Judas was only playing his part in a greater play...
 

...and christian 'perscution complex' is really self starting!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science....ap/index.html


And for the rescord. the vatican hell burnings were NERO (remember, the jackass of emperors) wanbtting some entertainment. Must remember to curse Agrippina's name thrice from thsi day foward.. goddamn Drow mucking up rome.


*Agrippina was IIRC nero's mother.

Actually there are some new debates about the burning of Rome during the time of Nero. It is now thought that the fires were started by some militant early Christians in an attempt to belittle Nero.The whole 'Nero fiddled while Rome burned' is also thought to be an ealry militant Christian invention. After the fire Nero cleared out a whole burned section of Rome and built his Golden Palace. After he did that rumours started to circulate that he had in fact started the fires on purpose in order to build it. Nero conteracted the rumours by claiming that the Christians started them. It turns out that he may have been right. Nero was never a popular emperor and it was well known that his mother was the real power behind the throne.

Your post barely makes sense at all. Please be more articulate in future posts.

As to the Gospel Of Judas. I think people are dismissing the gospel way too easily. Just because it wasn't 'accepted' by early Church leaders into the bible doesn't mean that it didn't happen. I think perhaps that early Church leaders made Judas into an anti-hero because they needed that factor in order to recruit more members. It made Jesus seem more sympathetic if he was betrayed by a close friend.

I'm surprised CNN would play that.
On the other hand, I guess Fox is the more republican one, right?

That sympathetic point is a good one. It fits in with Christianity's view of Jesus as a very meek person. Maybe that was Jesus' plan; to use it as a recruitment strategy. I haven't read much of the bible, so I don't know much about what's in it (I should get on that; it's a major part of North American culture).

Maybe the other gospels were jealous of Judas cuz he got the special trust. Horray for the sin of Envy.

On an other note, I think it's funny in Old English literature when Jesus is portrayed as a "stout-hearted warrior." Meh, whatever floats your boat.

You know what I don't get?
Why do they call Judas a traitor?
It was Jesus who made Judas betray him.

John 13:21-27
21 When Jesus had said these things, He was troubled in spirit, and testified and said, “Most assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray Me.” 22 Then the disciples looked at one another, perplexed about whom He spoke.
23 Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. 24 Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom He spoke.
25 Then, leaning back[a] on Jesus’ breast, he said to Him, “Lord, who is it?”
26 Jesus answered, “It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I have dipped it.” And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. 27 Now after the piece of bread, Satan entered him. Then Jesus said to him, “What you do, do quickly.”

So, wasn't it because of the bread?

Perhaps, perhaps not. The bread could have been just a sign. It's entirely possible that Satan might have entered him anyway. On the other hand, Jesus may have created a self-fulfilling prophesy for Judas: by telling him, it caused Judas to take on the mentality that "Well, since I'm apparently destined to do it..." In which case, it wouldn't have been the bread, it would have been because Jesus gave the bread to Judas.

Given this, I think what the Gospel of Judas says makes sense. It would seem that Jesus had spoken to Judas before or after the giving of the bread. He just chose to inform his other disciples by giving Judas the bread.

Too bad the name Judas has such negative connotations; it's got a really nice sound to it. Too many words or place names are like that.

I hate this thread.

Why? What's the matter?

*waits for Tenet's reply with curious anticipation*

Are you guys saying that there were evil powers in the bread, and that's why Judas betrayed Jesus?! Isn't it possible that he was jealous of Jesus, or that he simply wanted the money he was going to earn from the Romans?

No! The bread is EVIL!

Don't you get it?

My worst nightmare...Evil Bread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Well, more incredible things have happened in the Bible. I wouldn't think that Judas eating the bread and Satan entering him at that moment were just coincidence.
What I don't get is, if Jesus very specifically pointe out who was going to betray him, why did no one do anything about it?

Maybe this was supposed to happen. Judas would betray Jesus, and later on Jesus would be crucified and dies in order to save the world from coming to an end.

Because of the suicide, which is an unforgivable sin?

Besides, it's not like we have a proof Judas really is in Hell.

