Did Judas have a choice ?

RublevRublev Shipmate
edited February 21 in Kerygmania
Jesus said, 'I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me - one who is eating with me' (Mark 14: 18).

Since it was already foretold, did Judas really have a choice about betraying Jesus?
«1

Comments

  • Raptor EyeRaptor Eye Shipmate
    edited February 21
    Yes. That something is foretold means that your choice is known by those who can see into the future. It doesn't mean the choice wasn't there.
  • What is choice? Jesus chose a kleptomaniac terrorist. Why is that?
  • GalilitGalilit Shipmate
    The Narrative required the betrayal
    Concentrating on "who dunnit" is pointless
  • stetsonstetson Shipmate
    edited February 21
    Rublev wrote: »
    Jesus said, 'I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me - one who is eating with me' (Mark 14: 18).

    Since it was already foretold, did Judas really have a choice about betraying Jesus?

    You could pretty much just skip this question, and go straight to the old classic "How can anyone be held responsible for their evil if God knows everything beforehand?" Answer that, and you've got the answer to your OP.

  • EnochEnoch Shipmate
    It's my suspicion that the way the disciples all ask him "is it I Lord?' indicates that it was built into the programme, life the universe and everything, that one of them would betray him, but until Judas actually did, Jesus did not know which of them that would be.

    Yes - I know that causes problems with those whose understanding of God means that his omnipotence and knowledge of all things past, present and future oblige Jesus to have known Judas would be the one to betray him from the point when he chose him as a disciple. But there's a mystery there, just as all free will is a mystery. I think we've got no alternative but to accept that and live with it.
  • This is the example I use: I have a friend who knows me very well. She knows what I like, dislike, and how I will react. She knows my conversational habits. Every now and then, I will make a comment and she says "I knew you were going to say that."

    Now, does that mean that I had no choice in the matter? That her knowledge divested me of control? No, of course not. It is just that she knows me so well that some response are highly predictable.

    Now if one human being can be so accurate in predicting the conduct of another human being, let's ramp it up to God Level. God, knowing our faults, knowing our hearts, knowing our habits, knowing everything about us to the ultimate degree: with such knowledge, it would be surprising if he couldn't predict with complete accuracy what each of us will do. That does not mean that we don't have any choice in the matter, anymore than my friend's knowledge of me divested me of choice. He just knows us and how we will react.

    Judas had a free choice, but God, knowing him to levels that we can hardly understand, could easily predict what he would do.
  • No. Those two statements are completely irreconcilable.
  • Enoch wrote: »
    It's my suspicion that the way the disciples all ask him "is it I Lord?' indicates that it was built into the programme, life the universe and everything, that one of them would betray him, but until Judas actually did, Jesus did not know which of them that would be.

    Yes - I know that causes problems with those whose understanding of God means that his omnipotence and knowledge of all things past, present and future oblige Jesus to have known Judas would be the one to betray him from the point when he chose him as a disciple. But there's a mystery there, just as all free will is a mystery. I think we've got no alternative but to accept that and live with it.

    There are no future things. And what is free will?
  • Martin54 wrote: »
    No. Those two statements are completely irreconcilable.
    I disagree.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited February 21
    So how could Judas have a free choice - especially when Satan possessed - whatever that means, and God know what he would choose?
  • I think I explained that in my post, but to simplify it: knowing what somebody will do is not at all the same thing as making them do it.
  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    Martin54 wrote: »
    So how could Judas have a free choice - especially when Satan possessed - whatever that means, and God know what he would choose?

    What that means is that Satan took control of Judas.

    You cannot square foreknowledge with predestination without destroying the choice of humanity and if you do that, there is no possibility of human responsibility. However, the whole Biblical narrative hinges on God justly holding man responsible for actions. Thus to condemn God for Judas’ action, is to impugn God’s character.

