Did Judas do God's will? (Jesus, priests, ritual, the passion)

[rheff78]

Ahh, much better.

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Done.

*** Mod Note ***

This thread has been moved to Same Faith Debates. Members of other faiths, please refrain from posting in this thread.

If you wish to discuss this topic or any other, you are welcome to start a new thread in one of the other debate forums.

[Jeremy Mason]

Originally Posted by mudge991

Hmm Then explain Acts 1:13

1:13 And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.

Then reference it with Mark 3:14-18

3:14 And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, 3:15 And to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils:
3:16 And Simon he surnamed Peter; 3:17 And James the son of Zebedee, and John the brother of James; and he surnamed them Boanerges, which is, The sons of thunder: 3:18 And Andrew, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus, and Simon the Canaanite

Mark says that Thaddeus was one of the twelve apostles, but his name is not included in the lists given in Luke (6:14-16) or Acts (1:13), which list Judas the brother of James instead.

Maybe Judas was just a guy in the wrong place at the wrong time?

The answer according to the NIV is that Thaddaeus is Judas brother of James. As Peter is sometimes called Simon, people were called by different names. As for Judas Iscariot, the traitor--well, he took the money, betrayed the Son of God and knew he had done something wrong to say the least.

[Big_TJ]

Originally Posted by trinity2359

This goes against Catholic teaching that the ends NEVER justify the means. I was just thinking this from Catholic reading about abortion - saving the mom does not justify aborting the baby because the means don't justify the good ends. (read from Cathlolicism for dummies).

Back to topic, therefore, God to allow Judas to 'sin' to bring about the crucifixion wouldn't work...hmm have to think about this.

"Cathlolicism for dummies" oh, my bad. I thought I saw "Cathlolicism are for dummies."

[Big_TJ]

Originally Posted by Jeremy Mason

The answer according to the NIV is that Thaddaeus is Judas brother of James. As Peter is sometimes called Simon, people were called by different names. As for Judas Iscariot, the traitor--well, he took the money, betrayed the Son of God and knew he had done something wrong to say the least.

I have two issues with this. First, this is an assumption, since apparently, Taddaeus is a "normal" name just as "Judas" is a normal name.

Secondly, we see situation where the "person called by different name" is used to explain some disparity but this may not be a genuine defence. For example.

Matthew 9:9-10
As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and he said to him, "Follow me," he told him. And he rose and followed him. And as he sat at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples.

Mark 2:14-15 (Luke 5:27-29)
And as he passed on, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose and followed him. And as he sat at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners were sitting with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him.

The on looking on these two scriptures, one may correctly assume that Levi and Matthew are the same, and probably the writer of Matthew know the tax collector as Matthew while the writer of Mark and Luke know the Tax collector as Levi.

If this is so, why did the writer of Mark and Luke did not use the name Levi when listing the twelve disciples if this is the name they knew the tax collector by?

If you do an analysis of the list of disciples provided in the first 4 books of the new testament, you will see that Jesus had 12 disciples, but it was 15 names given!

Another note, isn't is interesting how Matthew wrote about himself in the third-person?

[Captain Civic]

Originally Posted by crystalonyx

None of the disciples existed, just like Jesus, just a story invented by bishops of the early literalist church to create a real Jesus to gain believers.

Ahhh! Mini-logician!

[gnostic]

I was going to say that I have written similar view to the OP but in another forum, but since it has been moved to Same Faith Debate, I will not put my input here.

[Jeremy Mason]

Originally Posted by Big_TJ

I have two issues with this. First, this is an assumption, since apparently, Taddaeus is a "normal" name just as "Judas" is a normal name.

Secondly, we see situation where the "person called by different name" is used to explain some disparity but this may not be a genuine defence. For example.

Matthew 9:9-10
As Jesus passed on from there, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax office; and he said to him, "Follow me," he told him. And he rose and followed him. And as he sat at the table in the house, behold, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat down with Jesus and his disciples.

Mark 2:14-15 (Luke 5:27-29)
And as he passed on, he saw Levi the son of Alphaeus sitting at the tax office, and he said to him, "Follow me." And he rose and followed him. And as he sat at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners were sitting with Jesus and his disciples; for there were many who followed him.

The on looking on these two scriptures, one may correctly assume that Levi and Matthew are the same, and probably the writer of Matthew know the tax collector as Matthew while the writer of Mark and Luke know the Tax collector as Levi.

If this is so, why did the writer of Mark and Luke did not use the name Levi when listing the twelve disciples if this is the name they knew the tax collector by?

If you do an analysis of the list of disciples provided in the first 4 books of the new testament, you will see that Jesus had 12 disciples, but it was 15 names given!

Another note, isn't is interesting how Matthew wrote about himself in the third-person?

Ahhhh...the name game begins. Is it Jesus or Yeshua? You say potato. I say patato. You say tomato. I say tamato. Patato, patato,tomata, tamato, let's call the whole thing off. I'm glad your reading the Bible, and I personally don't mind discussing this with you. However you should read the thread a little bit more before posting. As staff have clearly stated that this is a same faith debate. If you would like to start another thread, please do so in another forum. Post #22

[Big_TJ]

OOPS!! My bad!!

Did not realize that I was in the Same Faith Debates.

Please accept my apology!

[Ratiocinative]

Thought it doesn't specifically say this in the text, we can guess that Judas, like many others, thought that Jesus was going to free the Israelites from the rule of the Roman Empire. He likely thought that having Jesus arrested would causing him to start fighting against the Romans. This would also explain why Judas felt so terrible after hearing Jesus was condemned to death. If he wanted Jesus to be arrested so that he would be killed, then he would not have been so upset when he was ordered to be crucified, so he obviously had some other plan in mind when betrayed Jesus.

And no, Judas was not required for Jesus to be crucified. The pharisees made many attempts to arrest Jesus before, so once Jesus' time had come he could have just gone out in public and gotten arrested. Judas merely made his own choice to betray Jesus because he, like many other characters in the Bible, wanted to try and "help" God fulfill his promises.