![\"\"](\"https:\/\/wp-media.patheos.com\/blogs\/sites\/572\/2021\/04\/Judas3.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Michael J. Alter is the author of the copiously researched, 913-page volume,\u00a0The Resurrection: a Critical Inquiry<\/em><\/a> (2015). I initially offered\u00a0 59 \u201cbrief\u201d replies to as many alleged New Testament contradictions<\/a> (March 2021). We later engaged in amiable correspondence and decided to enter into a major ongoing dialogue about his book. He graciously (and impressively!) sent me a PDF file of it, free of charge, for my review.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Mike describes himself as \u201cof the Jewish faith\u201d but is quick to point out that labels are often \u201cmisleading\u201d and \u201cdivisive\u201d (I agree to a large extent). He continues to be influenced by, for example, \u201cReformed, Conservative, Orthodox, and Chabad\u201d variants of Judaism and learns \u201cfrom those of other faiths, the secular, the non-theists, etc.\u201d Fair enough. I have a great many influences, too, am very ecumenical, and am a great admirer of Judaism, as I told Michael in a combox comment<\/a> on my blog.<\/p>\n He says his book \u201ccan be described as Jewish apologetics\u201d and one that provides reasons for \u201cwhy members of the Jewish community should\u00a0not\u00a0convert to Christianity.\u201d I will be writing many critiques of the book and we\u2019ll be engaging in ongoing discussion for likely a long time. I\u2019m quite excited about it and am most grateful for Mike\u2019s willingness to interact, minus any personal hostility.<\/p>\n To see all the other installments, search \u201cMichael J. Alter\u201d on either my Jews and Judaism<\/a> or Trinitarianism & Christology<\/a> web pages. That will take you to the subsection with the series.<\/p>\n I use RSV for all Bible verses that I cite. His words will be in blue<\/span>.<\/p>\n *****<\/p>\n Alter wrote:<\/span><\/p>\n CONTRADICTION #85<\/em> Acts Contradicts Matthew\u2014Judas\u2019s\u00a0Repentance<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n The account of Judas\u2019s nonrepentance reported in Acts directly contradicts\u00a0Matthew. This narration is perhaps one of the simplest and yet strongest\u00a0arguments supporting the thesis that their respective authors wrote completely\u00a0different stories. Unequivocally, these two stories demonstrate no resemblance\u00a0to each other. . . . Matthew 27:3-5 reports that after Jesus was arrested: \u201cThen Judas, which\u00a0had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself,\u00a0and brought again the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders,\u00a0Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they\u00a0said, What is that to us? see thou to that. And he cast down the pieces of silver\u00a0in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.\u201d . . .\u00a0Judas repented (i.e., felt remorseful) . . .\u00a0A careful analysis of Matthew\u2019s Judas reveals a repentant and remorseful\u00a0Judas. . . .\u00a0Judas was so remorseful that he wanted nothing to do with the\u00a0money that he had received for betraying Jesus. . . .\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Contrary to Matthew, in Acts there is no repentance,\u00a0no remorse, and no sense of guilt.<\/span>\u00a0(pp. 503-504, 507)<\/p>\n In Matthew 27:3-4, it says in RSV that Judas \u201crepented\u201d and said \u201cI have sinned\u00a0in betraying innocent blood.\u201d Acts 1:16-20, in mentioning Judas\u2019 suicide, simply doesn\u2019t say one way or the other whether he repented or not. So it\u2019s an argument from silence, from which nothing can be determined, as to alleged contradiction. But there is also a linguistic consideration (the following sources are all commenting on Matthew 27:3):<\/p>\n The Greek word is not that commonly used for \u201crepentance,\u201d as involving a change of mind and heart, but is rather\u00a0\u201c<\/span>regret,\u201d a simple change of feeling. (Ellicott\u2019s Commentary for English Readers<\/a><\/em>)<\/p>\n A different Greek word from that used, ch.\u00a0Matthew 3:2<\/a>; it implies no change of heart or life, but merely remorse or regret. See note ch.\u00a0Matthew 21:29<\/a>;\u00a0Matthew 21:32<\/a>. (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/a><\/em>)<\/p>\n Repented himself<\/span>\u00a0(\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u1f77\u03c2<\/span>). This word (differing from\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1f73\u03c9<\/span>, which expresses change of heart) denotes only a change of feeling, a desire that what has been done could be undone; this is not repentance in the Scripture sense; it springs not from love of God, it has not that character which calls for pardon. (Pulpit Commentary<\/a><\/em>)<\/p>\n Repented himself<\/span>\u00a0(\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2<\/span>\u00a0\u2014\u00a0metamele\u0304theis<\/span><\/i>). Probably Judas saw Jesus led away to Pilate and thus knew that the condemnation had taken place. This verb (first aorist passive participle of\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9<\/span>\u00a0\u2014\u00a0metamelomai<\/span><\/i>) really means to be sorry afterwards like the English word\u00a0repent<\/i>\u00a0from the Latin\u00a0repoenitet<\/i>, to have pain again or afterwards. See the same verb\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2<\/span>\u00a0\u2014\u00a0metamele\u0304theis<\/span><\/i>\u00a0in\u00a0Matthew 21:30<\/a><\/span>\u00a0of the boy who became sorry and changed to obedience. The word does not have an evil sense in itself. Paul uses it of his sorrow for his sharp letter to the Corinthians, a sorrow that ceased when good came of the letter (2 Corinthians 7:8<\/a><\/span>). But mere sorrow avails nothing unless it leads to change of mind and life (\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1<\/span>\u00a0\u2014\u00a0metanoia<\/span><\/i>), the sorrow according to God (2 Corinthians 7:9<\/a><\/span>). This sorrow Peter had when he wept bitterly. It led Peter back to Christ. But Judas had only remorse that led to suicide. (A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/em><\/a>)<\/p>\n