Judah, Territory Of – Jude

Judah, Territory Of

(yehudhah):

I. GEOGRAPHICAL DATA

1. The Natural Boundaries

2. The Natural Divisions of Judah

(1) The Maritime Plain

(2) The Shephelah

(3) The Hill Country of Judah

II. THE TRIBE OF JUDAH AND ITS TERRITORY

III. THE BOUNDARIES OF THE KINGDOM OF JUDAH

LITERATURE

I. Geographical Data.

Although the physical conformation of Western Palestine divides this land into very definite areas running longitudinally North and South, yet all through history there has been a recognition of a further--and politically more important--division into 3 areas running transversely, known in New Testament times as Galilee, Samaria and Judea. These districts are differentiated to some extent by distinctive physical features which have in no small degree influenced the history of their inhabitants.

1. The Natural Boundaries:

The southernmost of these regions possesses on 3 sides very definite natural boundaries: to the West the Mediterranean, to the East the Dead Sea, and the Jordan, and to the South 60 miles, North to South, of practically trackless desert, a frontier as secure as sea or mountain range. On the North no such marked "scientific frontier" exists, and on this the one really accessible side, history bears witness that the frontier has been pushed backward and forward. The most ideal natural northern frontier, which only became the actual one comparatively late in Hebrew times (see JUDAEA), is that which passes from the river `Aujeh in the West, up the Wady Deir Baldt, by the wide and deep Wady Ishar to `Akrabbeh and thence East to the Jordan. A second natural frontier commences at the same line on the West, but after following the Wady Deir Baldt, branches off southward along the Wady Nimr (now traversed by the modern carriage road from Jerusalem to Nablus), crosses the water-parting close to the lofty Tell Ashur and runs successively down the Wady Sanieh and the Wady `Aujeh and by the eastern river `Aujeh to the Jordan. This division-line is one conformable to the physical features, because north of it the table-lands of "Judea" give place to the more broken mountain groups of "Samaria." Another less natural, though much more historic, frontier is that which traverses the Vale of Ajalon, follows the Beth-horon pass, and, after crossing the central plateau near el Jib (Gibeon) and er Ram (Ramah of Benjamin), runs down the deep and rugged Wady SuweiniT, between Jeba` (Geba) and Mukhmas (Michmash), to Jericho and the Jordan. It was along this line that the great frontier fortresses, Bethel, Gibeon, Ramah, Adasa, Geba and Michmash, were erected. Such, on the North, South, East, and West, were the natural boundaries of the southern third of Palestine; yet in all history the land thus enclosed scarcely ever formed a homogeneous whole.

2. The Natural Divisions of Judah:

Within these boundaries lay four very different types of land--the maritime plain, the "lowland" or Shephelah, the "hill country" and, included usually with the last, the desert or Jeshimon.

(1) The Maritime Plain:

The maritime plain, the "land Judah of the Philis" (1 Samuel 6:1; 1 Samuel 27:1; 2 Kings 8:2; Zechariah 2:5), was ideally though never actually, the territory of Judah (compare Joshua 15:45–47); it may have been included, as it is by some modern writers, as part of the Shephelah, but this is not the usual use of the word. It is a great stretch of level plain or rolling downs of very fertile soil, capable of supporting a thriving population and cities of considerable size, especially near the seacoast.

(2) The Shephelah:

The Shephelah (shephelah), or "lowland" of Judah (Deuteronomy 1:7; Joshua 9:1; Joshua 11:2,Joshua 11:16; Joshua 15:33–44; 1 Kings 10:27; 1 Chronicles 27:28; Jeremiah 17:26).--In these references the word is variously rendered in the King James Version, usually as "vale" or "valley," sometimes, as in the last two, as "plain." In the Revised Version (British and American) the usual rendering is "lowland." In 1 Macc 12:38, the King James Version has "Shephela" and the Revised Version (British and American) "plain country." The word "Shephelah" appears to survive in the Arabic Sifla about Beit Jebrin.

