Judas (!) gets rehabilitated?

[advancedatheist]

First the pope wants to abolish limbo, and now this. Next the Catholic Church will tell us that Judas didn't die in the 1st Century CE, but spent the next several centuries living in a cave while having conversations with himself about "the Precious":

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1981591,00.html

The Times January 12, 2006

Judas the Misunderstood
From Richard Owen, in Rome

Vatican moves to clear reviled disciple’s name

JUDAS ISCARIOT, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a kiss, is to be given a makeover by Vatican scholars.

The proposed “rehabilitation” of the man who was paid 30 pieces of silver to identify Jesus to Roman soldiers in the Garden of Gethsemane, comes on the ground that he was not deliberately evil, but was just “fulfilling his part in God’s plan”.

Christians have traditionally blamed Judas for aiding and abetting the Crucifixion, and his name is synonymous with treachery. According to St Luke, Judas was “possessed by Satan”.

Now, a campaign led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller, head of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, is aimed at persuading believers to look kindly at a man reviled for 2,000 years.

[Beleth]

I always thought Judas got a bad rap for exactly that reason.

[TragicMonkey]

So, Judas didn't have free will? If he didn't, how can the Church ever condemn any sin committed by anyone, ever? Because however awful the deed, it might be another instance of God revoking someone's free will. If, on the other hand, Judas did have free will, then he is responsible for his actions whether or not God was counting on them.

[Beleth]

One can fulfill one's part in God's plan and still have free will.

Mary is another example.

[clarsct]

I always wondered that is God forgives all if you only confess, why bother not sinning at all?

Man: "Yep, I sure did have sex with those twins. Man was it hot and wild, too! Then I went home and did my wife with my dirty (rule 8). After that, I tortured some puppies."

Priest: "God forgives you."

Man: "Yippie! Now I can go sin some more!! Thanks, Padre!"

Priest: "Anytime, my son. Have fun! Be sure to come on back and give me all the gory details! God Forgives!"


EH?


The whole bit seems nucking futs.

[TragicMonkey]

One can fulfill one's part in God's plan and still have free will.

Not if you want to "rehabilitate" one because he was "fulfilling his part in God's plan".

[clarsct]

I gotta go with TM here.

If he wasn't 'deliberately evil' but only 'fulfilling God's plan', then any sin can be excused this way, because you're just fulfilling God's plan. YOu cannot be 'deliberately evil'. No choice...no free will.

No sin.


EVER.


Unless Judas was the only guy to have his free will revoked. But it doesn't say that anywhere, now does it? Unless we only have free will part of the time, in which case, how do we choose which is which? How do we know that a rapist isn't 'fulfilling God's plan'?

We can't.

[Beleth]

Not if you want to "rehabilitate" one because he was "fulfilling his part in God's plan".
I think that the quote marks around "rehabilitation" in the OP indicate that that's kind of a tongue-in-cheek way of looking at it. It's not so much rehabilitation as it is a re-examination of Catholic dogma. After all, it's not the Church that is the final arbiter of Judas' fate.

[TragicMonkey]

I think that the quote marks around "rehabilitation" in the OP indicate that that's kind of a tongue-in-cheek way of looking at it. It's not so much rehabilitation as it is a re-examination of Catholic dogma. After all, it's not the Church that is the final arbiter of Judas' fate.

Which is why the Church shouldn't be wasting its time discussing and debating Judas's fate. That's between Judas and God, and probably Jesus, and possibly Mary because she's always butting in, and then there's a bunch of saints, and the other Apostles will have opinions about it, but that's no reason for the Church, run by mortals, to bother telegraphing the deity urgent bulletins about something that happened two thousand years ago and is none of those mortals' business.

I was always taught that it was ridiculously presumptuous to speculate about anyone's probable/possible destination after death, because that was God's judgment and his alone, and only he had the requisite complete knowledge to be fair. (Assuming he is going to be fair, but since he's all powerful you might as well hope he's always fair, because you're screwed if he's not.)

[Beleth]

Okay, look at the converse.

Last Supper. Jesus saying "one of you will betray me." The whole deal.

Now say Judas doesn't betray Jesus. Result: Jesus catches wind of the fact that the Romans are looking for him but don't know what he looks like. He dodges them time and again and eventually dies of old age in some podunk town that the Romans weren't even looking for him in.

