In light of the new information contained in the gospel of Judas. Christ knew if his revolution was to succeed someone needed to challenge the power of the priests in Jerulslem and make a stand for self determination that is within us all. Most of the apostles told Christ to leave and live a life on the run to preserve the knowledge he taught.\n\nWhy did Judas do as Christ wanted and the other apostles waver at his request to turn him in to the authorities? \n\nCould it have been Judas and Mary Magnalin were given secret knowledge the others were not privy to because of their strong faith and knowledge. \n\nDid the other apostles have remorse that they did not join Christ, Mary Magnalin, and Judas in the desert for 40 days to learn the lessons of succession Christ had to give them the truly faithful?\n \nOr could it have been the apostles that were left out, were vindictive of the knowledge Christ gave them because they had faith that the other apostles did not have?
205189
I don't believe this so called "Gospel of Judas". I don't doubt that it exists, or that it was written when it was supposedly written, but I do believe the writer skewed the text to reflect his/her thoughts and that it is not an accurate account of the facts. Yes, Judas betrayed Jesus and yes it was a part of the grand design that God had planned for the salvation of man. I don't think Judas necessarily betrayed Jesus because Jesus told him to though, I think Judas didn't realize at the time of the betrayal that it would end in the crucifixion of his Lord. That's why Judas tried to get the Pharisees to take back the 30 pieces of silver and why he ultimately committed suicide. This is simply another example of how satan tries to confuse the truth and turn people away from God.
323322
YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!\n\nYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY!!\n\nWhat a great new idea!  Christ spoke to abandon organization and temples!  He pretended to be the messiah to steer people away from the status quo.  He sacrificed himself to show them they were fooled!!!  And cried out that God had forsaken him!!!!  So they would KNOW!  The apostles simply capitalized on his fame, after the heat died off.  Turned him into an icon of what he tried to destroy...the Bible.
579460
Jesus stayed out of politics.  so it is hard to  transfer what he taught in that day to present times, politically speaking.\n\nExample; Because he saved the woman caught in the act of adultery, does that mean he would be against ALL death penalty cases?\n\nAnd, if you noticed, while he saved her, he didn't back down on saying she was wrong. ("Go & sin no more.") I can imagine liberals screaming, "Who are you telling her what to do with her own body!"\n\nHe obviously wanted the poor to be taken care of, but does that mean he would have wanted the government to be in charge of it? And 50% of the rich man's income being confiscated to pay for it? That sounds more like Robin Hood than Jesus Christ!\n\nHe said you have to pay your taxes, but would he have voted for a politician who advocated fixing things by higher taxes?\n\nHe taught obedience to the government, but does that mean he wanted a big government?\n\nI can't imagine Jesus being anything but disgusted by mid to late- term abortions, but the Bible is not specific on the subject. The issue of "when life begins" would have to be answered, first.\n\nBut as far as issues like trade unions and strong regulation of business, strong environmental regulations, animal rights & gun control, it's hard to say, exactly. \n \nBTW - The mythology of Mary Magdalene is that she was a REFORMED prostitute.  But there isn't actually anything in the Bible to support the notion she ever was a prostitute.\n\nNOW, as to why ANYONE would fork over money to the likes of Bennie Hin is beyond me!\n\nP.S.  You can always count on KooKoo Bananas to spit out the hatred, can't you?
584721
Well, God has a plan. They asked to be put into the herd of swine. Jesus allowed it. See the point? The demons couldn't even make a move without His very approval. The question misses the overall view. They could do nothing apart from His power. And they knew it. Jesus was demonstrating His power over the very forces of Hell. They will "get theirs" in due time, so to speak.
