The death of Jesus is certainly one of the pinnacles of the Gospel stories, yet exactly how Jesus came to be killed is a topic up for debate. The earliest “nodes” of Jewish oral tradition can be found illustrated in Paul’s letters to Corinth, specifically in 1 Corinthians 11:23, where Paul writes that Jesus was “delivered up” to death. (White 128) As the Gospel writers began to craft their stories of Jesus and his eventual resurrection, we see the character of Judas Iscariot enter the scene. Mark writes about this disciple in order to solve the dilemma of Jesus dying on the same night as the “Passover” dinner adn to offer insight into how and why it happened. He solution is to present the “deliverance” of Jesus to the authorities as an act committed by one of Jesus’ disciples himself, Judas.

In Mark, on the night of Jesus “deliverance” Judas approaches the chief priests in order to “betray” Jesus, as Mark states. This key change in wording, shifts the entire mood of the story to a story of orchestrated betrayal away from the Jewish storytelling node of deliverance alluded to by Paul. However, scholars of the book of Mark argue that the Markian Judas might have really been an “overly zealous disciple with revolutionary leanings” (White 130). In other words, he might have wanted Jesus to show the chief priests that he was really the messiah, not simply turn him in to be killed.

Matthew follows this story of betrayal but takes it a step further. Matthew’s Judas not only goes to the chief priests but he also asks for a monetary reward for turning over Jesus to the authorities. With this act the word “betrayal” now resonates even more with the audience. Judas creates a plan to betray Jesus with a kiss in both Matthew and Mark, however in Matthew he is painted as a more “greedy and disloyal friend” than a misled zealot as was seen in the Markian portrayal. (White 130)

Luke describes a Judas that is beginning to look further and further from the nodes of early story telling mentioned by Paul. In fact, according to White and the book of Luke, Judas is diabolical and scheming. His character has progressed significantly from Mark’s original narrative and is now possessed by Satan himself- or at least Satan uses him for the act of betraying Jesus. Judas gives Jesus up to the authorities as he does in the other two gospels, but this time Jesus is portrayed as having divine knowledge of this betrayal before it happens. As Judas approaches to kiss Jesus and hand him over to the authorities, Jesus interjects, “Judas, is it with a kiss that you are betraying the Son of Man?” After this the actual kiss doesn’t happen as it does in the other two stories. It seems Luke plays up the irony of the a kiss, with connotations of love, as a means of betrayal. Luke seals the evil-nature of the act by including “But this is your hour, and the power of darkness” in Luke 22:53. He paints the jewish authorities and Judas as pawns of something evil, even Satan himself. Prophetic verses from Psalms are included at the end of Luke, included to solidify Judas’ fate with Jewish prophecy.

John’s depiction of Judas builds upon Luke’s, beginning with describing Judas as the dishonest treasurer of the group, and alluding to his corruption from the start. John fulfills a prophecy from Isaiah through the Judas he portrays: a Judas who doesn’t even converse with Jesus the night he betrays him because he is “thoroughly demonic” (White 131).

Judus’ persona develops significantly from the earliest Gospel Mark to the latest, John. It seems this development might directly reflect the pattern of development for early Christian storytelling. Mark typically displays a relatively low understanding of Christ. From Matthew, to Luke, and then John the authors Christologies begin to increase, with John taking the stance of a very high Christology. In each Gospel, the character of Judas displays the Gospel writer’s views of Jesus himself through the way Jesus reacts to Judas’ betrayal to the way Judas reacts himself, and the guilt or punishment he receives. The development of the Gospels from low Christology to high Christology might clue us into the fact that Christian storytelling most likely did the same. As the years went on and stories of Jesus spread, people moved from seeing Jesus as a good teacher (as the authors of Mark did) to seeing him as God himself (as authors of John might have). As many of these writings are heavily influenced by oral tradition, we can infer that this development of the Gospel’s was due to a progression towards higher understandings of Christ in stories passed on from generation to generation.