|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Was Judas especially evil, or just an average dude?
|
|
|
Laud-able
Ship's Ancient
# 9896
|
Posted
Dante’s vision of Hell sees Judas, the betrayer of Jesus, with Brutus and Cassius, betrayers of the Empire, for ever tormented by a weeping Satan – all four locked together in frozen isolation and darkness, as far removed from God as it is possible to be.
It is true that the vision, despite its immense power, is ultimately no more than a vision: it is possible that all four are in fact ‘Safe at last on Abra’m’s breast’. God alone knows.
However, Mark’s gospel (for instance) makes it clear that the betrayal of Jesus was Judas’ own idea – he chose to go to the authorities – and Jesus’ condemnation of that betrayal is stern:
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.
I find it difficult to sidestep that judgement.
--------------------
'. . . "Non Angli, sed Angeli" "not Angels, but Anglicans"', Sellar, W C, and Yeatman, R J, 1066 and All That, London, 1930, p. 6.
Posts: 279 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What judgement is that? Beyond dying knowing that you had sold the man you looked up to, loved, followed in a band of intimate brothers for three years, to torture and death in front of you, that all your dreams of liberation, of tangible redemption had come to nothing on nothing. You knew that you were a useless idiot, a thieving tool of murder, despised by everyone. And you couldn't even kill yourself neatly. You may well have survived the drop with your guts hanging out and suffocated after many long minutes or bled out even longer. There's something bad BEYOND that? Apart from two thousand years of revulsion, condemnation?
What?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Betrayal is a difficult concept. That is the word the Bible uses several times re. Judas and doesn't appear to mince it much. Some analysts have gone in for the mistranslation of 'betrayal', and reckon in Hebrew it stands for some far less serious or devious.
I can understand Roman civilisation having a pretty dim view of betrayal in the trust sense. The Roman power system stood on the foundations of obedience and trust and they weren't in the business of taking on fables which compromised loyalty.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Laud-able:
However, Mark’s gospel (for instance) makes it clear that the betrayal of Jesus was Judas’ own idea – he chose to go to the authorities – and Jesus’ condemnation of that betrayal is stern:
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.
I find it difficult to sidestep that judgement.
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
What judgement is that? Beyond dying knowing that you had sold the man you looked up to, loved, followed in a band of intimate brothers for three years, to torture and death in front of you, that all your dreams of liberation, of tangible redemption had come to nothing on nothing. You knew that you were a useless idiot, a thieving tool of murder, despised by everyone. And you couldn't even kill yourself neatly. You may well have survived the drop with your guts hanging out and suffocated after many long minutes or bled out even longer. There's something bad BEYOND that? Apart from two thousand years of revulsion, condemnation?
What?
Once again, I'm with Martin here. "Woe to him" means he will have a horrible future. Obviously it was horrible if it drove him to suicide. It tells us nothing about his eternal fate. Again, this is typical of the NT, which says very very little about the details of the afterlife, telling us only that there is one, that God is there, and that Jesus is the one who makes the final call.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kwesi
Shipmate
# 10274
|
Posted
Laud-able quote:
However, Mark’s gospel (for instance) makes it clear that the betrayal of Jesus was Judas’ own idea – he chose to go to the authorities – and Jesus’ condemnation of that betrayal is stern:
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.
I find it difficult to sidestep that judgement.
Laud-able, I’m with you in that it seems to me pretty clear that the gospel writers had decidedly negative views about Judas, as I have argued in previous posts with particular reference to Luke and John. From their point of view Judas had betrayed the Messiah, God’s Anointed, the Holy One of Israel, even to the point of suggesting not only was he in league with Satan, his master, but actually a devil. This is not the kind of language that resonates with Western Christians today, and there seems to be a great reluctance on the part of some of the posts to recognise the mind-set of the gospel writers regarding the seriousness and consequences for Judas of his actions. Counter-theories of varying plausability have been advanced and even sentimental legends recounted in their support but none of them is grounded in the gospel record. It is open for one to disagree with the gospel writers, but one ought not to argue that they meant the opposite of what they said.