    If you read the account of John carefully, it is clear that Jesus calling out Judas with the morsel, was an appeal to him to stop which was ignored. Satan only entered after the decision. The mystery of why the disciples didn’t get it was that when he left it was before the shops closed suggesting the last supper was the day before the feast and Judas was the groups ‘shopper’ and they could reasonably suppose he was getting supplies
  • Did Judas have a choice? Depends. Some people think that Judas thought if he forced the issue by having Jesus arrested, the people would rebel and Jesus would then be set up as king. Did not work out that way.

    Thus, when he realized just how bad things were going, he rejected his "fee for service" and hung himself.

    There are several other interpretations. Luther would have said Judas would have naturally rejected Jesus because he was bound to sin and death. The Holy Spirit did not enter into Judas' heart. His heart was hardened from the beginning.

    I think Jesus could easily have seen from Judas's behavior that Judas was going to betray him. Judas was very critical of Jesus allowing a woman to pour expensive perfume on his feet. Did not take omniscience to figure that one out.

  • Hedgehog wrote: »
    I think I explained that in my post, but to simplify it: knowing what somebody will do is not at all the same thing as making them do it.

    That explains nothing about the illusion, delusion of 'choice'.
  • Martin54Martin54 Shipmate
    edited February 22
    MPaul wrote: »
    Martin54 wrote: »
    So how could Judas have a free choice - especially when Satan possessed - whatever that means, and God know what he would choose?

    What that means is that Satan took control of Judas.

    You cannot square foreknowledge with predestination without destroying the choice of humanity and if you do that, there is no possibility of human responsibility. However, the whole Biblical narrative hinges on God justly holding man responsible for actions. Thus to condemn God for Judas’ action, is to impugn God’s character.

    If you read the account of John carefully, it is clear that Jesus calling out Judas with the morsel, was an appeal to him to stop which was ignored. Satan only entered after the decision. The mystery of why the disciples didn’t get it was that when he left it was before the shops closed suggesting the last supper was the day before the feast and Judas was the groups ‘shopper’ and they could reasonably suppose he was getting supplies

    The Bible has, is many narratives but it certainly doesn't have even that internal metanarrative. Who's condemning God?

    What makes you think I haven't read it carefully many, many times?

    That's not clear at all but to you. On the contrary, it's clear to me that Jesus, despite His human constraint, was demonstrating divine love to Judas in the divine knowledge of what he was up to. Jesus loved him unconditionally, with the perspective of eternal transcendence, sanctioned what he was about to do, gave permission, blessed it and Judas whose eternity isn't compromised in the slightest.
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited February 22
    Shusaku Endo's novel Silence tells the story of the persecuted Christians of Japan as a reflection upon the story of Judas.

    In 1632 a scandal shook the Christian church when the Jesuit Provincial Ferriera apostatised and collaborated with the Japanese authorities in stamping out the Christian faith.

    A missionary called Rodrigues is smuggled into Japan to encourage the persecuted believers. He thinks that he is going to follow in the path of Christ at Calvary. But instead he comes to understand the role of Judas. The authorities want him to renounce his faith publicly since martyrs gain too much prestige. So he is forced to watch his fellow Christians being tortured until he denies his faith by stepping on an icon of Christ.

    Rodrigues was ready to face suffering for the sake of his own faith. But he has to struggle with the question of whether it is moral to allow others to suffer on his behalf. At the climatic moment he hears the voice of Christ saying, 'It was to share man's pain that I carried my cross.' Rodrigues then gives in and steps upon the icon.

    When he takes his anguish to God, he hears in reply that neither he nor Judas were rejected for their betrayal. They cannot forgive themselves, but God can forgive. Rodrigues despite his fall has not put himself beyond the love and mercy of God. God's love is great enough to forgive him.
  • Good calls all round.
  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 22
    I guess it depends on how you define free will.

    To me, free will is not about having a choice. You can still be under compulsion even when faced with a choice (re: Sophie's choice).

    To my way of thinking, choice is something that even a rat in a maze has. Go right or left. Press the food pellet bar or the shock bar. Just because the rat has a choice doesn't mean it has free will.

