Something I posted in a thread over in the Apologetics forum (not realizing I was posting it in the wrong forum, oops) and so I’m bringing it over here in hopes of getting a bit of input from the proper forum :o.
I’m glad to see a topic regarding Judas Iscariot because i’ve been working on some ideas regarding him for the purpose of discussing OSAS with my Baptist family members. Maybe some of you here could help me firm it up a bit
Now, when i discuss this with them i’m not going to be doing it necessarily in the sense of trying to show Catholic belief, but rather bring it to them from their own standards … i.e. OSAS, Sola Scriptura, Sola Fides and KJV Bible. So if you have any advice, please try to form it in such a way that it goes along with that, rather than appearing as the Catholic viewpoint on it.
Mt 26:24 “The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! It had been good for that man if he had not been born.”
So, from the KJV Bible and applying the principle of Sola Scriptura, it would seem that Jesus himself declares that Judas Iscariot must not have been saved. If he had been saved it would have been good for him to have been born, regardless of any other difficulties in life. For a protestant who holds to SS and KJV I can really see no other option from this verse.
Mt 27:3 “Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,”
Here, again from the KJV and applied with a Sola Scriptura viewpoint it clearly says that Judas repented! This is at the heart of Sola Fides, he believed and repented therefore he was saved! Regardless of what comes later in his life, OSAS demands that he is saved and therefore must go to Heaven.
So it seems that we have Scripture saying that Judas was saved (based on Sola Fides and OSAS) but Jesus himself declaring that Judas was not (based on Sola Scriptura).
The arguments I expect are these:
- Judas was not truly saved. He did not actually “accept Jesus into his heart”.
Response1) Sola Scriptura! The Bible does not say he did not “accept” Jesus, it does say he repented. You can’t put words into the Bible that are not there (SS) and you cannot judge what was in his heart. From SS, you can only accept that the Bible says he repented and that is the only necessary thing for salvation (SF).
- Jesus only meant that it was better for him not to be born because he would kill himself.
Response2) Killing yourself is worse than going to hell? If by this you mean that Judas is in Heaven then killing himself is irrelevant, Heaven is the Ultimate Reward!
Now, please help me out! I’ve only been working on this mentally so far and I know i’ve left out a few things that crossed my mind (such as “When did the New Covenant actually begin? With Jesus ministry or with his death?”). If you can think of any other possible arguments and possible responses I would appreciate this. And again, remember, this is to be strictly from the viewpoint of a Baptist who holds the 3 beliefs listed and uses the KJV. My goal is to show that in the case of Judas Iscariot, those 3 beliefs can not be in agreement with each other. If I can get any of those family members to see that point, then perhaps I can present to them a more Catholic viewpoint on the subject