No, Judas' actions made Jesus' sacrifice possible, and Jesus' sacrifice was his entire reason for existence. Judas enabled God's plan, and it is not up to us mortals to judge him. And the RC Church finally realized that.

[TragicMonkey]

Okay, look at the converse.

Last Supper. Jesus saying "one of you will betray me." The whole deal.

Now say Judas doesn't betray Jesus. Result: Jesus catches wind of the fact that the Romans are looking for him but don't know what he looks like. He dodges them time and again and eventually dies of old age in some podunk town that the Romans weren't even looking for him in.

No, Judas' actions made Jesus' sacrifice possible, and Jesus' sacrifice was his entire reason for existence. Judas enabled God's plan, and it is not up to us mortals to judge him. And the RC Church finally realized that.

It's also not up to mortals to absolve Judas of his sin on the basis that "he was fulfilling God's plan". Even suggesting the possibility is to deny that everyone has free will and is responsible for their own sins, which is heresy. It is unreconciliable with established doctrine. It would actually make the Catholic Church Protestant.

[hgc]

One can fulfill one's part in God's plan and still have free will.
..I can't quite wrap my mind around this statement. If it's God's plan, how does Judas have any alternative than to do it? Does Judas' choice predate God's plan, or is it the other way around? Or does either of the terms "free will" or "plan" not mean what I thought they mean?

[jjramsey]

I always wondered that is God forgives all if you only confess, why bother not sinning at all?

Man: "Yep, I sure did have sex with those twins. Man was it hot and wild, too! Then I went home and did my wife with my dirty (rule 8). After that, I tortured some puppies."

Priest: "God forgives you."

Um, if the guy's not sorry for what he did, he doesn't get absolution, and if it's a Catholic priest, that guy's got a lot of penance to do.

[Beleth]

I can't quite wrap my mind around this statement. If it's God's plan, how does Judas have any alternative than to do it? Does Judas' choice predate God's plan, or is it the other way around? Or does either of the terms "free will" or "plan" not mean what I thought they mean? A "plan" is an intended result. What is intended is not always what results.

And to answer the followup question "how can the plan of an omnipotent, omniscient God not be what ends up happening?", well, that's where the free will part comes in. God planned for Jesus to be sacrificed. Judas' decision, made of his own free will, aided in the timely execution (no pun intended) of that plan.

[Beleth]

It's also not up to mortals to absolve Judas of his sin on the basis that "he was fulfilling God's plan".
I don't see how anyone is absolving Judas of anything. Absolving requires judging, too. All the RCC is saying is that they are not going to judge him at all.

[LawnOven]

A "plan" is an intended result. What is intended is not always what results.

And to answer the followup question "how can the plan of an omnipotent, omniscient God not be what ends up happening?", well, that's where the free will part comes in. God planned for Jesus to be sacrificed. Judas' decision, made of his own free will, aided in the timely execution (no pun intended) of that plan.

So what if judas didn't sell jesus out; would god have just waited for someone else to sell him out? Jesus seemed to know the future.

[Beleth]

So what if judas didn't sell jesus out; would god have just waited for someone else to sell him out? I don't know how to answer that. What happened is what happened.

Jesus seemed to know the future. He knew what the prophecies were, at least.

[slingblade]

So what if judas didn't sell jesus out; would god have just waited for someone else to sell him out? Jesus seemed to know the future.

Doesn't work. God is infallible. Christ is God manifest in flesh. Ergo, Christ is infallible. If Christ makes a prediction which doesn't then come true, he has failed; he was wrong. Ipso facto, he is either not God-made-flesh or else God is not infallible, or both, or other.

Therefore, because Judas did indeed betray Christ as predicted, either Judas had no free will by which to negate the prediction, or the future is set and immutable, and nothing anyone does can change it, and so no one has free will.

God gives me a headache.

[LawnOven]

I don't know how to answer that. What happened is what happened.

He knew what the prophecies were, at least.

So are you saying that the fate of judas was predestined? Like judas did what he did of his own free will; it's just that god knew the choices he would make ahead of time?

Some I think would say that that is not free will. I guess it is only a contradiction if you claim that god is just and loving.


*edit*

SLINGBLADE...

See that's what I would have thought; there's a logical contradiction somewhere in the idea that Judas made the choice to sell Jesus out of his own freewill. It seems like a lot of mental gymnastics need to be gone through to state otherwise.

