English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Some one had to do the dirty deed, right. The Romans didn't know what he looked like. Then why does the church and the congragation look down on what he did.

2006-12-07 10:09:45 · 7 answers · asked by Mariberry 2 in Arts & Humanities History

7 answers

This has always been a fascinating subject to me. There have been some good articles and books on the subject, but they are far and few between.

There's a link to an article by Kurt Saxon called "In Defense of Judas" (a popular title for the subject). It is a modest work, though (being a self-described Atheist) it seems to be relatively objective.

Also below is a link to an interesting work by William Story. The book, entitled "A Roman lawyer in Jerusalem" (written in 1870), is a fictional story about a first-century Jewish lawyer who comes to the defense of Judas. Interesting read.

There's also an article by John Lindsay (written earlier this year) called "Defending Judas." It's a pretty good article, though unfortunately short.

By far the best work that covers this subject is Eric Butterworth's book "Discover the Power within You: A Guide to the Unexplored Depths." There is a thought-provoking chapter in that work detailing Judas and the role he played in Yeshua's death.

Also, although I have yet to see the validity of the text, what amounts to "The Gospel of Judas" was recently discovered. It may be able to shed some light on the subject.

2006-12-07 11:19:21 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

That's a good question. It's easy to look at it that way in hindsight. We know now that it had to happen. And I agree with you that people in our day and age should not judge (judge not lest ye be judged).

From a different standpoint though Judas knew that selling the Lord and Savior to the Romans for a crime concocted by the Sanhedrin was morally wrong. Yet he did it anyway. The lesson one can take from this is that the Lord will use all things to His purpose. He let's us choose our own path. He knows us so well that he is familiar with our choices of the past and can foresee what we will do. But if we don't do, we won't learn. Learning prepares us more and more to live with him after this life.

It doesn't change the fact that Judas committed a sin. Judas will still have to answer for that in the day of Judgement and we should avoid making similar (and all other) mistakes in our own life.

2006-12-07 10:19:04 · answer #2 · answered by akula83 2 · 0 0

Many churches and Christians look down upon Judas because they don't see the Judas in themselves. Then need an external villain, someone to blame, someone at whom to focus their misdirected hostilities.

But they don't see the Judas in themselves i.e., they don't see that it's their own sin that caused the necessity of Christ's death. Judas merely played a part in an outcome that had to happen for humankind to be forgiven of its sins, but it's humankind's sins that made his death necessary. Had not each one of us sinned, Christ would not have had to die. But it's a lot easier, and certainly feels better, to believe that someone out there is worse than we are, and that we can be proud we're not that person. That person, for many Christians, is Judas.

We'd like to think that, were we in the same situation, we wouldn't have betrayed Christ. That's a load of baloney, IMHO. Peter, whose faith allowed him to walk on water, denied Christ three times. Are we better than Peter, are we better believers? No, we just happen to have the benefit of hindsight. Take away that hindsight, and most of us would be in that crowd, choosing Barabas over Christ & calling for Christ's crucifixion.

Certainly Judas' betrayal of Christ is not a matter worthy of praise. But in our culture, where we are drawn to black-and-white, good guy/bad guy paradigms to explain everything, Judas certainly has been villainized far more than he ought to be. He's just another sinner like the rest of us, and he made a mistake.

2006-12-07 10:24:39 · answer #3 · answered by Dave of the Hill People 4 · 1 0

this was a extreme new idea and was probably a cross analysis of retrospectives that takes quantum leaps all over the board just to c what pops, there were no one with this insight before today drug culture and computers could map out this correlation for short inroads of understanding thees and thos primitive subliminal messages of modern fabrication was relatively unique to today's multi-tasking thoughts, until thirty years ago Judas was the name of practically the anti-Christ, Germans used ,every-generation before our has him as evil, only today's guilt ridden baby boomers have this complex-dialogue

2006-12-07 10:22:29 · answer #4 · answered by bev 5 · 0 0

Yes, Judas looks like a down apron. So soft and fluffy and it keeps you warm in the winter.

2006-12-07 10:12:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Okay -- we need a little spelling lesson.

Chi st --- correctly spelled is Christ
apron -- correctly spelled is upon.
congragation -- correctly spelled congregation.

It would be easier to take your question seriously when your words are spelled right. Plus, you have a stupid question -- I find it offensive.

2006-12-07 10:14:37 · answer #6 · answered by JB 4 · 0 1

I don't know, you make a very valid point

2006-12-07 10:11:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers