=Something Bad Jesus Did=

[IF_u_knew]

Judas... well, he punished himself for Jesus having failed him.

Kind of jumped out at me most unexpectedly. What does this mean? What do you think he was expecting of Jesus? I will have to say that I am most intrigued here lately with the character of Judas and can not quite put my finger on what it is that I am missing.. and I know there is something more than what I have already shared.

And just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth on the view of women in the Tanakh. I personally see something quite different than others I guess. I find them to have almost a more fascinating and revered role than do many of the men. Esther, Hannah, Deborah, Sarah (in a way, that I am still unsure about personally), the Queen of Sheba (in fact, she was shown to be highly intelligent); and so on. I personally think that the Jewish culture is one that would benefit other cultures all around should they model themselves likewise. The women are strong in their femininity, but not haughty (and manly.. meaning competes with men in their role..that is vulgar) which seems to be the case in most other cultures and in the other cultures they are treated like dogs. There is a happy medium and it seems to me that the Jewish have perfected it. :yes: (off topic, from a female point of view, thought I would throw mine in).

 

[Ben Masada]

Kind of jumped out at me most unexpectedly. What does this mean? What do you think he was expecting of Jesus? I will have to say that I am most intrigued here lately with the character of Judas and can not quite put my finger on what it is that I am missing.. and I know there is something more than what I have already shared.

And just wanted to put in my 2 cents worth on the view of women in the Tanakh. I personally see something quite different than others I guess. I find them to have almost a more fascinating and revered role than do many of the men. Esther, Hannah, Deborah, Sarah (in a way, that I am still unsure about personally), the Queen of Sheba (in fact, she was shown to be highly intelligent); and so on. I personally think that the Jewish culture is one that would benefit other cultures all around should they model themselves likewise. The women are strong in their femininity, but not haughty (and manly.. meaning competes with men in their role..that is vulgar) which seems to be the case in most other cultures and in the other cultures they are treated like dogs. There is a happy medium and it seems to me that the Jewish have perfected it. :yes: (off topic, from a female point of view, thought I would throw mine in).

Judas was a patriot, and like all patriots, he was a fool. He either expected too much of Jesus or misread him. On the one hand, Jesus was to blame for the signs
he gave which fed the dreams in Judas' head. On the other hand, Judas had to pay
the price for having put all his eggs in one basket only. I mean, he had no second option in his agenda in case Jesus failed. Of one thing I am sure: Judas did not betray Jesus. His blunder was to force the issue in the hope that Jesus would not
fail him.

Judas wanted the Romans out of Israel, and Jesus was taking too long to define what he had come for. But Jesus was not too clear, at least to Judas, who misread
the signs Jesus would give off, which were translated in Judas's mind as if he would
decide at the right moment. And here Judas burned himself. Because the moment for Jesus was not the same as the moment for Judas. Jesus' reluctance in the mind
of Judas was begging for an outside action to introduce the momentum.


The authorities had decided to arrest Jesus. As he sensed arrest, he fled with the eleven disciples to their hiding place in the Gethsemani. Since Judas also knew of this hiding place, he found the moment propitious to guide the authorities to Jesus and force the issue which according to Judas, was what Jesus needed to decide. It didn't turn out the way Judas thought, and worse than that, he lost his Teacher whom he loved. The only way out of this predicament was death, and he walked to it.

There is a gospel, somewhere, the Gospel of Judas. Perhaps in the undergrounds of the Vatican. I would love to read it. It would say a lot that has not been said about the real Jesus of Nazareth, and all about what they expected of each other and didn't get it.

Ben:

 

[IF_u_knew]

There is a gospel, somewhere, the Gospel of Judas. Perhaps in the undergrounds of the Vatican. I would love to read it. It would say a lot that has not been said about the real Jesus of Nazareth, and all about what they expected of each other and didn't get it.

Ben:

Funny you should mention this.. I actually came across the following yesterday (was looking for something entirely differently.. so, imagine my surprise as I had not even realized they had found a lost gospel of Judas).