This is a very important region in the history of Judah. It is a district consisting mainly of rounded hills, 500-800 ft. high, with fertile open valleys full of corn fields; caves abound, and there are abundant evidences of a once crowded population. Situated as it is between the "hill country" and the maritime plain, it was the scene of frequent skirmishes between the Hebrews and the Philistines; Judah failed to hold it against the Philistines who kept it during most of their history. The Shephelah is somewhat sharply divided off from the central mountain mass by a remarkable series of valleys running North and South. Commencing at the Vale of Ajalon and passing South, we have in succession the Wady el Ghurab and, after crossing the Wady es Siwan, the Wady en Najil, the Wady es Sunt (Elah) and the Wady es Cur. It is noticeable that the western extremity of the most historic northern frontier of ancient Judah--that limited by the Vale of Ajalon in the West--appears to have been determined by the presence of this natural feature. North of this the hills of Samaria flatten out to the plain without any such intervening valleys.

(3) The Hill Country of Judah:

The hill country of Judah is by far the most characteristic part of that tribe's possessions; it was on account of the shelter of these mountain fastnesses that this people managed to hold their own against their neighbors and hide away from the conquering armies of Assyria and Egypt. No other section of the country was so secluded and protected by her natural borders. It was the environment of these bare hills and rugged valleys which did much to form the character and influence the literature of the Jews. The hill country is an area well defined, about 35 miles long and some 15 broad, and is protected on three sides by natural frontiers of great strength; on the North alone it has no "scientific frontier." On the South lay the Negeb, and beyond that the almost waterless wilderness, a barrier consisting of a series of stony hills running East and West, difficult for a caravan and almost impracticable for an army. On the West the hills rise sharply from those valleys which delimit them from the Shephelah, but they are pierced by a series of steep and rugged defiles which wind upward to the central table-land. At the northwestern corner the Bethhoron pass--part of the northern frontier line--runs upward from the wide Vale of Ajalon; this route, the most historic of all, has been associated with a succession of defeats inflicted by those holding the higher ground (see BETH-HORON). South of this is the Wady `Ali, up which runs the modern carriage road to Jerusalem, and still farther South lies the winding rocky defile, up part of which the railway from Jaffa is laid, the Wady es Surar. A more important valley, because of its width and easier gradient, is the great Vale of Elah (Wady es Cunt), to guard the highest parts of which (now the Wady es Cur) was built the powerful fortress of Beth-zur (2 Chronicles 11:7, etc.), which Josephus (Ant., XIII, v, 6) describes as "the strongest place in all Judea (see BETH-ZUR). Up this pass the Syrians successfully with the aid of elephants (Ant., XII, ix, 4) invaded Judea. The eastern frontier of the hill country is one of extraordinary natural strength. Firstly, there were the Jordan and the Dead Sea; then along all but the northernmost part of the eastern frontier lay a long line of semi-precipitous cliffs, in places over 1,000 ft. high, absolutely unscalable and pierced at long intervals by passes all steep and dangerous. Within this again came a wide area of waterless and barren desert, the Wilderness of Judah (or Judea) known in English Versions of the Bible as JESHIMON (which see). To the northeasterly part of the frontier, where the ascent from the Jericho plain to the mountains presents no special difficulty in gradation, the waterless condition of the Jeshimon greatly restricted the possible routes for an enemy. The natural position for the first line of defense was the fortified city of Jericho, but as a frontier fortress she failed from the days of Joshua onward (see JERICHO). From Jericho four roads pass upward to the plateau of Judah; unlike the corresponding passes on the western frontier, they do not traverse any definite line of valley, but in many places run actually along the ridges.

These roads are:

(a) The earliest historically, though now the least frequented, is the most northerly, which passes westward at the back of ancient Jericho (near `Ain es Sultan) and ascends by Michmash and Ai to Bethel;

(b) the route traversed by the modern Jerus-Jericho road;

(c) the more natural route which enters the hills by Wady Joreif Ghusal and runs by Nebi Musa joining the line of the modern carriage road a mile or so after passing the deserted ruin of the Saracenic Khan el Ahmar. Here runs the road for the thousands of pilgrims who visit the shrine of Nebi Musa in the spring.

(d) The most natural pass of all is by way of Wady el Kuneiterah, across the open plateau of el Bukeia' and over the shoulder of Jebel el Muntar to Bethlehem.

From `Ain Feshkhah a very steep road, probably ancient, ascends to join this last route in el Bukeia`, From Engedi (`Ain Jidy) a steep ascent--almost a stairway--winds abruptly to the plateau above, whence a road passes northwesterly by the Wady Hucaceh past Tekoa to Bethlehem and Jerusalem, and another branch goes west to Hebron and Juttah.

