Saved or Unsaved?

[Richard McFarland]

Reading in Luke again of the Crucification and discussing with my mother has caused me to think again of the Roman Soldiers who were chosen and assigned to crucify Jesus and the thieves on the crosses.

Jesus Christ asked His Father to forgive them because they did not know what they were doing. This was certainly true because these men were from Rome, sent to Jerusalem to keep rule over the Jews there and did not often involve themselves with the people but to keep order.

They were following orders from the upper command of the Roman Army in carrying out the requests of the chief priests and scribes because of Pilot's fear of Herod.

Did Jesus entreaty with His Father save these men or did this just wipe away the sin of killing the Christ? I realize that this is a discussion based on conjecture but I believe that these men will be in eternity with the faithful. Why would Christ pray for one sin to be forgiven and not cover the rest?

Just something I have pondered for many years...

Remember Christ always,

Richard

[ram]

Richard, is there not something in the Gospels about Jesus saying "lay not this sin to their charge ?"

Obviously I don't know the eternal destiny of these soldiers, but something happened which had some effect in the Roman army. Cornelius the centurion was one of the first Gentiles to become a Christian. Prior to this he had a good report from the Jews as a just man.

With regards to Christ's sacrifice. This would not have been a full and freewill sacrifice if anyone was to answer for putting Jesus on the cross. Jesus asked them to be forgiven for they knew not what they did. I don't think God would have ignored this intercession.

I believe also that this forgiveness extended to Judas.

For me the question is not whether those who were culpable were to answer for putting Jesus on the cross, but rather, did they ever avail themselves of the atonement made possible by that sacrifice ?

[Emy unlogged]

For me the question is not whether those who were culpable were to answer for putting Jesus on the cross, but rather, did they ever avail themselves of the atonement made possible by that sacrifice ?

I agree with this.

And applying the same to Judas, did he?

[ram]

Judas is a character to whom my opinions as to his eternal destiny have swung like a pendulum. In truth I cannot assert positively one way or the other, but my tendency in recent times has been to look favourably in his direction.

To start with, I do not believe anyone will answer for the cruel deed of putting Jesus on the cross. I do not believe such punishment lines up with Jesus' merciful actions and comments at that time, nor his character in general. Jesus came to die on the cross to offer up himself as a once and for all sacrifice to cleanse sinners by his shed blood that they might be saved. It would seem strange that such an action and pupose would exclude Judas who conspired to put him on the cross. ? In some of the Gospels we read that Jesus even prompted Judas to go and deliver him up. "That which ye must do, go and do quickly !"

In Luke 22, after we learn of Judas having collaborated to betray Jesus, a fact that Jesus was well aware of, Jesus encourages all 12 Disciples (including Judas) to partake of the emblems in remembrance of him. He tells them the cup in the New Terstament is his blood which is shed for "them." He continues by mentioning that one of them will betray him and says woe to the man by whom he is betrayed.

Shortly after this Jesus addresses "all" twelve in verse 28, "Ye are they which have continued with me in my temptations and I appoint you a Kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; that ye may eat and drink at my table in my Kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel."

Jesus is well aware of what Judas has done up until that point and what Judas will do. He has even mentioned it. However, he DOES NOT exclude Judas from that following statement when he recognises all 12 continued with him in his temptations, he would appoint them a Kingdom, that they would eat and drink at his table (as he had just encouraged and shown them) and that they would sit on thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel.

Judas's temporal end might signify what Jesus meant by "woe unto him" or "better that he had not been born" and what is said elsewhere in the scriptures that he "had gone to the place reserved for him ?"

For me it is significant that at the last supper, Jesus did not make any difference between Judas and the other disciples. He encouraged them all with the same encouragement and with the same promises for the future, making no exclusions, but he recognised and dealt with the faults of the disciples including "encouraging" Judas to go and betray him.

[nathanb]

~~~ In Acts chapter 1:15-26 we read How the Lord selected Matthias as the 14th apostle to fill the place of Judas.... Jesus was the first apostle= Sent one. (Heb. 3:1)

In the book of Revelation chapter 21:14 And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb...

My question is do you think Judas' name is one of the twelve foundations or Matthias? I feel very SAD for Judas' choice in betraying Jesus just for 30 pieces of silver.

Jesus own words about Judas in (Matthew 26:20-25) Now when the even was come, he sat down with the Twelve. And as they did eat, he said "Verily, Verily, I say unto you that ONE of you shall betray me. The Son of man goes as it is written of him (Jesus); but woe unto that man (Judas) by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had NOT been born."

Then Judas, who betrayed him, answered and said, "Master, is it I? Jesus said unto him, "Thou has said."