Posts: 1641 | From: South Ofankor | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Kwesi:
Laud-able, I’m with you in that it seems to me pretty clear that the gospel writers had decidedly negative views about Judas, as I have argued in previous posts with particular reference to Luke and John. From their point of view Judas had betrayed the Messiah, God’s Anointed, the Holy One of Israel, even to the point of suggesting not only was he in league with Satan, his master, but actually a devil. This is not the kind of language that resonates with Western Christians today, and there seems to be a great reluctance on the part of some of the posts to recognise the mind-set of the gospel writers regarding the seriousness and consequences for Judas of his actions. Counter-theories of varying plausability have been advanced and even sentimental legends recounted in their support but none of them is grounded in the gospel record. It is open for one to disagree with the gospel writers, but one ought not to argue that they meant the opposite of what they said.
Who exactly here has argued that the gospel writers did not have "decidedly negative views about Judas" or disagreed with the gospel writers that "Judas had betrayed the Messiah"??? I don't recall reading that anywhere on this thread. Again, no one here is disagreeing with the gospel writers. We are simply pointing out that they show far more restraint than you are in speculating about Judas' ultimate fate.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
And even if they didn't show restraint, what do they know?
As ever cliffdweller, it's ALL about what we bring to the party.
You don't bring wooden Dalek darkness. Apart from the one totally unnecessary bit of weirdness. Dump that nonsense and your credibility will soar.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
The Gospel story, esp. That surrounding the Crucifiction is constantly open to interpretation .
At risk of going Godwin side, the 'you-know-who's' in the 30's staged lavish pageant plays on the Passion. They depicted a story in which Judas(the Jude) was portrayed as a hook-nosed, almost sub-human creature, who was the epitome of evil.
Most of us now know where that was leading.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dave W.
Shipmate
# 8765
|
Posted
The Wikipedia article on the Passion Plays notes no special connection to Nazism; their connection with antisemitism has existed for centuries.
Posts: 2059 | From: the hub of the solar system | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
pimple
Ship's Irruption
# 10635
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
Two people betrayed Christ on the same night. One sought forgiveness and became a mighty apostle and some say first bishop of Rome. The other despaired of forgiveness and hanged himself.
I think the message is clear, at least to me: do not assume you are unforgivable. Seek and accept God's forgiveness.
How, exactly, would Judas have sought God's forgiveness? At Jesus' trial? At the foot of the cross? Only the disciple whom Jesus loved had the courage for that. And Jesus' response - to give him charge of Jesus' own mother - might not have
defended him forever. Peter was still after him when Jesus was asking him "Do you love me more than these?"
With Jesus on the cross, an unbelieving Judas might think the only chance of forgiveness might come from the other apostles. Particularly Peter. How credible is that? Is Peter, still smarting from the guilt of his own betrayal, a likely source of comfort for the repenting Judas? We know how far Peter's proclivity for forgiveness extended, from his later dealings with Ananias and Sapphira. So if Judas despaired of forgiveness, how much responsibility for that should be laid at the door of God's chosen, quivering Apostles?
--------------------
In other words, just because I made it all up, doesn't mean it isn't true (Reginald Hill)
Posts: 8018 | From: Wonderland | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
I see no suggestion anywhere that Judas was an atheist.
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
The ignorance of all the disciples is two thousand years more ignorant than ours. And ours is appalling.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by pimple:
With Jesus on the cross, an unbelieving Judas might think the only chance of forgiveness might come from the other apostles. Particularly Peter. How credible is that? Is Peter, still smarting from the guilt of his own betrayal, a likely source of comfort for the repenting Judas?
WE know that because we have the benefit of 2000 years of hindsight. Judas could have at least tried, but did not.
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
Judas was powerless to prevent the action he took. Like all who are drawn into darkness. The consequence in this instance was that a great Light was released.
No Judas , no Cross. No Cross, no salvation. No death of God, no Resurrection of God.
Not really sure if Judas should be forgiven or thanked. I can't see that his demonisation has done much good over the years. The need to demonise is though an intrinsic part of our human nature, suppress it in one area of our existence and it invariably pops up somewhere else.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Judas was powerless to prevent the action he took. Like all who are drawn into darkness.