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf

I have only skimmed over it and have no idea the accuracy and/or validity of said translation.. but from what I read, it seems to make Jesus sound somewhat mystical, as do many of the gnostics. In some senses, I can understand the objective point of the writings; but on the other hand, I think that there are many who could go insane by thinking along the lines of the gnostics (and are in fact going insane, in my opinion).
Also, in light of this "enlightenment" that was brought about by these gospel versions, I do understand to a degree why they would have been hidden. To set aside the mysticism that most approach these gospels with is to see a truth that I do not think many can handle. Many see the "gnosis" talked about as an enlightenment to achieve something in their personal afterlife when it really is an enlightenment to achieve something in this life after one's life is over; and that is all too depressing for most to be able to handle (in my opinion). I think most people need to be controlled.. control however needs not to be oppressive or viewed as a right of the 'controller.' More or less, the controller needs to be more a steerer of cattle toward safety, if that makes sense. And now, after writing this in the open haha, I do think the truth just needs to be seen so that we, the adults, can rework what future it is that we are handing to our children.. and quickly.

I tend to think that if Jesus existed, this was the message he was passing on to his people. One thing the Jewish people seemed to understand was the importance of collective memory and those with a collective memory hold the keys to the future for their people.. This would not bode well for those who would like nothing more than to keep the keys of oppressive control in their hands. The way that Jesus' message has been interpretated has been to control through rewards in an afterlife (which, I will continue to state does not seem to be the message that I perceive in the parts that read the Word to me... After - Life is clearly death). It is obvious, and even written, that he perceived heaven and hell to be here in the now.

Now, as to what all this has to do with Judas, I am starting to personally think this was the point in the death of Jesus; he seemed to be giving Judas instructions to betray him (even in the gospels that we have in the Bible)... thus representing the death of the Word if sold to those on the outside of the Jewish collective memory. It also seems that this was again the point via reinforcement of the message through the Masada account (whether myth or not matters little as to the point it was trying to get across). Because the Jewish find suicide to be dishonorable, one was appointed the dishonorable one for the point to be made without losing the honor of *that* point. This is how I view the role of Judas. He was chosen and willingly accepted that role of being the dishonorable one for the sake of the "cause" aka point; and in light of this (if true), one must wonder if he was not in fact more enlightened than the others (besides Magdalene, of course.. which is why I find it curious they are the two with the "bad" reps in many churches). In this sense, and being what I perceive, I find it hard to believe that he was misguided and even further, I question whether he actually committed suicide or if this was claimed for the same purposes that Magdalene's image was tarnished by Pope Gregory... to steer the line of thinking into something that it was not meant to be. *shrugs* (whew... I know.. :faint. And as always.. this is my speculation always open to being tweaked.

 

[Ben Masada]

Funny you should mention this.. I actually came across the following yesterday (was looking for something entirely differently.. so, imagine my surprise as I had not even realized they had found a lost gospel of Judas).

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf

I have only skimmed over it and have no idea the accuracy and/or validity of said translation.. but from what I read, it seems to make Jesus sound somewhat mystical, as do many of the gnostics. In some senses, I can understand the objective point of the writings; but on the other hand, I think that there are many who could go insane by thinking along the lines of the gnostics (and are in fact going insane, in my opinion).
Also, in light of this "enlightenment" that was brought about by these gospel versions, I do understand to a degree why they would have been hidden. To set aside the mysticism that most approach these gospels with is to see a truth that I do not think many can handle. Many see the "gnosis" talked about as an enlightenment to achieve something in their personal afterlife when it really is an enlightenment to achieve something in this life after one's life is over; and that is all too depressing for most to be able to handle (in my opinion). I think most people need to be controlled.. control however needs not to be oppressive or viewed as a right of the 'controller.' More or less, the controller needs to be more a steerer of cattle toward safety, if that makes sense. And now, after writing this in the open haha, I do think the truth just needs to be seen so that we, the adults, can rework what future it is that we are handing to our children.. and quickly.

I tend to think that if Jesus existed, this was the message he was passing on to his people. One thing the Jewish people seemed to understand was the importance of collective memory and those with a collective memory hold the keys to the future for their people.. This would not bode well for those who would like nothing more than to keep the keys of oppressive control in their hands. The way that Jesus' message has been interpretated has been to control through rewards in an afterlife (which, I will continue to state does not seem to be the message that I perceive in the parts that read the Word to me... After - Life is clearly death). It is obvious, and even written, that he perceived heaven and hell to be here in the now.

