Could God have forgiven and saved Judas?

[Strong in Him]

While it is often stated that Judas hanged himself shortly after returning the 30 pcs of silver that presents a contradiction ….as scripture has Judas alive up until the time Jesus was taken up.

If Judas had seen the resurrection, why would he have taken his own life?
Yes - if he had met with Jesus and Jesus had criticised, blamed and condemned him; but not otherwise. Peter had denied Jesus, with curses, and yet was fully restored by Jesus.
Judas took his own life because he had condemned an innocent man, and was not expecting the resurrection. But then, none of them were.

It is because of this one verse in Matthew we have always thought that Judas immediately went out and hanged himself, but the verse in 1Co 15:5-7 and the records (together) in both Luk 24:33-36 and Jhn 20:20-24 show Judas being present after the resurrection,

Luke 24:33 says "they returned and found the 11" - no contradiction there.
In John 20:24: 12 had been called, and they had been known as the 12. The text does not say that there were 12 disciples gathered after the resurrection; so no, it does not show Judas being present.

Luk 24:33-36 – both these accounts Luke & John are linked….to save space.

Can you prove that was the reason?
You know that John's Gospel was written many years after Luke's?

Jhn 20:20-24 You need to read both to make the connection and see who is missing.

John 20:24 mentions the 12; yes. But it does NOT say that all 12 were present.
Like I said, the disciples were known as the 12. Nowhere in this passage does it say that Judas was delighted when he saw the risen Christ. Therefore, we cannot assume it.

When we run across something that doesn’t fit or appears to contradict itself, we must look in one of the above four categories; in this case it has to be “misunderstanding” of the words “hanged himself” in Mat 27:5

Or, reading into the text and assuming that because Thomas is referred to as one of the 12, that must mean that all 12 were present after the resurrection.
Acts 1:14 lists those who were in the upper room after the ascension - no Judas. So Matthew says that he hanged himself before the crucifixion, and 50+ days later, Acts says that he is not there and not alive.
You seem to be saying that he HAD been alive and met the risen Lord - and then you have to play with words to explain the "contradiction".

There is no textual evidence to show that Judas met with the risen Christ.
If he had done, don't you think Jesus would have had something to say to him? He spoke to, and restored, Peter - why would he not have wanted to restore Judas? Jesus had chosen Judas to be a disciple, and Judas had seen all of his miracles and heard his teaching.
And if Judas HAD met, and seen, the risen Christ, why would he have taken his own life?

 

[sandman]

If Judas had seen the resurrection, why would he have taken his own life?
Yes - if he had met with Jesus and Jesus had criticised, blamed and condemned him; but not otherwise. Peter had denied Jesus, with curses, and yet was fully restored by Jesus.
Judas took his own life because he had condemned an innocent man, and was not expecting the resurrection. But then, none of them were.

Luke 24:33 says "they returned and found the 11" - no contradiction there.
In John 20:24: 12 had been called, and they had been known as the 12. The text does not say that there were 12 disciples gathered after the resurrection; so no, it does not show Judas being present.


Can you prove that was the reason?
You know that John's Gospel was written many years after Luke's?

John 20:24 mentions the 12; yes. But it does NOT say that all 12 were present.
Like I said, the disciples were known as the 12. Nowhere in this passage does it say that Judas was delighted when he saw the risen Christ. Therefore, we cannot assume it.

Or, reading into the text and assuming that because Thomas is referred to as one of the 12, that must mean that all 12 were present after the resurrection.
Acts 1:14 lists those who were in the upper room after the ascension - no Judas. So Matthew says that he hanged himself before the crucifixion, and 50+ days later, Acts says that he is not there and not alive.
You seem to be saying that he HAD been alive and met the risen Lord - and then you have to play with words to explain the "contradiction".

There is no textual evidence to show that Judas met with the risen Christ.
If he had done, don't you think Jesus would have had something to say to him? He spoke to, and restored, Peter - why would he not have wanted to restore Judas? Jesus had chosen Judas to be a disciple, and Judas had seen all of his miracles and heard his teaching.
And if Judas HAD met, and seen, the risen Christ, why would he have taken his own life?

