Judas Iscariot

[Anonymous]

I think LDS views of Judas are very one-sided, but I have read in other places discussions about him which go a little deeper.

If Judas Iscariot was entirely evil, and just a tool to bring the plan about, then he would have been spotted by the other disciples early on as a nasty piece of work. Presumably he had redeeming qualities which made him a valuable companion before the betrayal.

Also, I have heard great debates about why exactly Judas did what he did. Rather than the usual explanations of greed or devilishness, the one I find most convincing is that he wanted a political messiah, rather than just a spiritual one. Most Jews were thinking in these terms, and a century later Simon bar Kochba tried to play that role.*

So what was Judas thinking? Was he disappointed in what Jesus did? Did he think he would spur him into action? Did he wish to create a martyr as a figurehead for a future movement?

* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_bar_Kokhba

[Anonymous]

I think it was Elder Holland who mentioned recently in General Conference the idea that we can’t know fully why Judas did what he did. I really appreciated that reference, since I’ve read multiple explanations that all make perfect sense logically.

The fact that he hanged himself when he saw what actually happened is a key for me not to take a hardline view of him.

[Anonymous]

Frankly, I’m not even sure exactly what it is he did. Was it that hard to identify Jesus? At the time, he (Jesus) didn’t seem all that concerned about keeping anonymous, and in fact he seemed to be relatively well-known. Well, that’s beside the point. Clearly a betrayal of some kind was involved, but Judas seems to have been very sensible of having done something bad, and felt serious remorse for it. A literal reading of D&C 29:12 tells me he’s not that bad off.

[Anonymous]

It kind of runs parallel to the same conundrum of Satan and the The Plan of Salvation, or the Roman guards crucifying Jesus.

You can’t build an atonement story where Jesus is murdered (sacrificed) without a murderer (or executioners, aka the Romans). Why didn’t the Roman guards see all of Jesus’ glory and recognize him as their savior? If God “hid” this from them, that’s sort of problematic too in a lot of ways.

You also can’t have “free agency” without choice. So what would have happened if nobody rebelled against God? (Satan)

I come back time and time again to the observation that paradox is the juiciest part of Scripture. It just sends your mind and your heart spinning, asking questions, and stretching to grasp the meanings.

[Anonymous]

Hard to analyze a motive of an individual based on such a sketchy amount of information as contained in the New Testament. My first question would be did this event even take place, or is it myth or simply romanced into the narrative we have today.

[Anonymous]

Cadence wrote:

Hard to analyze a motive of an individual based on such a sketchy amount of information as contained in the New Testament. My first question would be did this event even take place, or is it myth or simply romanced into the narrative we have today.

I’m working on the basis that it did, but that the account is either misguiding, too thin or wrong. I’m not completely convinced by the account of his death for example – I think it quite likely that he did commit suicide if he realised just what he had done, but I don’t necessarily buy the story in Acts that his bowels burst out.

There is a possible hint to his motives in his name. Although the derivation of Iscariot is debated, one theory has it that the name derives from the Sicarii:

Quote:

a cadre of assassins among Jewish rebels intent on driving the Romans out of Judea. However, many historians maintain the Sicarii only arose in the 40s or 50s of the 1st century, in which case Judas could not have been a member.

Quote:

Was it that hard to identify Jesus? At the time, he (Jesus) didn’t seem all that concerned about keeping anonymous.

That’s true, but it does offer an interesting hint in itself. It gives me the impression that Jesus was excellent at speaking and dealing with crowds of people, but that he have had a very non-distinguished appearance. There is no hint of him wearing a special uniform, and he may have looked and dressed like many other people.

The kiss, IMHO, can be taken as either the ultimate betrayal, or a farewell from a misguided and confused man. It could also be an embellishment. However, it was actually very common for people to greet each other with kisses in those days. The French and Italians still do this, and some other Mediterranean people still do this.

[Anonymous]

There is the information in the Gospel of Judas that was found that says he was not a bad guy but was basically following instructions from Christ to facilitate the atonement.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5327692

[Anonymous]

I remember reading somewhere about Judas and Cain being sons of perdition, and then I read (I think in Miracle of Forgiveness) that Judas could not be a full son of perdition as he did not enjoy the full Holy Ghost and that Cain is the only confirmed son of perdition. I also have read statements from early church leaders (JS?) that imply that all apostates from the church are sons of perdition.

These disparities were some of my earliest contact with differing information from church leaders past present and future. It didn’t bother me much as it surely had nothing to do with my salvation. :angel:

My family was into musicals like Godspell and Jesus Christ Superstar among others. I remember the Judas portrayed in Jesus Christ Superstar to be conflicted. “Why are we the prophets, why are we the one’s, who know the sad solution and what must be done?” I had always thought that Judas was trying to force a confrontation wherein Jesus would reveal his divine nature and subdue his (and Israel’s) enemies, that Jesus was giving him confusing and sometimes contradictory signals, and that Judas very much regretted the outcome.

But I remember also bringing up the possibility of Judas being misunderstood as a youth at an EFY meeting and I was told quite matter of factly that he was evil. 😈

[Anonymous]

I kind of see Judas as playing a necessary role.

From the Wikipedia:

Quote:

The Gospels suggests that Jesus both foresaw (John 6:64, Matthew 26:25) and allowed Judas’s betrayal (John 13:27-28).[28] An explanation is that Jesus allowed the betrayal because it would allow God’s plan to be fulfilled.[29] In April 2006, a Coptic papyrus manuscript titled the Gospel of Judas dating back to 200 AD, was translated into modern language, and said to suggest that Jesus may have asked Judas to betray him,[30] although some scholars question the translation.[31][32]

John 13:27 “That thou doest, do quickly” has always sounded like a command to me. I take it that Jesus knew Judas needed to do what he did.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I remember reading somewhere about Judas and Cain being sons of perdition, and then I read (I think in Miracle of Forgiveness) that Judas could not be a full son of perdition as he did not enjoy the full Holy Ghost and that Cain is the only confirmed son of perdition. I also have read statements from early church leaders (JS?) that imply that all apostates from the church are sons of perdition.

Also unlike Cain, Judas was not a murderer, just a traitor.

On another note, interesting how we never hear much about the Roman (probably German actually) soldiers who nailed Jesus up. The Jews always get the blame. Could the soldiers (not including Pilate) have turned around and said “No” as well?

In fact, would it have been a sin NOT to nail Jesus up?

[Author]

Posts