-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Judas Iscariot Sinner or saint?
- Thread starter frangipani
- Start date
Nada
#
Where are the rules by the way? I do not see them. I see many discussing things on here who are Christian and other things.
nazz
Doubting Thomas
Very good question. There used to be a link but now I don't see one.
Nada
#
What about the others on here discussing that are not Gnostics? How do you feel about them?
nazz
Doubting Thomas
same rules for everyone apply
Nada
#
Oh,so you explained what you explained to me also to them?
nazz
Doubting Thomas
I didn't see the other posts. And why are you still breaking the rules?
Nada
#
Oh, I thought since you were answering me it was ok.Well now I know that only you can ask and speak.I will never come on here again.Sorry.I did not mean to mess up your thread.I wish the rules were posted up somewhere.
I read it though. I'm sorry it is in this dir as I find the topic interesting.
Tom
Reading the thread, I don't think I really see an issue. We do hold the Gospel(s) to be Scripture, correct? Judas is shown explicitly to be 'bad' and evil. But he is also shown to have been repented. We can attempt to look at a thought along the lines of the Gospel of Judas, claiming that Judas had to do what he did and how ultimately he was a tool and shouldn't be held accountable for what he did. But I think if we did that, we run the risk of undermining the Gospels who all cast Judas in a negative light. It seems almost universal that Judas was evil. But in careful reading, I think the spirit of the Gospels tell us that by repenting of what he had done, Judas would have been (and has been?) forgiven.
I would think it is one thing to have small contradictory information in the Gospels, which are to be expected since there are multiple. But to refute a universal within? That takes more discussion for.
I don't see how anything said in this topic was bad though. Even though Bible Student is not Gnostic, he does remind us what is written in the Scriptures. Perhaps the discussion should move into that question: do we trust (and use) the Scriptures we have now? What do we use, and what don't we?
I would think it is one thing to have small contradictory information in the Gospels, which are to be expected since there are multiple. But to refute a universal within? That takes more discussion for.
I don't see how anything said in this topic was bad though. Even though Bible Student is not Gnostic, he does remind us what is written in the Scriptures. Perhaps the discussion should move into that question: do we trust (and use) the Scriptures we have now? What do we use, and what don't we?
nazz
Doubting Thomas
Maybe start a thread on that? I think they are useful but none should be trusted as inerrant in a factually historic sense. It has struck me that "Judas" is the Greek for for Judah, that is the Jews, and so it may be symbolic of Jewish betrayal of Jesus in general.
It may be, but because of Iscariot, other Judus' have been changed. For example, Jude Thaddeus. If we accept Iscariot is the evil Jews, is Thaddeus the good ones (for their certainly were good ones)? And don't forget the intro to the Gospel of Thomas is said to be written by Didymos Judas Thomas.
nazz
Doubting Thomas
good point
Kai'a
Freethinker
In my personal view, he wasn't either of those extremes, true disciple nor the greatest sinner out there. He had his role. Not everyone can lead by 'positive' example, not everyone can make the right choices all of the time, that doesn't mean their mark in history is not meaningful or that they should be glorified or damned for ever for unwise choices they've made.