Somewhere along these routes must have lain the "Ascent of Ziz" and the "Wilderness of Jeruel," the scene of the events of 2 Chronicles 20:1–37. The hill country of Judah is distinguished from other parts of Palestine by certain physical characteristics. Its central part is a long plateau--or really series of plateaus-running North and South, very stony and barren and supplied with but scanty springs: "dew" is less plentiful than in the north; several of the elevated plains, e.g. about Bethlehem, Beit Jala and Hebron, are well suited to the growth of corn and olive trees; in the sheltered valleys and on the terraced hillsides to the West of the water-parting, vines, olives, figs and other fruit trees flourish exceedingly. There is evidence everywhere that cultivation was far more highly developed in ancient times; on most of the hill slopes to the West traces of ancient terraces can still be seen (see BOTANY). This district in many parts, especially on its eastern slopes, is preeminently a pastoral land, and flocks of sheep and goats abound, invading in the spring even the desert itself. This last is ever in evidence, visible from the environs of all Judah's greater cities and doubtless profoundly influencing the lives and thoughts of their inhabitants.

The altitude attained in this "hill country" is usually below 3,000 ft. in the north (e.g. Ramallah, 2,850 ft., Nebi Samwil, 2,935 ft.), but is higher near Hebron, where we get 3,545 ft. at Ramet el Khulil. Many would limit the term "hill country of Judea" to the higher hills centering around Hebron, but this is unnecessary. Jerusalem is situated near a lower and more expanded part of the plateau, while the higher hills to its north, are, like that city itself, in the territory of Benjamin.

II. The Tribe of Judah and Its Territory.

In Numbers 26:19–22, when the tribes of the Hebrews are enumerated "in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho" (Numbers 26:3), Judah is described as made up of the families of the Shelanites, the Perezites, the Zerahites, the Hezronites and the Hamulites. "These are the families of Judah according to those that were numbered of them," a total of 76,500 (Numbers 26:22). In Judges 1:16 we read that the Kenites united with the tribe of Judah, and from other references (Joshua 14:6–15; Joshua 15:13–19; Judges 1:12–15,Jude 1:20) we learn that the two Kenizzite clans of Caleb and Othniel also were absorbed; and it is clear from 1 Samuel 27:10; 1 Samuel 30:29 that the Jerahmeelites--closely connected with the Calebites (compare 1 Chronicles 2:42)--also formed a part of the tribe of Judah. The Kenizzites and Jerahmeelites were probably of Edomite origin (Genesis 36:11; compare 1 Chronicles 2:42), and this large admixture of foreign blood may partly account for the comparative isolation of Judah from the other tribes (e.g. she is not mentioned in Jud 5).

The territory of the tribe of Judas is described ideally in Joshua 15:1–63, but it never really extended over the maritime plain to the West. The natural frontiers to the West and East have already been described as the frontiers of the "hill country"; to the South the boundary is described as going "even to the wilderness of Zin southward, at the uttermost part of the south," i.e. of the Negeb (15:1), and (15:3) as far south as Kadesh-barnea, i.e. the oasis of `Ain Kadis, 50 miles South of Beersheba, far in the desert; the position of the "Ascent of Akrabbim," i.e. of scorpions, is not known. The "Brook of Egypt" is generally accepted to be the Wady el `Arish. The fact is, the actual frontier shaded off imperceptibly into the desert--varying perhaps with the possibilities of agriculture and depending therefore upon the rainfall. The cities mentioned on the boundaries, whose sites are now lost, probably roughly marked the edge of the habitable area (see NEGEB).

