Judas

[Free Palestine]

Something about Christianity is confusing me.  Judas is vilified as the betrayer of Jesus, the one that got him nailed to a cross.  But, the whole point of Christianity is that Jesus died for our sins, and that was the whole reason he was here to begin with.  So, without Judas, we'd all still be "living in sin," or something.  So, why is he vilified so much?  Was not Jesus the sacrificial "lamb" the whole time?

[Derek]

Judas fulfilled his calling in life which is impossible to avoid. In fact in the gospel of Judas, Jesus tells Judas to do what must be done so that he can save humankind. Judas was a hero who was demonized by the church for political reasons centuries later. He went the way of Mary Magdalene who was never said to be a prostitute until Dec.25, 591 by the pope.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Judas fulfilled his calling in life which is impossible to avoid. In fact in the gospel of Judas, Jesus tells Judas to do what must be done so that he can save humankind. Judas was a hero who was demonized by the church for political reasons centuries later. He went the way of Mary Magdalene who was never said to be a prostitute until Dec.25, 591 by the pope.

there is so much wrong about this post

[Gustaf]

Make a couple of explicit assumptions and there is no contradiction:

1. Judas didn't betray Jesus to save mankind but in order to get money.
2. After the betrayal Jesus could have saved himself.

[Derek]

1. Yes the 30 pieces of silver are in the story. What does that have to do with Jesus telling him to do it? Jesus in the Gospel of Judas simply tells him to do what must be done in order to save humanity. The early Christians needed someone to beat up on so he was vilified.

2. Jesus could have saved himself yes. I'm not sure if you're familiar with Christianity, but the point was that Jesus had to die for our sins which is explained on another forum on this site.

3. What's wrong with my post?

[Gustaf]

1. Yes the 30 pieces of silver are in the story. What does that have to do with Jesus telling him to do it? Jesus in the Gospel of Judas simply tells him to do what must be done in order to save humanity. The early Christians needed someone to beat up on so he was vilified.

2. Jesus could have saved himself yes. I'm not sure if you're familiar with Christianity, but the point was that Jesus had to die for our sins which is explained on another forum on this site.

3. What's wrong with my post?

It would seem that you're directing this at me, so I guess I will respond.

My point was that Judas made a choice to betray Jesus that was not dictated by noble feelings and that Jesus then made a choice not to save himself.

So, to be even more clear about this, the noble act of sacrifice lies not with Judas but with Jesus.

[Derek]

well yes Jesus is the noble one. There is an ancient source where Judas is the hero who fulfills his calling in life though. The church really demonized him and it rallied a cause. Without Judas, would Christ had died? I'm not at liberty to say, but it was part of a plan.

[cpeeks]

Ugh I want to get into this, but so many people would get angry lol.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Ugh I want to get into this, but so many people would get angry lol.

Perfect reason........go for it.

[Derek]

yea go for it. You're not going to offend me at least. Just be respectful.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Judas fulfilled his calling in life which is impossible to avoid. In fact in the gospel of Judas, Jesus tells Judas to do what must be done so that he can save humankind. Judas was a hero who was demonized by the church for political reasons centuries later. He went the way of Mary Magdalene who was never said to be a prostitute until Dec.25, 591 by the pope.

1) Judas was repeatedly demonized in both the old and new testament, NOT "centuries later"

2) Mary Magdalene is highly regarded in the new testament, therefore there is no comparison between her and Judas.

[cpeeks]

How was he demonized in the old testament when christs crucifixtion took place in the new testament, and he isnt even mentioned that much in the new. lol

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

How was he demonized in the old testament when christs crucifixtion took place in the new testament, and he isnt even mentioned that much in the new. lol

no lol, he was prophesied in the old testament in several scriptures (see Acts 1:15-22), including Psa 69:25 and Psalm 109:8 and Gen 37:28

[cpeeks]

Hmm ok I will look that up this evening.

[Derek]

Betrayers were prophesied back then all the time in that era. Those passages had nothing to do with Judas just like Isaiah 53 had nothing to do with Jesus and was about King Cyrus who allowed the Jews to return to their promised land.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

Betrayers were prophesied back then all the time in that era. Those passages had nothing to do with Judas just like Isaiah 53 had nothing to do with Jesus and was about King Cyrus who allowed the Jews to return to their promised land.

oh, so you are disagreeing with Acts' point blank linkage of Judas to the old testament....got it.  you're simply an unbeliever, which explains all your totally unfounded conspiracy theories and also explains why you're so blind to the meaning of scripture that you claim:

1) Judas wasn't demonized until centuries later
2) that Mary Mag. is demonized within Christianity
3) that Peter and Paul hated each other

etc, etc, etc...

[Derek]

No I'm a believer. I place my faith in Jesus dying for my sins. Not on whether or not Peter and Paul liked each other. Mary Magdelene was demonized by the church on Dec.25, 591 by the pope at the time. Isaiah 53 I happen to have enough knowledge about to be certain in its reference to Cyrus and not Jesus. I do not need a prophet from centuries before Christ to predict Jesus in order for me to believe. The messiah was expected to restore the Davidic dynasty, not to be a savior as Christ was. If you look at when the Jews returned from Babylon, they no longer spoke of having a king because the king was always to descend from David. It was a political system that had changed.

[Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.]

No I'm a believer. I place my faith in Jesus dying for my sins. Not on whether or not Peter and Paul liked each other. Mary Magdelene was demonized by the church on Dec.25, 591 by the pope at the time. Isaiah 53 I happen to have enough knowledge about to be certain in its reference to Cyrus and not Jesus. I do not need a prophet from centuries before Christ to predict Jesus in order for me to believe. The messiah was expected to restore the Davidic dynasty, not to be a savior as Christ was. If you look at when the Jews returned from Babylon, they no longer spoke of having a king because the king was always to descend from David. It was a political system that had changed.

in regard to your assertion that Isa 53 had nothing to do with Jesus, that puts you in disagreement with the following books of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Acts, Romans, 1Cor, 2Cor, Gal, Eph, 1Tim, Titus,  Hebrews, 1Pet, and 1John.  yet you consider yourself a "believer"....got it 

[Derek]

yes I base my faith on Jesus dying on the cross not books written by pseudonymous authors who were speaking to particular crowds.

Mark- Gentile speaking to the Jews
Matthew- Jew speaking to Jews
Luke- Gentile to Gentile
John- NOT Gnostic but you can see how the secret wisdom and play on words with light and dark are beginning to form. The author likely came into contact with the followers of John the Baptist who were Essenes.

Look at the difference between the birth in Matthew and the birth in Luke. Both are trying to reach different audiences. The former, reaching the Jews by referring to the OT. The latter is reaching out to the poor.

[Free Palestine]

Also, IIRC John was written about seventy or eighty years after Jesus.

[Derek]

I put John in the 90's right before Revalation.