Jesus said, "I have chosen you twelve, yet one of you is a devil."

BrotherTony · February 6, 2022

This morning I was listening to two different preachers when I heard them say nearly the same thing...."I have chosen you twelve, yet one of you is a devil." As they went on to explain this statement, one said that Christ knew that he was calling a devil when he chose him, and that he "calls" devils into the Christian ministry to try and accomplish his purpose. The second on said that Christ knew he was calling a devil so that he wouldn't be able to subvert the Father's will and that the prayer in the Garden of Gethesemane, "Not my will, but your will be done" was proof of this possible weakness in Christ. Both of these men used to be Baptist preachers! Is it possible that one or both of these preachers was right? I believe one may have some validity to it, but the other is totally off base (the second preacher). I know where I would lean doctrinally ....but why would this second preacher even say that Christ might have failed if he hadn't chosen Judas? This just sound like a heretical viewpoint to me. Both of these men have been preaching/pastoring for over 30 years. What say you all? Scripture that backs up your position??? Thanks in advance,

BT

SureWord · February 7, 2022

2 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

This morning I was listening to two different preachers when I heard them say nearly the same thing...."I have chosen you twelve, yet one of you is a devil." As they went on to explain this statement, one said that Christ knew that he was calling a devil when he chose him, and that he "calls" devils into the Christian ministry to try and accomplish his purpose. The second on said that Christ knew he was calling a devil so that he wouldn't be able to subvert the Father's will and that the prayer in the Garden of Gethesemane, "Not my will, but your will be done" was proof of this possible weakness in Christ. Both of these men used to be Baptist preachers! Is it possible that one or both of these preachers was right? I believe one may have some validity to it, but the other is totally off base (the second preacher). I know where I would lean doctrinally ....but why would this second preacher even say that Christ might have failed if he hadn't chosen Judas? This just sound like a heretical viewpoint to me. Both of these men have been preaching/pastoring for over 30 years. What say you all? Scripture that backs up your position??? Thanks in advance,

BT

Only two people are called the "son of perdition" in the bible, Judas Iscariot and the Antichrist. Judas was called a devil and eventually Satan himself entered him. When he killed himself Peter said he went to his own place, i.e. hell. He's a type of the Antichrist.

Jesus chose him so he would be betrayed and the scripture fulfilled.

Apparently, the "princes of this world", i.e. devils, had no idea this was accomplishing God's will.

This ultimately has to do with our Lord judging the Devil and his angels.

Jerry · February 7, 2022

Devil means slanderer, accuser. One of the 12 accused Jesus before the sanhedrin and religious leaders. He was not a physical devil, but spiritually. Then on the night Jesus was betrayed, Satan (the physical Devil) possessed him.

Brother Tony, I don't think either of those preachers were right. God does not toy with sin or with the Devil and bring him out to keep a believer on their good side. There is no Bible basis for those views. Yes, God does allow the Devil himself (or through his array of fallen angels) to test and tempt us, but that is a general principle in the Word of God, and not a specific teaching or anything that indicates that God does that to keep the church in line or keep His plan going right.

The Wanderer · February 25, 2022

On 2/7/2022 at 2:47 PM, Jerry said:

Devil means slanderer, accuser. One of the 12 accused Jesus before the sanhedrin and religious leaders. He was not a physical devil, but spiritually. Then on the night Jesus was betrayed, Satan (the physical Devil) possessed him.

Brother Tony, I don't think either of those preachers were right. God does not toy with sin or with the Devil and bring him out to keep a believer on their good side. There is no Bible basis for those views. Yes, God does allow the Devil himself (or through his array of fallen angels) to test and tempt us, but that is a general principle in the Word of God, and not a specific teaching or anything that indicates that God does that to keep the church in line or keep His plan going right.

Could I ask this question Jesus himself stated that he had called them ALL, yet, one was a devil. It seems to me that this would give the second minister some validity in his point.

Jerry · February 25, 2022

You don't arrive at Bible interpretation by guesswork. Yes, Jesus was tempted in all points as we are, included tempted to shrink from the cross - but He trusted in God the Father and submitted His earthly will (for lack of a better term) to His Father. There is nothing anywhere in the NT to indicate Jesus or the Father allowed Judas to be a part of His 12 Apostles to tempt Him or test Him. His testing was at the beginning of His ministry during the 40 days He spent in the desert being directly tempted by the Devil.

Also, again, in regards to Judas being a "devil", Judas was not a physical devil (ie. fallen angel) in any way.* Devil means slanderer, accuser. This is exactly what we see him doing before the Sanhedrin and the religious leaders - slandering and accusing Christ before them so they would have an excuse to arrest Jesus.

*Yes, he was possessed by Satan after he betrayed Christ, but that does not make him a fallen angel.

BrotherTony · February 26, 2022

I'm just using the words Christ used....So, is the translation in the KJV wrong? Whether Judas is a devil in spirit or flesh is immaterial...Jesus referred to him as "a devil."

Edited February 26, 2022 by BrotherTony

Jerry · February 26, 2022

Yes, he is a devil in the sense that I defined above - which is the Biblical definition of the word. But that doesn't make either of those two preacher's opinions or positions right.

Strong's Concordance gives this definition and the ways it is translated: a traducer; specially, Satan:—false accuser, devil, slanderer.

The same Greek word is used in these passages as well:

1 Timothy 3:11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.

Titus 2:3 The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;

SureWord · February 26, 2022

On 2/25/2022 at 3:26 PM, Jerry said:

You don't arrive at Bible interpretation by guesswork. Yes, Jesus was tempted in all points as we are, included tempted to shrink from the cross - but He trusted in God the Father and submitted His earthly will (for lack of a better term) to His Father. There is nothing anywhere in the NT to indicate Jesus or the Father allowed Judas to be a part of His 12 Apostles to tempt Him or test Him. His testing was at the beginning of His ministry during the 40 days He spent in the desert being directly tempted by the Devil.

