I found a thread (a very long thread) about this very topic, but could not find it after I logged in. :sigh:
I had a very in depth debate with a gentleman by the name Don Hewey. (1john57.com that has been down for a while) I am sure some of you have heard of this guy as he thinks very poorly of Universal Reconciliationist's.
Below is an email that I sent him regarding Judas and a different view on the verse in question (Youngs)
I don't think any should be so quick to judge Judas.
Hi Don,
Here is a short study on Judas, I really hope you get something out of it.
To begin I want visit a highly mistranslated Scripture:
Mar 14:21 KJ The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.
By reading the text above, it is clear that "him" refers to Jesus and "that man" to Judas.
however, is this the real message that was given? Not according to Youngs Literal Translation.
Mar 14:21 Yngs. the Son of Man doth indeed go, as it hath been written concerning him, but wo to that man through whom the Son of Man is delivered up; good were it to him if that man had not been born.'
We can see that this translation reads completely different in as much as "good were it to him (Jesus) if that man (Judas) had not been born."
Yet is there any wonder, with this clear attempt to paint Judas as the worst sinner ever, that they think it would have been better for Judas had he never been born, knowing that he will definitely spend all eternity suffering for his betrayal.
But, would God send someone to an eternal hell who has repented of his sins?
"When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor. Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he [Jesus] was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself" (Matt. 27:1-5).
No one knows what God has in store for Judas, but perhaps his judgments will be less than what might be inflicted upon those who joyfully proclaim that Judas is going to hell for all eternity.
"For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged" (Matt. 7:2).
Many scoff at what Matthew had to say; however, Jesus gave witness to his words when he taught his disciples how to pray:
"And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses" (Matt. 6:12-15).
Forgiveness is what forgiveness does.
However, why did Judas betray Jesus? For the silver, for the money? Jesus tells why Judas betrayed Him:
John 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in Thy Name: those that You gave Me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled"
Yes, that the Scripture might be fulfilled. Judas had to do what he did because the Scripture had to be fulfilled. Did Judas desire in his heart to betray Jesus? Did he personally look forward to this deed? Not according to the Scriptures:
Isaiah 53:10 "It pleased God to bruise Him [His Son]."
A child could reason that God takes full responsibility for the "bruising" [crucifixion] of His Son.
But there is still the question of why Judas did not rebel against what he knew he had to do. Why didn't he?
Like 22:3-4 "Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve. And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them"
I believe that this is the only account of Satan actually entering into and possessing the mind of another human being. Clearly Judas did not have the will to betray Jesus because if he had, it would not have been necessary for Satan to possess his mind. When Satan left Judas, Judas REPENTED.
Mat 27:4,5 Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What [is that] to us? see thou [to that]. And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.
If Judas did not have feelings of love toward Jesus Whom he publically acknowledged was an innocent Man, he would not have felt guilty, he would not have returned the silver, and he would not have killed himself. He would have gone out and spent the money. Now then, who are we to question or doubt the sincerity of his heart-felt repentance?
Luk 16:15 He said to them, "You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of men, but God knows your hearts. What is highly valued among men is detestable in God's sight.
I remember you saying to me that Judas got exactly what he deserved, but perhaps you for got the words of Judas himself.
Mat 26:25 Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, "Surely not I, Rabbi?" Jesus answered, "Yes, it is you."
Can you imagine how you would feel Don if you, one of the twelve hand picked by Jesus, learned that you were the one who was picked to betray Jesus. Perhaps Judas had the purest heart of the 12, we simply do not know why he was chosen other than the scripture be fulfilled.
I hope you find this study as revealing and as rewarding as I did.
God bless you always,
Julie
Post his response to this letter in this thread if you would but don't betray his trust either. I am just interested in his response to this.
Just some thing to consider.
BETRAY G3860 paradidōmi to surrender, that is, yield up, intrust, transmit:
Joh 13:16 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord; neither he that is sent greater than he that sent him.
Joh 13:17 If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them.
Joh 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.
Joh 13:19 Now I tell you before it come, that, when it is come to pass, ye may believe that I am he.
Joh 13:20 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that receiveth whomsoever I send receiveth me; and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.
Joh 13:21 When Jesus had thus said, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray[surrender, deliver up] me.
Judas couldn't have been noticeably different from the others.
When Jesus said one of them would betray him, they said, "It's not me is it?"
rather than, "I'll bet it's that theif Judas - he'll do anything for money."
Quote from: mplsfitter539 on July 23, 2013, 01:13:27 AM
Post his response to this letter in this thread if you would but don't betray his trust either. I am just interested in his response to this.
Well his response short and pretty much to the point. Thanks for asking :dsunny:
Quotegood grief. its emails like this that leave me shaking my head in wondering. how can someone be saved and even believe half of what you sent? Let alone all of it? Thats what is confusing me.
Judas IS the son of perdition. the bible clearly shows even AFTER judas committed suicide, revelation shows us all what happens.
all 12 disciples were given the same exact witness: they all saw the miracles of Jesus, they were FACE TO FACE WITH GOD. what idiotic excuse can anyone claim for judas? cmon.
