John 13: A Betrayer and A Denier

Last chapter focused around the events of Palm Sunday, as well as other surrounding events. John does not see any important events happening in the Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday following, so he skips right to Thursday evening, in which traditional Christians call Maundy Thursday or Holy Thursday. The Jews know this meal to be Passover, but Christians know it to be the Lord’s Supper or the Last Supper. Interesting enough, John does not mention the Last Supper at all. He must have assumed his readers read about it in the Synoptic Gospels, and with nothing more to add, he leaves it out. Instead, John decides to add a lot of the last teachings of Jesus, which the Synoptic Gospels do not give. John 13-17 are all the last teachings of Jesus, given at the Last Supper. Right now we’ll just focus on John 13, and I want to focus in on Jesus predicting both his betrayer and denier.

Since Jesus talks about the betrayer before the denier, let’s start off with the betrayer, since that’s who Jesus started off with. There’s no need to be hidden with the identity of the betrayer in John. It’s clearly Judas Iscariot. John has been foreshadowing a lot. In John 6:70,71, Jesus calls one of the disciples the devil, which John reveals to be Judas Iscariot. In John 12:4-6, Judas calls out Mary for wasting money. John interprets this to be Judas Iscariot exposing his evil heart. In John 13:2, John tells the reader the devil had prompted Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus. This could simply be interpreted as Judas Iscariot making the deal with the Jewish leaders to betray Jesus. Even in John 13:10, while John does not specifically mark Judas as the betrayer, John remembers Jesus saying not everyone was clean, and John interprets it to mean that the betrayer, Judas Iscariot, was not the clean one. So clearly both Jesus and John have been foreshadowing what Judas Iscariot will do in the whole book, but now it will come fully out in a prediction in John 13:18-30. Interesting enough, John, along with Matthew, are the only 2 who specifically and explicitly mention Judas Iscariot as the betrayer by name. Mark and Luke do not mention Judas Iscariot by name in the prediction. Only when he actually betrays Jesus is his name used. Between Matthew and John, Matthew is more specific and more explicit, as Matthew records Judas Iscariot asking if he’s the betrayer, to which Jesus affirms.

It might be obvious to us, but it wasn’t obvious to the disciples. The only reason John makes it so obvious is because he is writing this after the events went down (also, since he’s assumed his readers has read the Synoptic Gospels and know who the betrayer is, instead of keeping a surprise, he shows how it could have been foreshadowed). But John, as well as the rest of the disciples, has no clue. They are lacking a clue so much, that in the synoptic Gospels, each disciple asks Jesus if he himself is the betrayer. Yes, each disciple accused himself before anyone else. Despite all the foreshadowing that made it obvious to the reader, in the mind of the disciples, Judas Iscariot is probably the least likely candidate. He was the treasurer of the group, and a treasurer is a highly valued position in any group. The job, in theory, shows that the group trusts you with their money and their finances. If the disciples were mostly unaware of the embezzlement Judas Iscariot was guilty of, they trusted him with their money and finances, so they saw Judas Iscariot as a trustworthy man. Later on, the text will show the reader that Judas Iscariot was within arm’s reach of Jesus. When it came to seating guests at the table during Bible times, the closer the person was to the host, the more honored the guest was. If Judas was within arm reach of Jesus, he was one of the higher up guests. The disciples must have thought Judas Iscariot was an honorable man. Already we have described (at least, by outward appearances) Judas Iscariot as trustworthy and honorable, which are not the qualities of a betrayer. Although a weak argument, we can even use an argument from the silence to show Judas wasn’t a suspect. Quickly skim through all your Synoptic Gospels. Besides when the Twelve Disciples are called, you’ll notice Judas isn’t mentioned until the Last Supper or the Betrayal. From the Gospels, he doesn’t seem to have an active role in the ministry of Jesus. Besides the words of Jesus, which are only mentioned in John, nothing seems to stick out with him. If you were one of Twelve Disciples in the 1st century, you wouldn’t have suspected Judas Iscariot either. The disciples are so unaware, they have to ask Jesus who it is.