[Beleth]

So are you saying that the fate of judas was predestined? That is pretty much the exact opposite of what I have been saying.

Like judas did what he did of his own free will; it's just that god knew the choices he would make ahead of time? No. One more time:
God had a plan. Judas' free-will-based actions just happened to fit into that plan.

Ever hear the schoolyard taunt "I'm doing this because I want to, not because you told me to"? Same thing here. God had Jesus' sacrifice planned for a long time. Judas, through no coercion from God, enabled that sacrifice.

I guess it is only a contradiction if you claim that god is just and loving. You say that as if you know what Judas' fate is.

[LawnOven]

No. One more time:
God had a plan. Judas' free-will-based actions just happened to fit into that plan.

Ever hear the schoolyard taunt "I'm doing this because I want to, not because you told me to"? Same thing here. God had Jesus' sacrifice planned for a long time. Judas, through no coercion from God, enabled that sacrifice.

Wait a minute; then your answer should be "yes"; because that's what I wrote.

Further it can't be "just happened to" because that would leave room open for falability; and as Sling blade said, God is (supposed to be) infallible. If God can't be wrong then Judas didn't have a choice.



You say that as if you know what Judas' fate is.

I do know what Judas' fate was, there are two versions of it in the bible; neither one is very pretty. A painful death for fulfilling gods plan doesn't seem very just and loving to me.

[slingblade]

You say that as if you know what Judas' fate is.

I didn't say it, but I do know Judas' fate.
He was a suicide. Suicide is an unforgivable sin, insofar as my religious teaching went, and so Judas is in Hell.

I was taught that the real tragedy of Judas is that he didn't have to feel so guilty for what he'd done that he went and hanged himself, because God had already forgiven him, being part of the Divine Plan and all.

So the Church is right: it should not condemn Judas for betraying Christ.

[prewitt81]

So how can the Catholic Church go against what Jesus said?

Mat 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.

[slingblade]

So how can the Catholic Church go against what Jesus said?

Mat 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.

Feeling so guilty for what you did that you hang yourself is pretty woeful, isn't it? I don't see where that quote says Judas was punished for the betrayal; in fact, I don't see anything about going to Hell or punishment.

It only says, "wow, that dude is going to wish he had never been born," and to me it implies that's because Judas would never realize he only did what had to be done. Heavy, man.

(edited because speeling metters.)

[prewitt81]

Why would not being born and never existing be better than dying, getting forgiven, and going to heaven? It seems to me, though no doubt I could be wrong, that Jesus is saying that his betrayer will suffer eternal torment.

If he had never been born, he wouldn't suffer eternally, right?

[slingblade]

Why would not being born and never existing be better than dying, getting forgiven, and going to heaven? It seems to me, though no doubt I could be wrong, that Jesus is saying that his betrayer will suffer eternal torment.

If he had never been born, he wouldn't suffer eternally, right?

Right. You do realize you just answered yourself, yes? ;)

In this mythology, Christ, being all-knowing, knew Judas was going to betray him. He also knew Judas would see this betrayal through limited, human eyes, and would feel so miserable, so guilty, that he would take his own life and would send himself to eternal punishment when in reality, he didn't have to do any such thing.

It would therefore be better never to have been born, than to be born only to end up sending yourself to hell for no reason. Of course, God could have been merciful, and could have sent angels to Judas just like he sent them to Mary, Joseph, and Elizabeth, and could have told Judas that everything was fine, no worries, "you just did what I needed someone to do to make my plan work"...but he didn't. Because he hadn't, and he already knew he hadn't. In making this plan, God didn't reserve any mercy for Judas. It wasn't part of the script, and God, being the Planner, must have known it all along.

Again, bummer, man.

[prewitt81]

Agreed. Sucks to be him! :)

[slingblade]

I can't remember which author it was...my mind says it was Roger Zelazny or Piers Anthony, but I'm not sure....who has a character who states that people have gotten this whole thing wrong from nearly the beginning. Since Christ had to die in order for redemption to be possible, everyone involved, from Pontius Pilate, to Herod, to Judas, should be celebrated, not castigated. Christ's crucifixion itself should be celebrated, never mourned, never condemned.

If anyone knows which SF author I mean, I'd love to hear.

[kittynh]

I always felt badly for Judas.

Benedict Arnold, nope.