Balderdash and nonsense. Choice, Freedom to choose. Freewill.
quote:
rolyn:
The consequence in this instance was that a great Light was released.
No Judas , no Cross. No Cross, no salvation. No death of God, no Resurrection of God.
Jesus was on a trajectory that if not in that episode, it probably would have been another, in which the authorities caught up with him. As a former bishop and archbishop suggested to me that might be a pile of stones instead of a cross. Or a sword, spears or clubs. Though it is interesting to consider that our focus on the cross as a symbol is more recent and unfamiliar to Christians until much later.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What are choice, freedom, freewill?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I am absolutely certain Jesus forgave Judas. This is built into His character.
I am also reasonably sure (because He was famously persuasive, could probably sell ice to Eskimos) that He was able to get Judas to accept His proffered forgiveness. And then they adjourned to the bar, because if Heaven is anything at all as advertised it must have a bar, right? And had, possibly not a beer, but certainly a nice drink of something.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
The way I see it, Judas did repent of his actions. He was wretched over it, as evidenced by his suicide. So, did this repentance save him?
Or perhaps this repentance didn't count, because he didn't ask forgiveness from Jesus. Of course, Jesus was taken away so he couldn't talk to Him anymore. But he could have prayed to Jesus. Is there anywhere in the Gospel where Jesus said to the disciples that they should pray to Him if they wanted forgiveness?
(Man, this kind of theology is fucked up.)
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
What are choice, freedom, freewill?
We recently had a thread on freedom which foundered on it being relative . Freewill? A double mountain of theology has tried to cover that with little success.
That leave choice. Ok, if those teetering on the edge of dark deeds retain the power to be able to choose, and pull back from such actions, then yes, Thanks be to God and Alleluia indeed.
I suppose these matters come down to excusability. There are those who do not wish, or maybe do not feel able to excuse Judas for what he did. I accept this.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Then they are excused accordingly.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
Alan Jones tells of a legend thast Jesus went into the depths of Hell to fetch Judas to a second Last Supper as all the others were waitjng for him befopre they could start. (Towards the end of this page)
I love that story, partly because I first heard it from Madeleine L'Engle herself. It's a nice contrast to the sermon I recall from high school days, given by our bright young curate, who called Judas "the one person we can be quite sure is in hell."
I gather, though, that there was a lot of personal ambition underlying Judas's actions. Wasn't he the treasurer for Christ's inner circle, possibly with his hand in the till? The one who objected to the pouring of precious ointment because the money should be given to the poor (wink-wink)? Or is that just negative propaganda from legend?
But in any case, I'd like to to envision a happy ending for him in the afterlife. In the careful words of Bishop Robert Barron, "we are permitted to hope that hell is empty." Or in the words of a Catholic priest on TV years ago, "To rejoice in anyone's spending eternity in hell would be to wish for Christ's redemptive work to fail."
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
Surely the point about Judas (assuming for the moment that he existed) was that he was necessary.
If you believe that God caused Jesus to die as the solution to the problem of sin (I don't) he had to have an agent didn't he - I'm assuming that neither suicide nor natural causes would have got the job done; would they?
If, in the view of those such as WLC, morality is doing what God wants you to do - Judas's betrayal would have been a moral imperative. Thus neither especially evil nor an average dude - a special person of the highest moral character doing what his God required of him even though it lead to his own early demise.
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So God is that Machiavellian? That "pragmatic"? That amoral?
Or we're just wooden literalists, making it up badly as we go along. Just like they did 2000 years ago, but with 2000 years less excuse?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
Surely the point about Judas (assuming for the moment that he existed) was that he was necessary.
If you believe that God caused Jesus to die as the solution to the problem of sin (I don't) he had to have an agent didn't he - I'm assuming that neither suicide nor natural causes would have got the job done; would they?
If, in the view of those such as WLC, morality is doing what God wants you to do - Judas's betrayal would have been a moral imperative. Thus neither especially evil nor an average dude - a special person of the highest moral character doing what his God required of him even though it lead to his own early demise.
