Jump to content
warrior12

Judas Iscariot

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Matthew 27 King James Version (KJV)

Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,

Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that.

Did Judas repented of his sin or  what the above verses can be seen as.   John McArthur wrote the following. Is he correct ?.  

"Judas’s remorse was not repentance of sin, as the King James version suggests. Matthew did not use metanoeo, which means a genuine change of mind and will, but metamelomai, which merely connotes regret or sorrow. He did not experience spiritual penitence but only emotional remorse. Although he would not repent of his sin, he could not escape the reality of his guilt. Genuine sorrow for sin (metamelomai) can be prompted by God in order to produce repentance (metanoeo), as Paul declares in 2 Corinthians 7:10. But Judas’s remorse was not prompted by God to lead to repentance but only to guilt and despair."

FULL ARTICLE:

https://www.gty.org/library/bibleqnas-library/QA0115/did-judas-repent

 

Edited by warrior12
  • Thumbs Up 3
  • This is Worthy 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to agree.

Verse 3. Then Judas--when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself. This shows that Judas did not suppose that the affair would have results in this calamitous manner. He probably expected that Jesus would have worked a miracle to deliver himself, and not have suffered this condemnation to come upon him. When he saw him taken, bound, tried, and condemned; when he saw that all probability that he would deliver himself was taken away, he was overwhelmed with disappointment, sorrow, and remorse of conscience. The word rendered repented himself, it has been observed, does not of necessity denote a change for the better, but any change of views and feelings. Here it evidently means no other change than that produced by the horrors of a guilty conscience, and by deep remorse, for crime at its unexpected results. It was not saving repentance; that leads to a holy life: this led to an increase of crime in his own death. True repentance leads the sinner to the Saviour: this led away from the Saviour to the gallows. Judas, if he had been a true penitent, would have come then to Jesus, confessed his crime at his feet, and sought for pardon there. But, overwhelmed with remorse, and the conviction of vast guilt, he was not willing to come into his presence, and added to the crime of a traitor that of self-murder. Assuredly, such a man could not be a true penitent. ~ Albert Barnes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really do believe that we should leave the judging to our Lord.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly.

Jesus even said so.

In his prayer for his disciples, Jesus said this, "While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled."  John 17:12

And Jesus calls him a devil.  Talking directly to the 12 disciples, Jesus said,  “Did I not choose you the twelve, and one of you is a devil?”

Judas' remorse was just a worldly sorrow of doing wrong.  Everybody - lost and saved - can have a guilty conscience.  The evidence of that is that he killed himself.

  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jayne said:

Exactly.

Jesus even said so.

In his prayer for his disciples, Jesus said this, "While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled."  John 17:12

And Jesus calls him a devil.  Talking directly to the 12 disciples, Jesus said,  “Did I not choose you the twelve, and one of you is a devil?”

Judas' remorse was just a worldly sorrow of doing wrong.  Everybody - lost and saved - can have a guilty conscience.  The evidence of that is that he killed himself.

Shalom, Jayne.

You should know that the word "devil" here is the Greek word "diabolos," one who "throws" accusations "through" another's reputation, a "slanderer." Yeshua`s not saying that Yhudah was an evil spirit, or even that he was possessed by an evil spirit (although he was). He was calling him a slanderer, one who slanders someone else.

The thesaurus has this entry:

slander

noun 

he could sue us for slanderdefamation (of character), character assassinationcalumnylibel (in print)scandalmongeringmalicious gossipdisparagementdenigrationaspersionsvilificationtraducementobloquy; lie, slur, smear, false accusation; informal mudslinging, bad-mouthing, smack talk; archaic contumely.

verb 

they were accused of slandering the ministerdefame (someone's character), blacken someone's nametell lies aboutspeak ill/evil ofsully someone's reputationlibel (in print), smearcast aspersions onspread scandal aboutbesmirchtarnishtaintmaligntraducevilifydisparagedenigraterun downslur; informal badmouthdistrash; formal derogate.

Choose whatever words you're most comfortable saying.

Regarding the Scriptures saying that Yhudah "repented himself" in Matthew 27:3, the Greek word is "metameleetheis" and means that he changed his mind about it; he next tried to undo what he had done by attempting to return the money. When they wouldn't take the thirty pieces of silver back, he THREW it down in the Temple, but like Esau, he "found no place for repentance"; that is, he couldn't undo the damage, no matter how hard he tried. Yeshua` lost that disciple, because Yhudah went out and hanged himself. He couldn't live with what he had done.

