←
Explanation for:
Matthew
26
:
24
The Son of man indeed goeth, as it is written of him: but woe to that man by whom the Son of man shall be betrayed: it were better for him, if that man had not been born.
9
more explanations
& daily audio-books
spoken by
– enjoy in Theosis App –
Start your
Bible-journey
with explanations
& daily audio-books
only 4$* per month
{"arr":[{"author-name":"Jerome of Stridon","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88dcd3432c6dd41375498_Jerome%20of%20Stridon.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"When he fails to heed correction the first or second time, he continues to tread the path of betrayal; yet by God's patience, he nurtures his audacity and accumulates wrath for the day of judgment, as stated in Romans 2:5. It would have been preferable for this individual never to have been born. This should not be interpreted as him having existed prior to his birth, for true goodness pertains only to one who existed beforehand; rather, the statement conveys that it is far more advantageous not to exist at all than to live a life steeped in wickedness."},{"author-name":"Ephraem the Syrian","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88b589fc3e99eb7bb1839_Ephraem%20the%20Syrian.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"One of those who shares bread with Me will betray Me, as it is written, and look, the hand of My betrayer is at the table with Me. Indeed, the Son of Man is destined to come as foretold. In expressing such sentiments, He grieved with compassion for the wicked betrayer, declaring that it would have been better if he had never been born. If the Lord's intention was to endure the Crucifixion, how do we interpret His lament: is it due to His foreknowledge, a lack of awareness, or cunning, since He proclaimed it would have been better for the traitor not to exist? What could prevent the traitor's remorse from being recognized and embraced? If it is your mockery and scorn that provoke such thoughts, consider the serpent as a case in point, and do not accuse me—rather, point your blame at my Lord. If Adam chose to violate the commandment, where is the justification in the criticism against the one who filled the serpent's mouth with dust, subdued it, and rendered it unable to walk? If Adam could not fall into transgression without the seducer’s influence, then the rightful punishment rested upon the serpent. While indeed the tempter made Adam susceptible to sin, Adam too justly faced punishment for having succumbed to that influence. Even had the serpent not instigated sin, Adam, due to his inherent frailty at the moment of temptation, may have still succumbed to other transgressions. Likewise, He who ascended the Cross may have intended to do so independently of the treachery of Judas, although this is unlikely, as the Hebrew Scriptures and many other factors lead us to a different conclusion."},{"author-name":"John Chrysostom","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88ea76859f9f8e2ffd3ee_John%20Chrysostom.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":4,"exegesis-text":"Observe the gentleness with which Christ addressed Judas, saying, “The Son of man cometh as it is written of him.” This statement served to reassure His disciples, ensuring they did not misinterpret His actions as a sign of weakness, while simultaneously offering a rebuke to the betrayer. “Woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed: it would have been better for that man not to have been born.” Again, one can see an extraordinary gentleness in His admonition. Even at this moment, He does not confront the traitor with threats but rather with kindness, speaking privately to him. This approach is remarkable, especially given Judas's previous callousness and the brazen treachery later revealed in his actions, which would have warranted profound outrage."},{"author-name":"Photios of Constantinople","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c89714cf3e65c36024d2b8_Photios%20of%20Constantinople.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":9,"exegesis-text":"If eternal punishment is indeed far worse than complete non-existence—since enduring torment and suffering is significantly more dreadful than experiencing nothing—then why did God choose to create those who are described as living in sin and who prefer evil over good? Our Lord teaches in the Scriptures that it would have been preferable for those engaged in severe sins not to be born at all, stating, “It would be better for this man not to be born.” For Judas and others like him, not coming into being would have been more favorable than their existence. Not creating at all would serve a purpose for God, as such a reality would not showcase His Providence or creation. Things that do not exist cannot manifest the divine wisdom of God nor partake in His goodness. Consequently, since existence is inherently better than non-existence, it stands that the Divine Essence should not favor the worst during creation but should instead bring forth the best. Thus, it is unjust for God to allow things to remain in non-existence rather than bringing them into being, even if His loving Wisdom remarked to the traitor, for whom the law pronounces woe: “It would have been better for you not to have been born.” To be considered equivalent to the blameless may seem appealing to the sinner; however, it holds no approval in God’s judgment. For those who deserve punishment, the absence of suffering would not equate to goodness, diverging sharply from God's justice. Similarly, the very act of creation is a manifestation of divine goodness and is entirely fitting for God, despite the fact that some beings, through their free choices, have exchanged the best for the worst, putting the marvelous and salvation-oriented creation of God at risk by making decisions that turn the best into the worst. \\n\\nMoreover, if the Divine is eternal, existing forever within its own unchangeable nature, and if all that came into being is subject to endless transformations, then to argue that God should not have created those destined to sin implies a belief that either humanity should not have been created or that humanity should have been formed immutable and unchanging. This conclusion leads to either the complete exclusion of the human race from existence or a demand for man to possess a divine nature, a line of thought that borders on madness and impiety. In addition, that which does not exist cannot be inherently good, whereas those who abide in sin can indeed become good, for the distinction between good and evil is clear and honored by the blessed. Furthermore, the assertion that if some individuals were intended to fall into sin, they should not have been created at all, suggests that sin must have dominated God's creation prior to its occurrence. If it holds true that God must cease creating due to anticipated sinfulness, then sin undeniably has overpowered His creative work.