it was Jesus' selection of Judas that actually led to the betrayal itself. To the best of our knowledge, Judas did not plan on betraying Jesus until after Jesus told him he would.

9 This happened so that the words he had spoken would be fulfilled: "I have not lost one of those you gave me."

This is immediately after the betrayal itself, and we again have the concept of the betrayal being necessary to fulfill Jesus' destiny. In fact, even after the betrayal has already happened, and Jesus knows that he will be dead within the week, he still offers no rebuke of Judas. Jesus is certainly capable of rebuking someone, his actions in the temple against the money lenders are proof of that.

It could be argued that Jesus offered no ill will towards his betrayer, instead, that rightly recognized the role Judas NEEDED to play in order for Christ to do what Christ must do. Jesus required a betrayer, and Jesus got a betrayer.

So, we have the "if God needed you to do it to accomplish God's goals, so how can that really be sin" argument. And, I have to admit, it is a fairly compelling one to someone who understands what the end game is, that Christ MUST die to save the world. How sinful can an act really be, if its completion means the fulfillment of God's prophecy?

However, that argument isn't enough, by itself. Instead, we also must look at Judas's actions after the betrayal, and then at the Crucifixion itself.

Luke 23 gives us the rest of the argument.

39 One of the criminals who were hanged there was hurling abuse at Him, saying, "Are You not the Christ? Save Yourself and us!" 40 But the other answered, and rebuking him said, "Do you not even fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? 41 "And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." 42 And he was saying, "Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom!" 43 And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise."

The criminal recognized Christ for what He was, and Christ forgave him and offered him salvation. Well, how is that substantially different from

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."

Here, after the betraying act, Judas expresses remorse and recognizes Christ's innocence. Not very different from the criminal on the cross. If Christ could forgive the criminal and grant him eternal life for recognizing Him for what He was, why couldn't Christ do the same for an individual whose actions were necessary for God's plan?

While researching my friend's argument, the majority of Christian scholars seem to indicate that Judas was in fact, damned for his actions...but there were enough counter arguments that made sense to me as well, enough to make me want to post the argument as a debatable topic.

I have read enough from both sides to come to the conclusion that I really cannot conclude anything about the fate of Judas Iscariot, so I am interested in everyone else's thoughts on the matter, especially from those who are believers in Christ.

 

[Lee]

I also believe that and it's backed up by two bits in the Bible.

Firstly Luke 22 and verse 3

Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the Twelve.

So that's saying it was Satan in Judas' body who did this, not Judas.

Then there's Matthew 19 and verse 28

Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

That's Jesus telling his twelve that they'll each get a throne to rule in the new world.

 

[Suibon]

I happen to wonder over this as well: the layman and the Curiate make haste in damning Judas and making him a word of abuse to anybody who deviates from mainstream Christian thought, without giving thought to the fact that Judas' betrayal was essential to Jesus performing His duty here on earth.

Quoting John 13:27 gives me an idea. Probably a heretical one, but hear me out. Since Satan entered Judas' body, and Christ in effect gave his assent to what would be Judas' betrayal, it should follow that not only Judas but Satan were part of Jesus' plan to save humanity. This should also mean that if anybody else should be absolved for doing his duty other than Judas, it would be Satan himself. After all, if Satan did not enter Judas, would the betrayal not have happened?

Like I said, probably heretical.

Wait for my excommunication by the Vatican.
​

 

[wrestlingfan]

Many, Christians hate Judas but probably because they don't understand or are too simply stuck up to understand, God's Plan, Jesus knew from the start their would be a traitor, and he told the Prophets, that they should not intervene. if there was no Judas, there may not be Christianity as an official religion today. Also Judas was necessary for Jesus' plan like many believe Satan for, for God's. Also Jesus forgived Judas because Judas underwent one of the greatest punishments of all in guilt, ultimately giving the money back to the Jewish Council and then commiting suicide.