Whoa! The action was inevitable, given the hearts of sinful humankind; and so you could in one sense say that the role of betrayer was inevitable for somebody.
But nobody is forced into volunteering for the role. God didn't reach down a divine finger and push Judas, protesting all the way, down the highway to Jerusalem and into a conference room with Jesus' enemies. That was a voluntary act.
If Judas had refrained, no doubt we'd have seen Peter or James or Philip or Simon taking on the role. In any group of twelve, there's going to be at least one who breaks under pressure. And that pressure (from temptation, from circumstances, from fear) would have just kept growing. That's the trajectory Jesus was on.
It's probably more surprising, under the circumstances, that somebody didn't fall earlier, or even several somebodies.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Whoa! The action was inevitable, given the hearts of sinful humankind; and so you could in one sense say that the role of betrayer was inevitable for somebody.
But nobody is forced into volunteering for the role. God didn't reach down a divine finger and push Judas, protesting all the way, down the highway to Jerusalem and into a conference room with Jesus' enemies. That was a voluntary act.
If, as you suggest, it was a voluntary act it was not inevitable was it? Probably someone would have done the deed - or rewritten the story with a different cast - but that is not the same as inevitability. So - if it wasn't inevitable (and it cannot have been in your scenario) how would god have justified all the bother of producing Jesus? If it had looked as though Jesus was going to die of natural causes God would either have had to "encourage" someone or have another try a few years later and, possibly, somewhere else.
Mind you, there is also the point, isn't there, that apparently one has to talk with a lot of people actively working in neuroscientific research before finding one who believes that any of our actions are truly voluntary.
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
That's more like it Lamb Chopped. Jesus avoided trouble until it was His time. He couldn't be betrayed in Galilee or Trachonitis.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Martin60:
That's more like it Lamb Chopped. Jesus avoided trouble until it was His time. He couldn't be betrayed in Galilee or Trachonitis.
I don't think the location is important. Nor exactly who and by what method betrayed and killed. It was going to happen. That's what happens ton people like him, as inevitable as winter will come. We don't know the day, whether via a storm over night, or by a blizzard in the afternoon. We don't know what the temperature will be, nor the windspeed nor the direction. But winter will come. -- Jesus was going to get caught and killed. Somehow. That is the clear part. The rest I think is circumstance. Because the circumstances are less important than the main event (betrayed, killed), the people who told the stories, and the later people who wrote them down, didn't always agree on each detail. But the main event is the same.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
He knew.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
If, as you suggest, it was a voluntary act it was not inevitable was it? Probably someone would have done the deed - or rewritten the story with a different cast - but that is not the same as inevitability. So - if it wasn't inevitable (and it cannot have been in your scenario) how would god have justified all the bother of producing Jesus? If it had looked as though Jesus was going to die of natural causes God would either have had to "encourage" someone or have another try a few years later and, possibly, somewhere else.
Mind you, there is also the point, isn't there, that apparently one has to talk with a lot of people actively working in neuroscientific research before finding one who believes that any of our actions are truly voluntary.
Voluntary does not equal "uninfluenced in any way by any person, temptation, or outside circumstance." It means that the individual could have chosen to do otherwise. The fact that a particular choice is either easy or difficult doesn't stop it from being voluntary.
As for inevitability--look, the only way I can see Jesus surviving to, say, age 80 without being murdered would be if the entire human race had a sudden miraculous attack of selfless goodness. "Oh no," they'd say, "I'm happy to give up my power and prestigious position rather than harm this innocent man. I don't mind Jesus' competition, truly, it's just great to see people seeking God! And if the Romans come in and sweep us all away due to a Messianic uprising, that's fine with me too, just as long as I don't get involved in any dirty work."
And Pilate and the Roman soldiers would of course be saying, "We're just here to uphold justice, and if protecting an innocent man loses us our jobs, or even our lives, we're good with that, really."