233105
I always wonder about that.\n\nJesus handpicked 12 apostles, spent at least a year with them and taught them much. Now, obviously one of those 12 didn't work out so well, but I am curious why Paul is even necessary?\n\nDid Jesus screw up on the other 11 he choose as well?  Why was Paul necessary to spread the word.  He never even met Jesus, nor does he tell anything about his life, his teachings, or any real details about what Jesus wanted.\n\nIt is also fairly obvious from Acts and Galatians that Paul and the Apostles' relationship was, at best, pretty icy.  It is also fairly obvious that Paul's message is radically different from the Old Testament, and quite different in many aspects from the Gospels.\n\nBut my central point, is Paul seems utterly unnecessary, give the resume's of the othe 11 original apostles.  Given that they didn't get along, my conclusion is that Paul simply tried to elbow his way in on the nascent Christian message, and the Apostles begrudgingly let him preach to the Gentiles.  After the destruction of the Temple in 70 AD, the jewish Christians (which the apostles seemingly were) were scattered or destroyed, and the only thing left was Paul's version of Christianity.\n\nThere are many other ways Paul and Jesus disagree (works versus faith, did Jesus come to take away the law, etc).  Christians (particularly evangelicals), for some reason, always take Paul's version over Jesus, which seems odd since they believe Jesus IS God.\n\nBut the question that has never been satisfactorally answered remains:  If Jesus handpicked his Apostles, why was Paul (who self-appointed himself an apostle based solely on a dream he had) necessary?
386781
You should continue reading the book. But I thought your question was sincere. You are saying that the martyrs were twisted and un-enlightened. That is your opinion.\nThe same people that killed the Martyrs were saying "Where is your God to save you". They said that to Jesus too. \nThe Martyrs weren't necessarily "willing" to be killed. But they were very very aware that they would be with the Lord in heaven. \nMartyrdom was a way to proove how strongly they believed.\nIn the Roman Empire everyone was pressured to worship the Ceasar. Nobody really believed he was a god, but they all went along with that to avoid getting killed. How much more convincing would it be that Jesus is real, and that what the Christians believed is real if they were willing to die for what they believe in?\nIf they weren't willing to die, then Christianity was just like any other fad religion that was happening. At that time in history it was crucial that Christians show the importance of what they believe. That's why Paul was willing to appeal to Ceasar in Rome knowing that he would be killed by Caeser. He had an opportunity to escape, but he felt his whole purpose in appealing was to see Nero at any cost. He was beheaded. How strong of a message is that that someone is willing to die for it?\nIf they didn't really believe, they wouldn'd die for it.  \nAnd to the Christians death meant nothing, because they knew that they would be ressurected. You are seeing the picture from your own world view. God doesn't see it that way. He has a plan that has to do with eternity, not our short lived lives. We only live just a short time compared to eternity. Which is more important? Eternity, or just a number of years which are uncertain?\nWhy would God need to save them? He already did save them.
156754
At that time Satan went into them. They were scared. Jesus had twelve faithful followeers otherwise known as the twelve disciples. The other people just folowed him around to see if he could actually do the miracles people said he could do.
324125
I am so freaking stoked someone asked this question!!!!! lol \nusually I am stuck answering a bunch of anti questions! \n\nQuestion 1,2,3,4\nWhy do you have 12 Apostles? They were just meant to be around for the time of Christ, not to be replaced with new apostles.That's a common misconception, perhaps one that is taught out of necessity among churches that have obviously lost the presence of apostles and prophets that were in the New Testament church. Rather than admit that something has been lost (or that there was an Apostasy), it's much safer to say that the lost elements were intended to be lost. But the Bible doesn't justify such teachings. Look at Acts 1:23-26: \n23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.\n24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,\n25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.\n26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.\nAfter Judas Iscariot apostatized and died, the remaining eleven apostles came together and sought revelation about the next apostle they should appoint to take the place of Judas. Clearly, they understood that the body of twelve was meant to be maintained. \nI'm happy to announce that in these latter days, the Twelve Apostles have been restored under divine direction from Jesus Christ. The Restoration of the Gospel of Jesus Christ and His Church has taken place! \n\n\nThe apostasy of the early Church in the 200 A.D.