Evaluation

The portrait of Judas that emerges from the New Testament accounts can be probed in many ways. Brown and Klassen argue that παραδίδωμι (paradidōmi) should be read in the neutral sense of handing over rather than with a pejorative connotation of betrayal, despite contexts where a negative sense is explicit (Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21; Luke 22:22). Judas’ motivation is also questioned, since the Gospels are ambiguous as to whether he was motivated by:

• Greed (Matt 26:15; John 12:5–6)

• Satanic influence (Luke 22:3; John 13:2, 27)

• Obedience to Jesus (Matt 26:50; John 13:27)

• A mistaken understanding of the nature of Jesus’ Messiahship which anticipated His establishment of an earthly kingdom (Matt 20:21; Mark 10:37; Acts 1:6; compare Matt 27:3)

• A growing understanding of Jesus’ true Messianic mission with which Judas disagreed

Meyer and Ehrman claim the so-called Gospel of Judas presents a Judas who is closer to Jesus than any of the other disciples, who alone understands Jesus’ message and intentions, and who acts in obedience to help Jesus attain His death. However, DeConick and Pearson, among others, have challenged this argument.

Additionally, the Gospel accounts themselves create theological tensions, many of which were explored early on by Origen (see Origen, Against Celsus 2.11; Comm. Jo. 32.240–50). For instance, they raise the question of how Judas can be faulted if his betrayal led to the fulfillment of God’s will for Jesus to die on the cross. It is also questioned whether Judas was corrupt from the time of his initial call—and if so, why Jesus chose him if He knew that Judas would betray Him.

The Gospel texts never indicate that the disciples were suspicious of Judas after Jesus predicts a betrayer; instead, they appear to be unaware of the offender’s identity (Matt 26:22; Mark 14:19; Luke 22:23; John 13:29). Judas does not express enough outward signs of duplicity throughout Jesus’ ministry to draw attention to himself; he appears no less sincere in his commitment to Jesus than the rest of the Twelve.

Passages like, “The Son of man now goes as it has been decreed, but woe to that person by whom he is betrayed” (Luke 22:22; compare Matt 26:24; Mark 14:21 NASB) indicate that the Gospel writers are comfortable with the theological complexity of their accounts. They appear to uphold God’s will, Satan’s evil influence, and Judas’ human responsibility simultaneously in their presentations of Judas’ act of betrayal.