Now, as to what all this has to do with Judas, I am starting to personally think this was the point in the death of Jesus; he seemed to be giving Judas instructions to betray him (even in the gospels that we have in the Bible)... thus representing the death of the Word if sold to those on the outside of the Jewish collective memory. It also seems that this was again the point via reinforcement of the message through the Masada account (whether myth or not matters little as to the point it was trying to get across). Because the Jewish find suicide to be dishonorable, one was appointed the dishonorable one for the point to be made without losing the honor of *that* point. This is how I view the role of Judas. He was chosen and willingly accepted that role of being the dishonorable one for the sake of the "cause" aka point; and in light of this (if true), one must wonder if he was not in fact more enlightened than the others (besides Magdalene, of course.. which is why I find it curious they are the two with the "bad" reps in many churches). In this sense, and being what I perceive, I find it hard to believe that he was misguided and even further, I question whether he actually committed suicide or if this was claimed for the same purposes that Magdalene's image was tarnished by Pope Gregory... to steer the line of thinking into something that it was not meant to be. *shrugs* (whew... I know.. :faint. And as always.. this is my speculation always open to being tweaked.

Hi Katie, this last paragraph of yours is a revelation to me. I am very impressed by it. I am aware of what the Church has done to tarnish the name of Mary Magdalene, perhaps to discard her from any possibility that she might indeed have been the wife of Jesus. However, doesn't it sound a contradiction to you that in spite of the tarnishing of Mary's name they would canonize her into a saint? That's odd!

And, as you well remind me, it could be that Judas entered the records as one who committed suicide in order to enhance Jesus' divinity, given the greatness of his act of betraying God. That's something to research into.

Ben:

 

[K.Venugopal]

Then, to erase a little the impression left on her for being forced to recognize her doggy condition, he mentioned something about her strong faith and left.

Maybe it was exactly to test her faith that Jesus prolonged her agony. Maybe the expression 'dogged determination' came from the enactment of this drama. Any way, all's well that ends well. The woman got what she wanted and her faith in Jesus was fulfiled.

 

[IF_u_knew]

However, doesn't it sound a contradiction to you that in spite of the tarnishing of Mary's name they would canonize her into a saint? That's odd!

Well, Ben... the whole of Catholicism seems contradictory to me. I think the thing with Magdalene is to show that... well, you know what? I have nothing to offer out here! haha Perhaps their wine is a bit on the strong side, thus clouding the ability to use logic?

 

[IF_u_knew]

And, as you well remind me, it could be that Judas entered the records as one who committed suicide in order to enhance Jesus' divinity, given the greatness of his act of betraying God. That's something to research into.

Ben:

Forgot to address this part of your reply. What got me to thinking about Judas were the oddities that I kept coming across. Namely, the placing of his name at the beginning of Matthew (which startled me as I had never noticed it there before) and then John 13 also seems rather to speak that Jesus had much to do with putting Judas up to it.. even in the other gospels, he was aware of Judas' intent.. I actually tend to think that this whole story is a picture of something more practical rather than actual events that took place. *shrugs* I just have a hard time not seeing this all as allegorical of something far more practical and more in line with the prophecies.

 

[ayani]

well, in truth, someone had to betray Jesus.

the Gospel accounts tell us that what motivated Judas to do what he did, was evil. the fruits of that evil inclination were greed, and betrayal.

satan was at work. yet his evil was part of a greater plan. something something evil and painful had to happen in order for a greater good to come about in God's plan. He is sovereign, and uses evil as well sometimes, to bring to light a greater good. this is the central message of the cross- evil and pain bringing forth glory, goodness, and salvation.

the Bible tells us over and over that often, in order to get to the good stuff, difficulties must often be worked through first. i'm sure plenty of non-Christians could agree with that, too. the theme is that God has a plan, even in the midst of suffering and hard times. think of Joseph's mistreatment by his brothers, and the tumultuous way Jesus of Nazareth came into the world.

