I’ve heard another interpretation along the lines of Judas, a member of the Sicarii who advocated violent attacks and uprisings against the Romans, was getting pretty fed up with Jesus’ lack of action re: the whole conquest thing, so he thought that if he put Jesus in a life threatening situation, Jesus would then have to finally bring out the big guns and save himself and probably kick out the Romans while he was at it.
I don’t have any cite for it, but I remember reading about a related problem the early missionaries (17th century-ish) to Japan encountered. After telling the local nobles the story of Jesus and the crucifixion, their reaction was that while both Peter and Judas had betrayed their master, only Judas had done the honorable thing. Peter was the shameful and cowardly one.
Since it was the purpose of Judas to betray Jesus then Christians should be thanking him in stead of scorning. Jesus(according to how he is quoted in the New Testament) was to be born, suffer for the sins of mankind, die and ressurect. He chose to let Judas Betray him and so the death penalty was approved by God (if one believes the writers).
Jesus accoring to the writers, only suffered for about 3 hours, and there are many innocent people who suffer great pain for long periods of time and have no idea when it will end,or if it is invain or not.
When I was a child I used to cry for poor Jesus during the lent rites in the church, as I aged, studied an observed the world around me I no longer think it was such a big deal. Jesus suffering was(if true) a choice he made, for other humans it was not.
Monavis
It seems to me that Jesus had a choice (“Father, let this cup pass from me”), but Judas had none-he was the unwitting agent in a chain of events, that he had no say in. So, is he desrving of damnation–or faint praise?
Fair enough. Perhaps we could discuss this another time. 
Well, as long as you’re quoting what Jesus said, you might pay attention to the verse about it being necessary for the Son of Man to be betrayed, but woe to him by whom the betrayal came.
Interesting. If someone had one of his kidneys cut out and donated it to me so that I would not die, I would consider that as being of all the more moment if he had a choice than if he did not.
The duration of the suffering is perhaps not important (though I wouldn’t talk too glibly about a mere three hours on the cross, if it were me). Maybe more to the point is that Jesus underwent a permanent transition from someone who could not die to someone who could die - and had. And he has all Eternity to remember it with absolutely unfailing recall.
You mean, apart from the flogging, beating, crown-of-thornsing and dragged-through-the-citying? And the whole, yanno, being dead part?
That’s leaving aside the oft-held belief that he spend the weekend in Hell.
.
What in the text gives you to think that Judas didn’t make his own choices?
.
No way. He acted with vile intentions, regardless of what the actual outcome was. As others have already emphasized, you don’t excuse a vile act simply because it inadvertently produced some good.
Yes, there are many people who have suffered worse and it was not of their choosing, Prisoners of War suffered as much, if not more, and Jesus had the opportunity to stop the suffering when ever he chose. And since no one was there we do not know if he suffered more than the other people who were crucified. Like a woman in labor he knew it would be over soon.
I think he would have accomplished a lot more if he stayed on earth and lived these past 2,000 years teaching etc., There would be no confusion as there is now over what some call truth, and others have a different spin on the Gospel writings
If he suffered to the full of his capacity then hell would not be worse.
Monavis
We do not know the real intention of Judas. If Jesus came to save all mankind he could have given himself up(with out betrayal by Judas) when he hid the first time. And according to many Christians there are people who will still be dammed if they do not follow their translation of the Bible.
Monavis
Of course, he’s been prepared for everything since then.
Re: the suffering of Jesus-
As Paul Thiroux points out in the Patagonia Express, the crucifixes in Latin America tend to be a bit more gory than those in the US. His theory was that there is much more suffering there, and a prettier Jesus, or just an empty cross, would provoke responses such as “eh, he didn’t get it so bad.”
As for the three days (or 36 hours) between the crucifixion and resurrection, during which Jesus descended into Hell, perhaps Hell works on a different clock than Earth. If a thousand years is a day to God, maybe a day is a thousand years in Hell.
Haven’t read the Bible, have you?
“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.” (Matthew 27:3) If Judas had been acting with the very noblest of intentions, he would NOT have been seized with remorse, and he most certainly would not have been so desperate as to kill himself. By his own actions, he knew that he had committed a vile, despicable act indeed!
Look Jesus knew everything that would happen. He even admonished Peter “I say to you, you will deny me THREE times before the cock crows”.
So, wouldn’t it have been nice of him to have taken Judas aside and said" listen friend , you must betray me, in order that the salvation of the world take place. I absolve you from your part in this; you HAVE to do this!"
Would that have satisfied the will of the Father?
There’s no cheating in Christianity. Even God can’t give you “permission” to do evil, and Judas was not compelled to do anything.
No, it would not have, for reasons that smiling bandit already gave.
Moreover, I think you’re missing a vital point that has been made throughout this thread – namely, that the evil intent was already in the heart of Judas! That alone makes his action evil, regardless of what the ultimate outcome was.
This really is not a difficult concept to grasp.
Actually, that doesn’t speak to whether his intentions were noble or not. He might have thought his intentions were noble and then had his mind changed - he realised he’d committed a despicable act, but that doesn’t preclude him honestly having good intentions beforehand.
Yes, but the differences in that account are simply not relevant to the issue at hand. Nowhere does the account in Acts say that Judas acted with the very noblest of intentions, feeling confident that he had served his Master well. Quite the contrary; while that account does not explicitly state that Judas killed himself in remorse, it most certainly seems to suggest that he did!