    To me, free will is about having the genuine capacity to work one's will on one's circumstances in order to shape them to one's preference, without hindrance or resistance.

    Like being the author of a story. As the story's author, you can create any narrative you like, change it, add, delete, overwrite, switch scenarios, make your characters sprout wings and fly, defy physical laws, and nobody and nothing can hinder you. That to me is free will, and that kind of free will I certainly do not exert over my material circumstances.

    It seems to me that human experience is like the experience of a rat in a rich and varied landscape. The sheer abundance of choices obscures the view that they are in fact managed choices, that are circumscribed by accident of birth, geography, social, economic, physiological and other factors.

    It's a rich and complex landscape, but if I were to operate free will, I would certainly be reshaping a number of things to better suit my preferences like *poof* I win the lottery.

    So did Judas have a choice? The choices were clearly present, but a more important question to me is, did he have the ability to operate his Free Will? And my answer to that is, no.

    Because as far as I understand it, none of us has that ability at this level of consciousness.

    The way I understand it, to operate Free Will, one must step one level out and assume the role of the author of the narrative.

    To my way of understanding, here and now is not where I operate free will, here and now is where I experience it. Like an author - there's no way she can know what the heroine of her story feels like unless she enters the story and has the experiences she wrote for her. She operates her free will when she writes the story, then experiences it once she arrives inside the narrative.

    And so IMO Judas was only able to do what was in his script. And I think this was the Big Deal about the Christ coming to us through Jesus - that for His own reasons He needed to know what it felt like to be a bowling ball in a trough just like the rest of us in order to feel what it feels like to experience but not operate free will.

    AFF





  • First class.
  • NenyaNenya Shipmate
    I guess it depends on how you define free will.

    ...

    Like being the author of a story. As the story's author, you can create any narrative you like, change it, add, delete, overwrite, switch scenarios, make your characters sprout wings and fly, defy physical laws, and nobody and nothing can hinder you. That to me is free will, and that kind of free will I certainly do not exert over my material circumstances.

    ...

    And so IMO Judas was only able to do what was in his script. And I think this was the Big Deal about the Christ coming to us through Jesus - that for His own reasons He needed to know what it felt like to be a bowling ball in a trough just like the rest of us in order to feel what it feels like to experience but not operate free will.

    Thank you for your post. I'm thinking a lot about it. I haven't previously considered the difference between free will and choice in this way.

    Do you mean that in this life, this plane of consciousness, we know what it could or would mean to have free will (such as arranging to win the lottery) but as we cannot have or do everything we want we do not have it? Is that what you mean by experiencing free will (knowing what it is as a concept) but not operating it (because we can't have or do everything)?
  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 24
    Nenya wrote: »

    Thank you for your post. I'm thinking a lot about it. I haven't previously considered the difference between free will and choice in this way.

    Do you mean that in this life, this plane of consciousness, we know what it could or would mean to have free will (such as arranging to win the lottery) but as we cannot have or do everything we want we do not have it? Is that what you mean by experiencing free will (knowing what it is as a concept) but not operating it (because we can't have or do everything)?

    This, in a nutshell, is it. But it represents only a starting point.

    Let me make it clear - IMO we do have Free Will but just cannot operate it here and now. This is not the Time or Place or State of Being for operating it.

    There's a whole lot that follows ... but it's probably long and boring and only represents my particular conclusions from my non-transmissible insights and experiences.

    AFF





















  • I'm sorry, but in my case, despite the vaaaaast gulf between us, you've transmitted it beautifully, in clear.
  • NenyaNenya Shipmate
    edited February 24
    Let me make it clear - IMO we do have Free Will but just cannot operate it here and now. This is not the Time or Place or State of Being for operating it.

    I can get that we can know what free will is while we are here, without being able to operate it. Could you explain how we can actually have it but not operate it?
  • Nenya wrote: »
    Let me make it clear - IMO we do have Free Will but just cannot operate it here and now. This is not the Time or Place or State of Being for operating it.

