Over the years on the blog whenever I have posted something about Judas Iscariot (as in my last post), I’ve had readers ask me whether he was a real person or, as some folk have it, he was made up by Christian story tellers who wanted to explain how Jesus ended up in the hands of his enemies? Often it is pointed out that “Judas” sounds like “Jew”: did Christian story tellers come up with the “Jew” who “betrayed Jesus” in order to make a theological point?
I have a definite view about that.
I think he was a real person. Actually one of Jesus’ disciples. And the one who betrayed him to the authorities leading to his arrest and crucifixion.
Why should I think so? The following explanation is based on the discussion in my book, The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot (Oxford University Press, 2006) — where I start with the question of historical evidence and what “counts”:
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
,,,,, The very day Bishop John S Spong died I listened to one of his speach about Judas,,,,,,,that he is not primarily the biography of one evil disciple. He is a literary symbol of betrayal, developed as the early Christian movement increasingly defined itself against Judaism.,,,,, . In the midts of the well of different opinions,,,I still love and are open to Spongs ideas!
I remember John Shelby Spong saying that he believed Judas was a fictional character created by anti-Jewish authors to try to shift the blame of Jesus death to the Jews. Well, I have a good deal of respect for Bishop Spong, I think this is one of the areas where he showed that he was not a professional historian.
My understanding, from all I have learned from you, is that one Christian “dogma” is that God sent Jesus into the world “to die for our sins.” This was intentional by God. If this is accepted in the faith , how can Jews (or Romans or any group) be blamed and castigated through the centuries for killing him? This was one of the points of his existence; God’s gift to mankind.
Yup, it’s one of those ironies of the Christian tradition, right up there with some forms of “predestination.” How can we be punished for something over which we had no control. Predestined to go to hell??
In my b/f Undergrad. I heard those that did not hear of God would not go to Hell, also young kids & babies. As you know I have no clue of Jesus nor the signers of the New Covenant. Other than Jesus condemned the whole world, when the OT was the Jews.
Finally up until 1997, I wrote run-on sentences- while you Dr Ehrman have beautiful elegant flowing sentences. Since I use commas & semicolons [probably incorrectly] to avoid run-on sentences or gramatical nightmares.
Finally Jesus was quoted that Judas Iscariot was “predestined” to have Jesus arrested John 6:70-71; John 13:2, 27; Acts 1:25
The creators of that biased, eternal perspective apparently were unaware of quantum physics or the ability to reincarnate into another version of themselves but retain old memories and shape shift into another cultural identity and context. (Of course I’m being facetious for every word written after physics).
Hi, Bart. In your blog of January 19, 2022, you quoted from First Isaiah ” he expected justice [in Hebrew: mishpat] but saw bloodshed [Hebrew: mispah]; righteousness [Hebrew sedaqa], but heard a cry [Hebrew se’aqa].”
I’d love to find more of these puns, but I don’t read Hebrew.
Is there a transcription of the Hebrew available? or a website that will discuss them?
Thanks.
Lucinda
THat’s a great question and I’m afraid I don’t know the answer. Maybe another blog reader could help us out?
usually discover these things not by reading the Hebrew but by reading commentaries. One excellent place to find things like this is in a good annotated Bible, such as the HarperCollins or the SBL Study Bibles. In the notes to passages they often identify those kinds of puns. The problem is that there is no list of them there. Is there somewhere else? Again, maybe someone can help us on that one.
I have a question about the “ sources” for Judas. Drs. Hugo Mendez and Mark Goodarce agree the gospel of John knows the synoptic gospels. Other scholars agree the gospel writer at least knew Mark. Should we take John out of our independent source category?
M & L have not been found to independently circulate. Are not these hypothetical sources? Can one reasonably argue M & L are creations of Matthew and Luke?
As far as Papias is an independent source, is not also more likely he knew of the gospels?
It seems to me, the originating source for Judas is Mark. Everything else is a sort of reception history.
I think Mark created him to create tension or drama in the passion story.