By this time the Spirit lead me to even greater understanding/discovery.
I replied back with this.....Not mine but the best argument I have ever heard for the case for Judas
Putting things into perspective.
Foreordained by God, one would suppose that Judas was born with the evil urge in him which should lead to his downfall. But this was not the case. It was true that he was not clean, as the other apostles were clean (John 13:10-11). Nevertheless, the impulse to lift up his heel against the One Who fed him (John 13:19) and to betray Him to His enemies did not come from within, but from without. Let us be clear on this point. Judas, by himself, would not have betrayed the Christ. It was put into his heart by the Adversary (John 13:2). And again the question arises, Could he have helped himself? It was because his heart was not depraved enough that the incentive had to come from without. The great Adversary could not trust him to do it of his own volition. Our Lord knew what was in his heart, but does not lift His finger to deter him from his awful deed. Rather, He hurries him in the doing of it.
It is a remarkable fact that Satan does not, as a rule, enter into, or "possess" human beings. Demons make a practice of doing this. It is a pity that "the devil" has been confused with "the devils" in English versions. Otherwise the fact that Satan entered into Judas would stand forth, as it should, as a most notable exception. The facts are clear. Judas, by himself, would not have betrayed Christ. The arch-enemy did not entrust the task of coercing Judas to the hands of evil spirits or demons, as would ordinarily be the case. He will employ such demon spirits at the time of the end to mobilize earth's kings for the great day of God Almighty (Rev. 16:14). But this most important task Satan did not leave to others. Contrary to all precedent, he himself entered into the apostle and transformed him into a traitor (Luke 22:3).
According to the most popular view Judas' full career would read something like this:
Foredoomed by God, long before he was born, to betray the Messiah, chosen by Christ Himself to be the traitor, he proves too weak to perform his part, so Satan takes control of him until he has done the deed, and, driven by remorse, he takes his own life. As punishment he has been suffering in the flames of hell ever since and will continue to do so until the judgment of the great white throne, more than a thousand years hence. Then he will be tried and condemned to anguish unspeakable, above all other men, for a never-ending eternity in the lake that burns with sulphur, miraculously kept alive to undergo his agony.
We have tried not to exaggerate. Yet the plain statement seems so fiendish, so utterly and horribly repulsive that one wonders how sane human beings can bear to think of it. The fact is they do not consider it, or, rather they dare not face it. If they did they would lose all faith in a god who is such a hateful, hideous monster. First he fixes Judas' fate, foretells it long before, then gives him a place among the apostles, with the brightest of prospects, then refuses to shield him from Satan, until the dastardly deed is done and he dies a self-inflicted death. I repeat, Judas could no more help himself than a piece of straw in a tornado. Not a person who reads these lines could have done differently, had he been in Judas' place.
And now, for doing what God forced him to do in one short hour he is to suffer woe utterly beyond human conception for all eternity!
If Judas is sent to Hell for his betrayal, and his betrayal was a necessary step in the humanity-saving death of Jesus Christ, then Judas is punished for saving humanity. If Jesus only suffered while dying on the cross and then ascended into Heaven, while Judas must suffer for eternity in Hell, then does Judas not suffer much more for the sins of humanity than Jesus?
We have shuddered at the awful caricatures of the deity which men carve out of wood or stone, but none of them can compare with the revolting and hateful fiendishness which coerced Judas to do wrong and then expends infinite power in torturing him, and works an eternal miracle to sustain his life so that he is able to survive his sufferings.
It is not Judas who suffers most from this terrible travesty of justice, but our Loving God. This is intensely practical. The apostasy of these days is largely the result of such terrible teaching. It has led to the virtual repudiation of the deity of God, and of those passages which represent Him as the great Potter, Who fashions vessels for dishonor, adapted to destruction (Rom. 9:21-22). The doctrine of eternal torment dethrones God. Only an inhuman fiend can really hold to His absolute sovereignty and torture everlasting. Acts speak louder then words. If God deliberately creates to doom and damn, it is useless to insist that He is Love. Black is not white, nor darkness light, neither is hate love. Judas will not burn on.
Again, I insist, I am not so much concerned for Judas as for God. If this solution is true, He will lose His reputation through His dealings with the betrayer. It will be just a sorry piece of business in which His great Name will suffer severely. It will take away the very foundations of His throne. Every righteous creature in the universe will agree with me that it is unjust of Him to place one of His creatures in a position where he must sin, and then not only punish him for it, but blot him out of existence. Judas will not gain. God will not gain. It will be a total loss, and God will be the prime loser. Moreover, God Himself has never said that this is His solution. It is only a reaction from eternal torment, a deduction of reasoning rather than a matter of faith in actual divine declarations. Judas will not burn up.
A lot of this was paraphrased from: http://www.theheraldofgodsgrace.org/Knoch/judasgod.htm (http://www.theheraldofgodsgrace.org/Knoch/judasgod.htm) & [rrl]http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/896398#ixzz2F4NDdKq3[/url] which were included in the reponse.