Jesus was betrayed and sold, handed over to be beaten and killed, and subjected to a truly lowly and painful execution. yet marvelously, according to Christian faith, through this dizzyingly sad and apparently meaningless series of events, God's glory shone through in a way not even hoped for from Golgotha, and death was conquered on a quiet Sunday morning.

for a Christian, the central character is Jesus, not Judas. i remember a wonderful animated film called "The Miracle Maker" which gave an intersting perspective on Judas' character and motivations. it portrayed Him as a patriot, waiting excitedly for Jesus to leap onto horseback, and lead a Messianic army against the hated Roman empire. this didn't happen, and when Jesus was clear that He'd be handed over to the Roamns to be killed, Judas' hopes were crushed. furious, embarassed, and indignant, Judas sells his friend out, and gets Him arrested, realizing later that He'd betrayed an innocent man. this is, mind you, the perspective of the film and not neccesarily the Bible. but i found it interesting, and plausible.

what is most meaningful for me as a Christian is not hypothesis derived from details of the Gospel narrative, but the overall message. God has sent His Son, the Messiah, to save all peoples. He has died, but is risen, and is alive today. to know Him and walk with Him, to believe on Him, is to have the treasure of God's kingdom. i do believe this, and live out that faith as best i can., with God's help.

scholars and curious critics of faith will always have a new spin, something new to guess at or emphasize. previously it was the person and role of Mary of Magdala, and scores of stories supposing all kinds of things. before that it was a ton of new books trying to discredit or dismantle the Biblical portrait of Jesus, and reduce Him to an over-blown, mythicized human rabbi, a kind of Jewish Gotama Buddha.

there are many things to emphasize or speculate over, yet to remain fixed on them is to miss the Man. He's a lot of things to a lot of people. and no two people who have met Him and known Him will see Him the same. yet the Man remains the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. He's always there; patient, available, offering us His word and His promise.

 

[AK4]

IF U KNEW

Keep in mind, Jesus kept company with the rich in the community, so he could not have been but a poor beggar... obvious if one actually takes note of who it is that is amongst his "following."
I am sure that either this will be ignored or will be explained away by "faith" type explanations.. but, can't we even just consider that it is quite odd and hypocritical, considering (especially considering the last 2 verses)?

First off Jesus didnt keep company with the rich. It was mostly with poor and "sinners" and the multitudes almost always came to Him.

Second i dont know what you are trying to say there in blue.

 

[ayani]

i agree with AK4.

He sometimes ate at the houses of rich leaders, and he certainly talked with people from all walks of life.

yet from what we read of Him in the Gospels, He was not a rich man by any of the world's standards. to follow Him was to live on one's daily bread, and to do an awful lot of walking.

Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go."Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." (Matthew 8:19-20)

At that time Jesus went through the grain fields on the Sabbath. His disciples were hungry and began to pick some heads of grain and eat them. (Matthew 12:1)

Jesus was a wanderer. He had no fixed house, and no address. He had friends and disciples who supported Him in His ministry (Luke 8:103). yet He was a man not attached to the world. He renounced the world and all its pleasures and power (Matthew 4:1-10) to share His Father's kingdom with a hungry world, and to be broken as the bread of life for all .

He taught that men should not be attached to worldly riches, but should seek God's kingdom first, be humble, be a servant, and take up one's cross if one wanted to follow Him. in doing so, we wouldn't be going anywhere He hasn't already been.

 

[herushura]

Jesus did may strange bad things

Cursed a fig tree for not brearing fruit, well i dont know if jesus was educated in seasonal changed, but fig tree fruits are seasonal.

 

[ayani]

Jesus did may strange bad things

Cursed a fig tree for not brearing fruit, well i dont know if jesus was educated in seasonal changed, but fig tree fruits are seasonal.

a Christian would answer that Jesus, being the Son of God and sharing in the nature of the Creator, knew plenty about figs.

i would argue that He used the withering of the fig tree to illustrate two points.

