Help support TMP

"Most Notorious Traitor? It's Judas" Topic

17 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the Historical Wargaming in General Message Board

Areas of Interest


650 hits since 21 Jun 2018
©1994-2019 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian21 Jun 2018 5:44 p.m. PST

In the final round, Judas Iscariot wins handily. TMP link

Quisling and Benedict Arnold tie for 2nd place.

Jane Fonda in 4th place beats out Brutus, 5th place, by one vote.

Cacique Caribe Inactive Member21 Jun 2018 9:22 p.m. PST

Hanoi Jane beats Brutus? Priceless.




repaint21 Jun 2018 9:28 p.m. PST

they forgot to mention Mark Zuckerberg.

RittervonBek22 Jun 2018 1:42 a.m. PST

That's hardly fair. Judas betrayed a traitor to the Roman Empire. Or more accurately he informed on a dangerous radical who was conspiring to undermine the establishment. Without Judas there was no crucifixion and no Christian religion.

cosmicbank Inactive Member22 Jun 2018 3:26 a.m. PST

Yep Judas did his job, No Judas and Jesus is just an out of work carpenter, who likes to fish. Southeast Texas is covered with those guys, without the family connections of course.

skipper John Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 4:57 a.m. PST

Really?? Are you kidding me? Get real. There was no "chance" in the outcome. If it hadn't been Judas it would have been someone else.

zoneofcontrol Inactive Member22 Jun 2018 5:44 a.m. PST

"Without Judas there was no crucifixion and no Christian religion."

"…No Judas and Jesus is just an out of work carpenter…"

Just like the beliefs that are part of many other religions, Christianity is also about Living and how that life is lived. So without the creation of the Christian Faith, there would not have been The Crucifixion.

Choctaw22 Jun 2018 6:24 a.m. PST

I hate Jane Fonda. Now back to the religious discussion that isn't going to end well.

Personal logo Parzival Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 7:25 a.m. PST


Judas had free will. That his choice was already known is not a denial of that, nor is it a determiner of that. Y'all's understanding of spacetime isn't any better than your understanding of religion. You need to work on both.

I'm not surprised at the results. Judas, Benedict and Quisling are all now words in the English language that stand as colorful synonyms for "traitor."

By the way, Jesus, who was not a Roman citizen, could not be a traitor to Rome. He was a Jew and a Galilean. Nor did he advocate revolt, or even critcize Rome or Roman rule. He criticized the religious rule of the Pharisees and Saducees. Yes, he spoke (obliquely) against paganism, but the Romans hardly would have cared about that. He was a threat to the local political and religious leaders, not Rome. They stirred the trouble to get Rome to remove him. (Judas betrayed Jesus to the Temple guards, not the Romans,)

Personal logo PrivateSnafu Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 9:04 a.m. PST

Oh piffle…

Ceterman Supporting Member of TMP Inactive Member22 Jun 2018 9:28 a.m. PST

Again, this crap ain't worth my time. Why is this bs on TMP to start with? Wait, I know. To get people in the DH…

Personal logo Parzival Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 10:32 a.m. PST

It appears some have taken what was a discussion of an account about historical figures (whatever you think of them) and turned it into an attack on religion. It doesn't matter WHAT anyone believes about those people or the faith of Christianity. The account of Judas' treason is what it is, whether one believes it happened or not. If you noticed, I didn't say ANYTHING about the faith, merely the alleged historical situation and the erronoeus discussion of it by others: Jesus was not a Roman, and therefore could not be a traitor to Rome. Jesus was not a rebel and did not advocate rebellion against Rome, nor did he call for armed action. Jesus was not arrested by Rome, but by the Sanhedrin, the Jewish authorities in Jerusalem. They tried him, and sentenced him to death, but because his execution would have been illegal and a potential trigger for religious unrest, they turned him over to the Roman governor for a legal execution, who complied out of a fear of civil unrest. All of these statements are the assertions of the historical texts we have, and counter arguments are not supported by any contemporary historical text, real or imagined. So, no, by the account we have, Jesus was not by any stretch either a traitor or a rebel to Rome, though he was a gadfly to the local religious authorities of the day.

As for Judas, even if one takes the religious part of the story to be true, foreknowledge, as I pointed out, is not cause. If I'm watching a football game and I realize there is going to be a pass play, do I cause the pass play? Of course not. So, no, Judas is not left off the hook for his actions, any more than Benedict Arnold is off the hook for his. If all religious aspects are ignored, then Judas is still a traitor to his rabbi, and still on the hook for his actions. Either way, no one else, divine or otherwise, is responsible for Judas's betrayal.

Note that NONE of the above is religious discussion; it's merely an examination of the sources, the events and personages claimed, and the historicity of the same. There is no assertion or claim of religious fact in any of it, nor either an advocacy of or denigration of any faith or the refusal of one.

However, the posts others have made are neither history nor logical debate; they're just religious opinion (largely derogatory) drawn from obvious biases, unsupported by any assertions of actual fact. Therefore, the arguments made must be rejected as either fact or informed opinion.

Cacique Caribe Inactive Member22 Jun 2018 1:27 p.m. PST

Maybe this thread needs a new title?


Personal logo PrivateSnafu Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 3:24 p.m. PST

Posts have been removed here…

Old Glory Sponsoring Member of TMP22 Jun 2018 9:00 p.m. PST

Is there a chance that the concept of "foreknowledge" of a extremely limited mortal might just be different and have more implications then the "foreknowledge" of a omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent immortal?
Just saying??????

Also, being a Nam vet, Hanoi Jane is the tops for me!!!!
Russ Dunaway

Cacique Caribe Inactive Member23 Jun 2018 9:41 a.m. PST

PrivateSnafu: "Posts have been removed here…"

You must be imagining things. :)




Personal logo Parzival Supporting Member of TMP23 Jun 2018 8:13 p.m. PST

In regards to foreknowledge, actually, no, there is no cnfloct in my comparison. Think of it as the ultimate time traveler, which would essentially imply an "atemporal" existence, that is, outside of time, capable of knowing and viewing all spacetime simultaneously. Though of incredible power and scope (indeed, infinite), that doesn't mean that free will for those inside that scope doesn't exist. Even for the infinite, knowledge is not cause. Simple logic, really, though the grokking of it is not so simple. In any case, the analogy holds, as neither omniscience or omnipotence preclude free will; they can coincide without paradox. (Offered as a philosophical explanation and solution for a hypothetical, not as doctrinal theology of any faith.)

So, no, such a situation still does not trap or excuse Judas. Though honestly, I think we've beaten this thread into the ground. (Not sure why so many care that Judas topped the poll, and then get riled about it. It's a poll, and is name in Western culture is synonymous with betrayal. So the result isn't either surprising or offensive.)

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.