if Judas had already agreed with betraying Jesus to the authorities, then why in 3 out of 4 gospels (Matthew left this part out) that Satan entered into Judas at the Last Supper?
Three of the four? Read Mark 14:10-20 and Luke 22:1-23. In three of the four gospels, Judas had already met with the chief priests
prior to the last supper.
You seem to be quoting John 13:27: "As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him."
You also seem to be ignoring John 13:2: "The evening meal was in progress, and the devil had
already prompted Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, to betray Jesus." So it's a little ambiguous, but it sounds like the betrayal may have already been in motion according to the fourth gospel as well. (John 12:4-6 states that Judas was stealing from the group's funds, which provides an existing motive which
precedes any mention of Satan's involvement.)
You're also assuming that by entering Judas, satan was possessing him. It's possible that is meant as an indication that satan was
tempting Judas. Unless satan was controlling Judas as a puppet, then Judas had free will to deny satan.
Was it really Judas' will that betray Jesus? Or was it the will of God, with the assistance of Satan?
According to christian doctrine, satan is also known as
The Adversary. Satan does not assist god. Satan opposes god.
Also, if it was the will of God that Jesus and Judas would go through what they did in the gospels, then surely Judas was fated to betray the one he called Rabbi.
That's circular logic. You're assuming that Judas was fulfilling the will of god, then using that to prove that Judas was fated to betray Jesus.
Let's start with a different assumption: It's god's will that
all people have free will.
If we start with that assumption, then we have to conclude that god
wouldn't force Judas to betray Jesus, and satan
couldn't force Judas to betray Jesus. Under that assumption, satan tempted Judas, Jesus predicted Judas' betrayal, and god permitted Judas' plans to succeed. But none of those prevented Judas from being responsible for his own decision.
Because from Christian point-of-view, Jesus had to suffer the arrest, flogging and crucifixion.
And Jesus could have been arrested without Judas' betrayal. If Judas hadn't led the pharisees and romans to Jesus, then Jesus could have shown up in front of the temple (where they'd have an easy time finding him). Judas isn't a
necessary element for those events to transpire.
Someone need to betray Jesus, and it would seem a foregone conclusion that it would be Judas Iscariot.
In order to fulfill prophecy,
someone had to betray Jesus. "Betray" is a broad term. Can you think of any
other actions that might be considered a betrayal?
Peter swore that he'd never deny Jesus, then he did so three times within hours of giving his word. Most people would consider that to be a betrayal as well. It's not as severe as Judas' betrayal, but it is
a betrayal. The same could be said of the other apostles/disciples desserting Jesus when he was arrested, tried, flogged and crucified.
No shortage of betrayals that day. Remove one and you can easily find a replacement. Judas wasn't
necessary for the fulfillment of prophecy. He's just convenient.
Jesus knew who, and didn't do anything to stop Judas. Why?
Why did those crazy cultists poison themselves in an attempt to hitch a ride on a comet? They believed that their deaths would help them accomplish their ultimate goal.
Jesus saw his death as a necessary step towards his higher goal. Why would he do anything to stop someone who was facilitating his death? Jesus' actions were consistent with his belief.
Based on results, I would say that Jesus' belief was more correct than the crazy cultists' belief.
Do you see any other outcomes for Jesus and Judas with the betrayal/death/resurrection?
Sure.
Alternate History with slight modifications:
Judas doesn't betray Jesus to the chief priests. At the last supper, Jesus says someone present will betray him, but doesn't indicate who or how (and since the apostles didn't realize that Judas was the betrayer until
after the arrest, even in John 13:21-30, it seems obvious that the conversation between Judas and Jesus was sufficiently ambiguous).
Jesus isn't arrested in the garden of gethsemane. After leaving the garden, he goes into Jerusalem and runs into a group of priests and guards who arrest him. (We're assuming Jesus is divine, and omniscience should make this kind of group easy to locate.)
The rest of the day's events (sans Judas' betrayal) transpire as recorded.
Option 1:
Judas is embezzling from the group's funds (as mentioned in John 12:4-6). After the resurrection/ascension, this action is discovered and is cast out of the apostles for betraying Jesus and the commandments. He is recorded as being the betrayer.
Option 2:
Judas wasn't a thief (or was never caught). In reviewing the fulfillment of prophecy, Peter's denial of Jesus is seen as being the betrayal which was foretold. Peter is recorded as being the betrayer.
And if Judas was move to act the way he did, from the will of God or Satan's possession of Judas, then could Judas really be held accountable for his action?
If Judas was a puppet (for god or satan), then Judas was not accountable for his actions.
But we are in a poor position to
know whether Judas acted of his own volition, or whether he was being controlled by an outside force. You (apparently) believe that Judas was controlled by an outside force. I believe that Judas made his own choices.
Even if we assume accountability (or a lack thereof), that doesn't necessarily answer the question. Calvinists assume predestination, but believe some people end up in heaven, and some end up in hell. Universalists assume free will, but everyone ends up in heaven.
Therefore, not only is your perception of accountability based upon what you choose to believe, but your perception of a final outcome is also dependent upon belief, regardless of accountability.