~~~ I hope and pray that none of us ever found in betraying our Lord and Master like Judas for whatever reason maybe because the end is NOT very favorable. I pray that God will be merciful unto Judas in the day of Judgement. We have a Loving God so He will judge Fairly to the saved and unsaved.

[ram]

Hi Nathan,

My point is that very soon after Jesus said "woe unto that man" and "better that he had not been born" he promised ALL twelve (amongst whom was Judas) that they would sit down on the thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Jesus did not say "except the one who betrays me !" The one who had already collaborated to betray Jesus was one of the twelve to whom Jesus gave that promise to. That promise was never taken away as far as I can see.

On a slightly different matter. Jesus, despite knowing what Judas had already done (collabotated to betray him), also knowing he was a thief, and would shortly betrayed him, encouraged him to partake of the emblems saying "this is the cup of the New Testament is my blood shed FOR YOU !"

Two things here. All the disciples needed cleansing. This was the first and most remarkable celebration of the emblems ever. I believe this covered Judas's betrayal of Jesus. This was the only pre-crucifixion participation of the emblems and the only chance that Judas would have to participate. What happened to him afterwards (in this life) could certainly fit what was prophesied about him, although I do have some reservations due to the words "better that he had never been born."

Judas's replacement may have just been for this life. Mattias had never been promised a throne in Heaven to judge the twelve tribes of Israel as far as I am aware.

The other thing that is very important is the "example" here. If Jesus allowed Judas to partake of the emblems in these circumstances, what right does anyone have to prohibit a believer from partaking of the emblems, irrespective of how we judge them ?

[nathanb]

1) Hi Nathan,
My point is that very soon after Jesus said "woe unto that man" and "better that he had not been born" he promised ALL twelve (amongst whom was Judas) that they would sit down on the thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. Jesus did not say "except the one who betrays me !" The one who had already collaborated to betray Jesus was one of the twelve to whom Jesus gave that promise to. That promise was never taken away as far as I can see.

~~~ Nathan: This promise of sitting on a throne as one of the 12 judges was NEVER taken away from Judas is NOT 100% scriptures. I explain it some of the reasons that promise Jesus made could be taken away from Judas.

Jesus gave the position to Judas as a judge but he blew it so
that place went to Matthias according to Acts 1:22.

Jesus said in Matthew 24:14 And many false prophets shall arise, and shall deceive many! And because the iniquity shall abound, the LOVE of many shall wax cold. BUT he that ENDURE! unto the end shall be SAVED.

2) On a slightly different matter. Jesus, despite knowing what Judas had already done (collabotated to betray him), also knowing he was a thief, and would shortly betrayed him, encouraged him to partake of the emblems saying "this is the cup of the New Testament is my blood shed FOR YOU !"

Two things here. All the disciples needed cleansing. This was the first and most remarkable celebration of the emblems ever. I believe this covered Judas's betrayal of Jesus. This was the only pre-crucifixion participation of the emblems and the only chance that Judas would have to participate. What happened to him afterwards (in this life) could certainly fit what was prophesied about him, although I do have some reservations due to the words "better that he had never been born."

Judas's replacement may have just been for this life. Matthias had never been promised a throne in Heaven to judge the twelve tribes of Israel as far as I am aware.

~~~ You and I don't know for sure about Judas' replacement just for this life. Would Jesus allow a traitor and Betrayer! who did NOT repent to judge His chosen people the 12 tribes of Israel? I don't think so but I could be wrong.

In any type of government I don't think the president willl allow a Spy, a Traitor to have highest or sensitive job as National Security Agency administion in the country.

I could accept If the traitor repented and had a 100% changed of heart I could see the possiblity of him/her getting the job. I don't believe Judas ever repented for his sin in betraying against Jesus.

In the book of Revelation chapter 2 and 3 Jesus said to Seven Churches in Asia (Turkey) that If these believers or His servants did NOT repent from their sinful ways He would BLOT out their names! from the book of life. He'd remove their candles sticks, remove their Crowns of life, and kill the woman prophetess named and her children for teaching false teachings, etc...

If these Christians had ignored and chose NOT to REPENT at Jesus' warnings would they be spend in Eternity with Him? I don't think so.


