Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stir over Gospel of Judas may not be entirely justified
Duluth News Tribune ^ | Apr. 26, 2006 | ALAN COCHRUM

Posted on 04/26/2006 11:53:48 AM PDT by Caleb1411

Given that the old Greek word behind the English term "gospel" means "good news," you have to wonder whether the much-touted and recently published Gospel of Judas really qualifies as either.

Assuming you didn't give up the media for Lent -- which, come think of it ... oh, never mind -- you could hardly have avoided this month's announcement about the latest addition to the religious history files.

To make a long story short: The Gospel of Judas is part of an ancient manuscript that apparently was unearthed in the late 1970s in Egypt. After a lengthy trip through the sometimes shadowy realm of the antiquities trade, it came to rest about five years ago at the Maecenas Foundation for Ancient Art in Basel, Switzerland.

Since then, the badly damaged pages have been in the process of restoration, translation and publication -- this last in the form of a little volume titled "The Gospel of Judas," courtesy of the National Geographic Society.

In this revised-and-not-so-standard version of the story, Judas is not the archetypal villain who betrays his master to enemies under the influence of greed and dark powers. Instead, Judas does Jesus a favor by handing him over.

"Step away from the others," Jesus tells Judas, "and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom."

Which brings us to the question: Is the Gospel of Judas "good" and "news?" Well, yes -- and arguably no.

In one sense, this document is huge news: It apparently is the same text, vanished until now, that the second-century Christian author Irenaeus mentioned in his criticism of a sect of gnostics, the New Agers of his day.

"And Judas the betrayer was thoroughly acquainted with these things, they say," Irenaeus wrote in a passage quoted in the National Geographic book; "and he alone was acquainted with the truth as no others were, and so accomplished the mystery of the betrayal. ... And they bring forth a fabricated work to this effect, which they entitle the Gospel of Judas."

In Herbert Krosney's "The Lost Gospel: The Quest for the Gospel of Judas Iscariot," Swiss translator Rodolphe Kasser says: "The importance of this text is that it is not only a new manuscript, but an entirely new kind of document. ... We previously had only what the church forefathers were saying about the gnostics, but rarely the texts the gnostics wrote themselves. Now we can understand the nuances of what the forefathers said by using the gnostic texts."

In terms of its presentation of its namesake as hero rather than goat, the Gospel of Judas is indeed something new and interesting. But in its presentation of an arcane gnostic cosmology -- "The twelve aeons of the twelve luminaries constitute their father, with six heavens for each aeon, so that there are seventy-two heavens for the seventy-two luminaries" -- it seems to be old hat for scholars. In an essay in "The Gospel of Judas," co-editor Marvin Meyer indicates the content is typical of what's known in the trade as "Sethian" gnosticism.

You could be forgiven, then, for thinking (like a weary cop listening to an all-too-familiar tale): "Yah, yah -- we've heard it before."

So if the Gospel of Judas is not entirely news, is it "good?" True, it provides a touchstone for what certain people believed 150 or 200 years after Christ's death, but does it record the "real" story -- one that was unjustly erased by heavy-handed religious figures -- of Judas, Jesus and the early faith?

Maybe not.

In the book "Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and the Faiths We Never Knew," North Carolina scholar Bart D. Ehrman -- who provided commentary for both Krosney's book and "The Gospel of Judas" -- notes the diversity of theological talking heads in ancient times: "In the second and third centuries there were, of course, Christians who believed in one God. But there were others who insisted that there were two. Some said there were thirty. Others claimed there were 365."

But one can argue on a couple of grounds that the Biblical accounts have the edge here. Ehrman himself says in "The Lost Gospel:" "The first (canonical) Gospel to be written was that of Mark, from about 65 or 70 CE (35-40 years after the death of Jesus)." Matthew, he says, came "somewhat later (80-85 CE)."

And if the apostle Paul was writing his epistles in the years 49-62 (as per a time line in Krosney's book), that would tend to place the writing of Acts (which ends with Paul still alive) and the Gospel of Luke (traditionally ascribed to the same author) in the same historical ballpark.