    I can get that we can know what free will is while we are here, without being able to operate it. Could you explain how we can actually have it but not operate it?

    Well I think it requires that one make a shift in perspective about what and who we are.

    Without a similar experiences and insights to back up what I am about to share, it probably makes little sense, but here are my conclusions based on personal experiences and insights:

    1) We are eternal, multidimensional and multi-incarnational beings who enjoy our beingness in various forms and levels of awareness within a larger, eternal, infinite, multidimensional Being.

    2) Incarnation at this level offers us a range of experiences of which we are the authors.

    3) Free Will is operated at the level of authorship, from a higher perspective and point of view, and within a wider framework of awareness and cooperation with each other.

    This is of course the short version, and represents conclusions drawn from personal experience. Without the corresponding experiential information, these statements ask to be accepted as a matter of belief, and I don't expect you to do that.

    AFF







  • edited February 25
    The gospels were written after the events. Hindsight allows the divine intervention to be articulated however the writer truly believes and wanted to convey it. Judas has become the worst of. We've no idea of his actual state of mind and whether he was scripted into his role by JC, God, various angels etc.

    Did Mary have free will to become pregnant with JC? About at the same level I'd think.

    Let me spin a bit:
    If Judas had not played his role, another way would have been found. We've no way of knowing if Judas and the cross were plan A or B or C. Perhaps there was no orchestration of anything. Merely conditions such that inevitably JC would come to the attention of the authorities, that inevitably someone would betray. An alternate betrayal and different mechanism of JC's death would have ended up with a different gospel with the same points to be made. That's the free will. Maybe JC would have lived a little longer or shorter, our Christian symbols might have been, say, a pile of stoning rocks. The reviled person could have been named something else.
  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 25
    The gospels were written after the events. Hindsight allows the divine intervention to be articulated however the writer truly believes and wanted to convey it. Judas has become the worst of. We've no idea of his actual state of mind and whether he was scripted into his role by JC, God, various angels etc.

    Did Mary have free will to become pregnant with JC? About at the same level I'd think.

    Let me spin a bit:
    If Judas had not played his role, another way would have been found. We've no way of knowing if Judas and the cross were plan A or B or C. Perhaps there was no orchestration of anything. Merely conditions such that inevitably JC would come to the attention of the authorities, that inevitably someone would betray. An alternate betrayal and different mechanism of JC's death would have ended up with a different gospel with the same points to be made. That's the free will. Maybe JC would have lived a little longer or shorter, our Christian symbols might have been, say, a pile of stoning rocks. The reviled person could have been named something else.


    There's no way we can know this.

    As it happens, perhaps in another iteration of this dimensional reality, this was so, and is so. I don't assume there is only one version of scripted events.

    As I see it, this is still possible within the framework of a multidimensional awareness, cooperation and authorship.

    But as it so happens, we are currently corresponding within this iteration of events, and as it happens, this is how it went and so, it was how it had to go. If there had been some other way, then for whatever reason, we are not currently putting our attention on that particular version of the story or cooperating along that particular narrative strand.

    This is the version we are dealing with. Everything else is hypothetical.

    AFF









  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    @Enoch

    I was struck by your point that all the disciples ask Jesus, 'Is it I, Lord?' rather than rushing to deny it.

    And that the only one of them who strongly denies it is Peter.

    The opposite of faith is not doubt, but certainty.
  • The gospels were written after the events. Hindsight allows the divine intervention to be articulated however the writer truly believes and wanted to convey it. Judas has become the worst of. We've no idea of his actual state of mind and whether he was scripted into his role by JC, God, various angels etc.

    Further to this I'd like to add, yes of course you have no way of knowing, because your life's experiences haven't given you the informational framework to be able to say with any kind of certainty. My life's experiences have given me this information, and I'm just sharing what I understand and have concluded after decades of sifting the information and assembling it in a rational framework.

    I think you may have missed my point when I said "I am the author" . Not God, not angels, not thrones, principalities or powers. The way see it, those minor powers keep everything stable, they are the stage managers, set, lighting, props and scenery crew. God is the Theatre Owner.

