But it ia in connexion with their election thai the chief difficulty respecting Judas is found. Why was such a man chosen to be an apostle t Unless we are prepared to throw aside the express statements of St. John, we cannot here have re- course to the limitation of Christ's knowledge. He tells us, not only that Jesus ' knew all men, and . . . himself knew what was in man ' (2-*), but that ' Jesus knew from the beginning . . . who it was that should betray him ' (6**), and that a year before the Passion he said, ' Did not I choose you the Twelve, and one of you is a devil ? ' (6'°) The parable of the Barren Fig-tree suggests that Christ wished to give Judas eveiy opportunity of bearing good fruit. Or, He may have desired to prevent him from becoming even worse ; or, to lessen his powers of mischief ; or, to prove to all that no one IS safe or constrained, and that even an apostle can rebel to the uttermost ; electus enim a Cfhristo Slid libertate et vitio corruit (Toletus). Some main- tain that Christ selected Judas because He knew that He would betray Him and thus fulfil the divine decrees. None of these suggestions re- moves the difficulty, which runs up into the in- soluble problems of the origin of evil, and of divine omniscience combined with human free-will. See Westcott, Add. Note on Jn 13".
3. We may assume that Judas had some good qualities which led to his admission to the apostolic body. Among these, practical ability and energy seem to have been found. Hence, when the com- pany begins to have funds (Lk 8'), he is selected to administer them (Jn 13=°). This he did dishonestly (Jn 12'-'') ; and the same greed led him to betray ins Master to the priests for thirty shekels (Mt 26", Mk 14", Lk 22'). His pilfering from the money- box is the one thing to his discredit that is told us previous to his great crime, and the Synoptists are silent as to this preparatory course of sin. But, no doubt, he yielded to other forms of temptation ; and it has been much debated whether covetousness was the sole or the chief cause of his treachery.* It was certainly a cause. He sought the priests, not they him ; and his question is, ' What are ye will- ing to give me?' But disappointed ambition prob- ably helped. He looked, like the rest or the disciples, for an earthly kingdom with profits and honours, and he may have been the first to see that
• We muat not ar^e that so small a 8um as thirty shekela amid not have induced him to commit such a crime. Matricide has been committed for a few shillings. Thirty shekels was the price o( a slave (Ex 2132)=abDut £4 according to the present value of silver, but in purchasing power perhaps double thai amount. The power of avarice Is almost limitless.
JUDAS ISCAKIOT
JUDAS ISCARIOT
r97
nothuir;of the kind wa« in store for him. Jesus had refused to be made a kinj^ (.In 0") ; and it was soon after this that the presence of a diabolical character among the Twelve was announced (G"). The triumphal entry into Jerusalem led to nothin;; ; and then the com|>uct with the hierarchy was made. Ite.tentmeni rirohalily contributed sumetiiing, at any rate as tne end drew near. Duriu},' the Ia.st year Judas would feel that to some e.\tent his conduct was suspected or known. Christ's strong' warning's against avarice, and His denunciations of hypocrisy, would seem at times to be aimed at him, and no doubt were in part meant specially for him. Such passages as Alt 6'"-"' 13-, Mk 10", Lk 16""" acquire additional meaning when we remember that Judas waa among the hearers. His hypocrisy after the pilfering began must have been conscious, and seems to have been successful ; for to the last the other apostles did not suspect him (.Jn 13«. 2»)_ But, Christ declared that hypocrisy is always e.xposed in the end (Lk 12'-). It wjus ' to the disciples lirst of all,' and (we may believe) to Judas most of all, that He said, ' whatsoever ye have spoken in the car in the inner chambers shall be proclaimed upon the housetops' (Lk 12''). And V ho more than Judas needed the warning, 'Look vhether the light that is in thee be not darkness'? (Lk 11-"). His chagrin at the 'waste' of the ointment, and Christ's public rebuke of his hypo- critical lament, seem to have been among the incidents which completed his determination to betray Christ. Constant contact with a goodness to which he would not yield had generated a fierce hate. See Swete on Mk 14'".
Attempts have been made both to darken and to brighten what is lolij us of Judas. Was he a plotter from the (irst? May he not have sought admission to the inner circle of Christ's disciples in oriir to overthrow this revolutionary Teacher ? liut even St. John, whose horror of him is moat clearly expressed, gives no hint of this ; and, if it Were tnie, it would be amazing that Judas should share in the general success of the Twelve as preachers and workers of miracles On the other hand, may not his motive have been much less evil than is commonly supposed? Some would repre- sent him as a brave man who believed that patriot- ism reiiuired him to deliver Jesus to the rulers. Others, with more plausibility, suggest that, like the Baptist, he may have been impatient at the slow progress of the Messiah ; and he may have intended merely to precipitate a crisis. If the hierarchy were encouraged to arrest Jesus, His miraculous power would defeat them, the populace would declare for Him, and His triumph would be comiilete. The l'as.sover was an opportunity wliich must not be allowed to pass. In arguing and acting thus, Judas was presum|>tuous and wrongheaded, but he was not a sordid traitor. This view also, which is advocated by I)e (Juincey and Whately, has no support in Scripture, not even in the record of his remorse. If there was nothing worse than this, vould Christ have denounced him as devilish, and called him a ' son of perdition ' ? And granting that SidSoXot in Jn 6™ is not much stronger than Xarai'd in Mt 1 6" and Mk 8", yet of no one but Judas did He sav , • (lood were it lor liiiii il tliiit man bad not lieeii born ' ( Mt ••>'). After this it is hardly neces- sary to point out that both Luke and John regard Jud.is in the last stages of his career as becoming the abode of Satan (Lk 22'. Jn 1:) ■ 'l. who then •entered into him," an e.vpression which is unii|iie in Scripture in this S]>irltual sense. With Keim we reject these hviiotlifses in defence of *liidas as impossible and uinvortby inventions which have nothing noble to excuse them.