Ah, this calls for a devout Christian such as myself...
Quote Originally Posted by HoreTore View Post
1. I was thought that the word of the bible was absolute, delivered by god through the holy ghost, who "possessed", in lack of a better term, all the various writers of the bible, thus making it god's own words. Also, the holy ghost has protected every single translation of it, so every translation of the bible is just as correct. But the normal view is that the bible was written by men, isn't it?
The Koran is the direct word of God. The Bible is always indirect. I have never heard of a large denomination that thinks otherwise. (That belongs to tiny cults and, franky, amateur bible teachers. Or perhaps a deliberate simplification to teach the Bible to kids, who may not have the development of mind to grasp all nuances)

Catholicism considers Jerome's Latin translation, the Vulgate, as its official text. The exact status of the Hebrew and Greek originals, I am not sure about. I do not know whether Catholic theologians (at least of old) study these. Modern Catholicism, since Pius XII, allows other languages, and even archeology, as sources of theological knowledge.



2. Judas and the way he betrayed Jesus. I was taught that Judas did not betray Jesus. He was told by Jesus to do what he did, and that it was all part of Jesus' grand plan. And also that Judas was reluctant to do it, because of his great love for Jesus...

So, could anyone clear this one up for me? I'd be most grateful
This argument belongs not so much to any doctrine. It is an ancient theological debate, which follows from pondering the consequences of the crucifiction.

The commonly held (at least Catholic) doctrine is that Judas betrayed Jesus. For this he is punished with eternity in hell.

However, so the argument goes, it was God's plan, His intention, to save mankind. Jesus sacrificied Himself, died for our sins. Only through Him will man find salvation. This then raises the question: 'what are a few hours on a cross compared to an eternity in hell?'
If the death of Jesus was the intention, then all the players played out their part. So who made the bigger sacrifice? Jesus, sitting next to His Father in His kingdom, or Judas, tormented forever?


It all hinges on predestination and free will.
Either Judas could've chosen to betray or not betray Jesus. Which makes his choice to betray a sacrifice. Or else mankind would not have been saved. (And thus, this is an anti-argument, neither would Judas have been. Poor bugger. Damned if he did, damned if he didn't. One way or another he was going to burn)
Or Judas was destined to be a betrayer. And burns not for his sacricife but for his sin.


Struggling with this same topic and portraying a very interesting Judas is Nikos 'Zorba the Greek' Kazantzakis, in his book 'The Last Temptation'. (Okay, dropping the pretentious charade, I only know it through the excellent movie by the same name).
Incidentally, it also features the best Jesus I've ever seen. He too is not will-lessly playing out His act. Here he is a struggling man and God. I thought it very touching. It strengthens, even allows for, Jesus' sacrifice. Jesus here is not a mindless lamb that is sacrificied, as if struck by lightning. Here he is a person who willfully sacrifices himself. The temptation not to sacrifice is present, forcing Jesus to choose, and by making a choice, a difficult one at that, is shown not to be killed by others, but of making a sacrifice of his own making.
Needless to say, the book was put on the Index.