    If I am the author, then so are you. We are the playwrights, producers and directors.

    My perception of reality has been radically altered by this information . I perceive the fabric of human experience as just that: experience. An incredible tapestry of intertwining narratives that we cooperate and collaborate on, take turns swapping roles, facilitating and expanding each other's range of experience of ourselves and our experience of the nature of good and evil, and of reality itself.

    The god of the OT was the god of contracts. The agreements we make with one another on the higher level are sacred and binding. We can't improvise, alter or ad lib once we're here because much too much depends on us making our entrances, hitting our marks and delivering our lines. A word or deed out of place throws off everyone else's agreed-upon experience.

    All experience is sacred. All of it. Nothing is trivial. Everything is Very Important.

    Which is another way of saying nothing is important.

    And that's the absurdity that is existence. Either everything is worthy of awe and reverence or none of it is, and it's all just a hilarious joke we play on ourselves. Either way, I am cool with it.

    AFF









  • NenyaNenya Shipmate
    Well I think it requires that one make a shift in perspective about what and who we are.

    Without a similar experiences and insights to back up what I am about to share, it probably makes little sense, but here are my conclusions based on personal experiences and insights:

    1) We are eternal, multidimensional and multi-incarnational beings who enjoy our beingness in various forms and levels of awareness within a larger, eternal, infinite, multidimensional Being.

    2) Incarnation at this level offers us a range of experiences of which we are the authors.

    3) Free Will is operated at the level of authorship, from a higher perspective and point of view, and within a wider framework of awareness and cooperation with each other.

    Is it a very little bit like the analogy of an acorn and an oak tree? That encapsulated in the acorn is all it needs to become the tree, but until it's changed and transformed it can't operate things like growing leaves or photosynthesis or bearing fruit? It has everything in essence but is not in the right state of being to realise or experience those things.

    Is that something approaching what you mean, or nowhere near?
  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 26
    Nenya wrote: »

    Is it a very little bit like the analogy of an acorn and an oak tree? That encapsulated in the acorn is all it needs to become the tree, but until it's changed and transformed it can't operate things like growing leaves or photosynthesis or bearing fruit? It has everything in essence but is not in the right state of being to realise or experience those things.

    Is that something approaching what you mean, or nowhere near?

    I think it's a very good analogy, and if it's the one that makes the most sense to you then I would go with it.

    It seems to me there's a particular perspective that comes with looking at human beings having their human experience as being in need of lessons, growth, spiritual and physiological evolution, and perfection as if who and what we are is somehow small and insgnificant and flawed and full of unrealized potential.

    This is the point of view of every religion on earth. Even the so-called New-Age treats the human being as some kind of kindergartner who needs the help of the Space Brothers.

    My experiences have shown me the opposite - that we are something out-of-this-world gobsmackingly awesome voluntarily contained and constrained in something as small as a human body subject to the physical laws of a microscopic quadrant of an unexceptional galaxy. The fact that we can fit everything we are into this incredibly small and dense package to me is nothing short of a stupendous contortion, and a miracle of the first order.

    From my particular POV I would go with the acorn analogy something like: I'm an acorn who thinks it's just an acorn, and I'm hanging on a tree I don't even know is there, and I contain all the properties of that tree, but I just haven't enjoyed the experiences and conditions that enable me to realize that I am a tree too. In fact, if I become aware of the tree at all, it is so vast and incomprehensible a being, I can't even imagine what it must be like to be one. And if you told me I was a tree I would laugh in your face.

    AFF

  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    And so IMO Judas was only able to do what was in his script
    Essentially then you are a determinist. However sophisticated the reasoning, God in this schema must be responsible for mans’ decisions.

    Yet in the Bible, God operates as Judge. The HS judges the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Applied to Judas who Jesus labels ‘son of perdition’ ‘ better if that man had never been born.’, this means that Judas is justly judged or God’s character is flawed.

