What if Judas didn't do it?

[The Grand Nudger]

There was silver on the line. You know how The Jew are. I'm not sure you can really expect a committed believer in the great fairy to reject the overt antisemitism proto christianity employed to distance itself as a gentile community appropriating judaism.

[John 6IX Breezy]

I am curious. From which book are you getting those lines from?
Also, if it was you, wouldn’t you ask Jesus about his mission rather than just deciding “Let me go and tell the cops where Jesus is located.”

Again, I’ll ask. If Jesus points to you and tells you are going to betray him, would you betray him?
Does it make sense that Judas just ignores that at the supper and just goes on with his betrayal?
Would Judas or you just ignore it? You wouldn’t talk about it at all with Jesus?

The book is called The Desire of Ages. I mention it because it's a very old and central book within the Adventist church. These are beliefs that have been held about Judas since the mid 1800s at least.

As to whether or not it makes sense for Judas to continue his plan after being called out, I would say it does. Betrayal, by it's very nature, requires that you are betrayed by someone you trust or have a close relationship with. The closeness of the relationship maps directly onto the magnitude of the betrayal.

So questions like, why did a man cheat on his wife instead of talking with her about it first, are just questions that won't have a satisfying answer. They cheated, and that in itself is the answer.

So would Judas just ignore Jesus? Yes. That's why it's a betrayal.

[Angrboda]

Trust, yes. Have a close relationship with, no.

[The Grand Nudger]

Even better than the original. The judas bit in magic book was run of the mill roman antipathy towards jews, but Ellen White was a certifiable nutball, lol.

As they departed from God, the Jews in a great degree lost sight of the teaching of the ritual service. That service had been instituted by Christ Himself. In every part it was a symbol of Him; and it had been full of vitality and spiritual beauty. But the Jews lost the spiritual life from their ceremonies, and clung to the dead forms. They trusted to the sacrifices and ordinances themselves, instead of resting upon Him to whom they pointed. In order to supply the place of that which they had lost, the priests and rabbis multiplied requirements of their own; and the more rigid they grew, the less of the love of God was manifested. They measured their holiness by the multitude of their ceremonies, while their hearts were filled with pride and hypocrisy.

[Ferrocyanide]

There was silver on the line.  You know how The Jew are.  I'm not sure you can really expect a committed believer in the great fairy to reject the overt antisemitism proto christianity employed to distance itself as a gentile community appropriating judaism.

Yes, there is that angle to it.
Also, the authorities, the elders, priests, the pharisees  and so on all knew what Jesus looked like. I assume this was mentioned before (I did not read the entire thread).
So, there was no need for Judas.

The story often portrays people as idiots. It portrays the apostles as idiots at times, it portrays Judas as an idiot, it portrays Jesus’s parents as idiots and a few other people as well.
I would say this is evidence that the story is extremely distorted.

[Ferrocyanide]

I am curious. From which book are you getting those lines from?
Also, if it was you, wouldn’t you ask Jesus about his mission rather than just deciding “Let me go and tell the cops where Jesus is located.”

Again, I’ll ask. If Jesus points to you and tells you are going to betray him, would you betray him?
Does it make sense that Judas just ignores that at the supper and just goes on with his betrayal?
Would Judas or you just ignore it? You wouldn’t talk about it at all with Jesus?

The book is called The Desire of Ages. I mention it because it's a very old and central book within the Adventist church. These are beliefs that have been held about Judas since the mid 1800s at least.

As to whether or not it makes sense for Judas to continue his plan after being called out, I would say it does. Betrayal, by it's very nature, requires that you are betrayed by someone you trust or have a close relationship with. The closeness of the relationship maps directly onto the magnitude of the betrayal.

So questions like, why did a man cheat on his wife instead of talking with her about it first, are just questions that won't have a satisfying answer. They cheated, and that in itself is the answer.

So would Judas just ignore Jesus? Yes. That's why it's a betrayal.

OK, it is more in the category of Fan Fiction.
It isn't talking about actual history.

A man cheating on his wife is different. Humans are everywhere. There is evidence that humans exist.
Also, the wife is not claiming to be the daughter of god, she hasn’t demonstrated that she has magical powers.

In the case of Jesus, the claim is that he is god and also maybe he is the son of god or maybe he is not god.... whatever your particular flavor of christian claims.
So, Judas was in the presence of the jewish god or his right hand man (The Son) and he decides to go ahead with the betrayal even when he calls him out on it?

So, Judas is either incredibly stupid but I would say, more than likely, the story is a fabrication. The Bible is not a history book. It is primarily a religious book and I think the bar is set very low when it comes to sticking to the facts.

[John 6IX Breezy]

So, Judas was in the presence of the jewish god or his right hand man (The Son) and he decides to go ahead with the betrayal even when he calls him out on it?

Hmm I think you're touching on a much deeper topic with this question. For example, this isn't a behavior unique to Judas. The entirety of the bible depicts characters that experienced God in some way, and yet behaved contrary to that experience. From Adam all the way to Judas, the story is the same. I would argue that this conflict is one of the central themes of the Bible.

People smoke despite the warnings on the packaging; they drink and drive despite the dangers. To say Judas behaved "stupidly," is to say he behaved human.