You have accused me of reading into the text and playing with words … but on the converse you have done exactly that.

All I have done is put the gospel accounts together… you on the other hand have made excuses for God not being able to count asserting that He uses word capriciously in effort to back up what religion (through gospel harmony) has fed us over the years. If this was the only area that gospel harmony had gotten wrong that would be an anomaly …but there are about eight things that surround the crucifixion that are skewed because of harmony.

I believe there are around 27 accepted forms of gospel harmony in theology …none of them are in harmony with each other …. and all of them have to leave out scripture or make up excuses as to why other scripture contradicts their belief…. This can all be traced back to Tatian.

If we truly believe that the Word of God is God breathed and that it was received by revelation of/from Jesus Christ, then we have to agree that the Word of God is perfect, without errors. The gospels were written by men of God by way of revelation, but the author is God, and if we have an imperfect Word what does that say about God?

The only thing I speculate on is the word hanged … asserting that apanchomai may in fact be misrepresented as death by hanging, rather than “to choke with grief”. ((And consider the made up stories about how the hot sun and branch broke etc, etc, ….so religion could make it fit with Act 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.)) Impaling oneself on a sharp instrument such as a sword or stake was suicide in fashion common to his times and that way we don’t have to make up stories.

Acts 1:13 &14 would not include Judas as the pronoun used in that verse is related to it’s closest associated noun ....which changed from they/them referring to the 12 apostles whom He had chosen (in verses 1:2 through 1:10.) to Ye men of Galilee as I stated in my post. Judas was the only one who was not a Galilean he was from Kerioth, a town in Judea. So the they/these in Act 1:13 is referencing “Ye men of Galilee”.

And you didn’t bring up 1Co 15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

Did Jesus make a mistake when He gave this revelation to Paul?

 

[Strong in Him]

You have accused me of reading into the text and playing with words … but on the converse you have done exactly that.

No, I've said that nowhere in the NT does the text say that Judas saw Jesus after the resurrection; that he saw the risen Christ.

All I have done is put the gospel accounts together… you on the other hand have made excuses for God not being able to count

"Made excuses for God not being able to count"??
I have done nothing of the sort.

asserting that He uses word capriciously in effort to back up what religion (through gospel harmony) has fed us over the years.

I don't even understand that sentence - I certainly never used it.

If we truly believe that the Word of God is God breathed and that it was received by revelation of/from Jesus Christ, then we have to agree that the Word of God is perfect, without errors. The gospels were written by men of God by way of revelation, but the author is God, and if we have an imperfect Word what does that say about God?

The word of God is not imperfect.

The only thing I speculate on is the word hanged … asserting that apanchomai may in fact be misrepresented as death by hanging, rather than “to choke with grief”.

And yet the Pharisees would not take back the money that Judas threw at them because it was blood money, Matthew 27:6. True, they could have been referring to Jesus' blood, But Acts 1:19 says that the field they bought was given its name due to Judas' blood - his death.

Acts 1:13 &14 would not include Judas as the pronoun used in that verse is related to it’s closest associated noun ....which changed from they/them referring to the 12 apostles whom He had chosen (in verses 1:2 through 1:10.) to Ye men of Galilee as I stated in my post. Judas was the only one who was not a Galilean he was from Kerioth, a town in Judea. So the they/these in Act 1:13 is referencing “Ye men of Galilee”.

No - Acts 1:13 lists the 11 Apostles who were present in the room with Peter. Judas Iscariot is not mentioned - clearly, because Peter explained that he had died and they needed to choose a replacement.

And you didn’t bring up 1Co 15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

But it doesn't say that that included Judas.
Maybe he didn't know, at that point, that Judas had died, or maybe he is referring to "the 12" because that's what they were always known as.
And before you say I am reading into the text - no more than you are by saying that 1 Corinthians 15:5 shows that Judas was still alive.