    We must say then, Judas had control over his own heart and that is what led to his choice so he is responsible.
  • MPaul wrote: »
    And so IMO Judas was only able to do what was in his script
    Essentially then you are a determinist. However sophisticated the reasoning, God in this schema must be responsible for mans’ decisions.

    Yet in the Bible, God operates as Judge. The HS judges the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Applied to Judas who Jesus labels ‘son of perdition’ ‘ better if that man had never been born.’, this means that Judas is justly judged or God’s character is flawed.

    We must say then, Judas had control over his own heart and that is what led to his choice so he is responsible.

    Well I guess this depends on at what level you think God operates reality.

    When you expand the view far enough outward, God operates everything because there's nothing that exists outside, beyond or separate from Him.

    However, we are discussing beings and events that are much more locally and specifically identified as individual manifestations of the Totality of Being in which we have our own.

    And if you follow my reasoning carefully, in fact the conclusion is that Judas did have control, just not on the material plane in the moment. And yes, on that account he is responsible.

    But for what? You act like Jesus is dead and gone and that nothing good came of Judas' participation in the story, when in fact he was a pivotal character in The Greatest Story Ever Told.

    I don't personally see what's so hard to accept about a Judas who was a fully consenting and cooperating agent in a drama that he scripted in collaboration with the Christ, and all the other players, and that he willingly undertook to play his part as The Bad Guy so that the necessary chain of events could unfold for our greatest good.

    But, humanity needs to hate on someone for some reason. Might as well be that dude who had the guts to do a job and accept the consequences that nobody else had the balls to take on.

    Certainly IMO the Christ picked the right man for the job. That chicken shit Peter wasn't up to it.

    AFF





  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    AFF: that he willingly undertook to play his part as The Bad Guy
    Because it is simply an absolute opposite narrative from that which the Bible conveys.
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    I have never considered Judas before in the light of a potential hero.

    But what if he was?

    Supposing there was a Gospel of Judas?

    'I always knew it would be my role to be the so - called betrayer of Jesus. None of the others was up to the task. They've got no sense of strategy, they're just like sheep. And someone had to do it. It was the time, I tell you! The people were with us, I could see it. And I had those stupid Temple authorities just where I wanted them. They believed that I was on their side. As if I cared about 30 pieces of silver. I threw them back at them! Jesus, why didn't you speak up when they arrested you? Why didn't you raise the people? The Romans would never have known what had hit them. I would have been your right hand man when they made you the king...
  • GalilitGalilit Shipmate
    Rublev wrote: »

    Supposing there was a Gospel of Judas?

    My Name was Judas by C.K. Stead ... albeit a novel by a New Zealander (and I have not read it)


  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    And others as well.
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    I shall have to read that book and see his take on him.

    There are different views of Judas:
    As a thief (Acts 1: 18).
    As a member of the Sicarii.
    Or maybe as someone who knew it was his role to bring about the death of Jesus?

    `History will judge me harshly, I know. My name will become a byword for treachery. And I accept that. I accept it all. But no one will know, what it cost me to do it. I was chosen for this role from the beginning. I alone understood what Jesus was saying to us. He was going to Jerusalem to die. He wasn't coming back again. And He was right, there was nowhere else that a prophet should die. How else could He fulfil His mission except by His death? He needed my role to complete His role. And He asked me to do it, He gave His permission. I waited to see if the authorities would arrest Him at the Temple. Then I wouldn't have had to do it. But they were too afraid of the people. So the only way that it could happen was by betrayal. I had to lead them there at night...
  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    edited February 27
    Joking aside, we know that Jesus could read people's hearts: 'Jesus did not entrust Himself to them, for He knew all people (John 2: 24).

    So why did Jesus pick Judas as the treasurer (John 12: 6) rather than Nathaniel 'in whom there was no deceit' (John 1: 47) or Matthew the money changer (Luke 5: 27)?

    Was putting Judas in charge of the money bag Jesus' way of challenging him to overcome his fatal spiritual flaw - like the Rich Young Man?

