Was Judas part of God's plan?

[marco]

In one theological line Christ was sent by God to die for the sins of mankind. Bizarre though this is, let us accept that God's plan was for Jesus to die and then rise again. Had everyone accepted Jesus, they would have thwarted God's plan. Instead of curing a blind man or casting out devils or producing wine, had Christ channelled his miraculous energies into something so spectacular and beyond discussion and argument that Rome would have heard and bowed, then God's plan would have been ruined. Part of the divine plan seems to have been doubt and ambiguity.


But what part did Judas play? He was used as an instrument of betrayal; was it beyond Christ to prevent the suicide of Judas, if he had been so close to the man? We must then accept that Jesus is largely responsible for the preventable death of his friend.

Does the role of Judas cast doubt on the whole theology of Christ as redeemer and saviour?

[JehovahsWitness]

.... Jesus was unfortunately a guilty man..

Guilty of what? Certainly not guilty of blasphemy if that is what you are referring to. There is nothing he said or did that even came close to his being blasphemous.

In your modern view this may be so but the people who listened to him and were willing to stone him had a different view

I don't deny there were those that took a different view but I said there was there is nothing he said or did that even came close to his being blasphemous. The religious leaders had no right to arbitrarily declare something blasphemous just because they didn't like it. Much less to stone someone without due process.

There's no law that says one cannot claim to be older than Abraham, whatever reasoning they had for reacting as they did it certainly wasn't based on the scripture they claimed to follow as Jesus (who was present and knew the law better than they) demonstrated.



JW

[marco]

There's no law that says one cannot claim to be older than Abraham, whatever reasoning they had for reacting as they did it certainly wasn't based on the scripture they claimed to follow as Jesus (who was Jesus present and knew the law better than they) demonstrated.

There was a law against blasphemy. His statement about Abraham was offensive to devout believers, placing as it did Jesus above a renowned patriarch, but the addition of the emotive "I am" even today leads devout people to think Jesus is claiming Godhead. Regardless of what he wanted folk to understand, an obvious construction on his words is blasphemy against Yahweh.

If you are a follower of Christ you take it that he was speaking factually. Perhaps it would have been wiser to lead up to this stunning claim to give people a chance to swallow their shock. It comes over as blasphemy to a devout Jew.

[JehovahsWitness]

There was a law against blasphemy....

There most certainly was and this is what it said...

EXODUS 20:7

You must not take up the name of Jehovah your God in a worthless way, for Jehovah will not leave the one unpunished who takes up his name in a worthless way.

EXODUS 22:28
You must not curse God nor curse a chieftain among your people.

His statement about Abraham was offensive to devout believers, placing as it did Jesus above a renowned patriarch .... It comes over as blasphemy to a devout Jew.

That may well have been the case but offending sensibilities was not a capital offence and it certainly wasn't blasphemy. Jesus neither cursed God nor did he curse Abraham, so he did not commit the "offense " of blasphemy.




JW

[ttruscott]

In other words, the elect would be lost without the reprobate. That's quite a system God has developed.

Lost? How is this logical? GOD certainly has more resources than that. But according to HIS revealed character HE would choose the most beneficent, method to open the eyes /hearts of the sinful elect to their own deep desire to be holy which they had already given their (at least tacit) approval before they went off the rails. Life on this earth is that method.

[ttruscott]

No, it was BECAUSE he was picked by Jesus that he ended up where he was; he was part of the package.

No side stepping at all but straight out - all things are for the good of those that love HIM and are called to HIS purpose.

With everything predetermined, of course Judas was given to the job of betrayal because it fit his profile to be that person perfectly. We may be determined in this life but our lives are a perfect response to the decisions we made, reflecting our choices to be sinful.

[ttruscott]

A majority of Christians think he is God. What chance did poor Judas have?

Judas had the equal opportunity and ability as everyone else to chose to put his faith in GOD or to put it in the idea YHWH was a false god and a liar.... Becoming eternally evil by making a bad choice was no one's fault but his own. That his life reflects his chosen character in all things is just.

[ttruscott]

I believe Jesus loved someone else. Had he been interested in saving Judas, he had the power.

No sir. Power cannot create logical impossibilities nor does it give GOD the ability to break HIS promises. There is nothing about breaking a promise that is facilitated by power.

imCo,
when HE explained what our free will meant for us, HE had to have told us that to HIM our free will was sacrosanct, that HE would never go against it just because HE knew the consequences were inevitable.

It is useless to argue from the earthly experience of HIS manipulating men's choices and behaviour because the fact HE does this proves to me that once we chose sin, we lost our free will and there is no stricture against HIM going against a person's sinful will, just not their true free will they had before they sinned.

HE created us to find those who wanted by their free will to be married to HIM, living HIS ways, in the heavenly communion. The fulfilment of this purpose necessitated our free will which turn necessitated our ability to be able to reject HIM AND HIS purpose for us forever...the forever nature of the decison being most often rendered as they made themselves unforgivable.

Those who chose the unforgivable sin, that is, the sin that they can't free themselves from and from which they have forbidden GOD to ever cure, ie, their addiction to evil, effectively ended HIS love for them by this choice and they became subject to HIS wrath.

[ttruscott]

The point is that Judas was a mere pawn in the plan to have Christ die and return.

Mere is definitely not the right adjective to describe his being placed in the situation of inevitable malfeasance and betrayal. He was complicit with the plan of GOD since the day HE rejected YHWH as HIS LORD. The betrayal of Christ was in accord with his self chosen flawed character by which GOD predetermined his life choices and his end.

That he felt intense remorse must make us pity him and the role he was given.

IF he was in fact not unforgivable but could be brought to true remorse, repentance and redemption then he will indeed be saved from the consequences of his evil choices. The inference that his devotion to evil was so strong that it would take a sin of this magnitude to open his eyes to his guilty is startling...

But since there is nothing in the story to give us that impression, his guilt and the consequences of his guilt are his alone and being used to betray Christ to His death was in fact an expression of his sinful desires and the character flaws created by those desires and his past choices.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 28 by marco]

When plans were being made for Christ's stay on earth it was already decided Christ would NOT defend himself, that Judas would betray, repent and hang himself.

Why was Judas even necessary? If the plan was for Jesus to get himself killed as a sacrifice for humanity, surely it would have been more meaningful, not to mention considerate, if he simply presented himself to the Romans.

[benchwarmer]

[Replying to post 28 by marco]

When plans were being made for Christ's stay on earth it was already decided Christ would NOT defend himself, that Judas would betray, repent and hang himself.

Why was Judas even necessary? If the plan was for Jesus to get himself killed as a sacrifice for humanity, surely it would have been more meaningful, not to mention considerate, if he simply presented himself to the Romans.

Excellent point. Why is it, one has to wonder, why the god that created everything needs humans to get their hands dirty in order to accomplish anything?

Why didn't God simply:

1) Transport Jesus straight from heaven onto the Earth.
2) Have Jesus wander around for at least 200 years (i.e. longer than any human lifespan) performing feats that only a god could perform.
3) While Jesus was performing these miracles, have him also proclaim that God would take him in one great sacrifice at the time of God's choosing.
4) When the time arrived, God himself would 'kill' Jesus in whatever spectacular fashion he felt was required in order to consider this a useful exercise.
5) Jesus would be transported straight back to heaven in whatever spectacular fashion God felt would make his point.

Even better, rinse and repeat the above in a continuous cycle so that all mankind could be a witness to Jesus and his miracles and willingness to go through a death and resurrection to free the people from sin.

Instead what we have are poorly written stories that were obviously penned by men and always have to have people actually do anything to get anything done.