About Judas Iscariot

Revelation says:

Rev 21:13 There were three gates on the east, three on the north, three on the south and three on the west. 14 The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Does that mean one gate has the name "Judas Iscariot" over it?

Also, Jesus made this prophecy:

Mat 19:28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Did Jesus get is wrong? Or is Judas sitting on a throne right now, judging the Jews?

Some contend that Matthias will have replaced Judas, but was Matthias one of the Twelve Jesus was speaking to in Mat 19:28? I do not think so.

I have also seen Paul cited as the twelfth apostle, but it would be many years later before he converted, and some of those years he spent as an enemy of Christianity, so surely Jesus was not talking about him in Mat 19:28.

Could it actually be Judas? The crucifixion was God's great plan, and Judas played a vital part in that. Was Judas doing what had to be done? There were some fringe Christians who believed Judas was a good guy, and the Gospel of Judas reflects that, though obviously that is not the mainstream view!

The Gospel of Judas was possibly written in the second century, and supposes Judas was the only disciple who actually understood Jesus. Full text here.

The rock opera Jesus Christ Superstar - written rather later - also paints Judas as something of a good guy who is more concerned with helping the poor, and hands Jesus over because he is worried Jesus will cause civil unrest which will be bad for the people.

Or was the betrayal made up? Paul records there were still twelve disciples after Jesus was crucified.

1 Corinthians 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve.

Does the Twelve mean all twelve disciples, or is it just the name of the group? 

Judas' death

The two stories  ar as disparate as the two nativity stories!

Matthew 27:5 And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.

6 And the chief priests took the silver pieces, and said, It is not lawful for to put them into the treasury, because it is the price of blood.

7 And they took counsel, and bought with them the potter's field, to bury strangers in.

8 Wherefore that field was called, The field of blood, unto this day.

Acts 1:18 Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.

19 And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood.

The story in Matthew could well be inspired by this:

Zechariah 11:12 I told them, “If you think it best, give me my pay; but if not, keep it.” So they paid me thirty pieces of silver.

13 And the Lord said to me, “Throw it to the potter”—the handsome price at which they valued me! So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them to the potter at the house of the Lord.

The one in Acts might be from here, but it is more of a stretch.

2 Samuel 17:23 When Ahithophel saw that his advice had not been followed, he saddled his donkey and set out for his house in his hometown. He put his house in order and then hanged himself. So he died and was buried in his father’s tomb.

The Field of Blood was, I guess, an actual place in Jerusalem, giving Matthew says "unto this day", and indeed there is a location called that even now.