- plus era is rather easy to see. Apostles and prophets were rejected, persecuted, and killed, and the Roman state took over the administration of the Church, rather than divinely chosen priesthood leaders. Constantine, not even a Christian himself, melded the power of the state with the affairs of God and drove rapid transformation of the Church. Biblical doctrines rapidly gave way to Greek philosophy and the teachings of men. Ordinances like baptism were lost, the teachings of the temple were lost and corrupted, and even the most basic understanding of the nature of God was replaced with man-made doctrines (the Trinity concept). And all this was according to prophecies about the coming apostasy and the future need for restoration. \nThe issue is not that Christ failed - as many think an apostasy would imply - but that God allows men to choose freely, even if they choose to fail, to reject Him, and to choose darkness over light. Christ knew and taught that the purity of the Gospel and the church He established would continue for a time, but that there was darkness ahead due to the corruption of man and the attacks of the adversary. Hugh Nibley (Collected Works of Hugh Nibley, Vol. 4, Ch.6) summarizes these New Testament teachings as the "Three Acts of the Drama:" 1) the Lord comes and begins His work, 2) villains and impostors take over and rule, 3) the Lord returns in power and fixes everything.\n\nhttp://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_Restoration.shtml for more on this issue\n\nthe New Testament clearly and repeatedly reports that prophets and prophecy were integral parts of the original Church of Jesus Christ after Christ had ascended to heaven. For example, consider Acts 13:1-3: \n1 Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. \n2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. \n3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. \nUsing the gift of prophecy, leaders in the original Church received revelation through the gift of the Holy Ghost - praying and fasting
153791
I watched the Discovery Channel show all about it, and all I can say is God help us. It is NOT right by any means. Jesus would NEVER say that Judas would surpass the rest of the apostles and enter Heaven that "no angel has ever set eyes on" (which is what is said in this Gospel). This Gospel scares me, nothing good has surrounded it's finding (after finding it, it has been stolen and sought after greedily, and twisted peoples morals in a bad way), and nothing good will come from it. That is my opinion.\nTake care and God Bless
256769
YES!!! Finally someone that agrees with me!\n\nALso note in Hebrews how Paul keep changing his "VISION OF CHRIST" story! 3 TIMES!\nIf Jesus appered to me in a vision, I DEFNITLY remember.\n\nALSO note his obsession which finding salvation through the "BLOOD OF CHRIST". Why is he so interested in SACRIFICE?\n\nOh and Jesus said become as children (humble, trusting, submitting to the Lord) in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. (See Matthew 18:3.) There is no mention here of Him (christ) dying and ressurecting as basis for salvation.\n\nIf i am not mistaken he also say that "THE BLOOD/SACRIFICE of Jesus smelt good to GOD!\n\nPaul liked to profess that he is a Jew yet he INSULTED Jews at every hook and turn!\n\nThe dude had issues!!!
239048
Let me provide you two answers.  First, the question is unanswerable if you mean the apostles.  The apostles could have been great frauds, that possibility must always be admitted by a Christian.\n\nOn the other hand, lets look at some weak evidences.\n\nFirst, the faith of the apostles created the largest demographic group on Earth.  There are more people claiming memebership in a Christian Church than any single group on Earth.  For a fraud, it is very successful.  It could be profound mind control, but that is simply ignoring two millenia of writings and an extraordinary historical diversity.\n\nSecond, when the early Fathers were choosing Gospels one of the reasons they left out many of the competing books was that they provided "proof" of Jesus' resurrection.  The orthodox books, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, all have empty tombs, mixed accounts and to some extent unclear messages. (I can hear the screams now that it is clear, but you can find 46 impossible contradictions between them that if one element is true, then another Gospel must be false)  Still, that was part of the decision making.  You had faith in the Church and its proclaimation or you did not.\n\nThird, while the Church has spent two millenia finding new ways to tarnish Christ's name, it is really still proclaiming the same message as it was left.  The Catholics, Orthodox, Oriental and Coptic Churches all have maintained the apostolic succession that began in Acts 1:46.  The group of apostolic successors still lead the old Churches.  While all apostolic successors are sinners like the rest of us, it is clear from both the Gospels, Acts and the letters as well as the early letters from Christians who were ordained by the apostles, that the leadership is supposed to be in the hands of these apostolic successors.  The amazing thing about their leadership however is that it does not put them in charge, it puts us all in charge.  Their role is to make sure the message is not distorted, our role is to proclaim it and to accept correction when we are wrong.  The entirety of the apostolic message was handed on in the scriptures, in hymns, in the ancient services (which are still in use by the way), in writings and in stories.  It is available to any who wish to read, hear or sing them.  You cannot control what you widely proclaim.  Only the most naive can be controlled or the most powerless.  \n\nNow I do think there is a lot of Christians following a message that would have infuriated the early Christians and you can see that in the TV preachers especially.\n\nHas Christianity been used to influence or push the populace, absolutely, but every widely held concept has been used for that purpose.  That is the entire reason for politics.  It has nothing to do with religion or philosophy, that has to do with power.\n\nWhether it is the Tsar claiming divine right or the President of the United States claiming to act in the name of Freedom, the divine gift, it is always used by politicians.
