Skip to comments.Poor Judas.....
Posted on 04/14/2016 7:56:20 PM PDT by marshmallow
That's right. Judas experienced the worst evil that anyone could suffer. He was not warmly welcomed!
No one embraced him after he betrayed the Savior. No one had pity on him. He was treated harshly and without knowing what to do, he sought the gibbet.
This is the great evil of our times: the lack of welcome offered to sinners. And Francis has made this clear regarding the supreme sinner. The poor man, Judas, hung himself because he was not welcomed, for he was truly repentant, according to Francis.
Once more Francis condemns those who, according to his peculiar concept, clutch only at the truth of the Law, taking it by the letter. These would be the High Priests, guilty of the death of Judas due to their laws: they did not care about Judas repentance. Poor Judas!
Once more, Francis surprises us with a new exegesis: the poor repentant Judas, victim of hard hearted inexorable followers of the law.....
Curious repentance is this, which fails to bring about true conversion but rather despair and suicide and corresponds entirely to what the former Cardinal Bergoglio had declared: practically no one who commits suicide is to blame for his fault.
This doesnt surprise us, since it is not the first time that the current Bishop of Rome corrects Jesus Christ himself
his genius is up to this. A round of applause from the audience (ever more empty
(Excerpt) Read more at en.denzingerbergoglio.com ...
And yet Jesus chose to share the last supper with Judas.
Sort of makes you wonder what he’ll have to say to those who’ve fought so hard to deny communion to those they thought were unworthy.
He’s already said that Judas would have been better off if he had never been born.
Jesus also said..."it would be better for that man if he had never been born" (Mt 26:24)
Yes, apparently the pope glossed over that verse.
He could say that about anyone spending eternity in hell. It would be the truth.
No Judas, no Jesus.
Judas chose suicide over seeking God’s mercy.
Judas was predicted in the OT, his role not his exact person, in the thirty-pieces of silver. Prophecy had to be fulfilled.
We are told Judas had been stealing from the purse, but Jesus kept him as a disciple; Judas was first tempted, then possessed by Satan when he betrayed Jesus and wasn't operating [entirely] of his own free will. By the Catholic catechism he may have had diminished capacity. In any case, Judas (and others) was directly responsible for Deicide, and I don't think that crime ever could happen except that one time and place although some would say we all killed Jesus with our sins.
Judas only attempted suicide. It would have been carried out but the branch broke and he fell on the rocks disemboweling himself. It is stated in Acts. Satan never lets his subjects off that easily.
The problem with Judas’s repentance is that it was introverted. He was concerned about what it meant for him personally and could not imagine God would be able to forgive him. This led to despair and thus to suicide and thus to hell. His repentance was an external act only with no internal conversion and no Love of God.
Much like a couple living in adultery who want to partake of communion but have no conversion and no intention of amending their lives.
John 17:12 (NASB).
During His "High Priestly Prayer," Jesus stated that Judas, the "son of perdition," had, in effect, already "perished." Judas's repentance was never in view . . . at least, not in the view of the Lord.
It bears noting, too, that Judas was not merely demonically possessed, but Satanically possessed:
"And Satan entered into Judas who was called Iscariot, belonging to the number of the twelve."
Luke 22:3 (NASB). The only other figure in the Bible who is said to be Satanically possessed (see Revelation 13) is the final Antichrist himself. In 2 Thessalonians 2:3, Paul refers to this coming Antichrist as the "man of lawlessnes" and as the "son of destruction" -- or the "son of perdition," as the KJV has it.
In the Bible, only Judas and the final Antichrist are referenced as being the "son of perdition." In that regard, Judas is "type" of the coming Antichrist. Again, the notion that Judas's repentance and redemption were ever in view is scripturally unsound. And, even then, the idea that "redemption" itself was to have been found by repentance, on Judas's part, before the High Priests of the Temple is absurd on its face.
It's difficult even to know what contorted, unbiblical point this Pope was trying to make. But what is clear is that this Pope is a false teacher. Of course, that could (and should) be said of each and every Pope.
Jesus is Lord.
You do realize to take Catholic communion while in a state of mortal sin is a serious offense against God. See 1 Corinthians 11:27-30. It is not about preventing someone from taking the Eucharist. It is caring enough for the sinner to lead them back into God’s grace instead of confirming them in their sin.
Also, while Jesus being God, knew that Judas was to betray him, he had not acted on it yet. There is also some debate as to whether Judas left before or after the consecration. Finally, Judas’s sin was a private one, not a matter for public scandal.
Judas still had free will though. God’s foreknowledge of what someone will do is not the same as forcing them to do it.
If you meant that up to the point of possession, Judas had free will, I would agree.
It brings up an interesting speculation with the real deal Antichrist and how much free will he will have before and after. It seems like when he had free will, he knowingly and totally willed it and submitted to Satan's will. So the possession was merely an extension of his desire for the power and homage that he receives from Satan and couldn't make happen on his own. It's probably much more complex and evil than what we mortals can imagine though.
Here’s an idea I have not heard anyone yet propose! Here’s what’s coming down the pike, a little addendum to the New Theology!
The “evolution of doctrine” is leading to the startling but obvious idea that Jesus was not Jesus after all. They never could verify that Resurrection business and frankly it’s considered an old musty notion by the cutting-edge thinkers in the Church.
No folks, Judas was the real Jesus, see? This will probably be the topic of the pope’s next encyclical. Unless Cardinal Wuerl comes out with it first, probably in a spot on Fox News.
Judas died for our sins, and by suicide! Isn’t that more plausible than this sad and agonizing crucifixion nightmare? All that blood is so upsetting. Judas killed himself with one quick stroke, so much kinder to us, don’t you think so? He made a cry for help to those nasty pharasees, and they cast him aside. Hence Judas fully experiences his humanity. This is very cohesive with the new PC (Psychobabble Christianity).
Jesus was a good guy, sure. He had some inspiring notions and cute parables. But somehow the Gospel writers got distracted by his melodramatic demise and lost sight of the real Salvation Hero, Judas Iscariot!
(I hope it’s not necessary for me to put the /S/ here!?!)
According to experts of the Church, who deal with it, yes and no regarding free will and possession. The body is possessed, not the soul. The persons body is considered to be controlled by the demon or demons while the soul of the person is suspended. But for possession to take place the person had to open themselves up to demonic influence under free will.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.