Erat Autem Nox: Et Ipse Qui Exivit Erat Nox: Applying the Praeclarus Theorem to the Betrayal of Judas Iscariot. Based on John 13:26-30
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56194/spr.v4i2.96Keywords:
betrayal, salvation, praeclarus theorem, Lord's Supper, precious inheritanceAbstract
Recognizing the figure of Judas Iscariot as a traitor provides space for polemics among theologians and congregations. Various understandings, both in positive terms (praising him as a hero) and negative (as a cursed person), leave uncertainty in interpreting the true meaning of the text. A different approach is needed but provides adequate understanding. Praeclarus' theorem is applied in his introduction to the text of John 13:26-30. This application resulted in the finding that the emphasis on Judas Iscariot's act of betrayal was the antithesis of God's plan of salvation. Satan is behind the betrayal. So it is hoped that those who want to introduce the meaning of betrayal itself is a reality that cannot be avoided, but in it Jesus gives a strong affirmation to live it by having a banquet with His disciples. This is a valuable legacy for the church when it feels betrayed.
References
Worthin Mark. 2018.”Judas Iscariot: A Biblical and Theological reappraisal of the Forgotten Apostle.”
Lutheran Theological Journal 52 (3):152-163.
Ryan Maurice.2019. “Creating Judas Iscariot: Critical Questions for Presenting the Betrayer of
Jesus.”Journal of Religious Education 67(5):220-234.
McGrew, Lydia.2021. The Eye of the Beholder: The Gospel of john as Historical Reportage. Tampa:
De Ward Publishing.
Gubar, Susan.2009. Judas: A Biography. New York: W.W. Norton.
Green Clement. 2016. Cowardice, Betrayal, and Discipleship: Peter and Judas in the Gospels. Ph.D
Thesis. Edinburg: University of Edinburgh.
Cane, Anthony. 2017. The Place of Judas Iscariot in Christology. London: Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4102/hts.v67i1.923.
Laato. A.1995. Psalm 132. A Methodological Inquiry. Catholic Biblical Quarterly.57(4);643-653.
Laato A.1999. Psalm 132. A Cse Study in Methodology. Catholic Biblical Quarterly.61 (1):24-33.
O. Doherty. E.1957. The Organic development of Messianic Revelation. Catholic Biblical Quarterly.19
(*);16-24.
Michael Kochenash, Cross-Purpose in the Gospel of Judas: What Judas Intended for Evil, God
Intended for Good. Journal of Early Christian Studies 28:4: 481-500.
Don, Lioy. Denial Versus Betrayal: A Case study Analysis of Simon Peter and Judas Iscariot in the
Fourth Gospel. Conspectus. Journal of South Africa Theological Seminary. 2021.Volume.32.
Kim, Dongsu. 2004. An Exegesis of Apostasy Embedded in John is Narrative of Peter and Judas
Againts the Synoptic Parallels.
Sitepu, Edward.2023. Research Resonance. Cirebon: Green Publisher.
Rothgangel Martin & Ulrich Riegel. 2021. Reflecting Theology by a Generic Model of Research
Designs? Impulses from Religious Didactics. HTS Teologiese Studies/ Theological Studies 77(2),
Richard Harvey. 2018, Judas Iscariot: Betrayal, Blasphemy, and Idolatry in the Gospels and Acts.
Wipf & Stock. ISBN 9781532639579.
Fitzmyer, J. A. (1981). Gospel According to Luke 1-9. New York: Doubleday.
Black, M. (1967). An Aramaic Approach to the Gospels and Acts. 3 ed. New York: Oxford University
Press.
Oropeza, B.J. (2010), Judas' Death And Final Destiny In The Gospels And Earliest Christian
Writings. In Neotestamentica, New Testament Society of Southern Africa.
Tillich, Paul (1963/2005) The Eternal Now (Published by Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York).
Gosling, F.A. 1999. Oh Judas! What Have You Done? EQ 71:117-125.
Klassen, W. 1996. Judas: Betrayer or Friend of Jesus? Minneapolis: Fortress.
Klassen, W. 2002. The Authenticity of Judas' Participation in the Arrest of Jesus. in Authenticating
the Activities of Jesus. Edited by B. Chilton, C.A. Evans. Leiden: Brill.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 SAINT PAUL'S REVIEW
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
