- Feb 5, 2002
- 167,578
- 56,833
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
In a recent article at Catholic Answers titled “Hope for Judas?” Jimmy Akin tells us that though he used to find convincing the traditional view that Judas is damned, it now seems to him that “we don’thave conclusive proof that Judas is in hell, and there is still a ray of hope for him.” But there is a difference between hope and wishful thinking. And with all due respect for Akin, it seems to me that given the evidence, the view that Judas may have been saved crosses the line from the former to the latter.
Scriptural evidence
The reason it has traditionally been held that Judas is in hell is that this seems to be the clear teaching of several scriptural passages, including the words of Christ himself. In Matthew 26:24, Jesus says of Judas: “Woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born” (RSV translation). (Mark 14:21 records the same remark.) It is extremely difficult at best to see how this could possibly be true of someone who repented and was saved. It makes perfect sense, though, if Judas was damned. Matthew also tells us that Judas’s very last act was to commit suicide (27:5), which is mortally sinful.
The evidence of John’s gospel seems no less conclusive. Praying to the Father about his disciples, Jesus, once again referring to Judas, says that “none of them is lost but the son of perdition” (17:12). It is, needless to say, extremely hard to see how Judas could be “lost” and of “perdition” and yet be saved.
Then there is the Acts of the Apostles. It reports that Peter, referring to Judas’s death and the need to replace him, said: “For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’ and ‘His office let another take’” (1:20). This implies the opposite of a happy fate for Judas, and a later verse confirms this pessimistic judgment. We are told that Matthias was selected “to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place” (1:25). As Haydock’s commentarynotes, the reference appears to be “to his own place of perdition, which he brought himself to” (p. 1435).
Commenting on Christ’s remark in Matthew 26:24, Akin suggests that it may have been intended as a warning rather than a prediction. On this interpretation, Jesus was merely saying that it would be better for his betrayer not to have been born if he does not repent. But this leaves it open that Judas did indeed repent. And in fact, Akin claims, we have evidence that Judas repented in the very next chapter of Matthew’s Gospel, which tells us:
When Judas, his betrayer, saw that he was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.”(27: 3-4)
Continued below.
edwardfeser.blogspot.com
Scriptural evidence
The reason it has traditionally been held that Judas is in hell is that this seems to be the clear teaching of several scriptural passages, including the words of Christ himself. In Matthew 26:24, Jesus says of Judas: “Woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born” (RSV translation). (Mark 14:21 records the same remark.) It is extremely difficult at best to see how this could possibly be true of someone who repented and was saved. It makes perfect sense, though, if Judas was damned. Matthew also tells us that Judas’s very last act was to commit suicide (27:5), which is mortally sinful.
The evidence of John’s gospel seems no less conclusive. Praying to the Father about his disciples, Jesus, once again referring to Judas, says that “none of them is lost but the son of perdition” (17:12). It is, needless to say, extremely hard to see how Judas could be “lost” and of “perdition” and yet be saved.
Then there is the Acts of the Apostles. It reports that Peter, referring to Judas’s death and the need to replace him, said: “For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation become desolate, and let there be no one to live in it’ and ‘His office let another take’” (1:20). This implies the opposite of a happy fate for Judas, and a later verse confirms this pessimistic judgment. We are told that Matthias was selected “to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place” (1:25). As Haydock’s commentarynotes, the reference appears to be “to his own place of perdition, which he brought himself to” (p. 1435).
Commenting on Christ’s remark in Matthew 26:24, Akin suggests that it may have been intended as a warning rather than a prediction. On this interpretation, Jesus was merely saying that it would be better for his betrayer not to have been born if he does not repent. But this leaves it open that Judas did indeed repent. And in fact, Akin claims, we have evidence that Judas repented in the very next chapter of Matthew’s Gospel, which tells us:
When Judas, his betrayer, saw that he was condemned, he repented and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and the elders, saying, “I have sinned in betraying innocent blood.”(27: 3-4)
Continued below.
Wishful thinking about Judas
In a recent article at Catholic Answers titled “Hope for Judas?” Jimmy Akin tells us that though he used to find convincing the traditiona...
edwardfeser.blogspot.com
