Can the Jews or Romans or even Judas be blamed for the death of Jesus?

[removeduser_426582376423734]

It is a very interesting question indeed. If Jesus came here to die for mankind, can those whose very existence was to complete this prophecy be evil? Surely Judas was there specifically to betray Jesus, and thus have Jesus sacrificed on the cross - for if not, Jesus would just live on and not show his divinity through the resurrection.

The crux of the matter is, can they be blamed? Someone had to kill Christ - Christians revel in the fact Jesus sacrificed himself. Can these people be demonized (anti-semitism is rife due to this even today) and tortured simply for enacting a seemingly divine command?

[Dayman]

Of course not, it' all just an excuse to persecute people outside the status quo.

[Blau&Gruen]

@Shyam Popat
Is this an ethical or a historical question for you? (because of the Thread)


I could give you a historical response, though not an ethical.

[Chaigidel]

@ shyam-- judas was basically jesus; judas was the honored servant; the greatest follower of jesus, and he did what he was told. Judas sacrificed himself for christ.

but of course it is simply hatred that allows for people to lash out at jews or what not for the "death of christ"

[Ummon]

@ shyam-- judas was basically jesus; judas was the honored servant; the greatest follower of jesus, and he did what he was told. Judas sacrificed himself for christ.

but of course it is simply hatred that allows for people to lash out at jews or what not for the "death of christ"

That is what the Gospel of Judas (the two or three remaining pages) would tell us, in truth, not reality or fact.

It is a very interesting question indeed. If Jesus came here to die for mankind, can those whose very existence was to complete this prophecy be evil? Surely Judas was there specifically to betray Jesus, and thus have Jesus sacrificed on the cross - for if not, Jesus would just live on and not show his divinity through the resurrection.

The crux of the matter is, can they be blamed? Someone had to kill Christ - Christians revel in the fact Jesus sacrificed himself. Can these people be demonized (anti-semitism is rife due to this even today) and tortured simply for enacting a seemingly divine command?

You see, if they wanted, they might have given him his crown as King of the Jews. We are all responsible for our actions.

I've read some theological debates about this, and I think I remember something about Peter being a greater betrayer than Judas. It presents the differences in the two men, in the fact that although Peter betrayed Jesus 3 times as opposed to Judas' one time, Peter also atoned for this mistake 3 times. (Peter, do you love me? Take care of my sheep dialogue) (note: you might say, oh Peter had a lesser magnitude of sin, but if we look into the context that Peter was one of Jesus' most loyal disciples, his denial of Christ is just about as evil as Judas' betrayal. and he did it three times to boot.)

The stark difference is that Judas' heart was in the wrong place in the first place, leading him to commit suicide over his guilt.
If Judas was simply a tool for the divine plan (and informed of which as the gospel of Judas alleges), then he should have instead asked for forgiveness from God, as well as await Jesus' ressurection. After all, Peter who denied Christ 3 times was also forgiven 3 times. But was this the case? No, Judas killed himself out of guilt.

As for the Jews and Romans who conspired to kill Jesus, well, Jesus made a statement about that. "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."

Judas despaired, Peter did ask for forgiveness. This is the main difference, which makes so that Peter was forgiven and Judas went to hell because he did suicide.

Besides, even if forgiven, one is still responsible: just responsible and forgiven.

[userfri3ndly]

Judas despaired, Peter did ask for forgiveness. This is the main difference, which makes so that Peter was forgiven and Judas went to hell because he did suicide.

Besides, even if forgiven, one is still responsible: just responsible and forgiven.

exactly my point. Which is why we really can't acquit Judas on some ground that he is supposedly just a pawn and irresponsible for his actions. His actions post-betrayal reveal his true nature.

[Bokks]

exactly my point. Which is why we really can't acquit Judas on some ground that he is supposedly just a pawn and irresponsible for his actions. His actions post-betrayal reveal his true nature.

Many now claim that those actions showed true faith and sacrifice.
They say that Judas dispaired because of the death of Jesus, but knew it had to be done, but Peter asked for forgiveness because he was a "weaker" man, not privy to true intentions.
Then again, Peter was eventually crucified upside-down...
Even that story, though, has Peter running from Rome to save himself and meeting Jesus on the Publican Bridge. When Peter asked why Jesus had returned Jesus responded that he was to die again, Peter asked him what he meant and Jesus said that he was first killed to save all of humanity (be that as it may) and now he must die for Peter because Peter was too weak to die for himself.
Peter lamented, returned to Rome and was crucified on an inverted cross so that he wouldn't die the same way as his master did, Jesus being the better man.