Uh huh. If you can find an entire religious and political establishment where every freaking member would prefer to lose all rather than do in an innocent man--well, I'd say you have your miracle, society is already redeemed, and Jesus can quit worrying about being Savior of the world and go water-skiing instead. Without skis.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
Voluntary does not equal "uninfluenced in any way by any person, temptation, or outside circumstance." It means that the individual could have chosen to do otherwise. The fact that a particular choice is either easy or difficult doesn't stop it from being voluntary.
As for inevitability--look, the only way I can see Jesus surviving to, say, age 80 without being murdered would be if the entire human race had a sudden miraculous attack of selfless goodness. "Oh no," they'd say, "I'm happy to give up my power and prestigious position rather than harm this innocent man. I don't mind Jesus' competition, truly, it's just great to see people seeking God! And if the Romans come in and sweep us all away due to a Messianic uprising, that's fine with me too, just as long as I don't get involved in any dirty work."
And Pilate and the Roman soldiers would of course be saying, "We're just here to uphold justice, and if protecting an innocent man loses us our jobs, or even our lives, we're good with that, really."
Uh huh. If you can find an entire religious and political establishment where every freaking member would prefer to lose all rather than do in an innocent man--well, I'd say you have your miracle, society is already redeemed, and Jesus can quit worrying about being Savior of the world and go water-skiing instead. Without skis.
The overwhelming weight of experimental evidence is said, by those involved, to deny the possibility that we act in the way you describe as "voluntary". Although we think it true that some choices are more difficult than others that is part of the story we tell ourselves to maintain what we call sanity - just like thinking the story we unconsciously construct around a few salient points is an accurate memory. Our choices are made subconsciously based on data we hold and can only be modified by further data - that's why "getting them young" is so powerful. The more our existing data is reinforced the more contrary data it takes to change our mind.
There are many reasons why Jesus (again assuming an existence) might have died well before 80 other than as a formal sacrificial victim. Illness, starvation, drowning, accidental bodily injury, at 30 he was getting on; heck - once he got to five he was in the minority.
Even if the authorities wanted him silenced judicial murder was by no means inevitable. A trial is expensive and crucifixion (which was common) left no room for any return on the time and money invested. It is quite possible that a challenger to authority have been killed - possibly, though not necessarily judicially, but there were many alternatives for getting rid of malcontents - do you think volunteers rowed the Roman's warships and played the role of victim in the public circus?
No - if there was a script which demanded a human sacrifice a suitable enabler was essential and that enabler must have been both provided and unable to shirk his destiny - otherwise the risk of an ignominious, and probably anonymous, death would have been too great.
Martin60 - So God is that Machiavellian? That "pragmatic"? That amoral?
If you embarked on an unnecessary project which you knew in advance would lead to you murdering millions of people and wiping out almost all (blameless) life, causing billions of those you claim to love to lead painful, hungry, diseased, oppressed lives, sending the vast majority to eternal torment and (as an aside) sacrificing your own son for a couple of days I think Machiavellian and "pragmatic" would be letting you off the hook, wouldn't it?
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
The overwhelming weight of experimental evidence is said, by those involved, to deny the possibility that we act in the way you describe as "voluntary". Although we think it true that some choices are more difficult than others that is part of the story we tell ourselves to maintain what we call sanity - just like thinking the story we unconsciously construct around a few salient points is an accurate memory. Our choices are made subconsciously based on data we hold and can only be modified by further data - that's why "getting them young" is so powerful. The more our existing data is reinforced the more contrary data it takes to change our mind.
I will only note here that you are, in fact, posting on an internet forum with the goal of changing other people's minds. Your behavior therefore implies that voluntary choices exist, or why bother posting at all? Unless you go so far as to argue that your apparent choice to post is just as predetermined as my apparent choice to agree or disagree.
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
There are many reasons why Jesus (again assuming an existence) might have died well before 80 other than as a formal sacrificial victim. Illness, starvation, drowning, accidental bodily injury, at 30 he was getting on; heck - once he got to five he was in the minority.
