One final point in all of this is seen in the story of the betrayal itself. In Matthew’s account of Mary’s use of the valuable ointment on the feet of Jesus and the reaction of Judas, we see that the very next thing which Judas did was to go to the chief priests. “Then one of the twelve, who was called Judas Iscariot, went unto the chief priests, and said, What are ye willing to give me, and I will deliver him unto you? And they weighed unto him thirty pieces of silver. And from that time he sought opportunity to deliver him (unto them)” (Matthew 26:14-16).

Does this sound like a man who was being forced to betray the Son of God? His words to the chief priests make it sound as if this was completely a matter of his own choice, and this is not surprising, considering the depths to which his character had fallen due to his love of money. It is true that God ordained and revealed through prophecy that Jesus should be crucified, but God did not ordain or prophesy that Judas would be the particular man to betray Him. His words to the priests indicate that if they would pay him an acceptable amount of money, he would deliver Jesus to them, but the language here also indicates that he might have done so for an even smaller amount of money! The whole story of the betrayal of Jesus by Judas shows that it was a voluntary and deliberate act on the part of Judas, which is made even clearer by his actions after the fact: “Now when morning was come, all the chief priests and the elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: and they bound him, and led him away, and delivered him up to Pilate the governor. Then Judas, who betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, saying, I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood. But they said, What is that to us? see thou (to it). And he cast down the pieces of silver into the sanctuary, and departed; and he went away and hanged himself” (Matthew 27:1-5).

Judas shouldered the entire guilt for his actions. He said, “I have sinned…” Look also at the words of the priests to Judas after he brought back the silver, confessing his sin of betraying an innocent man into a decree of death. What the priests basically said to Judas was, “So you believe that you have betrayed an innocent man for money…why should we care about what you think in this matter? The responsibility for that is yours and yours alone! You deal with it!”

The responsibility for the betrayal of Jesus lay squarely on the shoulders of Judas and on him alone. God did not force him to commit this sin, but as we’ve seen, it was his own character and personality which caused him to do these things. Notice one other thing about this incident. John’s gospel reveals the following: “And during supper, the devil having already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s (son), to betray him…” (John 13:2).

The story of the temptation by Satan of Jesus in the wilderness shows us that there are two responses one might make when Satan tempts man. Jesus resisted those temptations, remaining the only sinless man to have ever lived. Judas gave in easily to those temptations, his own character and desire for money causing him to be obedient to the temptation to betray Jesus for monetary gain. The lesson for us is clear. It is our desire to live for Jesus which will make it possible to resist the temptation to sin. Judas could also have resisted Satan’s temptations, but he chose to commit sin by betraying Jesus. No one forced him to do so, but he did it purely of his own will and determination.

“Brother” Saul

In one of his most famous defenses of the Christian faith, Paul discussed the details of his conversion to the Lord in the 22^nd chapter of the book of Acts. In Acts 22:13, we read where Paul said that he was met by the preacher Ananias, who addressed him as “brother Saul.” After this, Ananias commanded Saul to “arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).

Those denominational preachers, who deny the necessity of baptism for the remission of sins, sometimes refer to these passages of Scripture in an attempt to prove that immersion in water is not a condition for salvation. Their reasoning goes like this: since Ananias referred to Saul as a “brother” prior to his baptism, then Saul was a child of God before and without the rite of baptism. In other words, Saul was saved on the road to Damascus when he acknowledged the Lordship of Jesus, and his baptism wasn’t necessary.

If this was the case, then Saul became a Christian without having his sins washed away, which makes no sense, because Acts 22:16 states that baptism is the act that washes away sins.

Second, the term “brother” is not applied by Ananias in the Christian sense. Instead, it is applied in a “nationalistic” sense because they were both Jews. They were both Jewish brethren. To clearly understand this, note Peter’s usage of this term “brethren” in the second chapter of Acts. When he addressed those who had murdered the Lord, and who accordingly needed to repent of that evil deed, Peter declared in Acts 2:29, “Brethren, I may say unto you…” So, if the use of “brother” in Acts 22:13 proves that baptism is not essential for salvation, then the use of “brethren” in Acts 2:29 teaches that repentance is also not essential for salvation, because these Jews had not yet repented of their sins (Acts 2:38). The reference to Saul by Ananias as a “brother”does not teach that we are saved from our sins without performing certain things which are conditions of salvation, including repentance and baptism.

It’s been my goal in tonight’s class to in some small way encourage each of you to a deeper study of God’s Word. If we are to remain true to the admonition found in 1 Peter 3:15, that we “be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear,” then we must know how to respond to those who would seek to destroy our faith in the inspired Word of God. We must study with that goal in mind.