Is suicide of Judas justified?

[dattaswami]

Judas betrayed the human incarnation. Judas may be an ordinary human being or may be the servant of Lord who belongs to the innermost circle. Thus there are two possibilities. Let us examine the scripture in the light of both the possibilities. If he is an ordinary human being, he shall be punished by death given by the judgement or he shall punish himself by committing suicide. The latter part of punishment was advised by Lord Jesus Himself. Jesus told that it is better himself to cut ones own sinful hand than falling in the eternal fire.

If the human being is a realised soul, he will follow the instruction of Jesus and will commit suicide. But if the human being is like an animal, he will betray the Lord and go away with the bribe. For such a fellow, the judgement in the court is required in this world. If he escapes the judgement here, he will certainly go to the liquid fire. Now Judas proved himself as a realised soul. According to Jesus, if you punish yourself for your own sin, you need not go to the hell. In Hinduism also, Manu Smruthi says ‘the sinner punished by the king in this world gets rid of his sin and goes to heaven.’ (Rajabhih Dhruta Dandastu …. Manu Smruthi).

Even from the court of law, we know that a single crime cannot have two punishments. Therefore if you take Judas as an ordinary human being, then also, he need not go to hell. Now if you analyse the case, in the path of second possibility, the devotee of the Lord acted in that bad role and punished himself for his own sin. In that case he has given the message to the world and entered the inner circle of the Lord after playing his due role. In both these possibilities, the scripture applies in toto. The conclusion of both the possibilities is only that one should not betray the Lord in human form.

If one betrays the creator it is better that he ends his life and join the list of unborn persons. This is the meaning of the statement of the scripture. Especially in the case of Judas, he became the disciple of Jesus for sometime. Betraying the spiritual preacher, who is the Lord in human form (Satguru) is the highest sin. No other way of repentance is justified. Betraying an ordinary human being itself is the highest sin. Betraying the Lord is higher than the highest sin. This shows the purity of the Lord and the importance that should be given to the Lord.

[Lotan]

The conclusion of both the possibilities is only that one should not betray the Lord in human form.

Tony Soprano would have seen it coming. What happened to Jesus? Can you ask him?

[melikio]

If one betrays the creator it is better that he ends his life and join the list of unborn persons. This is the meaning of the statement of the scripture. Especially in the case of Judas, he became the disciple of Jesus for sometime. Betraying the spiritual preacher, who is the Lord in human form (Satguru) is the highest sin. No other way of repentance is justified. Betraying an ordinary human being itself is the highest sin. Betraying the Lord is higher than the highest sin. This shows the purity of the Lord and the importance that should be given to the Lord.

IF God's love isn't greater than we imagine or interpret, what hope do ANY of us have?

Judas was likely taken by the same faults MANY "Chrisitians" possess today. In other words, people who are followers of Jesus, do offend and betray Him regularly.

I guess after nearly 40 years of feeling doomed, the fear became rather pointless to me. And the Bible supports the spiritual reality that people (humans) infrequently do "right" by God (Jesus).

The Judas-fault, is something that I believe exists within every person who claims to be a Christian. Due to the "record" Judas stands out for obvious reasons. What we DO NOT have to make an absolutely complete assessment, is what was in Judas' heart/mind or what Jesus actually thought of the whole issue.

Honestly, I certainly wouldn't want to be in Judas' shoes for several reasons; and I'd actually be more afraid of the Apostles attitudes toward me (once they found out). I'm nearly certain that unless Jesus stopped it, Peter would have "hurt" Judas for doing that. (Just some speculation for the fun of it.)

But the reality is that we DO NOT have certain parts of the puzzle. So, to me the greatest meaning behind the whole Judas thing, is that we should be true and upfront about who/what we are as human beings. I mean, what if Judas had told Jesus that he just wasn't "feeling" it? That would be interesting to see Judas admit that he wasn't really believing or trusting Jesus.

In a world where people are so often TOLD and PRESSURED that they must/should "believe", I think the point of letting Jesus and the people around you know that you aren't where they are in "faith" or "spirituality" gets lost. People walk around often pretending (fronting) to be holy or religious.

The Judas "suicide" doesn't seem justified to me, and I believe Jesus DID forgive him; also that He was grieved due to the fact Judas was dearly LOVED by the Savior. Jesus knew about Judas before He met him; yet I have little doubt that Judas was "forgiven" in the end. I can't prove that, but that's what I come up with when I look at the character of Jesus. We may not forgive Judas, but I think/believe Jesus surely did (due to the LOVE within His person).

-Mel-

[Columbus]

Judas betrayed the human incarnation. Judas may be an ordinary human being or may be the servant of Lord who belongs to the innermost circle.

It is possible to betray a human, because we have such limited power of perception. We can easily be fooled by another human, because we don't know what they are thinking or going to do. Betraying God is simply not possible.
Anyone who was chosen to be one of God's twelve Apostles is hardly "ordinary". The only real question here is this. Was Judas an innocent pawn, or was he used by God with knowledge of what was expected from him? Jesus picked the Apostles. Either He picked Judas for The Job, or else He was fooled into trusting a human and thereby provided Salvation by accident.
The idea that Judas could fool God into providing salvation for the human race is goofy. But that is exactly what traditional christianity teaches. Attributing human limitations to God, in order to make the story coherent, simply makes the image of God incoherent for the sake of a story.

Tom

[1John2_26]

dattaswami wrote:
The conclusion of both the possibilities is only that one should not betray the Lord in human form.

Tony Soprano would have seen it coming. What happened to Jesus? Can you ask him?

Lotan,

This is where atheists find my support. Have at it. If you need money PM me.