Repented (\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03b9\u0300\u03c2\u00a0<\/span>)<\/b><\/p>\n This is a different word from that in\u00a0Matthew 3:2<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0Matthew 4:17<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u03b9\u0342\u03c4\u03b5\u00a0<\/span>, Repent ye. Though it is fairly claimed that the word here implies all that is implied in the other word, the New Testament writers evidently recognize a distinction, since the noun which corresponds to the verb in this passage (\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0301\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u00a0<\/span>)<\/i>\u00a0is not used at all in the New Testament, and the verb itself only five times; and, in every case except the two in this passage (see\u00a0Matthew 21:32<\/a><\/span>), with a meaning quite foreign to repentance in the ordinary gospel sense. Thus it is used of Judas, when he brought back the thirty pieces (Matthew 27:3<\/a><\/span>); of Paul\u2019s not regretting his letter to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 7:8<\/a><\/span>); and of God (Hebrews 7:21<\/a><\/span>). On the other hand,\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b5\u0301\u03c9\u00a0<\/span>, repent, used by John and Jesus in their summons to repentance (Matthew 3:2<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0Matthew 4:17<\/a><\/span>), occurs thirty-four times, and the noun\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u00a0<\/span>,\u00a0repentance<\/i>\u00a0(Matthew 3:8<\/a><\/span>,\u00a0Matthew 3:11<\/a><\/span>), twenty-four times, and in every case with reference to that change of heart and life wrought by the Spirit of God, to which remission of sins and salvation are promised. It is not impossible, therefore, that the word in this passage may have been intended to carry a different shade of meaning, now lost to us.\u00a0\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0301\u03bb\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\u00a0<\/span>, as its etymology indicates (\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u0301\u00a0<\/span>,\u00a0after,<\/i>\u00a0and\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u0301\u03bb\u03c9\u00a0<\/span>, to be an object of care), implies an\u00a0after-care,<\/i>\u00a0as contrasted with the\u00a0change of<\/i>\u00a0mind denoted by\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u00a0<\/span>. Not sorrow for moral obliquity and sin against God, but annoyance at the consequences of an act or course of acts, and chagrin at not having known better. \u201cIt may be simply what our fathers were wont to call\u00a0hadiwist<\/i>\u00a0(had-I-wist, or known better, I should have acted otherwise)\u201d (Trench).\u00a0\u039c\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0301\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1\u00a0<\/span>refers chiefly to single acts;\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u00a0<\/span>denotes the repentance which affects the whole life. Hence the latter is often found in the imperative:\u00a0Repent ye<\/i>\u00a0(Matthew 3:2<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0Matthew 4:17<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0Acts 2:38<\/a><\/span>;\u00a0Acts 3:19<\/a><\/span>); the former never. Paul\u2019s recognition of the distinction (2 Corinthians 7:10<\/a><\/span>) is noteworthy. \u201cGodly sorrow worketh\u00a0repentance<\/i>\u00a0(\u00a0\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u0301\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03bd\u00a0<\/span>) unto salvation,\u201d a salvation or repentance \u201cwhich bringeth no regret on thinking of it afterwards\u201d (\u00a0\u03b1\u0313\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u0301\u03bb\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u00a0)There is no occasion for one ever to\u00a0think better<\/i>\u00a0of either his repentance or the salvation in which it issued. (Marvin Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament<\/em><\/a>)<\/span><\/p>\n 2 Corinthians 7:9-10\u00a0<\/strong>As it is, I rejoice, not because you were grieved, but because you were grieved into repenting; for you felt a godly grief, so that you suffered no loss through us.\u00a0[10] For godly grief produces a repentance that leads to salvation and brings no regret, but worldly grief produces death.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Nathan Millican from the Theology Along the Way<\/em> website, commented insightfully on Judas and this issue of his repentance (or lack thereof):<\/p>\n A worldly sorrow brings\u00a0regret<\/strong>\u00a0that leads to death, whereas a godly sorrow does not bring regret and leads to salvation. Barnett in his Second Corinthians Commentary writes, \u201cthe structure of Paul\u2019s verse is: For the grief that is according to God works repentance [that] leads to salvation, [which] is without regret. But the grief that is of the world works death.\u201d[1]<\/a>\u00a0Thus, there is a truth inferred here that is important for the discussion at hand, which is the \u201cgrief that is of the world works [un<\/em>repentance, which leads to] death [and is\u00a0with<\/em>\u00a0regret].\u201d[2]<\/a>\u00a0. . .<\/p>\n This type of sorrow as evidenced in Paul\u2019s Second Letter to the Corinthians is not a sorrow that leads to salvation, but rather brings with it death. Judas regretted his actions or showed remorse or sorrow for his actions because of their consequences \u201cnot necessarily because they were wrong as sins against a holy God.\u201d[5]<\/a>\u00a0What did Judas lack? He lacked a godly sorrow that brings no regrets that leads to salvation. His remorse was not commensurate with a remorse that God says is a prerequisite to salvation. And what was the end result of his remorse? He ended his life. \u201cHe was sorry for his sin, but instead of taking his sorrow to God, he despaired. He turned inward, not Godward, and his remorse became self-condemnation.\u201d[6]<\/a>\u00a0<\/a>(\u201cWhy wasn\u2019t Judas\u2019 repentance a repentance that leads to eternal life?\u201d<\/a>)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
\n<\/span><\/p>\n