In contrast, Meyer says that the Gospel of Judas probably was "composed around the middle of the second century, most likely on the basis of earlier ideas and sources." In other words, the historical gap between events and writing is about two or three times that of some of the Biblical material.

In addition to the matter of eras is that of ideas. "Jesus was a Jew living in Palestine," Ehrman notes in "The Gospel of Judas," "and like all Palestinian Jews, he accepted the authority of the Jewish Scriptures .... Jesus presented himself as an authoritative interpreter of these Scriptures and was known to his followers as a great rabbi (teacher)."

If so, given a theology that repudiates the God of the Torah as an inferior deity who created a hellhole of a world -- the view of gnosticism -- and a theology that affirms and builds on the Jewish Scriptures, which is more likely to record what the historical Jesus actually taught?

"But there are also many other things which Jesus did," said the author of the Gospel of John (Revised Standard Version); "were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written."

Something tells me that the Gospel of Judas wasn't exactly what the biblical writer had in mind.


TOPICS: Apologetics; Catholic; Charismatic Christian; Current Events; Evangelical Christian; General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant; Orthodox Christian; Other Christian; Religion & Culture
KEYWORDS: atheistidiots; christianhatingbigot; christiansarebad; crusades; elainepagels; epigraphyandlanguage; gnosticgospels; gnosticism; gnosticsaregood; gnosticssmarmy; godsgravesglyphs; gospelofjudas; inquisition; judas; judasiscariot; letshavejerusalem
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last
To: phatus maximus

I might not want my child to read a certain book for his own good, but I also would not kill my child if he did. And to me, a religion which has killed people over doctrine is not to be trusted. It has something to hide, and it probably has suppressed and hidden a LOT of things.


21 posted on 04/26/2006 6:34:11 PM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Respectfully, No one denies there have been those who wrongly used religion as a reason to destroy, but that doesn't mean those who are not wrongly using religion should be labeled as murders and people who are hiding something...We hide nothing, in fact we'd like to tell more people about the hope of Salvation in Christ, but there are many out there who HATE Christians more than anything in the world...Our message is of faith in Christ for our eternal salvation, no hiding there...anyway...

The issue here is the question of whether or not the Gospel of Judas (GoJ) is false gospel, not the atrocities (sp?) of the past...in an apples to apples comparison on the GoJ vs the four accepted Gospels in the Bible today the distinction is very clear...the Gospel of Judas doesn't recognize the crucifixion the other four do...the GoJ doesn't have the resurrection, the other four do...seems to be pretty straight forward, the GoJ isn't true gospel therefore the faithful of Christ are advised to avoid the GoJ...

Bottomline, anyone can choose to believe or not believe...I choose to believe, but I am not a murderer or am I? Mooo ha ha ha haaaaaa


22 posted on 04/26/2006 6:57:43 PM PDT by phatus maximus (John 6:29...Learn it, love it, live it...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
ME: "No, it is isn't a matter of one set of man's views against anothers."
YOU: LOL - yes it most certainly was! And Jesus was killed for it!

No, it is matter of man's views versus God's Truth. And that is the same reason that led to Cain killing Abel and Jesus being betrayed and crucified.

So who did the gnostics believe Jesus to be? Did they believe he existed at all? Did they or did they not believe he was the son of the one true God?

Different gnostics believe different things about Jesus, but all deny that He was God in the flesh. They say He was just a man, not God. Flesh is evil to most gnostics, so therefore, God cannot become flesh, which of course He did.

23 posted on 04/26/2006 7:14:01 PM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: phatus maximus
"seems to be pretty straight forward, the GoJ isn't true gospel therefore the faithful of Christ are advised to avoid the GoJ..."

Not you, not anyone on this can Earth prove that.

"I choose to believe, but I am not a murderer or am I?"

Only YOU know that.

24 posted on 04/26/2006 7:16:17 PM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: lupie
"No, it is matter of man's views versus God's Truth."

I'm sure that too was the justification of the religious people at the time for the death of Jesus. He was a man, and they were relying on THEIR religious doctrine. Therefore, by your reasoning, they were in the right because they were following "God's truth."

Jesus was killed because religious people feared and hated him for what he was saying. Cain killed Abel because of jealousy.