In Jesus Christ Superstar, Judas came down from heaven at the finale ^_^

We're not saying that the bread was evil, or at least I'm not saying so. It is possible that Judas was jealous/greedy, but what I was saying, if the Gospel of Judas isn't true, was that because Jesus indirectly told Judas that Judas would betray him, Judas believed it, and became a traitor, almost as if Jesus was telling him, subconsciously, to betray him.
I haven't read the bible, but with the knowledge I have, it is difficult to say what exactly set off Judas to betray Jesus. I doubt Judas would have betrayed Jesus if Jesus hadn't done something.

However, as I said, the Gospel of Judas makes sense, especially with the bread-giving.

I haven't read the Bible entirely, but I have read the accounts of this story and saw Mel Gibson's movie. :) So here it goes:

Jesus (being God = omniscient) knew all the decisions His disciples were going to make, as well as all our choices, which is why He knew what sacrifice He would have to give in order to be sufficient enough to pay our debt for sin. So yeah, before I get off topic, He also told Paul that he would deny Him three times before he hears a crow, which Paul didn't believe and said he would never do that to Him. This prophecy happened as well. So, Paul didn't do it as though he had to because Jesus said so, he did it because he made the choice and Jesus knew it beforehand ... same goes for Judas. He knew that Judas was going to betray Hi, which worked along with His plan that would lead Him to die for us.

Okay, I'm done. Hopefully, I make some sense here and didn't repeat someone else.

Sorry, my mistake, it was Peter not Paul. I get them mixed up a lot. :(

(It's not allowing me to edit my previous post.)

It's a bird!
It's a plane!
It's Comparative Religion Grad Student Man!

...

Judas betrayed Jesus, of course. Some suggest that since Jesus-as-God-made-flesh needed to die in order to cleanse the sins of humanity (not the sum total of sins each person has committed, but the sin of Adam - St. Augustine fucked that up, but it's another topic), he had to be betrayed, because he couldn't have chosen to kill himself; the sacrificial lamb doesn't kill itself, but is sacrificed by another.

It's related to doctrines of Satan, and what it truly means to go against God's word. To most, Satan is this evil being. Now think:

God's greatest gift to humankind, as mentioned in the Tanakh, is free will. Not even the angels have free will - the Fall of some angels is said to have occurred because some angels refused to bow down to Adam, as God commanded, because they would have only God above them.... odd, considering that angels in the Tanakh don't have free will...

Well, it has been suggested that God chose Satan as his Opposer as one might choose opposing counsel in a court case - in fact, this is the role Satan has in early Judaism. Satan is merely the angel that recounts the bad deeds of one's life, and there is another angel that tells God of the good deeds, and then a ruling is made.

Anyway, in order for there to be free will (remember God's greatest gift to humanity?) there has to be a choice. Well, there wasn't another option until God said, 'Don't eat this fruit from this tree.' The serpent then said, 'Go ahead and eat it.' So here was a choice! God's greatest gift requires that there be someone opposing God, even if that someone would really rather they listen to God. In order to perfectly serve God, they will do a damn good job tempting people away from God. Giving them a choice.

So, when the New Testament refers to Satan going into Judas at the moment that Jesus gives the bread to him, what you have, perhaps, is a story about how Judas was given the sacred duty to betray Jesus so that the sacrifice could occur. Unfortunately, this job, having been performed, was too much for Judas because he was a mere human - only an angel can serve God so perfectly that they can betray Him as God asks.

This view is unpopular, but it is my favourite.

But Judas had already made the deal with the Romans before the Last Supper.

Got some of this from an e-mail, thought maybe you'd be interested. :)

The gospel of Judas is a Gnostic gospel, espousing a Gnostic viewpoint of Christianity. The gospel of Judas is simply a heretical forgery, much the same as the gospel of Thomas, the gospel of Mary, and the gospel of Philip. Just as Judas Iscariot rejected Jesus and betrayed Him with a kiss, the gospel of Judas rejects the true Gospel and truth of God with a fraudulent appearance of validity.

For the full article, cliiiiick here. Have fun, enjoy. =P

I haven't the energy to mount a thoroughgoing critique of this viewpoint, but it's obviously partial to some form of Christianity. Any who are interested, inquire about the formation of the canonical Christian Bible at the Council of Nicea. Claming it as a 'forgery' misunderstands the history of Biblical manuscripts.

I love that article the website did saying that we MUST take the Bible literally.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-literal.html
And the one that there are no contradictions in the Bible. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-errors.html