:HeartThrob:
Love Julie
i believe it also says "Satan entered into Judas." Don't forget the Holy Spirit had not yet been given.
:HeartThrob: I think it says that about Satan
Its been a long day.......
Love Julie
I'm not so sure what the Scripture in the title speaks of, but the explanation that Jesus would be better of if Judas were not born seems difficult for some to accept because, as other replies to this thread have stated very well, without Judas to betray Him Jesus could not have the glory of being the Savior of the World. But several months ago I thought of a different way to look at Mark 14:21 that makes sense to me.
I think its possible that Mark 14:21 says that Judas would be better off if Jesus were not physically born in his lifetime. Judas was a man who obviously had some curiosity about God, for he was a disciple of Christ. Had he been born in another era of history, he could very well have found God, believed in Him, and have aeonian life today. But, Jesus was born into this world during Judas's life, giving Judas the unique opportunity to betray Jesus. This doesn't mean that Judas would be better off without Christ, for I believe that in the Old Testament, whenever God worked with men toward salvation it was God operating through the pre-incarnate Christ.
I am interested to know what you think about this.
Quote from: ded2daworld on July 23, 2013, 03:39:51 AM
i believe it also says "Satan entered into Judas." Don't forget the Holy Spirit had not yet been given.
:thumbsup:
FOUR GREEK - ENGLISH INTERLINEARS
[1] "The indeed son of the man goes away, even as it has been written concerning him; woe but to the man that through whom the son of the man is delivered up; good it was to him, if not was born the man that." (Mark 14:21, Emphatic Diaglott Interlinear).
Most modern English translations have this verse end with the words:
"...good were it for that man if he had never been born."
But did you notice that this Greek manuscript has the word order thus:
"...good it was to him, if not was born the man that."
See how they changed the inspired Greek word order from "...good it was to HIM," to "...good were it for THAT MAN."
Some will ask why it should matter? Is not "that man" and "him" the same person, Judas? If so, how can it matter which word order is used? Let's check a few other Greek manuscripts in Interlinear format for a second and third witness.
[2] "The indeed Son of man goes, as it has been written concerning him; but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is delivered up; good were it for him if had not been born that man." (The Interlinear Greek-English New Testament By Dr. Ricker Berry).
Notice again that this manuscript ends the sentence with "that man," rather than with "him."
[3] "The Truly Son of man goes, even as it has been written about Him, woe but man (to) that through whom the Son of man is betrayed, good were it [for him] if not was born man that." (Greek-English Interlinear New Testament, By Jay P. Green, Sr.).
Once again this Greek manuscript has the same word order as the others, and ends with "that man."
[4] "The indeed SON of the human is under leading according as it has been written about Him woe yet to the human that thru whom the SON of the human is being beside given ideal it was to Him if not was generated the human that." (Concordant Greek Text, Concordant Publishing Concern).
And finally this fourth Greek manuscript also is true to all the others and ends this verse with the words "the human [man] that" rather than with "him."
Even though all interlinears and all translations render some words differently from each other (that's why we have multiple versions & translations), they all at least copy the proper word order and arrangements of words as they are found in the Greek manuscripts when they produce their interlinears. But with this verse in question a remarkable thing has happened.
In it's proper order it is easy to distinguish between "him" and "that man." Jesus is referred to as "Him" and "the Son of man." And that is how we must translate the word order to make sense and be in harmony with the dozens of other Bible verses supporting the salvation of all. The words of Jesus are consistent. He did not use the pronoun "him" to represent Himself and Judas, just of Himself.
"Truly the Son of man [Jesus] goes as it has been written concerning Him [Jesus], but woe to that man [Judas] by whom the Son of man [Jesus] is betrayed! It were good for Him [Jesus] if that man [Judas] had never been born"
Jesus is consistent in His use of the third person pronoun, Him. The Son of man & The Son of man is Himself. He refers to Himself in the third person as Him & Him--both times, and He refers to Judas as that man & that man--both times.
When we translate this verse in the correct word order, "him" cannot possibly also be "that man." "Him" cannot be Judas. "Him" has to be someone else, and therefore the argument that it would have been better for Judas if Judas had not been born is fallacious.
We could say: "It would have been good for Joe if JOE had stayed home."
Or we could say: "It would have been good for Joe if HE had stayed home."
Or we could say: "It would have been good for him if HE had stayed home."
But when we say: "It would have been good for him if Joe had stayed home," then we are speaking of two different persons. How easy is that? The "him" cannot be "Joe" in our example sentence, just as the "him" in our problem verse cannot be "that man," Judas.
http://www.saviourofall.org/opposers/HeweyCLNTReliableOne.html
I think you'll find it interesting.
Quote from: WhiteWings on August 14, 2013, 05:09:11 PM
http://www.saviourofall.org/opposers/HeweyCLNTReliableOne.html (http://www.saviourofall.org/opposers/HeweyCLNTReliableOne.html)
I think you'll find it interesting.
I do love Don and tried very hard have him even consider LOVE, but I guess Father wasn't ready. :HeartThrob:
Love Jul
ie