To reveal the identity of the betrayer, Jesus dips a piece of bread in a dish and gives it to the betrayer. This was to fulfill the Scriptures, but also in irony of the custom of the day. In Biblical times, “sharing bread” or “breaking bread” (better translation) was an act done between two close people, like family or best friends. When it was done among 2 strangers, it was to acceptance and welcoming. It’s so ironic because here it represents the opposite. Jesus is not saying Judas Iscariot is a friend or a brother to him. Jesus is not welcoming Judas Iscariot, nor is He showing acceptance of Him. Instead, Jesus breaks breads with him to reveal a betrayer, a enemy or an antagonist. The action of breaking bread also fits very well with the context of the fulfilled Scriptures. Most Bibles will say that the Scripture Jesus is referring is Psalm 41:9. Most scholars will tell you that Psalm 41:9 is about Ahithophel, David’s trustworthy and honorable table companion, who betrayed David and then hanged himself for doing so. The parallels fit very well between Ahithophel and Judas Iscariot. Both betrayed a close companion, and both committed suicide over the guilt of the betrayal.

At the sign, John 13:27 tells the reader that Satan entered Judas Iscariot. Now most scholars will agree (although a few have said differently) that the bread that Jesus gave Judas Iscariot is not what caused Satan to enter Judas Iscariot. The issue is how to define “Satan entered.” The question is how much control Judas Iscariot had. Was Judas Isacariot possessed by Satan, or was he acting upon his own free will, but being tempted by Satan? Scholars have been split 50/50 on the two. A few liberal scholars have taken this metaphorically, simply stating it means that from this point on Judas Iscariot was no longer a disciple of Jesus. While in some contexts it fits, it really denies the evil present in this situation. We can’t go to the Greek, for the best literal translation of the Greek is “Satan entered.” Let’s try the other Gospels. Luke 22:3 does also say that Satan entered Judas Iscariot, but the Matthew and Mark passages paralleling the Luke passage do not mention Satan. In fact, Luke and John seem to be the only ones suggesting that Satan had any kind of hand on this. Since Matthew and Mark do not mention the devil with Judas Iscariot, it would almost seem like the Devil has no role at all. On top of that, in Matthew chapter 26, Jesus calls Judas Iscariot “friend.” It would be odd to call a Satan-possessed person “friend.” Possibly the best answer we can get it combining all the answers in harmony. Yes, Satan did play a role. Yes, Satan did enter him. Yet Satan did not have to put up a fight with Judas Iscariot’s free will. Judas Iscariot did not resist the temptations to betray Jesus. In fact, he entertained them. I think James 1:14 accurately describes what happened to Judas Iscariot. Judas entertained his own evil desires, he was enticed by his evil desires, and his evil desires dragged him into sin. Whether Judas Iscariot intended it or not, I think Judas virtually allowed Satan (“handed over the keys of his body” to Satan, if you will) by giving into sin. Judas Iscariot allowed Satan to use him as a tool, and Satan took full control of the opportunity. Even if Judas wanted to change his mind, it was too late, he was stooped into sin.

But our conversation doesn’t end there. Our next prompt is to ask why. Why would Judas do such a thing? Why would Judas betray a close friend and his messiah and savior? I think this is why many people would simply say “Satan entered him.” Their answer to the question would be, “He wouldn’t and he didn’t. Satan did.” Yet that denies Judas Iscariot’s free will. In the paragraph above, we decided Judas Iscariot’s free will to sin that led him to be controlled by Satan. So now we have to ask what would cause Judas to sin and betray Jesus. There’s been lots of theories on why Judas Iscariot betrayed Jesus, beside that he was Satan-possessed. First, it could be the sin coveting money. John 12 already revealed Judas Iscariot was concerned about his own personal wealth, so much he would steal from the disciples’ money bag. When the chief priests put a price on Jesus, Judas Iscariot was more than willing to hand Jesus over to get richer. Second, Judas Iscariot might simply have been a good Jew, respecting the Jewish leaders. Judas might have believed that Messiah and the Sanhedrin would get along in perfect harmony. When Judas saw Jesus, who he believed was the Messiah, disagreeing with the Jewish leaders, he had to decide whether the Jewish leaders were wrong or Jesus was wrong. He would decide Jesus was wrong. So when the Jewish leaders requested that anyone with information about Jesus should report it to them, Judas, being the good Jew, followed his leaders and handed Jesus over. Third, Judas Iscariot might have been a zealot, disappointed that Jesus was not the warrior Messiah he was expecting, which in turn could 2 results: either Judas handed over Jesus because Judas saw his an antichrist (false Christ), which is blasphemy, or Judas was trying to force the hand of Jesus, hoping to force him to violence. The last option is not a fourth option, but a combination of all of them. Maybe it was multiple reasons, such as the ones above, that led Judas Iscariot to betray Jesus. Yet I can hear people saying that these all excuses to take the blame off of Judas Iscariot and say it’s not his fault.

