Into The Inferno: Marcus Brutus And Cassius

1077 Words3 Pages

Into the Inferno

Judas Iscariot, the man who killed Jesus of Nazareth, the son of god. Marcus Brutus and Gaius Cassius, two men who are known far less, but are no less important in the formation of history. These humans are all seen to have met the kiss of death with heinous acts left untouched upon their shoulders. Though Cassius and Brutus were not necessarily unjustified in their actions. The ninth layer of hell, as illustrated by Dante Alighieri, is reserved for those who betray their master. Though, unlike Judas, Cassius and Brutus did not betray their master, for they were members of the senate, speakers of the people. Ultimately, Brutus and Cassius were forced to make a bitter decision, but their master was the republic of Rome, not …show more content…

As the conspirators of Caesar’s death moved in to take his life, they wished not to take the life of man, rather they wished only to allow the life of Rome to prosper. The conspirators were educated nobility, and were elected by the people to speak for the people. It was the duty of the senate to keep the people of Rome on track for what they want, and to correct them if they strayed off of the path of Rome, for the people are the power of Rome, it is important to keep them in check, to keep them understanding of what’s best for the society. As what the people want is not always what the people need. In addition, after having killed Caesar, as Brutus was forced to his final lines of defence, he was left to kill himself as he felt both cornered, and unsure of his previous enterprise. As Brutus moved to kill himself, he spoke to his servant, stating that he “kill’d not [Caesar] with half so good a will.” (Shakespeare 78) Brutus says this because he …show more content…

For these reasons, Judas’ actions were unwarranted as he had not noble intentions, nor purpose in betraying Jesus. Jesus was known for being “good, [and] giving protection in times of trouble” he was not a man who was deserving of death, he was a man who would have contributed to the lives of many (Naham 1:7). Also, based on this proclamation, Jesus would have undoubtedly gone on to change the world for the better. Furthermore, Judas was very covetous in his betrayal of Jesus, having been covenanted for a mere “thirty pieces of silver” he wished only to be wealthy, not caring for whose life he may change when Jesus was removed from the world (Matthew 26:15). Many people would have been touched by the altruism of Jesus had he not been betrayed, however Judas was selfish, only caring about how he would benefit from Jesus’ death in the moment, as opposed to how everyone would benefit from Jesus’ life in the future. As Judas realized the magnitude of his betrayal, he had been “condemned, [and] was remorseful, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver...saying ‘I have sinned by betraying innocent blood...’ and [he] went and hanged himself.” (Matthews 27:3-5) It is evident that Judas had recognized his misactions, however they weren’t for the right reasons, he was only apologetic because he had been condemned, it was too late for him, and any aspiration of living a meaningful life had been led

Open Document