"They say He was just a man, not God. Flesh is evil to most gnostics, so therefore, God cannot become flesh, which of course He did."

Now I do find that odd. God created all, including flesh. God can be anything God wants to be, including flesh.

25 posted on 04/26/2006 7:28:13 PM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Of course I can't prove it and I don't need to prove it...that's why it's called faith...no dispute, never has been...you either believe God or you don't...I guess I fail to see your frustration, no one is denying that you are 'technically' correct in that there is no imperical human based proof...I choose to believe that God inspired the books in the New Testament because the writers who followed Christ indicated they are and by faith I accept that...of course how certain books were considered inspired is another historical story, but again, by faith in the Holy Spirits guidance they were put together...

There is no dispute that the Gospel of Judas clearly contradicts the four Gospels in the bible therefore those who believe the four Gospels should believe that the GoJ is false gospel and thus avoid...that's all i'm sayin...whether one believes in God or not the contradictory message is a fact (even the "theologians" on the National Geographic admitted that).

Keep in mind a large amount of science can't be proved not by you nor anyone on this Earth to use your terms, yet many accept it. Prove to me that my fingers aren't actually touching the keys as I type...they aren't you know as there is a layer of atoms that seperate my fingers from the keys...I know it's true, but I can't prove it...I just accept it...Very similar to my faith...I can't see Christ, I can't smell, touch or hear him, but I believe in Him with all my convictions...

Regards and I pray that the Holy Spirit will flood your heart with the truth of Christ Jesus...blessings and good night.


26 posted on 04/26/2006 8:29:24 PM PDT by phatus maximus (John 6:29...Learn it, love it, live it...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
I'm sure that too was the justification of the religious people at the time for the death of Jesus. He was a man, and they were relying on THEIR religious doctrine. Therefore, by your reasoning, they were in the right because they were following "God's truth."

Yes, they were relying on their doctine - doctrine that Jesus called them on - that they had added to God's Truth and had perverted His truth. But no, they were not following God's Truth - and they knew it because Jesus called them on it - several times. And they knew in their hearts that He was right. They knew because they were extremely familiar with the scriptures and they knew because Jesus, who is God, made that clear to them. Just as everyone who rejects Truth knows in their hearts what they are doing - whether they admit it to themselves or not.

Jesus was killed because religious people feared and hated him for what he was saying. Cain killed Abel because of jealousy. Again, Jesus was killed because Jesus exposed them - exposed them that they were not acting or worshipping God in the way that He demands. They wanted to please God on their own accord, not God's way. And that is exactly why Cain killed Abel - because he was jealous that God accepted Abel's worship and not his. Why? Because Abel trusted God and Cain trusted in his own way.

Now I do find that odd. God created all, including flesh. God can be anything God wants to be, including flesh.

Then obviously you don't hold to gnostic teachings. Gnostics beliefs vary, but they do hold that in common and they do hold that the way to peace, the way to "heaven" is to somehow tap into that inner knowledge, that inner goodness that is within all in order to take away the effects of the evil flesh. But usually only some have the hidden knowledge on how to do that. The view is very prevalent in a lot of the new age and eastern religions.

27 posted on 04/27/2006 5:14:11 AM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise; wideawake
Well-known to church scholars perhaps, but not historically to the church goers in general.

Which proves what exactly? A recent survey show that most Americans couldn't name the freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment. Does that change anything about the First Amendment or what it says? No, it doesn't.

All this will do is teach those church goers something about ancient rejected heresies that they might now have known before.

28 posted on 04/27/2006 6:38:02 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; lupie; phatus maximus
"Which proves what exactly?"

Good question. And since the people and incidents described happened before there was a U.S., before there was a Europe, and before there was even a Christian church, no one here can "prove" anything more than they believe what one group of people wrote or interpreted, and disbelieve the writings and interpretations of others. Phatus Maximus wrote - it's "faith."

29 posted on 04/27/2006 7:00:42 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

We can prove that the material containg in these gnostic gospels contradict what was actually taught by the disciples of Jesus and that they had previously been rejected by those followers long ago.