3) The other thing that is very important is the "example" here. If Jesus allowed Judas to partake of the emblems in these circumstances, what right does anyone have to prohibit a believer from partaking of the emblems, irrespective of how we judge them ?

~~~ Paul wrote that let him or her to examine themselves! careful before he/she partakes the emblems because whosover shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord "UNWORTHILY" shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. (I Cor.11:24-30)

There was a man in Corinthin church who had sex with his father's wife and was proud of his action...Paul put him out of the fellowship and he NOT able to partake the emblems... However, AFTER this man had REPENTED from his sexual sin, Paul encouraged the Church to welcome him back with open arms and he was able to partake the emblems again.

~~~ RAM, we are just bouncing these things around none of us know for sure so I hope and pray that the Lord will be merciful to Judas and those like him in the day of judgement.

[selah]

I haven't read this thread completely through, but after reading the first few posts, I want to say...

Jesus death on Calvary covered not only the sin of the Romans in crucifying the Messiah, but every single sin of every single human being past, present and future.

He bore our sin...all of it...for all time...for everyone! Does that mean everyone is saved? No.

Entry into the Kingdom of God (even the ability to "see" the Kingdom of God) does not, cannot happen, until one is "born again" of the Spirit, and this could never happen unless one has acknowledged the freedom from sin imparted personally to him by Jesus' sacrifice.

What Jesus did by offering the great exchange...His righteousness for our sin...was to prepare us to receive the promise of His very LIFE within...the Holy Spirit.

If the Roman soldiers and Judas were regenerated in this way, then YES, they have eternal life...for that LIFE is the SON of God! Otherwise they are forgiven, just like ALL of mankind...but without acknowledgement of that incredible gift, one cannot be "born again" by which we enter the Kingdom of God.

Blessings,
Linda

[Joe]

I only want to inject a question into the juncture of the thread.

What do you think these words of Jesus meant?

John 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

I don't have much of an opinion on them except I believe what he said, but am interested in what others think they mean.

[nathanb]

joe said:

I only want to inject a question into the juncture of the thread.

What do you think these words of Jesus meant?

John 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.

I don't have much of an opinion on them except I believe what he said, but am interested in what others think they mean.

Wow! Joe... Very interesting verse somehow I overlooked that one. Thanks, for sharing.