The northern boundary which separated the land of Judah from that of Benjamin requires brief mention. The various localities mentioned in Joshua 15:5–12 are dealt with in separate articles, but, omitting the very doubtful, the following, which are generally accepted, will show the general direction of the boundary line: The border went from the mouth of the Jordan to Beth-hoglah (`Ain Hajlah), and from the Valley of Achor (Wady Kelt) by the ascent of Adummin (Tala `at edition Dumm) to the waters of Enoch Shemesh (probably `Ain Haud), Enoch Rogel (Bir Eyyub), and the Valley of Hinnom (Wady er Rababi). The line then crossed the Vale of Rephaim (el Bukeia') to the waters of Nephtoah (Lifta), Kiriath-jearim (Kuryet el `Enab), Chesalon (Kesla), Beth-shemesh (`Ain Shems), Ekron (`Akir), and Jabneel (Yebnah), "and the goings out of the border were at the sea." According to the above line, Jerusalem lay entirely within the bounds of Benjamin, though, according to a tradition recorded in the Talmud, the site of the altar was in a piece of land belonging to Judah. The above frontier line can be followed on any modern map of Palestine, and if it does not in many parts describe a natural frontier, it must be remembered that the frontiers of village and town possessions in modern Palestine are extremely arbitrary, and though undetermined by any natural limits such as streams or mountain summits, they persist from generation to generation, and this too during periods--not long past--when there was constant warfare between different clans.

The territory of Judah was small; even had it included all within its ideal boundaries, it would have been no more than 2,000 square miles; actually it was nearer 1,300 square miles, of which nearly half was desert.

III. The Boundaries of the Kingdom of Judah.

These were very circumscribed. In 2 Chronicles 11:5–12 there is a list of the cities--chiefly those on the frontier--which Rehoboam fortified. On the East were Bethlehem, Etam and Tekoa; and on the West and Southwest were Beth-zur, Soco, Adullam, Gath, Mareshah, Ziph, Adoraim, Lachish, Azekah, Zorah, Aijalon and Hebron. The sites of the great majority of these are known, and they are all upon the borders of the Shephelah or the hill country. It will be seen too that the military preparation then made was against an attack from the West. In the 5th year of the reign of Rehoboam the expected attack came, and Shishak (Sheshenq I) of Egypt swept over the land and not only conquered all Judah and Jerusalem, but, according to the reading of some authorities in the account of this campaign given in the great temple of Karnak, he handed over to Jeroboam of Israel certain strongholds of Judah.

The usual northern frontier between the two Hebrew kingdoms appears to have been the southernmost of the three natural lines described in I above, namely by the Valley of Ajalon on the West and the Gorge of Michmash (Wady SuweiniT) on the East. Along the central plateau the frontier varied. Bethel (1 Kings 12:29; 2 Kings 10:29; Amos 3:14; Amos 4:4; Amos 7:10,Amos 7:13; Hosea 10:15) belonged to Israel, though once it fell to Judah when Abijah took it and with it Jeshanah (`Ain Sinia) and Ephron (probably et Taiyibeh) (2 Chronicles 13:19). Geba (Jeba`), just to the South of the Wady Suweinit, was on the northern frontier of Judah, hence, instead of the old term "from Da to Beer-sheba" we read now of "from Geba to Beersheba" (2 Kings 23:8). Baasha, king of Israel, went South and fortified Ramah (er Ram, but 4 miles from Jerusalem) against Judah (1 Kings 15:17), but Asa stopped his work, removed the fortifications and with the materials strengthened his own frontier at Geba and Mizpah (1 Kings 15:21,1 Kings 15:22). In the Jordan valley Jericho was held by Israel (1 Kings 16:34; 2 Kings 2:4).

After the Northern Kingdom fell, the frontier of Judah appears to have extended a little farther North, and Bethel (2 Kings 23:15–19) and Jericho (to judge from Ezra 2:34; Nehemiah 3:2; Nehemiah 7:36) also became part of the kingdom of Judah. For the further history of this district see JUDAEA.

LITERATURE.

See especially H G H L, chapters viii-xv; P E F, III, and Saunders, Introduction to the Survey of Western Palestine.

E. W. G. Masterman

Judaism

joo'-da-iz'-m.

See ISRAEL, RELIGION OF.

Judas

joo'-das (Ioudas; Greek form of Hebrew "Judah"):

(1) A Levite mentioned in 1 Esdras 9:23 = JUDAH (3).

(2) Judas Maccabeus, 3rd son of Mattathias (1 Macc 2:4).

See MACCABEES.

(3) Judas, son of Chalphi, a Jewish officer who supported Jonathan bravely at the battle of Hazor (1 Macc 11:70; Ant, XIII, v, 7).

(4) A person of good position in Jerusalem at the time of the mission to Aristobulus (2 Macc 1:10); he has been identified with Judas Maccabeus and also with an Essene prophet (Ant., XIII, xi, 2; BJ, III, 5).