That leads us to an even bigger question: How much responsibility does Judas Iscariot assume in the betrayal of Jesus? This question is usually put in the form of asking about Judas Iscariot’s eternal whereabouts. Most people have put Judas in Hell. In Dante’s Inferno, Judas is put in the center and worst part of hell. Very few people will say Judas Iscariot is in heaven. I had a friend who did believe and he explained it to me quite well. To believe Judas is in heaven, you have to have a belief somewhere between Calvinist and fatalist. Judas Iscariot destined, even predestined to be the one to betray Jesus. He had to betray Jesus, for it was the only way for Scripture to be fulfilled and for salvation to be brought along properly. If Judas didn’t do this, then salvation would never come. So why should Judas Iscariot be punished for fulfilling Scripture and helping to bring salvation? Why should Judas be punished for a will predestined to him? He should be rewarded because he did what he was destined to do. May I also add to believe this, you have to have a strong belief in double predestination, the belief that not only does God select people for heaven, but also selects people for hell. While I understand their logic, there is holes in their logic that the Scriptures point out. In both Matthew and Mark, Jesus proclaims woe on him, saying it would be better for him to not be born. Some scholars have further contested this view, claiming that while Scripture does say there needs to be a betrayer, it didn’t have to be Judas Iscariot. Other scholars say the sin of betraying Jesus is not an unforgivable sin. What got Judas Iscariot in trouble was that he did not seek repentance, forgiveness or reconciliation. He instead committed suicide. That is why Judas is in hell, not because he betrayed Jesus, but because he did not seek repentance, forgiveness or reconciliation. While I’m satisfied with the Biblical proof, I am not fully satisfied with the logic the scholars give either. I’ll play along with the scholars who say it didn’t have to be Judas, but if it was any of the other 11 disciples, would they have been off the hook for betraying Jesus? And if you ask me, if you read Matthew 27:3-10, Judas does try to seek repentance and forgiveness. When the chief priests do a bad job and condemn him, he believes he is condemned and hangs himself in remorse. I’ve heard a lot of Calvinist scholars, both single and double predestination, say Judas was predestined to betray Jesus, but he still was accountable to his sin of betrayal, so he is in hell. On the other side, Armenian scholars will say that Jesus foreknew Judas Iscariot as the traitor, but he did not predestine him as the traitor. Thus, Judas Iscariot is guilty for his own sin, and thus in hell. Both views seem to be compromising, and I’m not comfortable with either.

There are other questions we do have concerning Judas Iscariot. I don’t have the time or space to go over every option, but one more I will throw out is “When Jesus selected Judas Iscariot as a disciple, did he truly select him as a disciple, or did he merely select Judas Iscariot be the betrayer?” I remember a while back watching a movie made for TV on Jesus from the eyes of Judas Iscariot. When it came time for the calling of the disciples, Jesus cheerfully called each disciple by name, giving them a hug. Last, he called Judas Iscariot, in a solemn tone, merely giving him a pat on the back. Did it go down like that? Did Jesus merely drag Judas along to fulfill Scripture, keeping an emotionless relationship with him? (Interesting note: According to this movie, Judas Iscariot could not perform the miraculous the disciples did when sent out. I believe they did the further the idea Judas was not a legitimate disciple.). The New Bible Dictionary suggests that Jesus did choose legitimately choose Judas Iscariot as a real disciple, yet Judas Iscariot never really met the title of disciple and apostle. For example, Judas Iscariot never called Jesus “Lord” but only “Rabbi.” Judas never saw Jesus as anything more than a teacher. Therefore, Judas was never really saved in the first place. For the most part, I like what they are saying, but they do seem to bounce back and forth between Calvinistic and Armenian, predestination and free will.