\\n\\nIt is inherent to human will and choice to sin, while it belongs to the Creator to create. Why, then, after abandoning the true cause of sin, attribute it to the Innocent? Even in the realm of such misguided reasoning, one cannot justify a judgment that those who are inclined to sin should not have been granted existence by the Creator. Such an individual seems to harbor resentment when sinners are punished, while simultaneously demanding punishment for those who have not yet sinned, effectively seeking to prevent future sinners from existing and thus excusing those already guilty of sin from retribution, a principle foreign to both human and divine justice. The fact that no one faces punishment prior to sinning stands as a common judgment among all people, consistent with divine law; the demand for punishment after unrepented sin serves as a testament to God’s justice and His disdain for evil.\\n\\nTherefore, does not one who chooses to think contrary to the prevalent view, failing to honor that which reflects God’s justice and His aversion to wickedness, indict themselves with profound folly and irreverence? What do you assert? Must man be created as immovable towards sin in order to evade punishment? Do you not subconsciously acknowledge that humanity must have been fashioned resistant to sin so as to ensure that those who triumph in their struggles are deserving of honor? If a rational being, one who does not delight in sin and wishes to evade its consequences, is faced with the choice between two paths—whether to strip from the victors their crowns in order to absolve the sinner from punishment, or to uphold the honor of the righteous—would it not be far more desirable to see the champions adorned with the crowns of valor while the wrongdoer receives due retribution?\\n\\nMoreover, does the creation of mankind alone trouble you, or does the existence of incorporeal, immaterial, and immortal beings elicit your discontent? For among these celestial hosts, one, the devil, willingly fell and became the author of all evil, leading others astray in like manner. In contrast, those immortal beings who remain steadfast in their loyalty to God, by maintaining their own rank and beauty, do not only remain pure; they also serve as helpers for humanity in good deeds and in fulfilling the Divine will. The fallen angels tremble in fear, distancing themselves from the sign of the cross—the very instrument through which salvation was achieved—while those who surround the throne of God, as much as created nature allows, witness reflections of this blessed and awe-inspiring sight. The former are destined for eternal punishment due to their actions, while the latter, who respect and exercise their will towards the good, are rewarded with unparalleled joy and everlasting bliss.\\n\\nAt this point, you may question why this evil entity emerged, along with those who fell with him. You might argue that since God is good, He should have preemptively excluded such creatures from existence, believing that it would have been better for them to face non-existence than inevitable torment. If your reasoning follows this logic, you might then extend the same argument to all creation, saying it would have been better for the earth, once formed, to remain still, or to have avoided the catastrophic floods described in Scripture, rather than being adorned by waters that once concealed it (Gen. 1:2). Should the air, which came into being pure and beneficial, have succumbed to a morbid state, negatively impacting those it was meant to heal? If their origin dictated a change in nature, and not merely this but also affected all linked aspects, then surely, it would have been best had nothing at all been created.\\n\\nThus, what conclusion does one reach when they undermine all creation—both mental and material—while not sparing even the inanimate? Do they recoil at the creation of humanity, or do they seek a different God and Creator (may He have mercy on us), mocking the One who produced all things, with shameless bravado, implying ignorance of what is best? What can be said about seeking another God and Creator? One who assumes a position of arrogance and folly, striving to correct the Divine order, attempts to dismantle in the souls of others the concept of God that they have already destroyed within themselves. In conclusion, I believe what has been articulated here provides sufficient insight into both the missing elements and a compelling case for those who have long contested these truths."},{"author-name":"Theophylact of Bulgaria","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c8989296bafed9104677d7_Theophylact%20of%20Bulgaria.png","category":"Holy Fathers and Teachers","century":11,"exegesis-text":"The Lord declares, \\"But the Son of man goes as it is written of him.\\" This indicates that while Christ was destined to endure suffering for the salvation of humanity, Judas should not receive honor for his actions. In fact, woe to him, for he acted not to fulfill the will of God, but to gratify his own malice. Furthermore, a close examination reveals that Christ did not possess an unwavering desire for crucifixion. This is evident in His prayer for the cup to be taken from Him. Yet, knowing from \\"before all ages\\" that due to the enemy’s malevolence, there was no other means for salvation, He ultimately consents to drink from the cup He had initially sought to avoid. By saying, \\"it would have been better for this man not to have been born,\\" He emphasizes that non-existence is preferable to being ensnared in sin. Additionally, the term \\"goes\\" signifies that Christ's death is a transition rather than a mere end."