You haven't answered my questions about why, and when, Judas took his life AFTER the resurrection.
The facts are; Matthew reported that Judas took his own life. The first chapter of Acts tells us how the Apostles elected someone to replace Judas, because he had taken his own life. (It's possible that Luke wrote Acts before Matthew wrote his Gospel.)
There is zero evidence to show that Judas did not die when Matthew said he did, but a couple of weeks later, AFTER he had seen that Jesus was no longer dead, but alive.

Did Jesus make a mistake when He gave this revelation to Paul?

Did the Holy Sprit make a mistake when he inspired Matthew to write of Judas' suicide, and that the Pharisees bought a field with the blood money, which agrees with Acts 1:19?

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Judas was / is possessed by Satan (Luke 22:3 / John 13:26–27).
Judas hung himself in that state and went to the abyss (Acts 1:25 / Revelation 20:1–3).
He will then be thrown into the eternal lake of fire (Revelation 20:10) prepared for the devil and his followers (25:41).

Judas would not have been saved. Jesus said:

Mark 14:21 The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born."

The problem with Judas was that he choose sin over God:

John 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.

Jesus showed that when He chose Judas, he was already classed as a devil.

John 6:70-71 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?" He spoke of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, for it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve.

Judas had previously rejected God in His life. He had outpaced the long-suffering of God. So God used him for a negative purpose.

Rom 9:21-22 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,

 

[Strong in Him]

Judas would not have been saved.

We don't know that.

Jesus said:

Mark 14:21 The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born."

I imagine that, by the end, Judas was wishing that he hadn't been born. That's why people seek to end their own lives - sheer desperation.
Judas knew that he had betrayed an innocent man. There is a theory that Judas may have done this to try to force Jesus' hand, declare himself to be the Messiah and lead a rebellion against the Romans. From his point of view he had failed. Jesus was being arrested and led away to his death.
What he didn't grasp was that a) this was part of God's plan and had been prophesied, b) God would raise him from the dead.

The problem with Judas was that he choose sin over God:

Just like Adam, Jacob, David, Solomon etc etc had done; just like we all do.
The problem with Judas was that he wasn't expecting the resurrection - none of them were. And his guilt and despair were too much.

Jesus showed that when He chose Judas, he was already classed as a devil.

No, he wasn't.
Otherwise you are saying that Jesus deliberately chose someone evil - and allowed this evil person to see his miracles, hear his teachings and go out with the others to proclaim the Gospel and drive out demons, Luke 9:1, Yet we know that Satan cannot drive out Satan, Mark 3:23.

Judas had previously rejected God in His life. He had outpaced the long-suffering of God. So God used him for a negative purpose.

Sorry, not Scriptural.

Jesus came to earth to die. Judas betrayed Jesus.
God did not require Judas to betray Jesus for the crucifixion to happen. If he had, then Judas would have been doing God's will. If Judas hadn't betrayed Jesus, he would still have died for the sins of the world; that is what he came to do, and he had already said that it would happen.
Satan was almost certainly behind Judas' betrayal - it was in Satan's interests to get rid of Jesus and prevent people coming to God and being forgiven. If the devil had known about the resurrection, and that he would be defeated on the cross, he would not have been so keen for Jesus to die.

But God knew that that was what would happen - so he foretold it through the prophets.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Sorry, not Scriptural.

It is a way that God works. If we look to the end of the age when the gospel is preached to all.

Mat 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a witness to all the nations, and then the end will come.

Those who reject the gospel, are given over to the beast, and his deception, to take the mark.

2Th 2:9-12 The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

God is actually the one to bring the deception. These people are still alive, and have lives, but are no longer classed as redeemable. The same could be said of Judas, he most likely refused the grace he was given, hence his nature as a thief even with Jesus. So Jesus called him a "devil". He was chosen due to his nature to betray Jesus.

 

[Strong in Him]

It is a way that God works.

You said:

Judas had previously rejected God in His life. He had outpaced the long-suffering of God. So God used him for a negative purpose.