But it seems to me that if he hadn't done what he did, then the whole rest of the plan wasn't going to come together. I guess this whole horror that Jesus was "killed" is a little different than what I learned.

I'm going back to the baby Jesus talking in the Koran thing. Talking baby, now that's interesting.

[jwr4a]

Reading this has caused me to wonder if Judas made a bigger sacrifice than Jesus. I mean, Jesus only spent 3 days in hell, but Judas (in order to fulfill Gods plan) was putting himself up for eternal torment.

So .. um ... should the churches have statues of a dangling Judas, maybe?

:boggled:


--
jwr

[Beleth]

Wait a minute; then your answer should be "yes"; because that's what I wrote.No, you wrote "So are you saying that the fate of judas was predestined?", to which my answer is No.

Jesus' sacrifice was predestined. Judas' role in it was not.

Further it can't be "just happened to" because that would leave room open for falability; and as Sling blade said, God is (supposed to be) infallible. If God can't be wrong then Judas didn't have a choice. Sure he can. God can leave enough details out of a prophecy to allow both for it to come true and for the person prophesied about to have free will. Jesus didn't say "Verily I say unto you, that Judas shall betray me"; he said "one of you".

Just because God knows the outcome of things doesn't mean that He forces things to happen by limiting free will.


I do know what Judas' fate was, there are two versions of it in the bible; neither one is very pretty. A painful death for fulfilling gods plan doesn't seem very just and loving to me. That's not Judas' fate.

[slingblade]

No, you wrote "So are you saying that the fate of judas was predestined?", to which my answer is No.

Jesus' sacrifice was predestined. Judas' role in it was not.

Sure he can. God can leave enough details out of a prophecy to allow both for it to come true and for the person prophesied about to have free will. Jesus didn't say "Verily I say unto you, that Judas shall betray me"; he said "one of you".

He still knew it was Judas, according to John:

(John 13:21) When Jesus had said these things, He was troubled in spirit, and testified and said, "Most assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray Me." (22) Then the disciples looked at one another, perplexed about whom He spoke.
(23) Now there was leaning on Jesus' bosom one of His disciples, whom Jesus loved. (24) Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask who it was of whom He spoke.

(25) Then, leaning back on Jesus' breast, he said to Him, "Lord, who is it?"

(26) Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give a piece of bread when I have dipped it." And having dipped the bread, He gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. (27) Now after the piece of bread, Satan entered him. Then Jesus said to him, "What you do, do quickly." (28) But no one at the table knew for what reason He said this to him.

Note it doesn't say "I don't know, but whoever chooses to take this bread . . ." Instead, it says that Jesus will deliberately give the bread to a certain disciple. He knew.

Free will comes back, also, as the passage clearly says "Satan entered [Judas]." (According to the dictates of English, it could just as well be saying Satan entered Christ, but we'll let that go.)

So, if Satan entered Judas, are we to take this to mean that Satan made or influenced Judas to betray Christ, which led to the crucifixion, which led to the redemption of all mankind and the defeat of Satan? Boy, that Devil, man, he's a self-defeating nut!

Or was Judas possessed, and so not responsible? Or was Judas responsible because he allowed his soul to get into a state whereby it could be possessed?


That's not Judas' fate.

Guessing games are so passe. So what was his fate, since you make me ask, and don't forget to include a proper citation to prove your claim.

[Spidey13]

Another way of interpreting this story doesn't have so much to do with free will, but that Judas was just following orders. It can be interpreted that Jesus didn't predict that someone would betray him, but he told them to do it.

20When evening came, Jesus was reclining at the table with the Twelve. 21And while they were eating, he said, "I tell you the truth, one of you will betray me."

Jesus does not say "I predict that one of you will betray me." He says "One of you will..." kind of like saying, "One of you will take out the trash."

22They were very sad and began to say to him one after the other, "Surely not I, Lord?"

In other words, "I don't want to do it."

23Jesus replied, "The one who has dipped his hand into the bowl with me will betray me.

I guess Judas dipped his hand in that bowl earlier, and Jesus is trying to tell him that he is the one while keeping it a secret from the others.

24The Son of Man will go just as it is written about him. But woe to that man who betrays the Son of Man! It would be better for him if he had not been born."

"Sucks to be you. You're going to be hated for millenia, but you gotta do it."

25Then Judas, the one who would betray him, said, "Surely not I, Rabbi?"

"But I don't wanna"

Jesus answered, "Yes, it is you."