Here’s my grand conclusion. Judas Iscariot was legitimately chosen as a disciple by Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, being God, was just like God and gave Judas Iscariot a fair and honest chance to do the right thing. Judas Iscariot, however, did not meet the expectation of a disciple of Jesus. He got caught up in his own selfish and sinful desires, whether those selfish and sinful desires be coveting money or overthrowing the political system. In accordance to James 1:14, those selfish and sinful desires enticed Judas Iscariot to sin and dragged Judas Iscariot into sin on his own free will. In accordance to Romans 1:24,26, God handed Judas Iscariot over to his own sinful desires and his own sin. Judas Iscariot got so caught up in his sin that no longer he controlled himself, but he was a slave to sin and a slave to Satan. He got in too deep, so deep, it led him to betraying Jesus Christ. But it didn’t stop there. Judas Iscariot was so steeped into sin that even after betraying Jesus, he could not fully repent or forgive himself. He instead committed suicide. Sin left unforgiving only led him to hell.

Back to the Judas Iscariot in the story. After Jesus gives Judas Iscariot the bread, he gives Judas the nod to do whatever he needs to do. Many scholars believe this is Jesus giving Judas Iscariot permission to excuse himself to set up to betray Jesus. Notice how Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot before any of Christ’s last teachings. If you have a Harmony of the Gospels, you’ll notice Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot even before Communion happens. I do believe these are signs that go back to our questions about Judas Iscariot, mainly his end whereabouts. Jesus excuses Judas Iscariot before Communion or the last teachings because Jesus knows Judas Iscariot will have no part in either of them. This time of communion and teaching is just for the true disciples of Jesus. What do the rest of the disciples think about this? They think Jesus is excusing their treasurer to do something with the money, either buy more food for the Passover Feast or give money to the poor. Both would fit the customs of the day. It was the treasurer’s job to make sure there was enough food and supplies for everyone at the Feast. To fail to do so would bring embarrassment upon the host and the treasurer. The disciples might have thought perhaps Judas Iscariot had to go pick up more food in case they ran out. Also, it was custom to give money to the poor during the Passover feast. The disciples might have thought that maybe Jesus was giving Judas Iscariot permission to leave the Feast to perform that task. Judas Iscariot’s part of the chapter ends with the sentence, “And it was night.” Scholars think John puts this in here for metaphorical purposes, although the Feast did happen during the dinner hours of the evening. Remember that both John and Jesus called Jesus “the [true] light” and call the ways of the world and the ways of sin “darkness.” John is stating that Judas Iscariot went from the light of Jesus Christ into the darkness of sin.

Now Judas Iscariot isn’t the only bad example among the disciples. There’s another highlighted in John 13. Believe it or not, it’s Simon Peter. Let’s take a quick look at him.

Now that Judas Iscariot has exited the building, Jesus wants to get more intimate in his conversation with his disciples. Now Jesus wants to reveal personal and deep secrets about Him and His Kingdom. Jesus makes His disciples aware that He is leaving soon, so he wants to also pass on new, important instruction, as well as remind them of old, important instruction. Jesus emphasizes all important teachings because He knows He will not be with the disciples for much longer, and he needs the disciples to keep following His teachings.

Right here, in John 13:36, I believe is one of those moments where all the disciples are thinking about it, but only one gets the nerve to say it out loud. All the disciples are not listening to the instruction, but rather, they are caught up on the sentence, “Where I am going, you cannot come.” They are in great distress because of this, and if you understand the context, you’ll understand why. These men have left their whole lives behind them 3 or 4 years ago to follow Jesus. They banked their whole lives on following Jesus for the rest of their lives. Most of them have nothing to go back to. If they tried to go back, they’d start all over again. So when Jesus says He is leaving, there is much reason for distress. Some of them might have felt like they threw their whole lives away for nothing. So Simon Peter, as concerned as everyone, speaks up, “Where are you going?” From his tone (as well as verse 37), you can tell he’s trying to figure out a way to go with Jesus.