Certainly he could have died by accident; that he did not I take to be a combination of prudence (on his part) and providence (on God the Father's part). As for "getting on"--33 or so was not old or even middle aged in that time period, anymore than it is now; it was in fact the age of majority (well, 30 was) for several religious functions among the Jews, such as serving in the temple. The low average lifespan does not mean that people grew old faster, but simply that so many infants and children died extremely young that they brought down the population average drastically. Those who made it to adulthood--heck, to five--were quite likely to make it to 60 or more. And these conditions still exist in much of the world today.
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
Even if the authorities wanted him silenced judicial murder was by no means inevitable. A trial is expensive and crucifixion (which was common) left no room for any return on the time and money invested. It is quite possible that a challenger to authority have been killed - possibly, though not necessarily judicially, but there were many alternatives for getting rid of malcontents - do you think volunteers rowed the Roman's warships and played the role of victim in the public circus?
First, I doubt that judicial murder was an absolute requirement for salvation--a mob stoning would have probably done as well. Nevertheless, I agree that the public, protracted, and humiliating nature of Jesus' actual death was something agreed upon by the Trinity-in-Council, and not a mere accident of who-got-to-him-first. The circumstances of his actual suffering and death pretty much remove any possibility that he did not realize, and suffer the realizing of, the whole horror of what was going on--with consequent fear, pain, humiliation, and so on. Stephen's death by stoning was quick and easy in comparison, and involved considerably less suffering. Which seems characteristic of God to me--if anyone is going to bear the brunt of suffering, he's going to make sure it lands on himself first of all. "In this is love," as John says. "Not that we have loved God but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins."
So let's grant the divine preference for judicial murder. (Dang, that sounds bad) Anyway, granting that--
Do you really think the high priests etc. would be satisfied with a lesser penalty? Pilate offered them just that, after all. He scourged Jesus and that wasn't enough for them. (Read up on that--people died under the lash.) It could be argued that he implicitly offered imprisonment, as he released another prisoner in a kind of swap-style deal. No, that wasn't enough either. "Crucify him!" they demanded. Why? Besides personal animosity, there is the simple fact that a dead man isn't likely to come back and bother you in the future. Death is a (usually) permanent end to a political threat. Selling him as a galley slave won't do--the Jews of all people realized that slaves could end up free again. As for the circus, they didn't do that kind of thing in Judea. Heck, I doubt they did galley slaves either--at least the selling of them. The Jews were persnickety like that. And what would be the sense in sending him to Rome or elsewhere to enact a penalty of this sort? Not to mention the increased likelihood of escape, etc. No, they want a permanent solution to the man, and they want it now.
You talk of the expense of a trial. What expense? No lawyers, no jurors, no lengthy imprisonment--the total cost of his trials (plural) and death were probably as follows:
item, 30 pieces of silver (later recouped and spent on a municipal graveyard);
item, the cost of soldiers and officials to arrest him, scourge him, and crucify him (which cost was going to be incurred regardless, since these people were salaried, and would have been paid the same whether they were working or playing dice around the courtyard fire);
item, the cost of the first century equivalent of coffee for the Sanhedrin during the illegal night trial;
item, some rope, a whip, wood, and several nails, all of which were probably recycled from other prisoners, and may have gone on to be used again later (Romans weren't squeamish);
item, some vinegar for pouring over the scourge marks;
item, some cheap wine (donated by a soldier at the cross);
item, dry cleaning costs for a Roman cape, used in mockery.
The reed, crown of thorns, and hyssop could all be gotten for free on the side of the road.
Now that you've forced me to consider it, I have to say this sounds an incredibly cheap way to dispose of a threat to your power. And the time involved was less than 24 hours.
quote:
Originally posted by HughWillRidmee:
No - if there was a script which demanded a human sacrifice a suitable enabler was essential and that enabler must have been both provided and unable to shirk his destiny - otherwise the risk of an ignominious, and probably anonymous, death would have been too great.
risk of IGNOMINIOUS DEATH?????!!! Seriously, what do you think the cross was??
Go read Apuleius, who is completely uncontaminated with post-Christian attitudes toward crucifixion. His foul-mouthed characters curse their way through the Golden Ass with "to the cross!" here, there, and everywhere, in the same way that modern punks use "motherfucker" for everything.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif)