"Stop whining and just do it."

[slingblade]

whoops! Wrong thread! :D

[Beleth]

Guessing games are so passe. So what was his fate, since you make me ask, and don't forget to include a proper citation to prove your claim.
His fate was to either end up in Heaven or Hell. As I said before, it's not up to humans to place him in either location, or even to guess.

[geni]

I blame Andrew Lloyd Webber

[LawnOven]

No, you wrote "So are you saying that the fate of judas was predestined?", to which my answer is No.

Jesus' sacrifice was predestined. Judas' role in it was not.

Sure he can. God can leave enough details out of a prophecy to allow both for it to come true and for the person prophesied about to have free will. Jesus didn't say "Verily I say unto you, that Judas shall betray me"; he said "one of you".

Just because God knows the outcome of things doesn't mean that He forces things to happen by limiting free will.


That's not Judas' fate.

I don't think your characterization of that section of our conversation is correct at all.

That was not a response you gave me to my first sentence, it was in regards to my second. In my SECOND sentence I said this:

"Like judas did what he did of his own free will; it's just that god knew the choices he would make ahead of time?"


and this, what you said in response:

God had a plan. Judas' free-will-based actions just happened to fit into that plan.

mean pretty much the same thing!

Yet you said "no" when you should have said "yes, that is exactly what I believe, here it is in my own words..."

So Judas had free will in regards to the little things in life, he had no choice about selling Jesus to the romans, because if he didn't God would be wrong and God can't be wrong.

I think we are just going to be going in circles at this point. Just let me say that you explanation as you have outlined it seems to ME to be suffering from quite a bit of cognitive dissonance. If it works for you, fine, but it doesn't do it for me.

[Beleth]

That was not a response you gave me to my first sentence, it was in regards to my second. In my SECOND sentence I said this:

"Like judas did what he did of his own free will; it's just that god knew the choices he would make ahead of time?" Ahh, I see where the problem is. Your first and second sentences do not mean the same things to me.

"Predestined" to me means that the object being predestined had no choice in the matter. This is not the same thing as God knowing the choices ahead of time. It is a very subtle difference. You can have both free will and God knowing the outcome ahead of time, but at the cost of God not being able to change it. In other words:

God is omniscient.
God is omnipotent.
Humans have free will.
Pick two.

So Judas had free will in regards to the little things in life, he had no choice about selling Jesus to the romans, because if he didn't God would be wrong and God can't be wrong. I hope what I said above clarifies my point a little better. It probably doesn't, however, because I just jumped to the conclusion without showing my work.

I think we are just going to be going in circles at this point. Just let me say that you explanation as you have outlined it seems to ME to be suffering from quite a bit of cognitive dissonance. I don't think name-calling is going to help this discussion.

[Beleth]

Jesus does not say "I predict that one of you will betray me." He says "One of you will..." kind of like saying, "One of you will take out the trash." I like this interpretation except for one thing.

In Mat 26:14-15, Judas had already talked to the priests about betraying Jesus. So it's not like Judas didn't want to do it. He had already set the wheels in motion before Jesus said the "One of you will..." thing.

[LawnOven]

I don't think name-calling is going to help this discussion.

Hmm, I didn't "name call", atleast that wasn't my intention;. I don't hang around here to make enemies if it can be avoided especially through name calling. I'm better than that thank you very much. Or atleast I'm far from emotionally invested enough in the current conversation to call you names ... thank you very much. :)


I assumed the capitalized 'ME' would make it clear about how your explanation was coming across to 'ME'.

It could be very well that I am suffering from cognitaive dissonance. My point was as I understand your explanation, I still don't buy it. I was trying to explain why it appears I keep repeating myself, and maybe you feel the same way too (hense the circles).

In summary, I am sorry if what I wrote came off as snarky. I know that you don't get anywhere by calling people names. I'm sorry.

Anyways...

I hope what I said above clarifies my point a little better. It probably doesn't, however, because I just jumped to the conclusion without showing my work.

Actually... that might do it. If I am to understand correctly you are saying God is not fully omnipotent? If that is true then I think I understand the relationship between God and freewill. But I thought that the Christian God was described as being omnipotent too?

[Beerina]

I like this interpretation except for one thing.

In Mat 26:14-15, Judas had already talked to the priests about betraying Jesus. So it's not like Judas didn't want to do it. He had already set the wheels in motion before Jesus said the "One of you will..." thing.

