What changed with Judas's betrayal

[MrShorty]

This is something I have been mulling over for a couple of weeks, and decided to pose this here to see if anyone has any thoughts.

I was reading through the Gospels' accounts of "holy week." One thing I noticed is that, shortly after the triumphal entry, Jesus cleansed the temple. He spent at least parts of that week publicly teaching. For much of Christ's ministry, the Jewish leader did not like him, and at times wanted to arrest him, but they were "afraid of the people." What do you might have happened between the Jewish leadership and Judas that finally gave them the "courage" to arrest Jesus?

I realize that scripture doesn't really say what happened, so this is mostly speculative.

[selek]

I realize that scripture doesn't really say what happened, so this is mostly speculative.

Agreed.

For my two-bits, it was that triumphal procession and the week which brought matters to a head.

Jerusalem was the seat of Jewish religious and political power. The temple was the center of their cultural identity.

That upstart Nazarene was defying them not in some backwater burg on the Sea of Galilee, but in the seat of their power. He was upstaging them where they lived- and the crowds were eating it up.

It'd be like Navy hosting a pep rally on the green at Falcon Stadium (the Air Force Academy field) and having the AF cadets (and cheerleaders) rally to the party.

The AF football team would go absolutely ape and the game the following night would be brutal.

Jesus cleansing the Temple, preaching to the crowds, and receiving the adoration of the masses was something the Pharisees and other religious leaders could not countenance- not in their own living room.

At that point (and in their own minds), they simply had nothing to lose.

[rameumptom]

Many scholars believe that Judas was a Zealot, one who believed the Messiah would physically overthrow the Roman regime and return rightful rule back to Israel. However, Jesus was not following the Zealot path. Scholars think that Judas was hoping that getting Jesus arrested may force him into the role of Messianic King and Deliverer over Rome. When Judas saw that Jesus refused and would therefore be executed instead, he took his own life.

It is likely that Barabbas (Son of Father) was a Zealot fighter that sought to be the physical Messiah, which Judas hoped for. So, we get an interesting parallel between the two prisoners.

The Jewish leaders were very interested in stopping the Zealots, because it upset the balance of power they had with the Romans. It would end up being the actions of Zealots that would lead to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD, quite ironic, given the Jews rejected Jesus and freed Barabbas.

[Miss_B]

Was it the same adoring crowds that later called for the release of Barabas?

I've never understood what changed the crowds from loving him to hating him.

[rameumptom]

Same crowd that loved Jesus when he was miraculously feeding them loaves and fish, but then rejected him when he told them to seek the Bread of Life. The crowd was looking for a Messiah that would save them from Rome. Barabbas also claimed to be a Messiah for the Zealots (his name meaning "Son of God"), and so they probably figured that one Messiah was as good as another. This is especially true when Jesus appeared before them beaten and silent, while Barabbas likely stood proudly and boasted on himself.

[Just_A_Guy]

Barabbas also claimed to be a Messiah for the Zealots (his name meaning "Son of God"),

Doesn't it mean "son" (bar) "of the father" (abbas, with "abbas" being a very familiar/intimate term analagous to the English "daddy")?

[rameumptom]

JAG, yes, you gave the literal translation.

[Still_Small_Voice]

Many of the Chief Priests wanted to arrest Jesus and were trying to almost from the beginning of His ministry. The reason they could not was "His hour was not yet come." Jesus could not be taken until He allowed Himself to be taken. He and His Father were in control of the atonement and the hour in which it would happen.

[RipplecutBuddha]

Many of the Chief Priests wanted to arrest Jesus and were trying to almost from the beginning of His ministry. The reason they could not was "His hour was not yet come." Jesus could not be taken until He allowed Himself to be taken. He and His Father were in control of the atonement and the hour in which it would happen.

I absolutely agree with this. At the same time, who knows what the actual machinations were that allowed such control. It could have been that Jesus and Heavenly Father both knew precisely what actions would prompt their reaction to take Jesus into custody. It could have been something far more spiritual that we don't understand at this point.

What is clear throughout Christ's ministry, however, is this; at all times Christ and Heavenly Father were always in control. Nobody could derail the process once it had begun regardless of what was tried.

[Matthew0059]

Was it the same adoring crowds that later called for the release of Barabas?

I've never understood what changed the crowds from loving him to hating him.

Besides what Rameumpton wrote (which was fantastic), another factor in their turn was their leaders. John 19:6 and Luke 23:13 and 23 all record that the primary instigators in the crowd that called for Christ's death were the chief priests and "rulers of the people" (Luke 23:13). Many of the Jews seemed to "go with the flow"- if Christ were exhibiting His wisdom and power in cleansing and preaching and healing in the temple they would follow Him, but when He became silent and allowed them to choose for themselves, they forgot what He had done for them and for God and joined in with the newest loud, powerful voice.

In this vignette from Christ's life- the mob calling for His crucifixion- we have one of the most perfect microcosmic representations of what had gone so wrong with the Jewish people that they rejected their own Messiah. The leaders, because of pride and love for power and blindness of their own minds, led the people to believe in and commit error so great that they would condemn an innocent man to death although he had literally done nothing wrong. The mob mentality involved can't be ignored- the mob essentially gave their own opinions and actions over to their leaders, who they blindly trusted to lead them the right way.

I didn't know about Barrabas being a Zealot instigator. How terribly tragic the whole event was!

[yjacket]

In this vignette from Christ's life- the mob calling for His crucifixion- we have one of the most perfect microcosmic representations of what had gone so wrong with the Jewish people that they rejected their own Messiah. The leaders, because of pride and love for power and blindness of their own minds, led the people to believe in and commit error so great that they would condemn an innocent man to death although he had literally done nothing wrong. The mob mentality involved can't be ignored- the mob essentially gave their own opinions and actions over to their leaders, who they blindly trusted to lead them the right way.

The really sad thing is that this typifies something that happens on a consistent basis. Individuals in general are way too trusting of their leaders and take on a different persona in large groups-the madness of crowds. I've been involved in many conventions where the people blindly trust their leaders and go along with what they've been told because their leaders told them.

Afterwards, if one went up and asked them privately what they thought about the leaders actions they would be in disagreement with what happened, yet they went right along with the leaders decisions, never complained, and actually encouraged the bad behavior.

They lacked the moral courage to stand up for what they believed in and to go against the crowd and their leaders.