Judas wasn't evil, just easily tempted. Goes to show that people know nothing about religion.
Couldn't "easily tempted" be a fundamental trait of "evil?" If someone is consistently "easily tempted" into ending lives of others, I would definitely find it justified to call them "evil."
Betraying someone to their death for money is evil. Enough said. He still made that choice. The one thing that does bug me was that Judas was in a way "used" to bring about Christ's crucifixtion so that we *could* be saved, but I highly doubt Judas was forced into that plot because God told him to. It was his own decision, I'm sure there are plenty of people that existed that would have made the same choice to betray Jesus. It just so happens God's a really smart cookie and knew it would be Judas specifically.
(From another viewpoint, if Jesus mentioned to Judas the betrayal, wouldn't that actually try to /stop/ him, rather than encourage him? That only makes what he did even worse, in my opinion.)
And actually, we're all sort of evil, since sin is evil, and everyone sins. Judas just sort of takes the cake in looking bad since, you know, he sort of helped a whole bunch of people put God's son to death.
And, Gospel of Judas, wtf? I wouldn't trust anything that wasn't the Bible. What's in the Bible is in the Bible for a reason, and what's not in it is not in it for a reason.
gos·pel
n.
1. often Gospel The proclamation of the redemption preached by Jesus and the Apostles, which is the central content of Christian revelation.
Since when did Judas come back and proclaim about Jesus? I'm confused. Gospel of Mark, written by Mark. Gospel of Luke, written by Luke. Etc.
What is this "Gospel of Judas" you speak of?
