Was Judas saved?

[TCGreek]

Are there any manuscripts that have "demon" there? Are there any translations that have "demon" there? (I'm not aware of any, but I don't know.)

1. There are no variants. The reading

I think the problem is that many people have come to equate "demon" with "devil" probably due to multiple factors that includes (but is not limited to) the KJV mistranslating some of them, Catholocism, and "the devil" being Satan with demons that follow him. It's similar to people who equate "hell" with "lake of fire". The language doesn't allow it, and there's no scriptural evidence for it, but traditions of men are strong.

So, if he's a slanderer, or an adversary, or an accuser, would that automatically preclude him from being a spiritually saved individual?[/QUOTE]

1. There are no variants. The text is purely preserved. Diabolos is the reading.

2. Here's the NET on this reading:

Although most translations render this last phrase as “one of you is a devil,” such a translation presupposes that there is more than one devil. This finds roots in the KJV in which the Greek word for demon was often translated “devil.” In fact, the KJV never uses the word “demon.” (Sixty-two of the 63 NT instances of δαιμόνιον [daimonion] are translated “devil” [in Acts 17:18 the plural has been translated “gods”]. This can get confusing in places where the singular “devil” is used: Is Satan or one of the demons in view [cf. Matt 9:33 (demon); 13:39 (devil); 17:18 (demon); Mark 7:26 (demon); Luke 4:2 (devil); etc.]?) Now regarding John 6:70, both the construction in Greek and the technical use of διάβολος (diabolos) indicate that the one devil is in view. To object to the translation “the devil” because it thus equates Judas with Satan does not take into consideration that Jesus often spoke figuratively (e.g., “destroy this temple” [John 2:19]; “he [John the Baptist] is Elijah” [Matt 11:14]), even equating Peter with the devil on one occasion (Mark 8:33). According to ExSyn 249, “A curious phenomenon has occurred in the English Bible with reference to one particular monadic noun, διάβολος. The KJV translates both διάβολος and δαιμόνιον as ‘devil.’ Thus in the AV translators’ minds, ‘devil’ was not a monadic noun. Modern translations have correctly rendered δαιμόνιον as ‘demon’ and have, for the most part, recognized that διάβολος is monadic (cf., e.g., 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 20:2). But in John 6:70 modern translations have fallen into the error of the King James translators. The KJV has ‘one of you is a devil.’ So does the RSV, NRSV, ASV, NIV, NKJV, and the JB [Jerusalem Bible]. Yet there is only one devil…The legacy of the KJV still lives on, then, even in places where it ought not.”

3. Both Carson and Mounce agrees with the NET footnote.

4. With that said, theology would have to decide the fate of Judas.

 

[Hope of Glory]

4. With that said, theology would have to decide the fate of Judas.

With that, I can agree. Would you also agree that using Judas to determine theology would be a bad idea?

BTW, most resources with which I am familiar state that "the devil" is undoubtedly a name for Satan. However, since "diabolos" is an adjective (in this instance) and is a generic noun, why would it be properly applied in such a manner?

 

[TCGreek]

With that, I can agree. Would you also agree that using Judas to determine theology would be a bad idea?

1. I would have to agree with that.

BTW, most resources with which I am familiar state that "the devil" is undoubtedly a name for Satan. However, since "diabolos" is an adjective (in this instance) and is a generic noun, why would it be properly applied in such a manner?

2. To apply diabolos as definite would be decided from the intent of the speaker. Was Jesus using diabolos that way?

3. Peter is called Satan in Matt. 16:23, where there's no article. Often a definite name doesn't need an article to be definite. When there's an article, emphasis is the issue.

4. Satan is called ho diabolos in Matt 4:1, which is often translated "the devil," where we have the definite article. But in John 6:70 we don't have the article; however, not having the article does not forbids it from being definite.

 

[Hope of Glory]

2. To apply diabolos as definite would be decided from the intent of the speaker. Was Jesus using diabolos that way?

The grammar also could make it definite, with the definite article, but as you point out, some nouns are anarthrous. Is this one? (I would say no.)

3. Peter is called Satan in Matt. 16:23, where there's no article. Often a definite name doesn't need an article to be definite. When there's an article, emphasis is the issue.

Names don't need the definite article ever, that I'm aware of, although one can be used. Is "Satan" a proper name always? Are there others referred to in such a manner?

4. Satan is called ho diabolos in Matt 4:1, which is often translated "the devil," where we have the definite article.

"The devil" is always the Devil, AFAIK.

But in John 6:70 we don't have the article; however, not having the article does not forbids it from being definite.

While you are correct that some nouns are anarthrous, in John 6:70, it's an adjective; it's describing the "one", and of course, in this situation, "one" is indefinite.

Where does that leave us?