Jesus often used agricultural analogies such as harvests and threshing to illustrate the sifting that occurs in God's kingdom. trees which bear good fruit (the fruits of the Holy Spirit) will be saved. those with no fruit will be withered and chopped down. the fig tree withering can be seen as a live-action agricultural metaphor. Jesus was hungry, went to the tree, and found no fruit. so He cursed the tree, and it withered. in other words? be ready. we do not know when the Master will come and inquire of our fruits.

in addition, Jesus uses His withering of the tree to demonstrate His control over the natural world, and to show the power of faith. faith can do amazing things. and faith in Him can do especially amazing things. faith in the God who saves can overcome empires, win hearts, and change the world for the better with the Good News. faith and love, Jesus emphasizes often.

 

[Ben Masada]

Jesus did may strange bad things

Cursed a fig tree for not brearing fruit, well i dont know if jesus was educated in seasonal changed, but fig tree fruits are seasonal.

That's all nonsense written 50+ years after Jesus had been gone. All interpolations to fill up the pages of a book like sausage fillers.

Ben:

 

[ayani]

not necessarily, Ben.

the Gospel accounts, while differing in details, agree on a number of key happenings.

one reason for the similarities is because these narratives were cross-checked with one another, and also cross-checked with living disciples of the Lord and with eye-witnesses.

these documents were in wide circulation by the second century, and were likely penned within thirty to fifty years after Jesus' earthy ministry. compared to most ancient documents citing historical happenings, which were often written down generations after the event occurred, this is a very close and credible lapse of time.

had completely false information found its way into the Gospels, there would have been hundreds, if not thousands of living eye-witnesses to speak up and say "wait! the Lord never did that or said that. nonsense!" in addition we have good evidence that these Gospels were translated rather quickly into Hebrew, Aramaic, Coptic, and other languages, to be read easily by diverse peoples.

what we have is not filler, or nonsense. what we have are the recountings of the sayings and doings of Jesus of Nazareth, who claimed to be the Messiah. Peter, one of Jesus' closest disciples, would have been an instrumental source of reference. what is neat about the Gospels is the style. it's like there's a camera there, recording details, names, places, and numbers. it's a great amount of detail, and going by the belief that in Jesus God breaks through into our world in a tangible way, not at all incredible.

That's all nonsense written 50+ years after Jesus had been gone. All interpolations to fill up the pages of a book like sausage fillers.

Ben:

 

[tomspug]

Once, I was asked if there was anything bad Jesus did in his life. My answer was:

Yes, there was something Jesus did, which I wish he had not done, because it does
not represent well the People he belonged to.

Once a Gentile Canaanite mother was crying after him, asking for her daughter to be cured, and Jesus would not give a damn to her. His disciples told him to do something for that woman or discard her, because she was making them go crazy with her no-stop crying.

What did Jesus say? I haven't come for Gentiles but ONLY for the House of Israel. Then, kept on going and the woman kept on crying and following him.

When he couldn't take any longer, he stopped and told her: Hey, listen, what do you want from me? To cure my daughter Master. No way, I cannot take of the food of the children and throw it unto the dogs.

He meant the Jews for the children, and the Gentiles for the dogs. But only after the woman understood and recognized her condition of dog, by saying that the dogs also feed from the crumbles that fall from the table of the children, Jesus saw that he would never get rid of that woman. So, he changed his mind and cured her
daughter. Then, to erase a little the impression left on her for being forced to recognize her doggy condition, he mentioned something about her strong faith and left.

That was terrible, if we can imagine what that poor woman went through till she got
what she wanted. The text is in Matthew 15:21-28.

Ben: :sad:

This is yet another example of you taking absolutely no effort to comprehend a passage of Christian scripture that you do not understand.

 

[Charity]

That's all nonsense written 50+ years after Jesus had been gone. All interpolations to fill up the pages of a book like sausage fillers.

Ben:

Hello Ben
As I was reading your post I had to laugh and I thought to myself "Ben doesn't do interpolations or especially sausage with fillers....I'm still reading, even thought silent......
Cookie for you Ben.....:coffee2:

Blessings and Prayers
Charity

 

[IF_u_knew]

well, in truth, someone had to betray Jesus.

the Gospel accounts tell us that what motivated Judas to do what he did, was evil. the fruits of that evil inclination were greed, and betrayal.

satan was at work. yet his evil was part of a greater plan. something something evil and painful had to happen in order for a greater good to come about in God's plan. He is sovereign, and uses evil as well sometimes, to bring to light a greater good. this is the central message of the cross- evil and pain bringing forth glory, goodness, and salvation.

