Featured BETRAYAL

You can define the word meaning according to your view, and then claim that it supports your view. But if you actually want to understand it, you use the meaning provided in the lexicon. And "paradidomi" refers to giving someone over to an enemy.

This Greek word (paradidomi) means "to give into the hands of another." It is most often translated as "deliver" or give or give over. But about 40 times it is translated as betrayal.

This is the word found in Matthew 10:4, Matthew 17:22, Matthew 20:18, Matthew 26:2, Matthew 26:16, Matthew 26:24, Matthew 26:25, Matthew 26:45, and Matthew 27:3,

I am guessing (because I did not see where you answered my question) that you are trying to say Judas lost his salvation, thus attacking the Calvinist doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved (OSAS).

Lets leave it that no, he didn't, he was chosen to be the betrayer and was prevented by God from believing in Jesus before the betrayal into the hands of His enemies. See John 6:64-65 where Judas was not allowed to come to Jesus spiritually. Judas is like those folks in Matthew 7 who did ministry but Jesus never knew them (indwelt them).

 

False disciple, never an apostle. Chosen deliberately by God's will. Problem solved.

 

Fair enough, false apostle then. One can be in the office but not truly meet the requirements.

Surely you can follow--are not your most wicked popes still considered popes?

 

Not required. Front or back, the result is the same.

 

How plain could He have been?:

70 Jesus answered them, Did not I choose you the twelve, and one of you is a devil? Jn 6

The "sacrilege" that you foolishly accuse Him of is 'fulfilling the scriptures' (which He did a whooooole lot of).:

17 If ye know these things, blessed are ye if ye do them.
18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled: He that eateth my bread lifted up his heel against me. Jn 13

 

An aside; I see similarity between the twelve apostles and the twelve tribes of Israel:

It could be asked concerning the tribes: Were there 12, 13, or 14 tribes of Israel?

It could be asked concerning the apostles: Were there 12, 13, or 14 apostles?

The question concerning the tribes revolves around Joseph and his two sons (the half-tribes) Manasseh and Ephraim. Which one of these is counted in the twelve?

The question concerning the apostles revolves around Judas, Matthias, and Paul. Which one of these is counted in the twelve?

Dan is called a serpent and an adder in his father's prophecy:

Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that his rider shall fall backward. Gen 49:17

Christ refers to Judas as a devil:

Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve. Jn 6:70,71

Dan is not included in the tally of the tribes given in Rev 7 . Manasseh is included in the count along with Joseph. Ephraim is almost of a certain counted as one with Joseph.

I can't see Judas's name included in Rev 21:14.:

20 For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be made desolate, And let no man dwell therein: and, His office let another take. Acts 1

 

16 Brethren, it was needful that the Scripture should be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spake before by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who was guide to them that took Jesus. Acts 1

 

Judas was never saved, he was chosen to be the betrayer, the one to deliver the Messiah over to enemies. Not only did he not believe, God prevented him from believing until the betrayal.

 

Unless you can support your assertions from scripture, I am not sure why you make then. Everybody sins, for all have fallen short...

One of the non-Cal views is that God makes some elections or choices based on the characteristics of the one chosen. Judas was well chosen to be the betrayer a child of wrath by nature. Matthew was well chosen, a tax collector, because he was meticulous in keeping records, thus his gospel is very detailed.
There are lots of flaws in the mistaken doctrines of Calvinism, but the doctrine of once saved always saved is not one of them.

Judas was a sinner deserving of wrath when He was chosen to betray. Now you ask a very good question, but it seems not to be clearly answered in scripture - if God compels a person to sin, would God turn around and punish the person for the sin God compelled. The logical answer is no, but without the support of scripture, it is speculation. God is just and that would be unjust, but who am I to judge God?

 

Does God compelling Judas to betray Jesus, conflict with God not tempting Judas? Nope.

Did I say God is deceptive or lies? Nope

If God compelled a person to sin, would that be the person's fault? Nope

So if God predestined whatsoever comes to pass, including our choice to sin, would He then punish us for those sins? Why not answer the question with a no.

 

Yes, I understand that you believe God never compels people to do evil. You equate being tempted (invited to make a evil choice) with being compelled (not allowed to choose). If you think that reasoning is sound, there appears nothing more I could say.

But let me try one more truth, evil can be in the eye of the beholder. Say, in a war, one soldier kills another. The person killed would say the killing was evil. The other soldier would say he just did his job and actually saved the innocent lives the other soldier might have taken. So if your house is hit with a tornado, you would say it was an evil wind, but God would see it as part of the harsh environment that encourages people to seek God as a refuge.

I provided scripture which says Judas was chosen from the beginning to be the betrayer, to fulfill the prophesy that the Messiah would be betrayed. Also that Judas from the time he was chosen was prevented from trusting in Christ. Thus Judas was compelled, not tempted, to betray Jesus.

 

As I said, there is nothing I can say. Whenever a fellow poster asserts my view is the opposite of my view, further discussion is pointless.