 

[TCGreek]

The grammar also could make it definite, with the definite article, but as you point out, some nouns are anarthrous. Is this one? (I would say no.)

1. We both agree with the anarthrous use of the noun, but I think this is a use of the adjective diabolos as definite noun, "the devil." I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

Names don't need the definite article ever, that I'm aware of, although one can be used. Is "Satan" a proper name always? Are there others referred to in such a manner?

2. While that is true, it is distinctly applied to Peter. Yet there is only one Satanas (Matt.16:23).

"The devil" is always the Devil, AFAIK.

3. But notice that is ho diabolos that is rendered "the devil."

While you are correct that some nouns are anarthrous, in John 6:70, it's an adjective; it's describing the "one", and of course, in this situation, "one" is indefinite.

Where does that leave us?

4. But adjectives do function as nouns, which is quite common in the NT.

 

[Askjo]

SFC,

Oh please.....

I ask you of Judas as human being, not animals. Animals have no soul, you know that.

Yes, Judas was saved at the first place, because he was 'called', but later afterward he fall by betryal Christ, he died and go to hell.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

This sounds that you believe the salvation can be lost, do you?

 

[Askjo]

SFC,

Correct. So, was Judas saved at the first place?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 1 Amen!

The Bible did not say that, but did you say that?

 

[Askjo]

Judas was never saved. He was the son of perdition (destruction)(John 17:12). He was a thief who kept the purse (John 12:6). Although He recognized Jesus as Master (teacher)(Matt. 26:25), he never recognized Him as Lord.

Judas was recognized early as 'a devil' early in his walk with Jesus (Joh 6:70).

Judas never was saved. Jesus knew what was in his heart.

Absolutely yes, I agree with you.

 

[Askjo]

SFC,

How can you be sure that Judas was never saved in the first place, when he was called by Christ to be one of the 12 disciples? Before Christ called Judas, He already know Judas will betryal him. Christ did command them (12 disciples) to healing them and did miracles. I am sure that Judas was invloved with them. Also, I believe Judas was the truly disciple before he fall.

Notice, Christ said, "MANY was called, but few chosen." - Matt. 22:14.

Judas was called in the first place, but afterward at end of his life, he fall, and he is not chosen.

Many people who were 'called' at the beginning of salvation, once, they enter into the narrow road, but afterward, they turn away and stopped follow Christ, at end of their life, they are not 'chosen', many are ended in everlasting fire.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

This is what you define, "Calvinism."

 

[Askjo]

Even the Roman soldiers (certainly not saved) who crucified Jesus, mocking Him while He hung on the cross were used by God. They gambled at His feet for the garments that were on the Lord.

And this was to fulfill prophecy.. God does use the lost for His purpose just as He used that lost Apostle Judas for His purpose

Interesting comment!

 

[Askjo]

1. Jesus does not say that. Rather, His sheep, because they are His, "Hear His voice, and I know them and they follow Me" (v.26).



2. The Bible says MANY, not ALL (John 6:66).

Exactly! You are right. :thumbs:

 

[Cutter]

How can someone be saved apart from the shed blood of Christ. The following scriptures occurred before the crucifixion.

Luke 22:3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.

John 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's [son], to betray him;.

His apostleship and ministry were by appointment not because he was saved.
He fell from these positions.

Acts 1:24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all [men], shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

Also look at the last verse where Matthias is listed as being numbered with the twelve. If you believe scripture then he became part of 12 apostles. In the following verse there is no mention of 13 apostles.

Revelation 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

So if Matthias became the 12th apostle, Judas was excluded and as the Bible states, he went to his own place. Sure wasn't heaven.

 

[EdSutton]

Quote from another thread, by "Yours Truly":

(This is a veterinarian workin on a horse with a special 'horse tool'. The horse is much better, now!)

Hey, I just saw a now-closed thread in another forum.

Veterinarian power works, for the horse is alive!

(Is Dr. Bob a vet??)

Or at least this thread and discussion about Judas is/are.

Ed

 

[DeafPosttrib]

Good morning.

I have a good thought on word, 'disciple'.

Matthew 10:1,2,4 - "And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. Now the names of the twelve apostles are these: the first, Simon,.......and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him."

I look in Strong's Concordance for word, 'disciple' in Greel Dictionary, it means learner.

I agree with it, but I think it is not enough to define the word.

Christ spoken of disciple, in Luke 14:26-27: "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whoseover doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple."

In my observe of 'disciple' means follower. I rather to say, 'disciple' means follower than learner.

Christ's point was, He commands us to come and to follow Christ.

I believe Judas was a truly 'disciple' & 'apostle' at the first place. Because, Judas was called by Christ, and Christ ordained all 12 disciples included Judas(Mark 3:14).

