Freethought & Rationalism Archive

the_cave · 05-24-2003, 01:01 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Toto
you have no reason left to claim any historical basis for Judas.

Except that the name "Judas" is not the same as the name "Flaccus"!

Perhaps what you mean to suggest is that there is not any historical evidence for the betrayal of Judas as portrayed in the passion narrative. (Which is not the same thing as no evidence for the existence of Judas.)

Which could be true--or it could be false. Who knows? This is what I'm saying.

Maybe there was a betrayal, the details were unknown, so Mark used Philo to flesh it out. Or some other scenario, equally plausible.

Vorkosigan · 05-24-2003, 04:48 PM

In addition to Philo, as Helms points out, the Judas story also parallels the story of Ahitabel in the OT, who betrayed David and then hung himself. Since every vector shows a distinct parallel, perhaps the burden of proof lies on those who want this to be historical.

I agree that showing parallels does not mean that Judas was not a real figure. But it's more than that, cave. Not only are the parallels extant, but further, the whole sequence is absurd. Why does Judas need to betray Jesus? Everyone knows who Jesus is -- he had just entered Jerusalem to hosannas from the mob, according to the story. Further, he'd been preaching all over Galilee. His followers were everywhere. It would have been easy for the Romans to take Jesus any time they wanted. As Toto pointed out earlier, what is Judas' motive? None is ever given. He's just a mechanical character there to ensure that Jesus is betrayed to his death. The whole story not only has the obvious parallels, but also makes no sense whatsoever. In other words, the legend created the story, not vice versa.

Vorkosigan

joedad · 05-29-2003, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Judas:

Acts 1:18 (With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. 19 Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)

Matthew supplies a variant mode of death, hanging himself, based on the OT model of Ahitophel, who sought to betray David (2 Sam 17:23)

The mere fact that two gospels use different sources to construct this event should show that it is entirely fictional.

Interestingly, ALPHONSUS MARIA De LIGUORI, a saint of Roman Catholicism and writing in the 1700s, wrote of Arius and Arianism;

Quote:

And on the same day, Saturday, at three o'clock, the Eusebians were triumphantly conducting Arius through the city, and he went along, boasting of his re-establishment; but when he came to the great square, the vengeance of God overtook him; he got a terrible spasm in his bowels, and was obliged to seek a place of retirement. A private place near the square was pointed out to him; he went in and left a servant at the door.
"He immediately burst open like Judas; his intestines, his spleen, and his liver all fell out, and thus his guilty soul took her flight to her Creator, deprived of all communion of the Church. When he delayed too long, his friends came to the door, and on opening it, they found him stretched on the floor in a pool of blood in that horrible state."
http://www.catholicism.org/pages/arianism.htm

The historical fiction writers continue undeterred. Perhaps it is all related to Jehoram:

Quote:

"After all this, the LORD afflicted Jehoram with an incurable disease of the bowels. In the course of time, at the end of the second year, his bowels came out because of the disease, and he died in great pain." 2 Chronicles 21:18-19

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-24-2003, 04:48 PM	#42
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	In addition to Philo, as Helms points out, the Judas story also parallels the story of Ahitabel in the OT, who betrayed David and then hung himself. Since every vector shows a distinct parallel, perhaps the burden of proof lies on those who want this to be historical. I agree that showing parallels does not mean that Judas was not a real figure. But it's more than that, cave. Not only are the parallels extant, but further, the whole sequence is absurd. Why does Judas need to betray Jesus? Everyone knows who Jesus is -- he had just entered Jerusalem to hosannas from the mob, according to the story. Further, he'd been preaching all over Galilee. His followers were everywhere. It would have been easy for the Romans to take Jesus any time they wanted. As Toto pointed out earlier, what is Judas' motive? None is ever given. He's just a mechanical character there to ensure that Jesus is betrayed to his death. The whole story not only has the obvious parallels, but also makes no sense whatsoever. In other words, the legend created the story, not vice versa. Vorkosigan

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.