(5) Son of Simon the Maccabee, and brother of John Hyrcanus (1 Macc 16:2). He was wounded in the battle which he fought along with his brother against Cendebeus (1 Macc 16:1 ff; Ant, XIII, vii, 3), and was murdered by Ptolemy the usurper, his brother-in-law, at Dok (1 Macc 16:11 ff).

J. Hutchinson

Judas Barsabbas

bar-sab-'as (Ioudas Barsabbas): Judas was, with Silas, a delegate from the church in Jerusalem to the GentileChristians of Antioch, Syria and Cilicia. They were appointed to convey the letter containing the decision of "the apostles and the elders, with the whole church" regarding the attitude to be taken by GentileChristians toward the Mosaic law, and also to explain "the same things by word of mouth." They accompanied Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, and, "being themselves also prophets," i.e. preachers, they not only handed over the epistle but stayed some time in the city preaching and teaching. They seem to have gone no farther than Antioch, for "they were dismissed in peace from the brethren unto those that had sent them forth," and it was Paul and Silas who some time afterward strengthened the churches in Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:40,Acts 15:41).

According to Acts 15:34 the King James Version, Judas returned to Jerusalem without Silas, who remained at Antioch and afterward became Paul's companion (Acts 15:40). The oldest manuscripts, however, omit Acts 15:34, and it is therefore omitted from the Revised Version (British and American). It was probably a marginal note to explain Acts 15:40, and in time it crept into the text. Judas and Silas are called "chief men among the brethren" (15:22), probably elders, and "prophets" (15:32).

Barsabbas being a patronymic, Judas was probably the brother of Joseph Barsabbas. He cannot be identified with any other Judas, e.g. "Judas not Iscariot" (John 14:22). We hear no more of Judas after his return to Jerusalem (Acts 15:22).

S. F. Hunter

Judas Iscariot

is-kar'-i-ot (Ioudas Iskariotes, i.e. 'ish qeriyoth, "Judas, man of Kerioth"): One of the twelve apostles and the betrayer of Jesus; for etymology, etc., see JUDAS.

I. Life.

Judas was, as his second name indicates, a native of Kerioth or Karioth. The exact locality of Kerioth (compare Joshua 15:25) is doubtful, but it lay probably to the South of Judea, being identified with the ruins of el Karjetein (compare A. Plummer, article "Judas Iscariot" in HDB).

1. Name and Early History:

He was the son of Simon (John 13:2) or Simon Iscariot (John 6:71; John 13:26), the meaning of Iscariot explaining why it was applied to his father also. The first Scriptural reference to Judas is his election to the apostleship (compare Matthew 10:4; Mark 3:19; Luke 6:16). He may have been present at the preaching of John the Baptist at Bethany beyond Jordan (compare John 1:28), but more probably he first met Jesus during the return of the latter through Judea with His followers (compare John 3:22). According to the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles (see SIMON THE CANAANITE), Judas was among those who received the call at the Sea of Tiberias (compare Matthew 4:18–22).

2. Before the Betrayal:

For any definite allusion to Judas during the interval lying between his call and the events immediately preceding the betrayal, we are indebted to John alone. These allusions are made with the manifest purpose of showing forth the nefarious character of Judas from the beginning; and in their sequence there is a gradual development and growing clearness in the manner in which Jesus makes prophecy regarding his future betrayer. Thus, after the discourse on the Bread of Life in the synagogue of Capernaum (John 6:26–59), when many of the disciples deserted Jesus (John 6:66) and Peter protested the allegiance of the apostles (John 6:69), Jesus answered, "Did not I choose you the twelve, and one of you is a devil" (John 6:70). Then follows John's commentary, "Now he spake of Judas the son of Simon Iscariot, for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve" (John 6:71), implying that Judas was already known to Jesus as being in spirit one of those who "went back, arid walked no more with him" (John 6:66). But the situation, however disquieting it must have been to the ambitious designs which probably actuated Judas in his acceptance of the apostleship (compare below), was not sufficiently critical to call for immediate desertion on his part. Instead, he lulled his fears of exposure by the fact that he was not mentioned by name, and continued ostensibly one of the faithful. Personal motives of a sordid nature had also influence in causing him to remain. Appointed keeper of the purse, he disregarded the warnings of Jesus concerning greed and hypocrisy (compare Matthew 6:20; Luke 12:1–3) and appropriated the funds to his own use. As a cloak to his avarice, he pretended to be zealous in their administration, and therefore, at the anointing of Jesus' feet by Mary, he asked "Why was not this ointment sold for 300 shillings, and given to the poor? Now this he said, not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and having the bag took away what was put therein" (John 12:5,John 12:6; compare also Matthew 26:7–13; Mark 14:3–8).