I believe Judas was saved at the first place, because in John 10:27-29 telling us, Christ says, people who hear the gospel and come to follow Christ, Christ have the power to hold or secure them in his hand, LONG AS they continue follow Him.

Judas have been followed Christ for 3 years. Also, Matt. 10:2 tells us, Judas was an apostle.

Apostle means an ambassador of the gospel or Jesus Christ.

I believe he was saved at the beginning when after Christ called and ordained him to became disciple & apostle.

Luke 14:26-27 defines of 'disciple', anyone who forsake things and family, and come to follow Christ.

So, I believe Judas did actual followed Christ at the beginning before he betryaled him.

Judas have been involved ministry with Jesus and other 11 disciples for 3 years. No question, he was saved.

Christ doesn't make mistake for to choose Judas to become disciple, He knew future what happened to Judas. God have the purpose and plan.

Christ doesn't force Judas to stay and follow Him. Christ allowed Judas to do something in his own freewill choice. Also, Judas stopped follow Christ, and he was thinking of make money by negotiation with Scribes and Pharisees for having evil plot or consirarcy against Christ. JUdas was thinking of getting money, I am sure that he have no faith for make living.

Christ never ask anyone for need money. He have no job. He have faith in His Father, that His father taking care of him.

I believe Judas made bad decisions and went into his wrong ways. Judas was so misery himself.

No doubt, Satan came into Judas' mind and more likely possess in him, because the Holy Spirit was not in him. Why? Because he had left Christ already before.

Yes, Judas was actual left Christ and he became lost and perdition. He committed suicide by hanged himself. Now, he is in hell.

I believe Judas was truly saved in the first place, because Christ called him, and ordained him became disciple/apostle. Judas was actual DID FOLLOWED Christ earlier. But, later, he stopped follow Christ, and he turn away and became perdition and lost.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Let me see if I can summarize one of the reasons why Judas is said to have been a devil from the beginning and as such never in a right relationship with God.

The first and most prominent view has been that because God knew Him from the beginning what Judas was, that shows that God could not have known him as anything else, therefore he was a devil from the beginning.

Now before I examine this once again, am I articulating this view as those that believe it true would say it is? Am I misunderstanding anything, or failing to understand it?

 

[Eliyahu]

So far I see that Judas is said to be a devil from the beginning. But this verse shows the devil entered into him at the last supper? Why did it happen then if he was a devil from the beginning?

Luke 22:1-6 (KJV)

1 Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called the Passover.
2 And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.
3 Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of the number of the twelve.
4 And he went his way, and communed with the chief priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.
5 And they were glad, and covenanted to give him money.
6 And he promised, and sought opportunity to betray him unto them in the absence of the multitude.

I think this was not answered enough.

Jesus mentioned this:

John 6.
70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

The people who believed in Jesus ( Jn 8:30) was also condemned like this:
30 As he spake these words, many believed on him.
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him,
39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. 41 Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. 42 Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. 43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. 44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.


Remember this,

In the eyes of God, son of devil is devil, even before the Devil put any specific willingness into the heart of his son, his follower.

Son of man is a man,
Son of dog is a dog
Son of monkey is monkey
Son of God is God
Son of Devil is a devil.

Jesus meant this in Jn 6:70, and later on Satan inserted the specific desire and willingness into his son, Judas.

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Eliyahu:
Son of man is a man,
Son of dog is a dog
Son of monkey is monkey
Son of God is God
Son of Devil is a devil.

Jesus meant this in Jn 6:70, and later on Satan inserted the specific desire and willingness into his son, Judas.

HP: Was there a time you were not a son of God? Whose son were you?

Are you suggesting that those that Jesus said the devil was their father had no possibility of believing on Him and becoming a child of God?

 

[Cutter]

I believe he was saved at the beginning when after Christ called and ordained him to became disciple & apostle.

How can anybody be saved before Calvary? "Without shedding of blood there is no remission."

No doubt, Satan came into Judas' mind and more likely possess in him, because the Holy Spirit was not in him. Why? Because he had left Christ already before.

The Holy Spirit was not in him because, "the Holy Ghost was not yet [given]; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

 

[Heavenly Pilgrim]

Cutter: How can anybody be saved before Calvary?

HP: By faith. Heb 11.

What is amazing to me is that you would put a time frame on Calvery. Did not God forknow it from the beginning, therefore in reality it had already or always been accomplished?

 

[Cutter]

HP: By faith. Heb 11.

What is amazing to me is that you would put a time frame on Calvery. Did not God forknow it from the beginning, therefore in reality it had already or always been accomplished?

So the blood of Christ plays no role in our atonement and forgiveness of sin? Jesus said, "It is finished," when He died on the cross. How can something be complete, such as salvation, when the work was not yet finished?
Jesus also said, "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father." You think maybe He wanted to present Himself to the Father as the perfect sacrifice on behalf of sin that was needed for salvation?