Also, again, in regards to Judas being a "devil", Judas was not a physical devil (ie. fallen angel) in any way.* Devil means slanderer, accuser. This is exactly what we see him doing before the Sanhedrin and the religious leaders - slandering and accusing Christ before them so they would have an excuse to arrest Jesus.

*Yes, he was possessed by Satan after he betrayed Christ, but that does not make him a fallen angel.

So, you are going to take the word "devil", and make it into meaning "false accuser? How 'bout a "naughty boy or trickster" like how the old timers used the expression "Oh, you little devil, you" when talking to a child.

You compare scripture with scripture and a "devil" is always that, a physical, literal, devil.

Anything but believe the Bible, right Jerry?

I guess him being called the "son of perdition" just meant he was a the offspring of a bad man.

You compare scripture with scripture and the language of the Bible with the language of the Bible to come to it's meaning.

A devil is always a devil in the bible.

Jerry · February 27, 2022

So, he is a literal fallen angel - that got possessed by a fallen angel the night he betrayed Christ. That's a new one I never heard before.

How do you fit this verse in about Judas?

Mark 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Fallen angels were all created by the Lord God before they fell, then they chose to follow Lucifer - they were never BORN.

BrotherTony · February 27, 2022

10 hours ago, Jerry said:

So, he is a literal fallen angel - that got possessed by a fallen angel the night he betrayed Christ. That's a new one I never heard before.

How do you fit this verse in about Judas?

Mark 14:21 The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! good were it for that man if he had never been born.

Fallen angels were all created by the Lord God before they fell, then they chose to follow Lucifer - they were never BORN.

Jerry, you seem to want us to take your understanding of a verse as literal, yet, when others point out what was actually said, you won't accept that. Unbelievable! Christ himself said, "one of you is a devil." I'll take the words of Christ over your interpretation....thanks.

Jerry · February 28, 2022

So if it is not a spiritual description of Judas, what does it mean? It certainly cannot mean he himself is a real/physical fallen angel - BECAUSE the Bible teaches that he became possessed by the Devil the night he betrayed the Lord Jesus Christ. Unless you have some new doctrine teaching demons can be possessed by demons - that is a new one to me.

And do you also believe that Peter was literally turned into Satan when Jesus said, Get thee behind me, Satan"?

Matthew 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

BrotherTony · March 1, 2022

12 hours ago, Jerry said:

So if it is not a spiritual description of Judas, what does it mean? It certainly cannot mean he himself is a real/physical fallen angel - BECAUSE the Bible teaches that he became possessed by the Devil the night he betrayed the Lord Jesus Christ. Unless you have some new doctrine teaching demons can be possessed by demons - that is a new one to me.

And do you also believe that Peter was literally turned into Satan when Jesus said, Get thee behind me, Satan"?

Matthew 16:23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

It's pretty clear that Satan seemed to have a free reign in Judas' life. Nobody has ever said that Judas was a literal devil....One doesn't have to be a literal fallen angel to be a devil....You seem to like to put your twist on everything, but can't seem to allow others to have their views or opinions without trying to steamroll. It's just an observation, and I may be wrong...but it does come across this way...at least to me.

Jerry · March 1, 2022

You're a hoot! You knock me for my position, then you say basically the same thing - but you don't even define or fit the term to the passage at all.

SureWord · March 1, 2022

A rule of interpretation is that you define a word by how it is used throughout scripture.

Every time the word "devil" is used in scripture it is referring to just that, a devil. Not a false accuser. Any deviation from how that word is established in scripture becomes "private interpretation".

Now, this is getting into some deep speculation here but I think though Judas Iscariot was not a literal devil he was as close to one as possible. It's possible his father may have been a devil. Judas was called the "son of perdition" just as the Antichrist is called that and he essentially will be Satan incarnate. This is why the Antichrist is referred to as the "mystery of iniquity" as opposed to the "mystery of godliness" which refers to the incarnate Son of God. One has God as his Father and one has Satan as his.

Even more speculation here is that something may happen to a person, particularly one who obtains power, in which if he/she goes beyond a certain point of reprobation into making a pact with Satan they will have entered into a realm of darkness on high and a change will happen to their being. This could be why some leaders almost seem none human and all the conspiracy theories of Annunaki and reptilian aliens controlling world history. These conspiracies are not too far off as we think except instead of Sumerian gods or aliens they are devils.

Many times in the bible world and religious leaders are mentioned to have a close affinity with "powers and principalities on high". Sometimes no distinction is made.

Look how the king of Babylon is referred to as Lucifer or Cyrus is called the Lord's "anointed" and shepherd.

In Daniel 10:20 the angel says he was to struggle against the "king of Grecia". This battle takes place in the spiritual realm.

In I Cor. 2:8 Paul says the "princes of this world" crucified Christ. The "princes" here in this passage are not only human but a reference to evil spirits and spiritual wickedness from on high. Not all the human princes of the world crucified Jesus.

HappyChristian · March 1, 2022

I think it is in very poor taste to accuse someone who has actually quoted scripture of believing anything except the Bible.

The plain fact of the matter, whether you, SureWord or BroTony, like it or not, is that the Greek definition of the word 'devil' is "slanderer, false accuser." A "rule of interpretation" is to actually know the definition of a word - in Greek or Hebrew, depending, obviously, on testament - not to assume something just because it sounds spiritual.

I also find it interesting that Jerry is accused of believing anything but the Bible by the very one who spends a couple paragraphs SPECULATING about something. LOL

Locking the thread cuz I'm tired of the childishness.