Now if you have a Harmony of the Gospels, here’s where it gets interesting. Harmony of the Gospel books can be helpful tools to compare parallel passages in the Gospels, however, they are far from inerrant. There is no one right Harmony of the Gospel. All these books will have their own interpretation on the order of events and which passages parallel one another. Such is Peter’s denial. Each Gospel has a prediction of Peter’s Denial: Matthew 26:31-35, Mark 14:27-31, Luke 22:31-38, and John 13:37-38. These books will disagree whether they parallel one another. There are 2 main camps of thought. The first is all 4 Gospel writers are telling the same story from 4 different points of view. The second is that Matthew and Mark are telling about one prediction, while Luke and John are talking about another prediction. Let’s examine each camp closely, first the one that puts them all together, then the one that separates Matthew and Mark from Luke and John.

The first camp does have good evidence to put all 4 together. All 4 have Peter making a pledge of allegiance to Jesus. All 4 Gospel accounts have Jesus saying that Peter will disown or deny him. All 4 Gospel narratives have Jesus telling the reader the denial will happen before the rooster crows. With so many parallels, it’s easy to see why all 4 described as retelling the same exact event.

The second camp also has good evidence to bunch Matthew and Mark together and bunch Luke and John as a separate bunch. Read Matthew 26:31-35 and Mark 14:27-31 together. They are about 98% to 99% the same thing, even down to Zechariah prophecy. Both Luke and John are nowhere near the same wording. Where they do talk about the same things, notice the small detail differences. In Matthew and Mark, Peter simply says he will never fall away. In Luke, Peter tells Jesus he will go to prison and death for Jesus. In John, Peter claims he will lay down his life for Jesus. While you might say they are small details, I see big differences. In both Matthew and Mark, Peter denies Christ’s prediction, while in Luke and John, Peter does no such thing. Context also helps. In Matthew and Mark, Jesus seems to be talking to all the disciples (minus Judas Iscariot). In Luke and John, Jesus seems to be talking directly to Peter. The biggest evidence, though, would be the location. Matthew and Mark record the events happening at the Mount of Olives, before going into the Garden of Gethsemane. Luke and John record the events happening in the upper room during the Last Supper.

Therefore, despite the parallels in all 4 Gospel stories, the best view is to say they happened at 2 different times. This is not a contradiction, but rather a repeat. Jesus predicted Peter’s denial first in the upper room, when Peter claimed that he would go wherever Jesus went, even if it meant giving up his life. The second time Jesus predicted Peter’s denial was on the Mount of Olives, before the Garden of Gethsemane, when Jesus told the disciples they will all scatter. In response to the second accusation of denial, Peter once again claims he will never disown Jesus, even if it means giving up his life for him. Perhaps there’s a parallel happening there: Peter declares 3 times he will stick with Jesus, Peter denies Jesus 3 times. Maybe Peter denied Jesus for each time he said he would stick up for Jesus. We’ll talk about that more when we get to the actual event.

In closing this chapter, we know there is a betrayer and a denier among the Twelve Disciples. The betrayer is Judas Iscariot and the denier is Simon Peter. This was no new news to Jesus, as Jesus foreknew Judas Iscariot would betray him and Simon Peter would deny him. But Jesus, being the all-knowing God, knew more than just that. Imagine Jesus at the dinner table of the Last Supper. He looks at Judas Iscariot, and He knows Judas will betray Him. He looks at Simon Peter, and He knows Peter will deny him 3 times before the rooster crows twice. He looks at Thomas (called Didymus), and He knows that Thomas will doubt Him when He rises from the dead. Then Jesus looks at all the rest of disciples, and He knows they will all scatter when He gets arrested. In a sense, they will all betray him, they will all deny him, and they will all doubt him. I wonder if Jesus ever questioned himself to why He was sticking with this sad, sorry bunch. Yet Jesus knew that this was totally worth it, for His disciples, and for all mankind. So He stayed true for His disciples, as well as mankind, to bring everyone salvation.