That's the bit that's not Scriptural.
Where do we read that Judas had "outpaced the long-suffering of God"? Are you suggesting that, in Judas' case, God's love and patience were exhausted? That Judas had done something so bad that he could not be forgiven?
Not only do we not read that in Scripture, that sentiment calls Scripture itself into question. "Love is patient", 1 Corinthians 13:4 - but not endlessly patient? "Love does not dishonour others", 1 Corinthians 13:5 - except in Judas' case? "Love keeps no record of wrongs", 1 Corinthians 13:5 - unless someone does something very bad.
Heaven help all of us, if that's the case.

God is actually the one to bring the deception. These people are still alive, and have lives, but are no longer classed as redeemable. The same could be said of Judas, he most likely refused the grace he was given,

"Most likely". Like I said, we do not know.
How do we know that, as one theory says, he didn't just want to force Jesus' hand? Most people, when backed into a corner and facing a threat to their own lives, would do whatever it took to survive. How do we know that Judas didn't believe that Jesus really would "call down legions of angels", Matthew 26:53, to help him? And that he would then defeat the Romans?
Judas despaired after Jesus was taken away and sentenced to death. He threw the money back at the religious leaders and then took his own life. The devil would have only rejoiced that he had caused the downfall, and death, of the Son of God.

 

[JohnD70X7]

Judas would not have been saved. Jesus said:

Mark 14:21 The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had never been born."

The problem with Judas was that he choose sin over God:

John 12:6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor, but because he was a thief, and had the money box; and he used to take what was put in it.

Jesus showed that when He chose Judas, he was already classed as a devil.

John 6:70-71 Jesus answered them, "Did I not choose you, the twelve, and one of you is a devil?" He spoke of Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon, for it was he who would betray Him, being one of the twelve.

Judas had previously rejected God in His life. He had outpaced the long-suffering of God. So God used him for a negative purpose.

Rom 9:21-22 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,

Both what you and I said are true.

 

[sandman]

No, I've said that nowhere in the NT does the text say that Judas saw Jesus after the resurrection; that he saw the risen Christ.

"Made excuses for God not being able to count"??
I have done nothing of the sort.


I don't even understand that sentence - I certainly never used it.



The word of God is not imperfect.


And yet the Pharisees would not take back the money that Judas threw at them because it was blood money, Matthew 27:6. True, they could have been referring to Jesus' blood, But Acts 1:19 says that the field they bought was given its name due to Judas' blood - his death.


No - Acts 1:13 lists the 11 Apostles who were present in the room with Peter. Judas Iscariot is not mentioned - clearly, because Peter explained that he had died and they needed to choose a replacement.

But it doesn't say that that included Judas.
Maybe he didn't know, at that point, that Judas had died, or maybe he is referring to "the 12" because that's what they were always known as.
And before you say I am reading into the text - no more than you are by saying that 1 Corinthians 15:5 shows that Judas was still alive.

You haven't answered my questions about why, and when, Judas took his life AFTER the resurrection.
The facts are; Matthew reported that Judas took his own life. The first chapter of Acts tells us how the Apostles elected someone to replace Judas, because he had taken his own life. (It's possible that Luke wrote Acts before Matthew wrote his Gospel.)
There is zero evidence to show that Judas did not die when Matthew said he did, but a couple of weeks later, AFTER he had seen that Jesus was no longer dead, but alive.

Did the Holy Sprit make a mistake when he inspired Matthew to write of Judas' suicide, and that the Pharisees bought a field with the blood money, which agrees with Acts 1:19?

It is difficult to respond to someone who doesn’t really read what I have written.

But I will come on board with your twelve “not including Judas scenario” (In other words, where 12 actually means 11) ….if you can find me any place in the Word that shows that as being the case. Otherwise, it is something that you have assumed …and assuming is nothing more than adlibbing with you own private interpretation. I know you actually think I have done that ….but I have backed up everything from the Word.

