I’m imagining the power of a Christianity where Jesus choked on a grape instead of being crucified.
That’s some trippy stuff.
If Satan couldn’t grasp that, why did he attempt to tempt Jesus in the desert, and all that jazz. Being brought up Jewish, I’ve never been able to understand why Christians are so upset by an adversary who is so flippin’ stupid. The burglars in Home Alone are Einsteins compared to this guy.
And don’t get me started on the torments of hell. That has to be God’s doing - what idiot would torture his disciples? As a character, Satan is less believable than a guy in a Pel Torro book.
Up until the point when Judas reached for bread at the same time as Jesus, you mean. That, in combination which Jesus’s prophecy immidiately prior, did mention Judas as good as by name, right in front of him, and in front of the other apostles too. (Which puts them in the running for Biggest Idiot for not grabbing and hogtying the guy right on the spot. They had no agenda in favor of the sacrifice occurring.)
From that point on until the betraying kiss, Judas is the man of the hour, and he carried out his job like a proper clockwork, despite knowing that he didn’t get away with it undetected. Sounds to me like an excellent argument for destiny and against free will, if he weren’t so obviously a highly fictionalized (if not outright fictional) character.
11 guys and a messiah slung over a mule, and choked on a grape, have me laughing hard enough to scare the cats. i’m imagining the hymns written about those events. what a hoot! “save us oh saviour, who was flung on an ass by thy disciples; and carted ah…way…!”
it is all supposed to be free will. even if destiny occurs the choice to accept destiny or not is up to the destined.
a. we have a woman visited by an angel and told she could bear a son and he will be the messiah. the woman can say yes or no. if yes, we go on to b. if no we go on to a different woman and try again.
b. she said yes, and a son is born, destined to be the messiah. the son is given a choice of accepting or not. if yes, we go on to c. if no we go back to plan a and try again with a different woman.
c. the son decides to be the messiah. he starts to preach and has followers. at any point he can decide to go his own way, or stay the course. if stay the course we go on to d. if not back to plan a.
d. the moment approaches when the messiah must make the ultimate sacrifice and die for his people. if he accepts the sacrifice we go on to e. if not back to plan a (again!)
e. there is amoung his followers one who thinks he has a better way of getting things done. he can set things into action. he can bring the showdown. if he decides to push the showdown we go on to f. if he doesn’t we go on to e.1.
e.1 follower decides not to go to the high priests. high priests come up with a plan on their own, or another follower aids them, somehow the showdown happens.
f. messiah is sacrificed. follower is guilt ridden, decides he has done something unforgivable , ends it all.
there ya have it, choices galore.
when i was a kid and a priest once said “how do you know mary was the only woman approached by the angel?” there may have been others who said “no”. we only know about her because she said yes, and jesus said yes.
ever since i have wondered about who else in the b.c. world could have been the messiah but chose not to be. kinda fun thing to do. especially given the way the temptation of christ by the devil is written. could a big player in b.c. have said, “okay, i’ll go with world domination. that sounds good to me.”?
This works great for the big picture, but still stumbles on the details. What if, after Jesus predicted that his betrayer would reach for bread at the same time with him, Judas had had the brain cells to think, “Wow, I need to be careful not to do that, lest I reveal my plans. Maybe I should just avoid the bread entirely for the rest of the meal, just in case.” Would one of the other apostles have reached at the same time then, and risen to the task of being the betrayer?
(And imagine all the statues of giant, slightly quished grapes mounted behind the altars of churches, and atop their spires…)
Unfortunately, both you answers are wrong. The answer to the first is 1. The answer to the second is, “Judas did what he wanted and paid the price.”
Ah, that’s the problem. Satan isn’t stupid. He’s so smart he’s smarter than anyone else. He strong, too. He’s so strong he thinks he’s stronger than anyone else. He should know that he’s not, but he won’t believe it. Satan is essentially a sociopathic narcisist. Nobody else matters to him. He doesn’t have “disciples”. He just want to drag everyone and everything down to the same scum-sucking level as himself.
Yeah well, Judas was pretty much screwed by the dining arrangements. History doesn’t record Judas’ thoughts following the prophecy when he noticed that he alone couldn’t reach one of the other loaves of bread on that long table. 