Hmmm.. I am just not perceiving the same thing about Judas. Jesus knew what Judas was up to and this is not a secret, even in the gospels; so if Jesus approved, who are we to say he was wrong. Jesus condemned for the Son of man being betrayed, no? Since the Son of man is the Word of the LORD and I do not see that as being bound to Jesus, I do not see that Jesus having been betrayed as something that was condemned. How does one betray another when the "another" is in on the "secret."?

I could be wrong, but something just does not set right to me. And to call him evil is a bit harsh, no? Jesus was not G.d.

Second i dont know what you are trying to say there in blue.

Well, I wrote it plainly in English, so I do not know what you are not understanding. Do you want me to expound on the point?

 

[IF_u_knew]

Then a teacher of the law came to him and said, "Teacher, I will follow you wherever you go."Jesus replied, "Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head." (Matthew 8:19-20)

The Son of man is the Word in the mouth of a man. It is not and was not bound to Jesus. You think Jesus did not have a place to lay his head? I rather think he did. He was speaking allegorically. It had nothing to do with *his* actual status.

 

[ayani]

actually, what Judas was evil, but necessary. and when satan enters you and acts through you, you necessarily *become* evil. the Bible tells us that satan entered Judas, and inspired his act. yet satan didn't work through any of the other disciples that evening. Jesus knew who would betray Him. He knew that it had to happen.

Jesus said "woe to that man through whom the Son of Man is betrayed" (Matthew 26:24). indeed. he did not benefit much from the selling of his friend.

it was the wrong thing to do to someone you love (handing your friend over to be arrested and killed), but had to happen. so in the greater picture, his selfish act brought about the events making possible the crucifixion, and the resurrection. in other words, even evil can pave the way for what is right.

the Bible doesn't tell us much more about Judas. he killed himself, and was replaced by Matthias. the story continues after that, through Acts and beyond the events described therein.

and it can be argued and demonstrated that Jesus *is* diety incarnate. He is clear that there is a relationship between Him and the Father, true. and that the Father gives all things to the Son. yet He says also that to know and see Him is to know and see God in the flesh. and His Messianic title, Imannuel, means "God with us". His name, a common one, Yeshua, means "God saves". God saves us through Jesus, and in Jesus, too.

Hmmm.. I am just not perceiving the same thing about Judas. Jesus knew what Judas was up to and this is not a secret, even in the gospels; so if Jesus approved, who are we to say he was wrong. Jesus condemned for the Son of man being betrayed, no? Since the Son of man is the Word of the LORD and I do not see that as being bound to Jesus, I do not see that Jesus having been betrayed as something that was condemned. How does one betray another when the "another" is in on the "secret."?

I could be wrong, but something just does not set right to me. And to call him evil is a bit harsh, no? Jesus was not G.d.

 

[ayani]

yet Jesus says it. He points continually to Himself, the flesh and blood person. He says that He *is* certain things, not simply that He acts as a vessel for certain things. Jesus lays strong emphasis on Himself, and His relationship to God. He tells crowds of people the there is something unique and important about Himself, the Man standing in front of you, talking to you. (John 6:25-58)

Jesus had an extensive ministry, and traveled a great deal. He stayed at people's houses. He walked all over the place. He was not ministering from his home or his office, answering the phone and responding to letters, as we might put it today. He wandered, He preached, and this was not easy all the time.

discipleship for those coming to Him was not for those who wished to work from home. He is clear that one's old way of life must die, and one must put their hands to the plow and not look back. He demands a lot. yet He lived it Himself, and the disciple is to become like the teacher (Luke 6:40).

The Son of man is the Word in the mouth of a man. It is not and was not bound to Jesus. You think Jesus did not have a place to lay his head? I rather think he did. He was speaking allegorically. It had nothing to do with *his* actual status.