},{"author-name":"Euthymios Zigabenos","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":11,"exegesis-text":"He departs, meaning transitions from this earthly existence, as foretold by the prophets, precisely at the moment of his demise. It would have been preferable for him to never have been born at all, considering the grave offenses he committed and the punishment he warranted. Some may argue that one who fulfills the predetermined plan is blameless. In response, we assert that his betrayal was not a result of being destined, but rather a decision that stemmed from God's foreknowledge of future events; he became what he was, not due to his nature, but through his own volition. The question arises as to why Jesus Christ welcomed him as a disciple if he was meant to betray. This was to reveal the profound goodness of Christ juxtaposed with the treachery of the traitor. Christ imparted the life-giving truth to him, extended genuine love, bestowed honor through kindness, and continued to include him among the other disciples, utilizing every opportunity for his redemption and correction—so that Judas could not claim that he lacked a teacher capable of salvation. Even after receiving all these gifts, he remained steadfast in his deceit. Having allowed his heart to become a residence for the devil, enticed by the lure of greed, he sealed his fate and could no longer evade his wrongdoing. Thus, the Lord mourns for him as someone who chose treachery rather than fulfilling necessity, lamenting that he disregarded the multitude of teachings on moderation and was readily subdued by greed and satanic influence. This was not due to any inadequacy in the Master's teachings, which were compelling enough to draw even tax collectors and sinners, but rather because of Judas' own negligence and duplicity. \\n\\nShould one question, if Judas would have been better off not being born, why did God permit his birth? The answer is that he was not created evil but became so through the corruption of his mind and the twistedness of his will. God does not compel anyone towards goodness if they do not choose it freely but provides the means of salvation and aids those who accept them—granting everyone the autonomy to pursue their own paths, due to the gift of free will. Therefore, Judas' wickedness did not arise from his birth but from his own carelessness. Those who turn to evil deserve a dual punishment: for their transformation into wickedness and for failing to embrace the good offered to them; conversely, those who become righteous merit a double reward for their goodness and for not yielding to evil's harm."},{"author-name":"Michail (Lusin)","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c89550c567e172d15b3055_Michail%20(Lusin).png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"The term \\"Goes\\" refers to death, indicating the necessity of dying (as seen in Gen. 15:2, Ps. 38:14). The prophecies in the Old Testament provide insight concerning Him, particularly in texts such as Ps. 40:10 alongside Jn. 13:18, Is. 53:4-9, and Dan. 9:26-27. He spoke these words to strengthen His disciples, ensuring they wouldn't misinterpret His actions as a sign of weakness, and to admonish the traitor (Chrysostom). The phrase \\"Woe to that man\\" denotes that the gravest offense will face severe and dreadful punishment. One might question why Judas faces condemnation if it is foretold that Christ must suffer in such a manner. While Judas did fulfill the prophesy, his actions stemmed from malevolence rather than necessity. Neglecting to consider the outcome would unjustly absolve the devil of blame. Both Judas and the devil are deserving of immense suffering, even if the entirety of creation were redeemed. It was not Judas's betrayal that secured our salvation, but rather Christ's divine wisdom and providence that transforms the wrongdoings of others to our advantage. One might wonder whether, had Judas not betrayed Him, someone else would not have done so. Yet if all had remained virtuous, the blueprint for our salvation would not have been realized. This shall not be! The Divine Architect already possessed the knowledge to orchestrate our salvation, even in the absence of betrayal. His wisdom is profound and beyond human comprehension. Thus, to deter any notion that Judas played a beneficial role in God's plan, Jesus describes him as the wretched man (Zlat.)."},{"author-name":"Abbot Panteleimon about the Trinity","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c96d263b8c22d9c467bdab_no-pic-theosis.png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"As the Son of Man fulfills what has been foretold about Him in the prophetic scriptures, He must endure suffering, ultimately returning to His Father in heaven; this path is predetermined from above. However, this does not excuse the betrayer’s guilt or diminish the severe consequences that lie ahead for him. “Woe to the man through whom the Son of Man is betrayed; it would have been better for that man not to have been born!” St. Chrysostom highlights a profound gentleness in this condemnation, noting that even now, the Lord engages with the traitor in a gracious manner rather than with threats, maintaining a closeness to him despite his previous insensitivity and subsequent blatant disregard for righteousness, which merit severe indignation. Thus, the Heavenly Teacher “contends with the wickedness of the sinner through His goodness, seeking to triumph over it” (Philaret, Archbishop of Chernigov)."},{"author-name":"Gladkow B.I.","author-image":"https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/6864003fdf3714da6ff0b33a/68c88bf0ceef8c96e09a6521_Gladkow%20B.I..png","category":"Christian Authors","century":19,"exegesis-text":"I recognize that the Scriptures will be accomplished, as it is written, \\"He who eats bread with me has lifted up his heel against me\\" (John 13:18). This is why I share this with you now, so that when it happens, you may understand that it was foretold about me. Yet, woe to the one through whom the Son of Man is betrayed! If Judas had any sense of remorse, he would have fallen at His feet in repentance for his grave transgression, weeping, and would not have stood again until he had received the grace of forgiveness from the compassionate Christ. However, being a thief, he was solely focused on devising clever ways to manipulate his circumstances and secure a reward from the Sanhedrin in addition to what he had already obtained for his betrayal."}]}
Support this project and get full access for only 4$/month
Commentarie text can’t be scrolled on PC at the moment. Please use your phone. We’re working on a fix.