3. The Betrayal:

Yet, although by this craftiness Judas concealed for a time his true nature from the rest of the disciples, and fomented any discontent that might arise among them (compare Mark 14:4), he now felt that his present source of income could not long remain secure. The pregnant words of his Master regarding the day of his burial (compare Matthew 26:12; Mark 14:8; John 12:7) revealed to His betrayer that Jesus already knew well the evil powers that were at work against Him; and it is significant that, according to Mt and Mk, who alone of the synoptists mention the anointing, Judas departed immediately afterward and made his compact with the chief priests (compare Matthew 26:14,Matthew 26:15; Mark 14:10,Mark 14:11; compare also Luke 22:3–6). But his absence was only temporary. He was present at the washing of the disciples' feet, there to be differentiated once more by Jesus from the rest of the Twelve (compare "Ye are clean, but not all" and "He that eateth my bread lifted up his heel against me," John 13:10,John 13:18), but again without being named. It seemed as if Jesus wished to give Judas every opportunity, even at this late hour, of repenting and making his confession. For the last time, when they had sat down to eat, Jesus appealed him thus with the words, "One of you shall betray me" (Matthew 26:21; Mark 14:18; Luke 22:21; John 13:21). And at the end, in answer to the anxious queries of His disciples, "Is it I?" He indicated his betrayer, not by name, but by a sign: "He it is, for whom I shall dip the sop, and give it him" (John 13:26). Immediately upon its reception, Judas left the supper room; the opportunity which he sought for was come (compare John 13:30; Matthew 26:16). There is some doubt as to whether he actually received the eucharistic bread and wine previous to his departure or not, but most modern commentators hold that he did not. On his departure, Judas made his way to the high priests and their followers, and coming upon Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, he betrayed his Master with a kiss (Matthew 26:47–50; Mark 14:43,Mark 14:44; Luke 22:47; John 18:2–5).

4. His Death:

After the betrayal, Mk, Lu and Joh are silent as regards Judas, and the accounts given in Mt and Ac of his remorse and death vary in detail. According to Mt, the actual condemnation of Jesus awakened Judas' sense of guilt, and becoming still more despondent at his repulse by the chief priests and elders, "he cast down the pieces of silver into the sanctuary, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself." With the money the chief priests purchased the potter's field, afterward called "the field of blood," and in this way was fulfilled the prophecy of Zechariah (11:12-14) ascribed by Matthew to Jeremiah (Matthew 27:3–10). The account given in Acts 1:16–20 is much shorter. It mentions neither Judas' repentance nor the chief priests, but simply states that Judas "obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out" (1:18). The author of Ac finds in this the fulfillment of the prophecy in Psalms 69:25. The Vulgate (Jerome's Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) rendering, "When he had hanged himself, he burst asunder," suggests a means of reconciling the two accounts.

According to a legendary account mentioned by Papias, the death of Judas was due to elephantiasis (compare Hennecke, Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, 5). A so-called "Gospel of Judas" was in use among the Gnostic sect of the Cainites.