Yes, you could argue that. I myself think the evidence that John knew the Synoptics is very thin. BUT, even if he did, he had other sources of information since most of what he says is not in the Synoptics (including things about Judas). So the options are that he had independent sources or that he was makin’ everything up. We have good evidence (even apart from the Synoptics) that he had sources. I know know of any good reason to think he was just inventing everything else (story after story). Especially given what must have been his historical context, in a Christian community where stories of Jesus are being told both to convert people and to inform Christians of what Jesus said and did.
it’s there a good accessible book that takes about John’s sources?
You might start wiht the chapter in my textbook on John, which discusses the issue with evidence and includes bibliography. But you may need to use one of the editions BEFORE the most recent 8th ed., co-authored with my colleague Hugo Mendez, who rewrote the chapter. He doesn’t agree with me on sources….
Thank you, I appreciate your response.
I think Judas may not have understood what he was agreeing to. After Jesus’s protest in the Temple, Judas was probably told that the authorities just wanted to get Jesus off the streets until after the festival. I can’t imagine that anyone who had faithfully followed his teacher around for months would agree to turn him over for execution, let alone crucifixion. I think Judas was deceived by whomever he dealt with.
The thing I’ve never understood is the strange logic of Christians who believe that the “sacrificial” death of Jesus was essential to the redemption of all humanity. If Judas had not — deliberately or unintentionally — brought that about, how do they think it would have been accomplished? Do they believe that Jesus would have gone to the Romans and volunteered for crucifixion? Wouldn’t it be more honest to say that Judas was second only to Jesus in making the messianic mission a success?
Yup, it’s strange to blame Judas for doing what needed to be done. But later Christians said Jesus did have to be crucified, but that this didn’t remove teh guilt from any of those responsible for it on the earthly plain. Not sure how convincing that is….
Regarding the contradiction concerning Judas’s death: Note that Acts does not actually state in its own voice that this is what happened to Judas—that he fell headlong, his body burst open, and his bowels gushed out, etc. It merely reports Peter as saying this.
If I were a fundamentalist, I would argue that Peter was simply mistaken or had been misinformed. Since Peter is portrayed in the Gospels as being far from perfect, I find this considerably less far-fetched than the attempts to harmonize the two accounts by suggesting that the branch on which Judas had hanged himself broke, causing him to fall and his body to burst open when he hit the ground, etc.
But of course, that is not my problem, since I am an atheist, not a fundamentalist.
But would you have considered this an acceptable explanation back when you were a fundamentalist?
No, we wouldn’t have agreed that Peter got it wrong. Acts is reporting it as a true account by one who would know. Our approach was to (try to) reconcile it with Matthew.
As Ehrman has pointed out, the name Judas shares a linguistic and conceptual root with “Judah” and “Jews,” making him an easy scapegoat for the narrative of Jesus’s death. Blame the Jews. According to the Gospels, Jewish leaders brought Jesus to Pilate and urged his condemnation. Mark and John describe Pilate as reluctant, but gave in to the “crowd” to prevent a riot, the “crowd” being Jews. Some Orthodox churches believe Pilate converted to Christianity and even recognize Pilate as a saint! My point is that when a Jew is blamed, in this case a Jew who is a chosen Disciple, I’m skeptical.
I remember a skit in the 80s on Swedish TV, a group of some 10 young men being schooled in what looks like an ancient Greek academy, text says it’s around AD 30. The teacher scolds the group for not having performed well on the homework assignment they had on literature and writing. Their stories are bad, lack the passion of a true hero, of wonderful things like love and bad things in life, like betrayal. “Go and redo your homework!”, the teacher commands, “And do better!”. The group grunts, says in unison “Yes, Mr Judas” and leaves.
I’m sorry, this had nothing to do with prof Ehrmans excellent article. Just a childhood memory coming up to the surface after 40 years.
For me, John 14:22 is pretty convincing evidence that Judas did exist. If he was made up, then surely they would have picked a name that wasn’t shared by another disciple.