And Jesus got wind of it somehow. Ahh, like "psychics" who glean information from their marks in the audience, but, as it turns out, they had talked to or eavesdropped on the marks earlier on. Nothing supernatural about this prediction of Jesus, at least beyond a reasonable, laboratory-setting doubt.

[Bob Klase]

So what was his fate, since you make me ask, and don't forget to include a proper citation to prove your claim.

Didn't the movie Dracula 2000 answer that?

[Jorghnassen]

Nah, the best portrayal of Judas in a movie was in Jesus of Nazareth (ok, so it was technically a miniseries). You've got to admit Anthony Burgess is a terrific writer.

[Jon.]

First the pope wants to abolish limbo, and now this. Next the Catholic Church will tell us that Judas didn't die in the 1st Century CE, but spent the next several centuries living in a cave while having conversations with himself about "the Precious":

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-1981591,00.html

The Times January 12, 2006

Judas the Misunderstood
From Richard Owen, in Rome

Vatican moves to clear reviled disciple’s name

JUDAS ISCARIOT, the disciple who betrayed Jesus with a kiss, is to be given a makeover by Vatican scholars.

The proposed “rehabilitation” of the man who was paid 30 pieces of silver to identify Jesus to Roman soldiers in the Garden of Gethsemane, comes on the ground that he was not deliberately evil, but was just “fulfilling his part in God’s plan”.

Christians have traditionally blamed Judas for aiding and abetting the Crucifixion, and his name is synonymous with treachery. According to St Luke, Judas was “possessed by Satan”.

Now, a campaign led by Monsignor Walter Brandmuller, head of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Science, is aimed at persuading believers to look kindly at a man reviled for 2,000 years.

Bumping this thread because I was just listening to a little ditty by Bobby Zimmerman yesterday that had a verse that seemed apropos:

In a many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

[Ossai]

Beleth
And to answer the followup question "how can the plan of an omnipotent, omniscient God not be what ends up happening?", well, that's where the free will part comes in. God planned for Jesus to be sacrificed. Judas' decision, made of his own free will, aided in the timely execution (no pun intended) of that plan. Blah, not this crap again.
Very simply omnipotence trumps freewill. If god is all knowing then freewill does not exist. If freewill exists then god is not all knowing and hence no the tri-omni Christian diety with which we’re all familiar.

No. One more time:
God had a plan. Judas' free-will-based actions just happened to fit into that plan. Then god isn’t omnipotent.

Just because God knows the outcome of things doesn't mean that He forces things to happen by limiting free will. If god knew the outcome then there is nothing that could have been done to prevent it, i.e. no freewill.

God is omniscient.
God is omnipotent.
Humans have free will.
Pick two.
Omnipotent encompasses omniscient.

Ossai

[Beleth]

Blah, not this crap again. Indeed.

Omnipotent encompasses omniscient. Nope.

[geetarmoore]

So what if judas didn't sell jesus out; would god have just waited for someone else to sell him out? Jesus seemed to know the future.

I think it's clear that if Judas didn't rat Jesus out, then he would have sinned, and been sent into the bowels of hell for eternal torment for not doing God's will.

:confused: :confused:

This really doesn't make any sense.

[geetarmoore]

So how can the Catholic Church go against what Jesus said?

Mat 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.

The Catholic Church is bigger than Jesus, of course.. ;)

[Ossai]

Beleth
Omnipotent encompasses omniscient.
Nope. Omniscience is a power. Omnipotent means all powerful, having all power. Omnipotence encompasses omniscient.

[Wheezebucket]

Wait, I thought Judas was the one who fought the giant. Or was that Noah? No, that was the world flood guy...maybe I was thinking of the sea parting dude, he did something with stick-to-snake magic too, I remember that much.

Oh no you're right, Judas is the betrayal guy. I remember now, it's got that ol' water/wine bit.

You know for people that had free will, God and the Devil sure did take an active role in everyone's lives back then. I wish I was an omnipotent God that screwed up all the time and then had the people I screwed over defend me by claiming it was "all part of my plan". There's always an excuse when you're perfect.

[Beleth]

Beleth
Omniscience is a power. Omnipotent means all powerful, having all power. Omnipotence encompasses omniscient.Omniscience is a power, not power itself. There is a difference between "a power" and "power".

But, as you said, "not this crap again".