II. Character and Theories.

1. Joined the Apostles to Betray Jesus:

Much discussion and controversy have centered, not only around the discrepancies of the Gospel narratives of Judas, but also around his character and the problems connected with it. That the betrayer of Jesus should also be one of the chosen Twelve has given opportunity for the attacks of the foes of Christianity from the earliest times (compare Orig., Con. Cel., ii.12); and the difficulty of finding any proper solution has proved so great that some have been induced to regard Judas as merely a personification of the spirit of Judaism. The acceptance of this view would, however, invalidate the historical value of much of the Scriptural writings. Other theories are put forward in explanation, namely, that Judas joined the apostolic band with the definite intention of betraying Jesus. The aim of this intention has again received two different interpretations, both of which seek to elevate the character of Judas and to free him from the charge of sordid motives and cowardly treachery. According to one, Judas was a strong patriot, who saw in Jesus the foe of his race and its ancient creed, and therefore betrayed Him in the interests of his country. This view is, however, irreconcilable with the rejection of Judas by the chief priests (compare Matthew 27:3–10). According to the other, Judas regarded himself as a true servant of Christianity, who assumed the role of traitor to precipitate the action of the Messiah and induce Him to manifest His miraculous powers by calling down the angels of God from heaven to help Him (compare Matthew 26:53). His suicide was further due to his disappointment at the failure of Jesus to fulfill his expectations. This theory found favor in ancient times with the Cainites (compare above), and in modern days with De Quincey and Bishop Whately. But the terms and manner of denunciation employed by Jesus in regard to Judas (compare also John 17:12) render this view also untenable.

2. Foreordained to Be a Traitor:

Another view is that Judas was foreordained to be the traitor: that Jesus was conscious from the first that He was to suffer death on the cross, and chose Judas because He knew that he should betray Him and thus fulfill the Divine decrees (compare Matthew 26:54). Those holding this view base their arguments on the omniscience of Jesus implied in John 2:24, Jesus "knew all men"; John 6:64, "Jesus knew from the beginning who should betray him," and John 18:4, "knowing all the things that were coming upon him." Yet to take those texts literally would mean too rigid application of the doctrine of predestination. It would treat Judas as a mere instrument, as a means and not an end in the hands of a higher power: it would render meaningless the appeals and reproaches made to him by Jesus and deny any real existence of that personal responsibility and sense of guilt which it was our Lord's very purpose to awaken and stimulate in the hearts of His hearers. John himself wrote after the event, but in the words of our Lord there was, as we have seen, a growing clearness in the manner in which He foretold His betrayal. The omniscience of Jesus was greater than that of a mere clairvoyant who claimed to foretell the exact course of future events. It was the omniscience of one who knew on the one hand the ways of His Eternal Father among men, and who, on the other, penetrated into the deepest recesses of human character and beheld there all its secret feelings and motives and tendencies.

3. Betrayal the Result of Gradual Development:

Although a full discussion of the character of Judas would of necessity involve those ultimate problems of Free Will and Original Sin (Westcott) which no theology can adequately solve, theory which regards the betrayal as the result of a gradual development within the soul of Judas seems the most practical. It is significant that Judas alone among the disciples was of southern extraction; and the differences in temperament and social outlook, together with the petty prejudices to which these generally give rise, may explain in part, though they do not justify, his after treachery--that lack of inner sympathy which existed between Judas and the rest of the apostles. He undoubtedly possessed certain business ability, and was therefore appointed keeper of the purse. But his heart could not have been clean, even from the first, as he administered even his primary charge dishonestly. The cancer of this greed spread from the material to the spiritual. To none of the disciples did the fading of the dream of an earthly kingdom of pomp and glory bring greater disappointment than to Judas. The cords of love by which Jesus gradually drew the hearts of the other disciples to Himself, the teaching by which He uplifted their souls above all earthly things, were as chafing bonds to the selfishness of Judas. And from his fettered greed and disappointed ambition sprang jealousy and spite and hatred. It was the hatred, not of a strong, but of an essentially weak man. Instead of making an open breach with his Lord, he remained ostensibly one of His followers: and this continued contact with a goodness to which he would not yield (compare Swete on Mark 14:10), and his brooding over the rebukes of his Master, gave ready entrance for "Satan into his soul." But if he "knew the good and did not do it" (compare John 13:17), so also he was weak in the carrying out of his nefarious designs. It was this hesitancy, rather than a fiendish cunning, which induced him to remain till the last moment in the supper room, and which prompted the remark of Jesus "What thou doest, do quickly" (John 13:27). Of piece with this weak-mindedness was his attempt to cast the blame upon the chief priests and elders (compare Matthew 27:3,Matthew 27:4). He sought to set himself right, not with the innocent Jesus whom he had betrayed, but with the accomplices in his crime; and because that world which his selfishness had made his god failed him at the last, he went and hanged himself. It was the tragic end of one who espoused a great cause in the spirit of speculation and selfish ambition, and who weighed not the dread consequences to which those impure motives might lead him (compare also Bruce, Training of the Twelve; Latham, Pastor Pastorum; Stalker, Trial and Death of Jesus Christ).