492840
Ok, not to sound cliche, but remember the musical Jesus Christ Superstar?  Remember in the title song Judas sings "Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication!..."  It's not like they could see his pic in the newspaper, or online.  It was dark, and even with a full moon there were lots of olive trees around, casting shade on whatever light may have been around, so they still wouldn't have seen him.  \n\nPlus, it's not like the Roman army got off days to go listen to Jesus.  Jesus and the Jews were a threat to Roman culture and power, and it was forbidden to be a soldier and a follower of Christ or Judaism.
126984
The Gospel of Judas was written many many years after the apostles lived and their associates (Timothy and Luke). Where did you get your historical research? \nGive me a break. \n\nThe gnostic gospels are from beliefs that began in the 2nd and 3rd century, which meens that the writings come from a time period more than 100 years after Jesus ministry, far later than any New Testament book. Why in the world should we believe that these later documents tell us more about events than the earlier documents? They are simply not useful for trying to understand Jesus ministry and the shape of very early Christianity. (1)\n\nThe gnostic gospels were late arrivals, which is ONE reason why church leaders rejected them ... they lacked authority since their authors were neither (a) apostles of Jesus nor (b) persons associated with apostles of Jesus... and no one knows who wrote those gnostic gospels. (2)
197307
Are you sure they knew nothing of it?  Also, are you sure that the Pharisees knew that he would rise from the dead?  Otherwise, why would they put guards at the tomb if they thought he would really rise.  I think the Pharisees thought someone would remove him from the tomb.  And I think his disciples didn't really know what "rise" meant.
292136
This is only a theory, \nbut when Constantine and the Council of Nicaea canonised the Bible, they weren't too kind to the Jews. They didn't want anything to do with them as they felt Jews were beneath them. So they made it known, separated Easter from Passover, introduced the death penalty for ministering Judaism, same for those listening, coined the term 'Christ Killers' and basically treated them like dirt, and the same went for their Prophet and Book. \nAfter changing words in the Bible, adding to it (words like 'begotten' meaning to sire or father), calling Jesus a son of God - which was more powerful than having a Prophet who was only spoken to by God, they then started to regain their power back away from the people.... and all because some guy called Jesus had stirred up plenty of trouble for Rome by giving out free medicals and telling them to believe in One God that created all of us.\nThey set out to burn any Bible that didn't match their own and kill anyone who wouldn't accept the new doctrine - crusades. \nThe God of Constantine in the NT would certainly be more merciful than the God of the Moses in the OT.... it says so, as written by powerful political men of the 4th Century.\n:)
555837
They were offended at Jesus. They all knew Him and now He was telling them the way to God and they did not want to receive Him.\n\nThere were actually 3 Judas' named in the NT. Jesus had a half brother named Judas he would have been Judas of Nazareth or Judas son of Joseph. Another Judas the one who betrayed Him was Judas Iscariot see Mark 14:10. There was also another apostle named Judas he was the son of James mentioned in Luke 6:16. Hope that helps.
675474
Not Sure\n\nFirst 12 Appointed Apostle will rule of Israel in Rev.  Jesus Christ Appointed = Judas was one of them\n\n2nd  In the bible suicide does not mean you will go to Hell, it only says you MAY  = May can mean May Not\n\n******\nJudas did repent, He did take the money back, but had guilt, how many people doyou know today that  are eat up with guilt?\n\n3rd  Someone had to betray Jesus, Do you think this was a example Jesus set on us, we are all sinner and weak, even if we do live for God and do our best ( we still sin), we are human also?