It's the same mentality that we have today with these hit-and-run pedestrian accidents. The runner thinks he can just ignore the accident, and it will just "go away." He pretends it never really happened; he thinks "I don't really know what I hit; it may have just been a deer. Yeah, it probably was just a deer." And, rather than stop and try to help the victim, he speeds away, hoping his deed will never be found out. "Be SURE your sin will find you out!" (Numbers 32:23.) If the police have to track the person down, it will be much worse for the runner, and if the victim dies because the driver did nothing to help that person, it will go worse still!

I live in the Tampa, Florida area, and I've noticed that hit-and-run accidents, whether they hit another vehicle, hit a bicycle, or hit a pedestrian, have been on the rise lately. It's really a STUPID mistake to run.

If you do something wrong, stop and take your lumps! You may be facing fines, law suits, and even jail time; it will RUIN YOUR DAY, but it will show that you have enough character to care, and you may save a life!

Was Yhudah sorrowful for his sin in betraying his Master? YOU BET! Will it be enough for Yeshua` to take him back in the afterlife? Can God forgive one who betrayed His only Son? YES! He does it EVERY DAY! Will it be enough for Yhudah to be redeemed? That's ENTIRELY UP TO GOD! All I'll say is, God is a God of second chances, and it's not up to us at all. So, we'll just have to wait and see.

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, God has already judged him. Judas brooded over his sin and committed suicide. His name was removed from the book of life, and another, (Matthias), took his place.

Judas, "by transgression" fell and his Bishopric was given to another, (Acts 1:25).

Murder is a death penalty sin, suicide is self murder, there's no repenting after death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Retrobyter said:

Shalom, Jayne.

You should know that the word "devil" here is the Greek word "diabolos," one who "throws" accusations "through" another's reputation, a "slanderer." Yeshua`s not saying that Yhudah was an evil spirit, or even that he was possessed by an evil spirit (although he was). He was calling him a slanderer, one who slanders someone else.

 

I never said that Jesus called Judas "the devil".  He called him "a" devil.  

And you've cherry-picked the definition of devil.  You must use the entire definition or nothing at all.

According to Strong's and Thayer's Greek Lexicon "devil" is

  • prone to slander, slanderous, accusing falsely;  a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer,

  • metaph. applied to a man who, by opposing the cause of God, may be said to act the part of the devil or to side with him

Yes, God is the God of second, third, and umpteenth chances.  And it's not like Judas didn't have a chance.  God didn't "make" him betray Jesus even though it was prophesied about in the Old Testament.

But taking all of the scriptures concerning Judas Iscariot - it's plan to see that he died having no relationship with God.  Here are a few more:

  • Jesus' words again - Matthew 26:24 - “The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born” 
  • Jesus' words yet again - John 6:64 - Speaking to the 12 - ""But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him."
  • Thumbs Up 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It so sad that Judas killed himself.   If he had not made the rash decision, Jesus would have forgiven him just like He forgave Peter and Jesus would have restored Judas.   Can you imagine what that would have done to Judas and what kind of apostle he would have been after having been forgiven? He might have been as passionate as Paul.   I believe Paul was the one God chose to replace Judas.    And God might have still appointed Paul regardless of how Judas ended up.

  • Huh?  I don't get it. 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

It so sad that Judas killed himself.   If he had not made the rash decision, Jesus would have forgiven him just like He forgave Peter and Jesus would have restored Judas.   Can you imagine what that would have done to Judas and what kind of apostle he would have been after having been forgiven? He might have been as passionate as Paul.   I believe Paul was the one God chose to replace Judas.    And God might have still appointed Paul regardless of how Judas ended up.

I've heard a lot of people make a connection between Judas and Paul.  I've never understood that.

It's clear as day that Matthias' replaced Judas.  Peter led the way on that and did it according to a godly protocol:

  • Peter used the Old Testament scriptures that showed that Judas had to be replaced.
  • They made qualifications that were important.
  • They prayed about it and asked God to choose which man should take Judas' place.
  • And even though we don't hear from Matthias again, the prayer was for one of the men who met the qualifications to take the "place in this ministry".  God chose and we can rightly infer that he did take his place in that ministry of the apostles.

I wish Judas had been truly saved, too.  But he wasn't.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Jayne said:

I've heard a lot of people make a connection between Judas and Paul.  I've never understood that.

It's clear as day that Matthias' replaced Judas.  Peter led the way on that and did it according to a godly protocol:

  • Peter used the Old Testament scriptures that showed that Judas had to be replaced.
  • They made qualifications that were important.
  • They prayed about it and asked God to choose which man should take Judas' place.
  • And even though we don't hear from Matthias again, the prayer was for one of the men who met the qualifications to take the "place in this ministry".  God chose and we can rightly infer that he did take his place in that ministry of the apostles.

I wish Judas had been truly saved, too.  But he wasn't.  

There is nothing to say that Matthias was God's choice to replace Judas.  The Bible does not state that explicitly.  You can infer that, but it is not stated, as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×