    Matthew suggests that Judas is fulfilling a necessary duty: Jesus says to him, 'Do what you came for, friend' (Matt 26: 47, 50). So perhaps Jesus understood that Judas had his part to play in the drama of redemptive history.
  • NenyaNenya Shipmate
    Judas - co-author with Christ in the script of The Greatest Story Ever Told. That's a striking thought.
    My experiences have shown me the opposite - that we are something out-of-this-world gobsmackingly awesome voluntarily contained and constrained in something as small as a human body subject to the physical laws of a microscopic quadrant of an unexceptional galaxy. The fact that we can fit everything we are into this incredibly small and dense package to me is nothing short of a stupendous contortion, and a miracle of the first order.

    From my particular POV I would go with the acorn analogy something like: I'm an acorn who thinks it's just an acorn, and I'm hanging on a tree I don't even know is there, and I contain all the properties of that tree, but I just haven't enjoyed the experiences and conditions that enable me to realize that I am a tree too. In fact, if I become aware of the tree at all, it is so vast and incomprehensible a being, I can't even imagine what it must be like to be one. And if you told me I was a tree I would laugh in your face.

    This reminds me of the quotation, "We are not human beings having a spiritual experience, we are spiritual beings having a human experience." I gather from Wikipedia this is attributed to both Teilhard de Chardin and G I Gurdjieff and as I'm familiar with these names but not conversant with the works of either that's all I can offer towards citing the source.

    Regarding the acorn analogy, in my mind I had the acorn separated from the tree, fallen to the ground, needing to die and be transformed before it can become a tree itself. I can see that while on the tree it is part of the tree, benefitting from and sustained by all that it means to be a tree (photosynthesis, etc), without realising it.

    Not to see this life as a learning and transforming experience turns a lot of things upside down.

    How would you (does one) reconcile us as these amazingly awesome beings with all the terrible stuff in the world? Is it something to do with being so far removed from the consciousness of who we really are?
  • Rublev wrote: »
    I have never considered Judas before in the light of a potential hero.

    But what if he was?

    Supposing there was a Gospel of Judas?

    'I always knew it would be my role to be the so - called betrayer of Jesus. None of the others was up to the task. They've got no sense of strategy, they're just like sheep. And someone had to do it. It was the time, I tell you! The people were with us, I could see it. And I had those stupid Temple authorities just where I wanted them. They believed that I was on their side. As if I cared about 30 pieces of silver. I threw them back at them! Jesus, why didn't you speak up when they arrested you? Why didn't you raise the people? The Romans would never have known what had hit them. I would have been your right hand man when they made you the king...

    There is.

    But for what it's worth, when I read it it confirmed my conclusions. I've been looking at things this way for a couple of decades now.

    Just was interesting to know I'm not the first or only one to reach these conclusions or to see things this way.

    I've been moving in gnostic circles for many incarnations, it seems.

    AFF


  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    A Feminine Force, I take my hat off to you for your creative and original ideas - they have been an inspiration!
  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 27
    Rublev wrote: »
    A Feminine Force, I take my hat off to you for your creative and original ideas - they have been an inspiration!

    Thank you for your kind thoughts. I wish I could take credit for originality but as it turns out there is nothing new under the sun. Others in deep history reached similar conclusions, just their version wasn't given air time.

    AFF


  • RublevRublev Shipmate
    Thanks for drawing my attention to the gnostic Gospel of Judas which presents the theory that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him in order to fulfil Jesus' plan. This is contrary to the NT accounts which present Judas as a traitor. The counter narrative has its place in offering a different perspective on what we think we know.
  • Nenya wrote: »

    ...

    Not to see this life as a learning and transforming experience turns a lot of things upside down.

    Learning is a function of survival. I don't regard it as a necessity. Experience is its own teacher, and if wisdom arises from it, then it's a happy byproduct, but I don't regard it as essential.