When the Word eleven is used it always makes a notation as to who is missing or who it is referring to such as Thomas and Judas. At times the Word will say one of he twelve but again it makes a notation as to who. But when it says the 12 with the article (the) it is making a distinction ….always referring back to the original 12 up until the time of Matthias (Act 1:26)

So when 1Co 15:5 states The twelve with the article it is the distinction of the original 12.

And the statement you made is kind of ridiculous → “Maybe he didn't know, at that point, that Judas had died, or maybe he is referring to "the 12" because that's what they were always known as.”

This was written around 27 years later … written by Paul who was receiving the revelation from Jesus Christ on what to write …I am pretty sure Christ didn’t make any mistake about who He had seen.



Just for clarification on your last statement.

("Did the Holy Sprit make a mistake when he inspired Matthew to write of Judas' suicide, and that the Pharisees bought a field with the blood money, which agrees with Acts 1:19?")

I am sure you meant Luke rather than Matthew but ….

The field that is refereed to in Act 1:19 is not the field that the Pharisees bought as verse 18 clarifies who bought it…There are actually two fields. The Pharisees did purchase a field Potters field, but this was not a field, but a lot a parcel that Judas had purchased “presumably” from monies from the bag …as he was the treasure and a thief. The distinction on fields is hard to note as most Bibles refer to them as fields ….but there are two different Greek words used, one meaning field the other as parcel or lot.

 

[Strong in Him]

It is difficult to respond to someone who doesn’t really read what I have written.

But I will come on board with your twelve “not including Judas scenario” (In other words, where 12 actually means 11) ….if you can find me any place in the Word that shows that as being the case. Otherwise, it is something that you have assumed …

I don't know why Paul said that Jesus appeared to Peter and then to the 12, so I said "could have" and "maybe."
Yes, I'm guessing, or surmising - that's what the words "maybe" and "could have" mean.
Yet seem to be presenting Judas being alive after the resurrection as a fact - with nothing more to go on other than writers using the word 12 instead of 11.

Again, if Judas was alive after the resurrection:
- where does the text say so?
- where did he meet, and have some sort of conversation with, Jesus?
- why did he end his own life? He would not longer have been "choked with grief"; what was the reason?
- when did he end his life? It must have been before the ascension otherwise they would not have needed to choose a replacement.
Textual evidence only please - no assumptions.

And the statement you made is kind of ridiculous → “Maybe he didn't know, at that point, that Judas had died, or maybe he is referring to "the 12" because that's what they were always known as.”

This was written around 27 years later … written by Paul who was receiving the revelation from Jesus Christ on what to write …I am pretty sure Christ didn’t make any mistake about who He had seen.

I said, "maybe", and the text doesn't say that he saw Judas.

Just for clarification on your last statement.

("Did the Holy Sprit make a mistake when he inspired Matthew to write of Judas' suicide, and that the Pharisees bought a field with the blood money, which agrees with Acts 1:19?")

I am sure you meant Luke rather than Matthew but ….

What was that you were saying about not reading what has been written? I said:

Did the Holy Sprit make a mistake when he inspired Matthew to write of Judas' suicide, and that the Pharisees bought a field with the blood money,

Matthew says that Judas threw the money back at the chief priests and then went and hanged himself, Matthew 27:5.
He says that the chief priests didn't want to accept the money so they used it to but a field - and this field was known as "the field of blood", Matthew 27:8.

which agrees with Acts 1:19?

Those words, written by Matthew, agree with the words written by Luke in Acts 1:19 - the field was called "the field of blood."
It was bought with the 30 pieces of silver that had been given to Judas, so it was bought with Judas' money. Therefore it was bought by Judas - even if he wasn't present at the time. If I bought something online, to be delivered on a certain day, but I were to die before I could see the person receiving it, they would still be told that it was me who had bought it. I don't have a job and receive benefits, and money from my husband. If I buy something for someone, no one asks "was it your husband or the benefits' agency who bought this"?

Where do we read that there were 2 fields, both called "the field of blood"?