I’ve always loved Kazantzakis’ take on the story.
It’s really easy to read “Truly I say to you, that one of you shall betray me.” as a nomination, not an accusation.
(particularly in light of “It’s interesting that in this book {Gospel of Judas} the Greek word that was elsewhere translated into English as “betrayal” is actually a more neutral word that means “to hand over.””*)
CMC +fnord!
- From an interesting interview with Elaine Pagels on the subject in general and the Gospel of Judas in particular.
Thanks. Very informative.
Well, that’s OK. You plainly find the faith of your forefathers more reasonable, and adhere to it.
Actually, no. I’m an atheist now.
That’s also what I have been taught.
Despite that, I found from an early age the fate of Judas to be blatantly unjust, for the reasons mentioned in this thread (“he had to betray Jesus, anyway, didn’t he?”). It might be why I was told about his suicide being his real sin, I don’t remember. In any case, I always have had since a positive view of Judas. He’s probably my preferred character in the gospels (Peter betrays, the other apostles don’t understand what they’re told most of the time, Saul was a persecutor, etc…). Even though I also like the no-BS Thomas, and the fatherly figure of Joseph.
What I’m seeing in this thread is a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of Jesus;
Jesus’s primary reason for being crucified wasn’t that Judas betrayed him. The primary reason was that all of humanity had betrayed God the father. Humanity’s betrayal was what made necessary the crucifixion; not a petty betrayal from Judas. The justice inherent in God made necessary the crucifixion; the Grace of God would lead to the ressurection.
There is a long history of “Judas hating” in Christianity. Personally, I see Judas’ betrayal as tragic but minor. Yes, he sold Jesus to his death. But Jesus’ death was necessary because of the sins of all humans, and if it hadn’t been Judas it would have been any one of the rest of us.
I see Judas as a tragic figure, but I don’t hate him. He made a few awful mistakes, but you know, “there but for the Grace of God…”
Ah, yes. Well, at least the religion of your forefathers served you well enough to deduce that Christianity was teh retardz, anyway. 
I hereby repent of this peevish comment.
According to the New Testament,Jesus knew he was going to die, there was a time he hid when the people came for him. He said his time had not come yet. He knew he would come back to life in 3 days (although from Friday after noon to early Sunday morning is not really three days) So I do not think it was a very big sacrifice. According to the writings of Judas( recently found) He and Jesus had a plan for this to be done. And also the New Testament qoutes Jesus as thanking the father that all had been saved except the son of perdition.
If my child said," I am going to die on Friday afternoon but I will be back on Sunday moring" I would ask," Do you want me to fix you some breakfast?
Monavis
The Gospel of Judas nowhere purports to have been written by Judas. Its champions did not make this claim. Also, it’s recently been revealed that sloppy translation work & a hurried publicity campaign by National Geographic resulted in total misinterpretation of the GoJ. Judas is not portrayed as a hero & is disdained, not praised, by Jesus.
No one said anything else (but some have come a little close) : these are not new ideas: the Canites a Gnostic Sect in the Second Century apparently believed that Judas was acting in Secret in concert with Jesus. Ireneus is writing stuff relevant to this thread against them within ~130ish years of the events in question.
Also, the Gospels all make an important point that is often lost: Judas seeks out the High Priests - they do not blackmail him, their agents don’t “pssst” at him from an alley. In Matthew and Mark he does it on his own because he is a dick, in John and Luke a devil or evil spirit enters him and he does it. In all the accounts he goes to them. Even today if film and books etc. this point is sometimes muddled.
Fascinating. So if you know you’re going to be up and about on Sunday morning, being raped on Friday is no big deal either?
Thanks for the recantation. However I have noted that not being brought up in the general indoctrination, it is easier for me to treat Christianity in the same way Christians treat Shinto, Hinduism, and cargo cults - worthy of respect, but fundamentally flawed. I might see Judaism as more absurd and not just incorrect if I weren’t brought up in it. More on this would be a hijack. But the effect of upbringing and the surrounding culture on what seems reasonable in religion is an interesting subject.