    And it does turn everything upside down - and inside out.
    Nenya wrote: »
    How would you (does one) reconcile us as these amazingly awesome beings with all the terrible stuff in the world? Is it something to do with being so far removed from the consciousness of who we really are?

    Well I guess it depends on what level you look at reality from.

    I regard the material plane as a kind of theme park - a funhouse of horrors. There's an entrance and an exit. There are horrifying rides. There are quiet and beautiful areas.

    What kind of experience do you want? You send out a casting call. You want to feel what it feels like to be a Good Guy? OK! Pick me! I'm really good at playing the Bad Guy. I'll be such a great Bad Guy you will never forget how great it felt to give me the ending I deserve. I have so much experience as The Bad Guy, I'll give you a performance that will thrill you to the soles of your feet. You'll have so much fun punishing me you might want to do it all over again.

    You want an experience of what it feels like to rescue someone? I'll play the one who suffers so you can feel how good it feels to help someone. You want to be a doctor and cure a disease? Great, I'll be the one with the rare condition.

    Why will I do this? Because I love you and I want you to have the experience you desire. I love you enough to be your Bad Guy because I know what that feels like and I'm OK with it.

    Every victim needs a bully. And every bully needs a victim. And around we go. And IMO that's just the tip of the iceberg.

    AFF





  • MPaulMPaul Shipmate
    Well I guess this depends on at what level you think God operates reality.

    When you expand the view far enough outward, God operates everything because there's nothing that exists outside, beyond or separate from Him.

    As stated above, this is determinism. There is no room for individual independence. The Bible does not teach this. How can he be just if he both controls us and holds us responsible?
  • False Dichotomy Of The Week Award.
  • NenyaNenya Shipmate
    I regard the material plane as a kind of theme park - a funhouse of horrors. There's an entrance and an exit. There are horrifying rides. There are quiet and beautiful areas.

    What kind of experience do you want? You send out a casting call. You want to feel what it feels like to be a Good Guy? OK! Pick me! I'm really good at playing the Bad Guy. I'll be such a great Bad Guy you will never forget how great it felt to give me the ending I deserve. I have so much experience as The Bad Guy, I'll give you a performance that will thrill you to the soles of your feet. You'll have so much fun punishing me you might want to do it all over again.

    You want an experience of what it feels like to rescue someone? I'll play the one who suffers so you can feel how good it feels to help someone. You want to be a doctor and cure a disease? Great, I'll be the one with the rare condition.

    Why will I do this? Because I love you and I want you to have the experience you desire. I love you enough to be your Bad Guy because I know what that feels like and I'm OK with it.

    So I want to play Good Guy and you agree to be my Bad Guy to give me that experience. Where would we be together to have that discussion and make that agreement before we come into this life and do that?
  • HuiaHuia Shipmate
    Galilit wrote: »
    Rublev wrote: »

    Supposing there was a Gospel of Judas?

    My Name was Judas by C.K. Stead ... albeit a novel by a New Zealander (and I have not read it)


    Thanks Galilit. I haven't read it, but it's available in the local library system both as an ebook and a tree book. I will chase it up.

    I was going to mention the gnostic Gospel of Judas - which I haven't read, only heard of, but I see AFF has knowledge of this.
  • Nenya wrote: »

    So I want to play Good Guy and you agree to be my Bad Guy to give me that experience. Where would we be together to have that discussion and make that agreement before we come into this life and do that?

    In between incarnations.

    Some narratives can play out in episodes ... like stay tuned for the next exciting chapter coming next life.

    I love the Hindu expression "Everything will be all right in the end, and if it's not all right, it's not the end."



    AFF



  • A Feminine ForceA Feminine Force Shipmate
    edited February 28
    MPaul wrote: »

    As stated above, this is determinism. There is no room for individual independence. The Bible does not teach this. How can he be just if he both controls us and holds us responsible?

    I agree.

    False dichotomy.

    God is not an either/or. He is a both/and.

    If paradox exists it's because He is it. He will not be put in a box circumscribed by our left hemisphere.

    AFF

Sign In or Register to comment.