The Four Gospels are avowedly biographical. They narrate the life of one person Jesus Christ. Beside him all other characters fade into comparative insignificance; but of them, none stands out with greater clearness than does Judas. The reason for this is not far to seek. The human mind seizes instinctively upon contrasts, and in Jesus and His betrayer is a contrast which all men Christian and unbelieving alike can appreciate. Just as Jesus was the very personification of holiness, so Judas has become the symbol of all that is unworthy in man. Yet few have understood, or even cared to investigate his character and the cause of his downfall.
To begin with, several interesting facts can be gained from his name alone. He was Judas Ish-Kerioth the man of Kerioth, a town of southern Judae. Here immediately is a marked distinction from the rest of the apostles, who all hailed from Galilee away in the north. Moreover, it is a well known fact that a pronounced difference of character existed in those days between the Jews of north and south. The southern Jews lacked the self-assertion and intense nationalism of the zealot Galileans.
There is yet another point which would serve to accentuate the difference between Judas and his colleagues. It would appear from the reference to Simon Iscariot, Judas’ father (John 13, 2). that he was a man of some repute, whereas the other apostles were, with possible exceptions, men of humble birth. Hence the remarkable separateness of Judas from the others a fact evident from the way in which his name always occurs alone in the different lists of the apostles’ names, whilst the others are always mentioned in groups of two or three.
Why then was he chosen, when it seemed from the very beginning that he would be ill at ease among men so different? Assuredly there must have been latent in him genius of some kind, some great potentialities for good in the Lord’s service, otherwise it were hard to see why he should ever have been called to follow Jesus.
The fact that he was given charge of the bag and was made treasurer, suggests that he was a good business man who had had previous experience in financial affairs in short, just the administrator that the early church required a few years later in the days when they had all things common.
But interest centers chiefly in the motive which Judas had in betraying his Lord. Many theories, some amazing and fantastic, have been propounded to account for his action.
One fashionable explanation, which seeks to exonerate him from blame, is to the effect that Judas thought by such a betrayal to force Jesus to assert Himself as the Messiah, to overthrow those who would oppose him and to re-establish the Jewish nation.
Such an explanation, however, is not in harmony with the facts, and will not stand close analysis. The key-passage to all Judas’ conduct is the one most frequently overlooked.
In John, Chap. 6, after the feeding of the five thousand, is the record of that sublime lesson which Jesus thought to inculcate.
“I am the living bread which came down from heaven ; if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever ; and the bread that I will give is my flesh which I will give for the life of the world Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, ye have no life in you.”
The Jews, unsympathetic and spiritually blind, exclaimed derisively, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?” and many of the disciples found it a hard saying. Jesus replied,
“Doth this offend you? the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit and they are life. But there are some of you that believe not.” The comment follows : “For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who it was that should betray him. (R.V.).
Why this sudden reference to Judas? It can only be explained on the assumption that Judas was one of those who “believed not” and who thought the word of Jesus “a hard saying.”
This interpretation is confirmed by the rest of the chapter.
“From that time, many of his disciples went back and walked no more with him,” but this only moved Peter to a great confession that, whatever others might do, they he apostles believed that Jesus was in truth the Holy One of God. The answer of Jesus is remarkable. “Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?”
Here again this reference to the traitor is quite out of context unless is be inferred that Judas was one of those who lost belief in Jesus as Messiah. The only conclusion possible is that about this time Judas became a disbeliever in the claims of his Master. The rest of his career falls into line with this explanation. Even on the day of his suicide, he exclaimed “I have betrayed innocent blood” not “I have betrayed the Son of God” thereby asserting no more than the righteousness of Jesus.
Apparently it was now his policy to serve his own base ends as far as possible, even to the extent of misappropriating the common funds. “he was a thief, and having the bag took away what was put therein.” (John 12, 6) (R.V.). In plain terms, he embezzled the money that was put into his charge.
It was at this time that Jesus declared “For in that she (Mary) hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.” (Matt. 26, 12). This foretelling of his death evidently confirmed Judas in his disbelief, for Matthew continued, “Then one of the twelve called Judas Iscariot went unto the chief priests, and said unto them, what will ye give me and I will deliver Him unto you and from that time forth he sought opportunity to betray Him.”
All the undescribable villainy of the man is revealed in that last phrase, that he coolly and deliberately sought opportunity to betray one, who, he knew, was without sin.
That he agreed to do so for thirty pieces of silver is not, though frequently asserted, an evidence that his besetting sin was love of money. For were that so, a man of his astuteness could easily have bargained with the wealthy chief priests for a greater reward than five pounds, the price of a common slave !
What then was his motive in selling his evil services at such a low price? The answer can only be conjectured. He had realised that failure (from the human point of view) must attend the mission of Jesus. Already Jesus and His disciples were in bad odour with the authorities, and a clash was inevitable. By betraying his Master for a nominal sum, he would shew himself to be no friend of the upstart prophet and would also ingratiate himself with the chief priests. An eminently sound scheme !
Doubtless it was with some such motive that Judas contemplated his heinous crime.
And so from that time forward he sought opportunity to carry the plan into effect a matter not easily accomplished in view of the tremendous influx of Jews into the city at the Passover. It was essential that Jesus should be apprehended away from the crowd, if a general uproar was to be avoided.
Remembering this, it becomes interesting to examine how the deed was accomplished.
Judas is present with the other apostles at the Last Supper. Like them, he is startled by the declaration, “Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.” This has greater meaning for Judas than it has for his associates. Can it be, he reflects, that Jesus has divined his wicked purpose? If that be so, then he must take immediate steps to put it into practice, or Jesus will elude capture by hiding himself among the crowd.
While these thoughts are still passing through his mind, Jesus gives them shape in words. “That thou doest, do quickly” a hint of the agonizing suspense that tortures his soul, but comprehended by none save the traitor. And Judas goes out into the night.
The scene changes to the moonlit garden of Gethsemane. In this incident appears the sharpest contrast between Master and false apostle. Judas approaches accompanied by a great multitude. “Hail, Master !” he cries, and runs to embrace Jesus, who, without any act of resistance and without any word of bitterness suffers himself to be arrested. This is surely the greatest of dramatic ironies that the Saviour of the world should be betrayed by a token of friendship.
The cup of Judas’ iniquity is full. We follow him no further. His later repentance and suicide are almost inevitable corollaries to his great sin. They show at any rate that he was not altogether an unnatural creature devoid of human feeling, as many have represented him, but he remains, nevertheless, an essential figure in God’s plan of redemption, and a supreme example of the dangers of disbelief.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One