Undoubtedly he joined the company of the disciples without, at first, the intention of betraying Jesus. He did so with a sincere disposition, like the other apostles.
Surely the Lord also saw in him one capable of becoming worthy of an apostle. Otherwise He would not have admitted him to close communion with Himself, nor dealt with him as with the other apostles.
This still does not exclude the possibility that there were bad traits in Judas's character, as well as good ones. No doubt the Lord saw these seeds of evil as clearly as the beginnings of good.
Only the struggle of evil with good had not yet been decided. One could hope that good would prevail over evil.
The question is this: What was the dominant evil disposition in Judas from which the betrayal flowed?
In seeking historical indications to resolve this question, one naturally turns first to love of money.
John the Evangelist notes that Judas had the money box in which the small fund of the Lord's disciples was kept. He was not faithful in fulfilling his duty, but secretly used the money for his own enrichment.
This observation agrees well with the circumstance that, according to the unanimous testimony of the first three evangelists, Judas agreed to betray his Teacher to the Sanhedrin for a certain sum.
On the basis of this reasoning, we might conclude that this greed for gain grew in him to such an extent that he did not fear such a crime in order to satisfy it.
Yet it is hard to agree with this supposition. If covetousness had so dominated everything in Judas, it seems unlikely that the Lord would have received such a man among His disciples.
He penetrated so deeply into the hidden feelings of each person and knew how to use each where he could be most useful. How, then, did He allow such a man to manage the fund?
If Judas betrayed his Teacher to the Jews solely from love of money, it is hard to explain why he was satisfied with such a small sum as thirty shekels, or pieces of silver.
One may think that the Sanhedrin, wishing to seize the desired person before the beginning of Passover, would not have grudged a larger sum if Judas had demanded it.
Unless one admits the supposition that the Sanhedrin was stingy, because it had other means in mind for seizing the Lord and would not agree to give Judas more.
Or perhaps it counted on the manner of the Lord's own actions, assuming that He would not use any gathering of the people for His defense.
Whatever the case, so insignificant a sum could not have been the sole motive for Judas's act.
Whether the sum was small or great, one must in any case admit that a man close to his teacher had long been inwardly related to Him differently than before.
At least for a time he considered Him the Messiah. Yet he must also have been inwardly related to Him differently from the other disciples. Thus it may be that love of money was not the chief motive of the betrayal.
And did Judas really foresee the outcome of the affair? His unnatural death, his laying hands upon himself when he saw that Jesus was condemned to death, seems to permit the conclusion that Judas did not reckon on this.
There is a supposition that Judas intended to hasten the course of events. By placing Jesus in a dangerous position, he thought to force Him to declare Himself at once as King-Messiah.
Or he thought to force Him to use divine power for triumph over every obstacle. Therefore, when the matter took an entirely different turn, Judas saw that He to whom his heart had once been devoted was condemned.
He then fell into such despair. This manner of acting must be called criminal. The end does not sanctify immoral means. And can one deal in such a way with the works of God?
What are we to think about this supposition? If Judas followed such views, though unlawful ones, then surely the Lord Himself would not have allowed him to be carried away by such a dream into blindness.
Further, if we admit this supposition, we cannot agree that the Lord, noticing Judas's intention to leave the supper, would have said to him the words recorded by the Evangelist.
They would have been taken directly as approval: What you do, do quickly.
It seems necessary to admit that Judas, like the other apostles, came to the Lord with earthly views and sensual hopes. But afterward, being quickly disappointed in them, he generally cooled toward the work that had first captivated him.
A year before His death, after the well-known discourse in the synagogue of Capernaum, when many left Him, the Lord told the disciples that there was a devil among them, meaning Judas.
Of course, it was also said to Peter: Get behind Me, Satan. You do not think the things of God, but those of men (Mt 16:23).
But Peter's heart easily inclined to repentance. Judas's heart was hard. Having separated himself from the company of Jesus, and being bound to it only by earthly interests, Judas had long ceased to be His disciple.
He was only waiting for an opportunity to withdraw from Him under a plausible pretext. The Lord endured him near Himself partly with the intention of acting upon his soul.
He also did so partly because He foresaw His own fate, which was bound up with Judas's person. For Jesus knew from the beginning who it was who would betray Him (Jn 6:64).
It remains to consider the events of the last period of the Lord's ministry. From the time when Lazarus's resurrection began to attract the people's attention, the intention of the Sanhedrin to destroy Jesus became fixed.
They had not yet agreed only on how to accomplish it. They wished to decide this according to circumstances. It was still unknown then whether He would come to Jerusalem.
Meanwhile, contrary to the Sanhedrin's expectation, Jesus not only appeared publicly in Jerusalem, in sight of the enemies who threatened Him with death, but entered it with a solemnity such as never before.
The ruling party of the Pharisees already regretted having allowed the matter to go so far. The Pharisees said among themselves: See, all your counsels lead to nothing. The whole people has attached itself to Him. What remains to be done now? (Jn 12:19).
They began to think how they might take Jesus by craft and kill Him (Mt 26:4). It is unknown whether this was to be by the hand of a secret betrayer, of whom there were many then.
Or perhaps the plan had already been formed to seize Him by cunning into their hands and deliver Him to a shameful death under a legal pretext.
But it had already been decided not to carry this out on the feast itself, but either after the feast or before it. The latter pleased them more and was chosen by all.
This happened when one of the Lord's own disciples, Judas Iscariot, offered them his services (Mt 26:14-16; Lk 22:3-6). They agreed with him on the price, and he promised to betray his Teacher and Lord to them.
THEOSIS