- 10 And Judas Iscariot, one of the twelve, went unto the chief priests, to betray him unto them. 11 And when they heard it, they were glad, and promised to give him money. And he sought how he might conveniently betray him.
- Compare: Matthew 26:14-16; Luke 22:3-6
Jesus and Judas
In contrast with the great faith of the woman in the previous verses who wasted expensive oil in anointing Jesus, Mark presents us with Judas Iscariot, the villain of Jesus’ passion narrative. Every story needs a villain and Judas fills this role well, although it’s unclear whether he should be condemned for this because he was, after all, simply carrying out the tasks God needed.
Indeed, it’s questionable whether Judas even acted of his own free will. There was no option for Jesus not to be executed because without his crucifixion, he could not rise again in three days and thus save humanity. To be executed, though, he had to be betrayed to the Jewish authorities — if Judas hadn’t done it, someone else would have.
God picked Judas, though, and he did as he was supposed to. There was no other option available to him — was there? Not according to the apocalyptic determinism which runs through all the gospels, and especially Mark. If that's the case, then it’s difficult to imagine how or why Judas can even be criticized, much less condemned.
Here in Mark, the motive of greed is ascribed to Judas. Matthew agrees with Mark but Luke claims that Judas was led astray by Satan. John, on the other hand, attributes the motivation to both Satan and a penchant for theft. It’s curious that Mark’s typical comments about the “necessity” for Jesus to experience what he does are not brought up here, especially in light of the fact that it is Judas who approaches the priests, not the other way around.
Why would Mark attribute the motive of greed to Judas when he isn’t approached by the priests offering money? It’s possible that we are to assume that Judas believed betraying Jesus would be worth a lot of money. Some have speculated that Judas was actually betraying Jesus out of disappointed expectations that Jesus would lead an anti-Roman rebellion.
It makes more sense, however, if we read Judas’ actions as nothing more than what is demanded by God and not motivated by any particular character flaws. After all, what “betrayal” is Judas performing? He points out Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane. This is hardly an action worthy of payment because Jesus wasn’t exactly in hiding. In John, he doesn’t even do that much. Judas doesn’t actually do anything except fulfill the narrative and eschatological need for the Messiah to be betrayed by someone.
Had Mark pointed any of this out, though, it would have been more difficult for his audience to experience the appropriately negative emotions — they are supposed to hate Judas for what he does, not nod in agreement that he is acting in exactly the manner that God needs. All we have is a slight, possible hint in the language used: the phrase “handing over” is the same used in various passion predictions (9:31, 10:33) which suggest God’s role in the events.
Did Jesus forgive Judas for what he did? Mark doesn’t say, which is curious given Jesus’ emphasis on forgiveness, but understandable in light of the above comments on Judas’ role. Now that Judas has done what God and the author needed, he disappears completely from the story and is never mentioned again.