30 posted on 04/27/2006 7:04:42 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

No you can't. Regarding the events in the Bible, anything written about what someone has said or done, can be refuted by others who write that it wasn't said or done.


31 posted on 04/27/2006 7:10:38 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise; wideawake; Salvation

Not true at all, it is readily apparent to anyone with a solid knowledge of the Bible and Church History that the gnostic gospels are outside of the body of Christian teachings and reflect a philosophy that actually predates Christianity.


32 posted on 04/27/2006 7:24:12 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: lupie
"Again, Jesus was killed because Jesus exposed them - exposed them that they were not acting or worshipping God in the way that He demands. They wanted to please God on their own accord, not God's way."

And you know this how? What were they doing or teaching? What were they supposed to be doing or teaching? Give me all the details. All - the details.

Jesus also followed certain practices and beliefs did he not? What are those practices and beliefs, and do you follow them too? ALL of them? If you're not, then you can't really be a follower of Jesus can you?

33 posted on 04/27/2006 7:34:01 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

Well it would certainly make sense that gnostic teachings were outside the body of Christian teachings, since they existed BEFORE Christianity and its spinoffs arrived. More correctly then, it can be said that Christian teachings are outside the body of gnostic teachings. Logic compels it. They have as much right to say that their views are correct because of their history as any one else.


34 posted on 04/27/2006 7:48:33 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

But they have no right to say that their views are Christian (or vice-versa), which is what the "Gospel of Judas" is all about.


35 posted on 04/27/2006 8:25:34 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
Me:"Again, Jesus was killed because Jesus exposed them - exposed them that they were not acting or worshipping God in the way that He demands. They wanted to please God on their own accord, not God's way."

You:And you know this how? What were they doing or teaching? What were they supposed to be doing or teaching? Give me all the details. All - the details.

Nobody knows all the details. And I also think that if you did know all the details, it still would not be enough for you. But that is between you and the Lord God. But there are plenty of details in the bible, which tells the same story from beginning to end, for those who care to understand.

Jesus also followed certain practices and beliefs did he not? What are those practices and beliefs, and do you follow them too? ALL of them? If you're not, then you can't really be a follower of Jesus can you?

No, that really isn't the right way to look at it per His Truth. All the commands that God (Jesus is God) gave to His people, He did follow them, but they were meant to point to Him and not as a means by themselves to please God. They were meant also as a way to expose our sin. They were also never set up so that anyone man could ever follow all of them. That is by God's design. Why? To show us that to follow Him means simply to put our trust in Him and not on ourselves. That He would/has/will provide for our atonement.

Following Him means to put your will and desires aside, to crucify them and then He works His way in you, changing you into His likeness, so that by His power, He works through you. THAT is what a true follower of Jesus is - where He is the Lord of your life, where we are strive to even take every thought captive to His obedience. Do true followers fail to do that always? Absolutely. But by His grace, when we don't, and we turn to Him in repentance, He washes us with forgiveness. You miss the point. But again, that is between you and the Lord God Jesus Christ. He has the answers if you truly seek them. I pray that you do.

36 posted on 04/27/2006 8:50:04 AM PDT by lupie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib; lupie

I forgot to ask, does anyone have the count of people were murdered by gnostics because they committed "heresy," and how much money has been spent by gnostics to hire people to kill others in crusades to take back the holy land?


37 posted on 04/27/2006 8:55:42 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise; lupie

LOL! What does that have to do with anything about whether or not the gnostics can speak for Christianity?

Right, nothing whatsoever.

So you're going with the "all Christans are Bad because of the Crusades and the Inquisition" line.

Good to know that early on because it makes it much easier to ignore further statements.


38 posted on 04/27/2006 8:59:47 AM PDT by FormerLib ("...the past ten years in Kosovo will be replayed here in what some call Aztlan.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: lupie
"Nobody knows all the details."

Thank you, and I rest my case.

39 posted on 04/27/2006 9:01:18 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib

I give credit to those who persuade from means other than a sword. On that basis, I give credit to gnostics, and take it away from other "religions."


40 posted on 04/27/2006 9:02:58 AM PDT by Enterprise (The MSM - Propaganda wing and news censorship division of the Democrat Party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-126 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson