Sought Repentance (Santamaria)

The line people often mean when they say “Judas sought repentance” is actually Hebrews 12:17—and that text is about Esau, not Judas. Judas does “repent” in the KJV (Matthew 27:3), but the Greek verb there is not the usual New Testament verb for gospel repentance. That difference is not a nerdy footnote. It’s the knife-edge between worldly remorse and repentance unto life.

So let’s take the Scriptures as they stand, keep a death-grip on the words God chose (Hebrew and Greek included), and deal honestly with what they force us to say: Judas could not repent savingly, because saving repentance is not something fallen man manufactures. It is granted. It is given. It is as much a gift of Christ as forgiveness itself.

MATTHEW 27 AND THE “REPENTANCE” OF JUDAS

Matthew records: “Then Judas, which had betrayed him, when he saw that he was condemned, repented himself, and brought again the thirty pieces of silver…” (Matt. 27:3). The Greek for “repented himself” is μεταμεληθείς (metamelētheis), an aorist passive participle from μεταμέλομαι (metamelomai). In plain English: he felt remorse, regret, self-reproach. The participle form matters because Matthew is describing what happened in Judas as he faced the consequences: “having regretted it / being seized with remorse, he returned…” The text does not present Judas as a man newly made alive to God; it presents him as a man crushed, cornered, and terrified.

Then Judas says, “I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood” (Matt. 27:4). The confession is real as far as it goes. He names the act as sin: ἥμαρτον (hēmarton)—“I sinned.” He even names the horror: “innocent blood,” αἷμα ἀθῷον (haima athōon). Yet confession by itself is not repentance unto life. Pharaoh said, “I have sinned” (Ex. 9:27). Saul said, “I have sinned” (1 Sam. 15:24). Both remained strangers to the saving embrace of God.

What does Judas do next? He throws down the money in the temple and goes and hangs himself (Matt. 27:5). That is not the fruit of godly sorrow. That is the terminal fruit of despair—what Paul calls “the sorrow of the world.”

2 CORINTHIANS 7:10 AND THE TWO SORROWS

Paul draws the line with frightening clarity: “For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death” (2 Cor. 7:10).

The Greek is sharp and worth looking at closely. “Godly sorrow” is ἡ κατὰ Θεὸν λύπη (hē kata Theon lypē), literally “the sorrow according to God.” It “works/produces” (κατεργάζεται, katergazetai) “repentance” (μετάνοιαν, metanoian) “unto salvation” (εἰς σωτηρίαν, eis sōtērian). But the sorrow of the world—τοῦ κόσμου λύπη (tou kosmou lypē)—produces death (θάνατον, thanaton).

Now notice the devastating wordplay in the very same verse. Paul says repentance unto salvation is ἀμεταμέλητον (ametamelēton), “not to be regretted.” That adjective is built from the same root as Judas’ remorse-verb μεταμέλομαι. Paul is practically waving a red flag: there is a kind of “regret/remorse” that belongs to the world and ends in death, and there is a repentance unto salvation that God gives, which will never end in regret.

Judas is a living illustration of “the sorrow of the world.” He is not the only example, but he is the most famous. His sorrow ends, exactly as Paul said it would, in death.

HEBREWS 12:17 AND THE “NO PLACE OF REPENTANCE”

Hebrews says of Esau: “For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears” (Heb. 12:17).

The Greek is: μετανοίας γὰρ τόπον οὐχ εὗρεν (metanoias gar topon ouch heuren)—“for he did not find a place/opportunity of repentance.” Then: καίπερ μετὰ δακρύων ἐκζητήσας αὐτήν (kaiper meta dakryōn ekzētēsas autēn)—“though seeking it out with tears.”

There are two main readings Christians have argued over, and you asked for different readings, so here they are plainly.

One reading takes “repentance” as Esau’s repentance—meaning Esau could not obtain true repentance, even though he cried. The other reading takes “repentance” as Isaac’s change of mind—meaning Esau could not get Isaac to reverse the blessing already given to Jacob (see Gen. 27:33–38). Grammatically, either can be defended in context. But here’s the point that survives both readings: tears are not proof of grace. Tears may be the language of wounded pride, lost advantage, or terror at consequences. Esau wanted the blessing; Judas wanted escape from the weight of what he had done. Both show us that a man can desperately want relief and still be a stranger to repentance unto life.

So when people mash Judas and Hebrews 12:17 into one idea—“Judas sought repentance with tears”—they’re mixing two stories. But the theology they’re reaching for is still a real biblical category: you can have agony, confession, dread, even tears—without saving repentance.

WHAT IS REPENTANCE, BIBLICALLY?

In the Old Testament, “repent/turn” language often uses שׁוּב (shuv), “to turn/return,” and sometimes נָחַם (nacham), “to regret/relent,” depending on context. Shuv is the big “turning” word: “Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways” (Ezek. 33:11). Yet Scripture also shows that such turning is impossible unless God works it: “Turn thou me, and I shall be turned” (Jer. 31:18). That is not poetry as decoration; it is theology as confession. The sinner does not first turn himself and then ask God to bless the turn. He begs God for the turning itself.

In the New Testament, the central “repentance” word group is μετάνοια / μετανοέω (metanoia / metanoeō), a “change of mind” that is inseparable from a God-given change of heart. It is not mere emotional pain. It is not merely rethinking strategy. It is a Spirit-wrought reversal: God becomes true, self becomes exposed, sin becomes bitter, and Christ becomes necessary.

That is why the New Testament repeatedly speaks of repentance as something given.

REPENTANCE IS GRANTED, GIVEN, BESTOWED

Peter says to the Sanhedrin that God exalted Jesus “to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins” (Acts 5:31). The Greek is δοῦναι μετάνοιαν (dounai metanoian), an aorist infinitive: Christ was exalted with this purpose—to give repentance.

Again, when the church hears of Gentile conversion, they glorify God: “Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life” (Acts 11:18). “Granted” there is ἔδωκεν (edōken), “he gave.” Repentance is not portrayed as the Gentiles’ independent moral achievement; it is God’s gift.

Paul tells Timothy to correct opponents “in meekness; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth” (2 Tim. 2:25). “Give” is δώῃ (dōē), aorist subjunctive—“might give.” The possibility is located in God’s hand, not man’s willpower.

This is exactly the Old School Baptist instinct: wherever Scripture makes salvation spiritual, it makes salvation divine in its source. Not half-and-half. Not “God provides, man supplies the decisive act.” If repentance is unto life, then life must precede it (John 3:3–8; Eph. 2:1–5).

Gilbert Beebe says this bluntly, and you can feel the polemical heat because he’s fighting for the same grammar we just looked at in Acts: “Christ is exalted… to give repentance to Israel and the forgiveness of sins… It is as exclusively the work of our exalted Saviour to give repentance as it is to forgive sins.”

Samuel Trott strikes the same note with pastoral urgency: “We… are… called upon to repent. But still we shall not truly repent unless the Lord is pleased to give us repentance.” And again, pointing to Christ as the source of repentance-fruit rather than man’s conditional performance, Trott says, “Christ is exalted… to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins.”

Those are not cute denominational slogans. They are the apostolic verbs—give, grant, bestow—being taken seriously.

WHY JUDAS COULD NOT REPENT SAVINGLY

Now we can answer your core claim in a way that is both hard and scriptural: Judas could not repent savingly because saving repentance is not “common,” not natural, not sitting latent in all men. It is a gift of sovereign grace—and Judas was never its subject.

Jesus Himself marks Judas out as not belonging to Him in the saving sense. In the High Priestly prayer: “Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled” (John 17:12). Judas is not described as a sheep that fell out of Christ’s hand. He is described as “the son of perdition,” bound up with the fulfillment of Scripture.

John tells us Judas’ heart was never clean: Jesus says, “Ye are clean, but not all” (John 13:10–11). John explains: “For he knew who should betray him; therefore said he, Ye are not all clean.” That “not clean” language is not about manners; it’s about spiritual state.

Scripture also says Satan uniquely entered Judas: “Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot” (Luke 22:3). And again at the supper, after the sop, “then entered Satan into him” (John 13:27). The devil tempts many; the text presents Judas as possessed and driven to betrayal as part of a larger divine purpose. Yet Judas is not excused. Divine decree and human guilt walk side by side in the Bible without apologizing (Acts 2:23; Acts 4:27–28).