...
That, though, is interesting, since the whole point of crucifiction is that eventually you are tied from holding yourself up, let yourself drop and are suffucated from your own armed collapsing your lungs. Dping it upside down... doesn't seem like that'd happen, it just seeme like he'd hang there for a week until he starved to death. Or fell through his bonds and broke his head from a fall; any bonds can't be as strong...:hmmm:

[userfri3ndly]

Many now claim that those actions showed true faith and sacrifice....
...That, though, is interesting, since the whole point of crucifiction is that eventually you are tied from holding yourself up, let yourself drop and are suffucated from your own armed collapsing your lungs. Dping it upside down... doesn't seem like that'd happen, it just seeme like he'd hang there for a week until he starved to death. Or fell through his bonds and broke his head from a fall; any bonds can't be as strong...:hmmm:

Hmm, well I guess having your blood rushing to your head constantly as well as blood loss from your wounds, dehydration and such would help. Not to mention there would probably be some kind of pre-crucifixion torture involved as the soldiers tended to be quite violent, which would open up some wounds that could contribute to the death. It is also possible that birds could feast on your flesh while hanging on the cross. Many think that crucifixion is a simple death process, but it is actually a combination of many painful factors.

I still can't say that Judas' actions post-betrayal were that of faith. If he really was a faithful guy, he wouldn't have killed himself. Suicide can by no means translate to martyrdom, as it is considered a mortal sin. If he really had faith and was acting under precise orders and had previously consulted Jesus about the entire betrayal as the GoJ alleges, then surely he must have known that he'd have redemption just by asking. I find it more believable that Judas was too ashamed of what he had done to even ask for forgiveness anymore. If he really did love Jesus, I should expect that he'd at least understand Jesus' principles regarding faith and mercy.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

Its ethical. Many people demonize Judas for being the great betrayer, but was he really?

[Blau&Gruen]

We have no independant sources to truely conclude. It is hard to say for that reason what the ethical situation had been, in which members of this group came. It is possible that the treason of Judas Ishkariot was just an invention, to thematize the relation of a very small minority to a majority who hardly took notice of them.

In this perspective the "topos treason" might be an expression of how the followers of Jesus saw themselves in their isolation as an exposed group with a radical practice. I would therefore think "the so called treason" is more a kind of a self portrait than a true ethical situation. As you maybe know, there are sources who say that the followers of Jesus who lived in Jerusalem had to escape at the begin of the Jewish War to Pella. I am inclined to understand everything that has been written in such a context.

Religions are based on inventions and immaginations to say something about an experience. The idea that a person with the name Judas Ishkariot had been responisble for the death of the Christ of the Christians is immoral in itself and tragic in an ethical perspective and the perspective of a likely historic fiction, though, because over the centuries that came afterwards thousands of Jews lost their lifes, their properity, their homes and were denied basic rigths hence. To say no to unjustice and immoral ideas is the true ethical challenge.

[Bokks]

Excellent post, Blau.
... And others!

This issue has farther reaching consequences than merely the innocense of an entire race and religion, believe it or not, as it has shaped the very catholic church itself. We now know that Judas had written his own book of scripture, one to add to the four christians so adamantly adhere to. In it he wrote about the inner struggle of having to betray Jesus, and how He in fact knew and consoled him on this. It reveals that possibly Judas was the most faithful of all to betray his master so that He could complete His task.
As Blau&Gruen pointed out so very well, this could be heresay. It is incredible that the very person who would betray the Christ is named Judas, and of course the scripture that Judas had apparently written was written after the fact, so it could be a book of self-consolation and public un-damnation.
Either way, however, the racial persecution that has occured since then has been due to racial hatred, particularly from the fact that after Jesus had been resurrected Peter and Paul and their successors had apparently tried to convert the last of the Jews--who the early christians saw as cousins--who refused, and therefor were demonized by later generations, eventually the justification of this resided not in the Jews unwillingness to convert (since technically speaking that unwillingness would have upheld even the christians testiments to God) but because they "murdered the messiah".

So no, they can't be blamed. Doesn't change the fact that they still are, but it does take a lot of wind from under the wings of evangilistic anti-semetics.
... Not that that really matter.

[userfri3ndly]

Its ethical. Many people demonize Judas for being the great betrayer, but was he really?