C. M. Kerr

Judas Iscariot, Gospel Of

A "Gospel of Judas" is mentioned by Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., i.31), Epiphanius (Haer., xxxviii.1), Theodoret, etc., as current in the Gnostic sect of the Cainites, to whom Judas was a hero. It must have been in existence in the 2nd century, but no quotation is given from it (see Baring-Gould, Lost and Hostile Gospels, III, chapter v).

Judas Maccabaeus

See MACCABAEUS.

Judas Of Damascus

See JUDAS, (6).

Judas Of Galilee

(ho Galilaios): Mentioned in Acts 5:37 as the leader of an insurrection occasioned by the census of Quirinius in 7 AD (see QUIRINIUS). He, and those who obeyed him, it is said, perished in that revolt. Josephus also repeatedly mentions Judas by this same name, "the Galilean," and speaks of his revolt (Ant., XVIII, i, 6; XX, v, 2; BJ, II, viii, 1; xviii, 8; VII, viii, 1), but in Ant, XVIII, i, names him a Gaulonite, of the city of Gamala. As Gamala was in Gaulonitis, not far from the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, it may be regarded as belonging to that province. The party of Judas seems to have been identified with the Zealots.

James Oar

Judas Of James

(Ioudas Iakobou): One of the twelve apostles (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13; for etymology, etc., see JUDAS). the King James Version has the reading "brother of James," and the Revised Version (British and American) reads "son of James." The latter is to be preferred. In John 14:22 he is described as "Judas (not Iscariot)." The name corresponds with the "Thaddaeus" or "Lebbaeus whose surname was Thaddaeus" of Matthew 10:3 the King James Version and Mark 3:18 (compare THADDAEUS). The identification of Thaddaeus with Judas is generally accepted, though Ewald and others hold that they were different persons, that Thaddeus died during Christ's lifetime, and that Judas was chosen in his place (compare Bruce, Training of the Twelve, 34). If the Revised Version (British and American) is accepted as the correct rendering of Luke 6:16 and Acts 1:13, this Judas cannot be identified either with the Juda (Mark 6:3 the King James Version), Judas (Mark 6:3 the Revised Version (British and American)), or Judas (Matthew 13:55), the brother of Jesus; or with the Judas (Jude 1:1 the Revised Version margin) or Jude (Jude 1:1 the King James Version), the brother of James, whether these two latter Judases are to be regarded as the same or not. The only incident recorded of Judas of James is in John 14:22, where during Christ's address to the disciples after the last supper he put the question, "Lord, what is come to pass that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?"

C. M. Kerr

Judas, Juda

(1) The name of an ancestor of Jesus (Luke 3:30). In the King James Version it occurs also in Luke 3:26, but the Revised Version (British and American) has "Joda" (Westcott-Hort, Ioda).

(2) Judas Iscariot (see separate article).

(3) One of the brothers of Jesus (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3).

See JUDE.

(4) An apostle, "not Iscariot" (John 14:22). He is generally identified with Lebbaeus (Matthew 10:3) and Thaddeus (Mark 3:18). See LEBBAEUS; THADDAEUS. He is called JUDAS OF JAMES (which see) (Luke 6:16; Acts 1:13), which means "the son of James" not (the King James Version) "the brother of James."

(5) A Galilean who stirred up rebellion "in the days of the enrollment" (Acts 5:37).

See JUDAS OF GALILEE.

(6) One with whom Paul lodged in Damascus, whose house was in "the street which is called Straight" (Acts 9:11). Nothing further is known of him. A house is pointed out as his, in a lane off the Straight Street.

(7) Judas Barsabbas (Acts 15:22,Acts 15:27,Acts 15:32; see separate article).

S. F. Hunter

Judas, Not Iscariot

(Ioudas ouch ho Iskariotes): One of the Twelve Apostles (John 14:22).

See JUDAS OF JAMES; LEBBAEUS; THADDAEUS.

Judas, The Lord's Brother

See JUDE.

Juddah

See JUTTAH.

Jude

jood (Ioudas): Brother of the Lord, and author of the Epistle of Jude.

See JUDAS OF JAMES and following article.