Jesus pronounces an almost unbearable woe: “The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born” (Matt. 26:24). That sentence does not sound like a man who will later be restored by grace. It sounds like a man marked out for judgment.

Peter, speaking by Scripture, says Judas “by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place” (Acts 1:25). Again, not a saved man losing rewards, but a betrayer going where he belongs by nature—outside Christ, outside mercy.

Put all of that together, and the conclusion is not speculative. It is the text’s trajectory: Judas’ remorse was real, but it was the remorse of a lost man under condemnation, not the repentance of a regenerated man under chastening.

THE COMMAND TO REPENT DOES NOT IMPLY ABILITY TO REPENT

Someone will immediately object: “But God commands all men to repent!” Yes. “God… commandeth all men everywhere to repent” (Acts 17:30). Jesus preaches, “Repent ye, and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15). John the Baptist preaches repentance (Matt. 3:2). The apostles preach repentance (Luke 24:47; Acts 20:21). The command is universal.

But Scripture nowhere teaches that a universal command proves universal ability. The law commands perfect love (Matt. 22:37–40). That does not prove the natural man can produce perfect love. The law commands holiness (1 Pet. 1:16). That does not prove man can generate holiness. Commands reveal duty; they do not prove power. The fall destroyed man’s moral ability without destroying his responsibility (Rom. 8:7–8; 1 Cor. 2:14).

That’s why Beebe warns that calling on “dead sinners” to repent as if they have native ability smuggles in a false anthropology: “To call on dead sinners to repent and believe… implies ability in them to do so, whereas the gospel proclaims that Christ is exalted… to give repentance…” Whether one agrees with every edge of Beebe’s rhetoric or not, the central point is straight from Acts 5:31: repentance is something Christ gives.

So the preacher can thunder God’s command without pretending man has the power. The command is true; the inability is also true; and the remedy is not self-improvement but sovereign mercy (John 6:44–45; John 6:65).

WHAT THEN IS THE PASTORAL LESSON?

First, do not take Judas as proof that a man can truly repent and still be rejected. Judas did not display μετάνοια (metanoia) in the saving sense; he displayed μετάμελος-sorrow (metamelos sorrow), sorrow that ended in death. Scripture itself gives you the categories to say that without guessing.

Second, do not trust tears as a sacrament. Esau wept. Judas despaired. Tears can be holy, but tears can also be the body’s reaction to loss, fear, humiliation, or consequence. The Bible will not let us canonize emotion.

Third, if repentance unto life is “granted,” then the right posture is not, “I will reform myself into repentance,” but, “Lord, turn thou me, and I shall be turned” (Jer. 31:18). That prayer is already a confession that grace is not common. It is particular. It is sovereign. It is God’s.

Fourth, Scripture gives trembling sinners a strange kind of comfort here. If you are haunted by sin and your fear is, “What if I’m Judas?”—listen carefully. Judas’ sorrow drove him away from Christ into death. Godly sorrow drives a sinner toward Christ for mercy (Luke 18:13; John 6:37). The publican’s cry—“God be merciful to me a sinner” (Luke 18:13)—is not the voice of the world’s sorrow. It is the Spirit’s kindling.

And finally, this whole subject is meant to strip us. It is meant to remove swagger from the mouth of man. Repentance is not a trophy the creature hands to God. It is a mercy God plants in the creature. Christ is not waiting at the finish line to congratulate human free will. He is exalted “to give repentance” and “forgiveness of sins” (Acts 5:31). The two gifts travel together, because the same blood that purchases forgiveness also purchases the new heart that hates sin.

That is why Judas could not repent savingly: not because Christ was unwilling to save sinners, but because Judas was never made a sinner who comes, never drawn (John 6:44), never given life (John 10:26–29), never granted repentance unto life (Acts 11:18). His remorse was not the Spirit’s work. It was the world’s sorrow, and it worked death (2 Cor. 7:10).

If you want this expanded into a longer full-length treatment in the same style (walking verse-by-verse through Matthew 27, John 13–17, Acts 1–5, and Hebrews 12 with more Greek/Hebrew detail), I can continue seamlessly and broaden the exegesis without changing the doctrinal stance.