Columbus wrote:
The only real question here is this. Was Judas an innocent pawn, or was he used by God with knowledge of what was expected from him? Jesus picked the Apostles. Either He picked Judas for The Job, or else He was fooled into trusting a human and thereby provided Salvation by accident.
The idea that Judas could fool God into providing salvation for the human race is goofy. But that is exactly what traditional christianity teaches. Attributing human limitations to God, in order to make the story coherent, simply makes the image of God incoherent for the sake of a story.

Of course this is wrong. All "Christian" theology comes from Israelite scripture. They (the Israelites) believe and even wrote that God was "a man" that wrestled with "Israel." And that God can dwell in a tent too. Even have a celebration of it. Sukkot.

The Gospel story is very "coherent."

[McCulloch]

Jesus picked the Apostles. Either He picked Judas for The Job, or else He was fooled into trusting a human and thereby provided Salvation by accident.
The idea that Judas could fool God into providing salvation for the human race is goofy. But that is exactly what traditional christianity teaches. Attributing human limitations to God, in order to make the story coherent, simply makes the image of God incoherent for the sake of a story.

Tom, why then do you continue to identify yourself as Christian?

[Columbus]

Tom, why then do you continue to identify yourself as Christian?

Usually I don't. In a place where I feel confident that people hear what I actually say, rather than making assuptions about what I mean, I will do so. Places like DC&R forum, for instance. Normally I would deny being a christian, because most people assume that christianity is a theological position, not a moral one. I disagree. Jesus' Message was about how to live your life. There are people who live for Jesus' Message, without believing in the christian theology. Gandhi is an example. There are people who trumpet the theology, but apparently have no understanding of the Message. Reverend Fred Phelps comes to mind.
The thing is, christian morality and christian theology are two different things. The morality works for me, but the theology is bogus. No-one knows what Jesus said about anything. We don't even know who was claiming to quote Him when they wrote the New Testament. I don't care where the Parables, the Sermon on the Mount, etc. came from. I attribute them to Jesus, and I don't worry about the details. I don't try to live my life according to Jesus' Message because I think He is God. I do it because it gives me a better life. It's the right thing to do. I don't claim to know anything important about God. So I'm not a christian theist. I'm not claiming to be a saint or anything. But I try to rise to Jesus' Challenge. I think that people are christians to the extent that they do that, and those who don't much aren't particularly christian. No matter what they believe they know about God.

Tom

[Columbus]

Quote:
Columbus wrote:

The only real question here is this. Was Judas an innocent pawn, or was he used by God with knowledge of what was expected from him? Jesus picked the Apostles. Either He picked Judas for The Job, or else He was fooled into trusting a human and thereby provided Salvation by accident.
The idea that Judas could fool God into providing salvation for the human race is goofy. But that is exactly what traditional christianity teaches. Attributing human limitations to God, in order to make the story coherent, simply makes the image of God incoherent for the sake of a story.

Of course this is wrong.

You don't actually say why you think I'm wrong. You barely refered to my post at all. You made a batch of vague assertions, some demonstrably wrong, and that's all.

All "Christian" theology comes from Israelite scripture.

No it doesn't. No Trinity, Heaven, or Redemption through Divine Sacrifice is taught in the Original Testament. Although one might expect Adam and Eve to know about such basic theology as the Trinity, there is no mention of it in Genesis.

They (the Israelites) believe and even wrote that God was "a man" that wrestled with "Israel."

This story from Genesis contradicts Exodus. The author of Exodus claims that Moses claims that God said that no-one could look upon His face and live. Now no-one can see Him at all. While it's possible that this is all somehow true, it's much more likely that different authors made up things they and their audience wanted to believe were true. Rather like when you made up the bit about Eve and the serpent having "an in depth conversation". But the different Bible authors came up with different stories because they were not interested in the literal truth, and had no way of knowing what it was.

And that God can dwell in a tent too. Even have a celebration of it. Sukkot.

The Festival of Booths is a celebration of Israelites surviving forty years in the desert. None of the three top Googles of Sukkot even mention "God dwelling in a tent".

You cannot say that all ancient Israelites believed that Scripture was literal history or that God resided in the Ark. While I am sure that some did, I am also confident that some were more sophisticated than that. Just like today, I'm sure that some were more given to superstition and some more aware of how much they didn't know. Some prefered to believe that the world was simple and known, and all the answers necessary can be found in a book. Others were smart enough to be aware of their own ignorance.

The Gospel story is very "coherent."

You can say this as often as you want. But since you can't even describe the details, like Judas' cause of death, much less the huge contradictions, like God requiring a Sacrifice of Himself to placate Himself, you aren't very convincing.

Tom

[kman]

Judas betrayed the human incarnation. Judas may be an ordinary human being or may be the servant of Lord who belongs to the innermost circle.

It is possible to betray a human, because we have such limited power of perception. We can easily be fooled by another human, because we don't know what they are thinking or going to do. Betraying God is simply not possible.
Anyone who was chosen to be one of God's twelve Apostles is hardly "ordinary". The only real question here is this. Was Judas an innocent pawn, or was he used by God with knowledge of what was expected from him? Jesus picked the Apostles. Either He picked Judas for The Job, or else He was fooled into trusting a human and thereby provided Salvation by accident.
The idea that Judas could fool God into providing salvation for the human race is goofy. But that is exactly what traditional christianity teaches. Attributing human limitations to God, in order to make the story coherent, simply makes the image of God incoherent for the sake of a story.

Tom

Judas did not fool Jesus into providing salvation. Judas was picked because everyone in the group had a job to do and that was Judas' job. It had nothing to with fooling God.

[The Nice Centurion]

[Replying to dattaswami in post #1]
But for all christians suicide is an enormous heavy sin.

When you say " If one betrays the creator (lame creator who gets fooled that easy) it is better for him to kill himself and join the unborn. ", do you mean by that that Judas suicide was not a sin?