Our Lord God Jesus is a righteous, a fair Judge of the Living and the dead. He knows what's in our hearts, minds, and what we are thinking so we can't say His decision and judgement are wrong about certain so and so who stands before Him on that GREAT Day of judgement to receive an etenal no noation or eternal glory with Him.

~~~ Thanks, Selah for the below verses! which you shared.

[selah]

When it says "so that Scripture would be fulfilled," it usually means there is a prophetic passage somewhere in the O.T. concerning what is happening in the N.T. I've wondered where that might be found? There is this one in Psalms, but in it there is the statement of a friend who was trusted. Since Jesus knew in advance about Judas, I doubt that He would trust him. What are your thoughts?

PSA 41:9 Yea, mine own familiar friend, in whom I trusted, which did eat of my bread, hath lifted up [his] heel against me.

Also, the title, "son of perdition" is used only one other time in scripture, and then it is in reference to the anti-Christ. The NIV uses the title, "the one doomed to destruction."

2 Thessalonians 2:3 3Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

Another verse in reference to Judas:

Johns 6:70
Then Jesus replied, "Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!" (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)

Blessings,
Linda

[Joe]

I looked in my bible and it has 3 references to the last part of this verse.

Ref. son of perdition: John 6:70 ( which you posted Linda )
Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? 71He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.


Ref. that the scripture might be fulfilled: Ps. 109:8
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.


and Acts 1:20
For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take.

[ram]

Joe, thanks for posting the verse about the son of perdition, which appears to be a clear reference to Judas. For me this portion clinches the fate of Judas and I can't think for the life of me, in light of this paragraph, why there are two camps on whether or not Judas was saved, since it now seems so clear.

It seems remarkable that Jesus did not hold this againt Judas, that even though he was possessed by the Devil, he permitted him to partake of the emblems. A remarkable example.

Nathan, as you mention, Paul said whoever partakes of the cup unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Judas clearly fitted in to this category. However, I cannot get my head round the fact that Jesus encouraged Judas to partake of the emblems in remembrace of him. He did not exclude Judas from anything and made no differences. Also, it appears that Jesus did not warn the disciples as Paul did regarding participation of the emblems. True, the sacrifice had not yet been made at that time, but Jesus clearly outlined what the emblems signified.

Regarding the man Paul put out of the fellowship until he repented. This is understandable because the man's actions clearly showed unbelief and would have made it impossible for true believers to worship with him. However, this in my opinion was a very extreme example. Today, a considerable number of people are denied partaking of the emblems in highly dubious circumstances. The seriousness of taking the emblems should be explained to them and then it is up to their own conscience as to whether or not they should participate. Also, some are left hanging on indefinately with no obvious prospect of participation. Even if repentence was an issue, it seems ages before anything is done. I'm inclined to think denial of the emblems isn't done so much for the individual concerned (in a number of cases), but rather the case is used as an example or a standard for others.

Anyway, back to Judas. A few years back a neighbour of mine shared his view which I thought was a bit fanciful at the time. He was of the opinion that Judas was satan incarnate. firstly Jesus was unsuccessfully tempted by satan to serve him, then afterwards God delivered satan to serve Jesus through Judas. This thinking must have come from the "he hath a devil" verses, etc, and why he was called the son of perdition.

Considering all the circumstances there are many things that just don't add up and I feel there must be more to this than meets the eye.

[selah]

Thanks for those references Joe and to all for the interesting comments.

When I read Paul's message on the Lord's Supper in 1 Corinthians 11, I don't see that he's speaking about the worthiness of the individual, but rather about participating with an intentional focus on the Lord's body and blood...partaking in a worthy manner.

Apparently some folks were just satisfying their gluttonous appetites and indulging themselves in too much wine, instead of honoring Jesus, the whole reason for the emblems.

None of us are worthy of the gift that was given us in the blood and body of the Lamb, but I don't think this passage is referencing individual worthiness, anyway.

Blessings,
Linda

[nathanb]

1) Ram wrote:
Joe, thanks for posting the verse about the son of perdition, which appears to be a clear reference to Judas. For me this portion clinches the fate of Judas and I can't think for the life of me, in light of this paragraph, why there are two camps on whether or not Judas was saved, since it now seems so clear.

It seems remarkable that Jesus did not hold this againt Judas, that even though he was possessed by the Devil, he permitted him to partake of the emblems. A remarkable example.

Nathan, as you mention, Paul said whoever partakes of the cup unworthily shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. Judas clearly fitted in to this category. However, I cannot get my head round the fact that Jesus encouraged Judas to partake of the emblems in remembrace of him. He did not exclude Judas from anything and made no differences. Also, it appears that Jesus did not warn the disciples as Paul did regarding participation of the emblems. True, the sacrifice had not yet been made at that time, but Jesus clearly outlined what the emblems signified.

Regarding the man Paul put out of the fellowship until he repented. This is understandable because the man's actions clearly showed unbelief and would have made it impossible for true believers to worship with him. However, this in my opinion was a very extreme example. Today, a considerable number of people are denied partaking of the emblems in highly dubious circumstances. The seriousness of taking the emblems should be explained to them and then it is up to their own conscience as to whether or not they should participate. Also, some are left hanging on indefinately with no obvious prospect of participation. Even if repentence was an issue, it seems ages before anything is done. I'm inclined to think denial of the emblems isn't done so much for the individual concerned (in a number of cases), but rather the case is used as an example or a standard for others.

~~~~ Nathan: Amen! brother about today, a considerable number of the friends are denied partaking of the emblems in highly dubious circumstances such as dating outsiders! dating or married non-professing mates, having TVs, .... These are not "Unforgivenable Sin" but personal choice.

Paul is right on the money by his writing in I Cor. 11:23-29 Let each believer examine himself/herself before so let him/her eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he/her that eats and drinks the cup "Unworthily, eat and drink no noation to himself/herself, NOT discerning the Lord's body.

I hope and pray the Holy Spirit will reveal and guide some of these overseers to see how ridiculous some of these human traditions, rules for NOT partaken the emblems are and allow the Spirit to convict each believer to examine themselves before partaking the emblems.

2) Ram:
Anyway, back to Judas. A few years back a neighbour of mine shared his view which I thought was a bit fanciful at the time. He was of the opinion that Judas was satan incarnate. firstly Jesus was unsuccessfully tempted by satan to serve him, then afterwards God delivered satan to serve Jesus through Judas. This thinking must have come from the "he hath a devil" verses, etc, and why he was called the son of perdition.

Considering all the circumstances there are many things that just don't add up and I feel there must be more to this than meets the eye.

~~~~ I wonder if the Lord did this on purpose so we MUST leave SAVED or NOT saved up for Him to decide on that Great Day of judgement.... just make sure we ourselves don't fall into the same trap or place as Judas. Thanks, to all who have participated and share your thoughts, verses. Awesome.