[Belacqua]

Humans are everywhere. There is evidence that humans exist.

And I think that anyone who has experience of humans knows that they are often illogical. We are extremely good at justifying unwise behavior, and finding reasons to work against our own best interests. 

If you reject a story because the characters behave illogically, then I'd say you are ignoring both logic and history.

Moreover, if we want to think about how and why people behave illogically, it's very useful to read fiction. (And fiction, by definition, doesn't "stick to the facts.") The unwise behavior of the protagonists actually constitutes a main reason why we read Proust or Dostoevsky or Iris Murdoch. Among many others. 

Remember that Phaedrus asks Socrates whether he thinks the Greek myths are true or not. Socrates answers that he doesn't care. Since the main project for each of us is to "know thyself," Socrates uses the myths to question whether and to what extent he is like the characters in the stories. It is reasonable and historical to read ancient literature with this goal in mind, and to assume that, like Plato, the writers wrote it with this goal in mind. 

The Bible is not a history book. It is primarily a religious book and I think the bar is set very low when it comes to sticking to the facts.

Are there any sola scriptura literalist Christians posting on this forum? If you're arguing against people who are absent -- literalist believers -- then you have a point. 

But "sticking to the facts" in the way that journalism or a modern history book sticks to the facts has never been the point of spiritual literature. It is meant as a provocation, as a challenge, as a puzzlement to inspire. Reading it through the lens of a category error will cause illogical and ahistorical misreadings, both for Christians and for atheists.

[Ferrocyanide]

So, Judas was in the presence of the jewish god or his right hand man (The Son) and he decides to go ahead with the betrayal even when he calls him out on it?

Hmm I think you're touching on a much deeper topic with this question. For example, this isn't a behavior unique to Judas. The entirety of the bible depicts characters that experienced God in some way, and yet behaved contrary to that experience. From Adam all the way to Judas, the story is the same. I would argue that this conflict is one of the central themes of the Bible.

People smoke despite the warnings on the packaging; they drink and drive despite the dangers. To say Judas behaved "stupidly," is to say he behaved human.

It isn’t quite the same. Adam did not betray anyone. He broke a silly rule.
Based on the story, it looks like Adam and Eve do not have much experience with anything.
There is a snake. The snake says this to Eve:

Genesis 3:5 KING JAMES VERSION
For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.

^^^^^The snake is saying that the jewish god gave them bad information and it is ok for them to eat and you become gods.
So, why not test out the claim?
The story doesn’t explain the motivation of the snake.

They eat the magic fruit which modifies the brain of Adam and Eve and they gain knowledge about good and evil.
For some reason, they suddenly realize that they are naked.
Being naked has something to do with good and evil?

Anyway, no one was betrayed. No one was harmed.
The only one harmed was the snake and his children and future generations. Ditto for Adam and Eve.

People smoke despite the warnings on the packaging; they drink and drive despite the dangers.

They are not betraying anyone, they are not betraying a friend or family member, they are not turning someone over to a violent authoritarian state.
They are just enjoying a product. They are likely addicted to the nicotine and ethanol.

The last supper story reads something like:
Jesus: “Hey Judas, I know that you are going to betray me.”
Judas: “No man. I wouldn’t do that.”

[Ferrocyanide]

Humans are everywhere. There is evidence that humans exist.

And I think that anyone who has experience of humans knows that they are often illogical. We are extremely good at justifying unwise behavior, and finding reasons to work against our own best interests. 

Yes, I have observed a certain set of humans and quite a number of them behave illogically, in varying degrees, depending on the situation.

I have also noted that when it comes to their god, people respect their god a lllllllllllllllllooooooooooooooottttttttttttttttt.
When I say a lot, I mean a huge a lot. They will bow down to it thousands of times a day, they will get down and lick his ass and will do absolutely anything for their god.

So, how does this happen? How does Judas sell his good friend, this good guy named Jesus, who goes around and spends his time bringing people to life, casts out demons, heals the sick and also Jesus is god.
How often in world religions do you have this kind of situation?

And more importantly, how big a moron is Judas?

The unwise behavior of the protagonists actually constitutes a main reason why we read Proust or Dostoevsky or Iris Murdoch

I haven’t read it. Tell me about it.

Remember that Phaedrus asks Socrates whether he thinks the Greek myths are true or not. Socrates answers that he doesn't care. Since the main project for each of us is to "know thyself," Socrates uses the myths to question whether and to what extent he is like the characters in the stories. It is reasonable and historical to read ancient literature with this goal in mind, and to assume that, like Plato, the writers wrote it with this goal in mind.

You think the Bible stories’ goal is to just read it and to learn about yourself?

Are there any sola scriptura literalist Christians posting on this forum? If you're arguing against people who are absent -- literalist believers -- then you have a point.

But "sticking to the facts" in the way that journalism or a modern history book sticks to the facts has never been the point of spiritual literature. It is meant as a provocation, as a challenge, as a puzzlement to inspire. Reading it through the lens of a category error will cause illogical and ahistorical misreadings, both for Christians and for atheists.

Yes, we keep running into this.
If anyone wants to declare themselves as non literalists, they can.
I have no problem with that.
I would just ask other questions. You can ask me other questions.