I've read some theological debates about this, and I think I remember something about Peter being a greater betrayer than Judas. It presents the differences in the two men, in the fact that although Peter betrayed Jesus 3 times as opposed to Judas' one time, Peter also atoned for this mistake 3 times. (Peter, do you love me? Take care of my sheep dialogue) (note: you might say, oh Peter had a lesser magnitude of sin, but if we look into the context that Peter was one of Jesus' most loyal disciples, his denial of Christ is just about as evil as Judas' betrayal. and he did it three times to boot.)

The stark difference is that Judas' heart was in the wrong place in the first place, leading him to commit suicide over his guilt.
If Judas was simply a tool for the divine plan (and informed of which as the gospel of Judas alleges), then he should have instead asked for forgiveness from God, as well as await Jesus' ressurection. After all, Peter who denied Christ 3 times was also forgiven 3 times. But was this the case? No, Judas killed himself out of guilt.

As for the Jews and Romans who conspired to kill Jesus, well, Jesus made a statement about that. "Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."

[Ataegina]

theres many theories, and points of view, even some gospells claims judas have not betray jesus, even some people says judas was the most closer disciple....

in another point of view, this was jesus will, die for mankind, for mankind sins, also romans or jews, well they treat jesus like any another jew, he was spreading new ideas, wich was dangerous for the fargile jewish society of his time !!

They killed jesus !! You bastards !! j/k

[Last Roman]

no, not if Christians believe in an all-knowing and all-powerful God.

[Ataegina]

my question is, if here, each post people can get wrong and distorted the words, how can we trust in gospells wroten so many years after, also we need remind, theres some conflicts between early church factions, so bible its just the selected gospell from only 1 faction !!

judas was just a easy way to blame somebody for his death... also judas have feel guilt, but in wich way ? by betrayal? or just because he can't do nothing to save jesus from his death ?

[Chaigidel]

it was a common practice for when kings died the servants commited suicide.

judas was the only servant of that king; all the others fell in line because of jesus's and judas's sacrifices.-- judas alone loved jesus. before apotheosis ( among the apostles)

[Chaigidel]

again it was common practice for the loyal followers of any ancient king to commit suicide upon the masters death; it was not despair but loyalty that brought judas to hang himself

[ThiudareiksGunthigg]

again it was common practice for the loyal followers of any ancient king to commit suicide upon the masters death; it was not despair but loyalty that brought judas to hang himself

That's a great fantasy Chaig. You should write a Dan Brown-style novel or something.

Anyway, back to the actual history. Despite the idea that Jesus had meant to sacrifice himself, all the earliest gospels (the Gospel of Judas is too late to be relevant to what actually happened) do condemn Judas: very much so. This is a very good indication that the idea that Jesus' death was part of the plan all along was a post factum justification, that his death was not foreseen by him or anyone else and that afterwards his followers had to scramble to make some kind of sense of it and turn an obvious unexpected setback and defeat into a new hope and victory.

They did this by coming up with the idea that Jesus was the "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah and that he'd been intending to be crucified all along. That made Judas the agent of his sacrifice, but they couldn't bring themselves extend that idea to the point where they saw Judas as a good guy.

Thus the gospel paradox of Judas still being a disloyal creep even when what he did made this supposed "redemptive sacrifice" possible.

[removeduser_426582376423734]

That's a great fantasy Chaig. You should write a Dan Brown-style novel or something.

Anyway, back to the actual history. Despite the idea that Jesus had meant to sacrifice himself, all the earliest gospels (the Gospel of Judas is too late to be relevant to what actually happened) do condemn Judas: very much so. This is a very good indication that the idea that Jesus' death was part of the plan all along was a post factum justification, that his death was not foreseen by him or anyone else and that afterwards his followers had to scramble to make some kind of sense of it and turn an obvious unexpected setback and defeat into a new hope and victory.

They did this by coming up with the idea that Jesus was the "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah and that he'd been intending to be crucified all along. That made Judas the agent of his sacrifice, but they couldn't bring themselves extend that idea to the point where they saw Judas as a good guy.

Thus the gospel paradox of Judas still being a disloyal creep even when what he did made this supposed "redemptive sacrifice" possible.

Without the crucifixion, Jesus' divinity could never be shown through the Resurrection - without a doubt the single most important thing Jesus ever did. Without the Resurrection, Jesus was a holy man, or a magician. With it, he was the Son of God.

[Ummon]

again it was common practice for the loyal followers of any ancient king to commit suicide upon the masters death; it was not despair but loyalty that brought judas to hang himself

Beyond what has been said already: suicide is a sin regardless of the reasons, in Jewish canon as well. Life does not belong to the person, but to God.