The Gospel of Judas

The place to go for debate on politics, religion, sex, and other tasty topics!
Post Reply
Slarti
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 5846
Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 2:25 pm
Title: Damn Not Given
Nightscrawlearth Character: :icey :phoenix

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Slarti »

I saw this on CNN this morning, and while I’d heard for the last few months this was coming, it was interesting. Especially after I listened to a bit on NPR about it.

The gist of all the news about this new – and apparently so far only – translation of this document is that Judas Iscariot may not be the big fat traitor everybody thought he was. This manuscript says Jesus asked Judas to betray him:

“The star that leads the way is your star, Jesus said to Judas... You will exceed all of them for you will have sacrificed the man that clothes me.”

Interesting, and I would think with the potential to change Biblical history, if it’s real and becomes accepted.

A couple of news stories on it, and the National Geographic site:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science/04 ... index.html

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=5327692

http://www9.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Bamfette »

Yeah. been seeing commercials for it on the National Geographic Channel... (apparenly NG has dibs on the story) from what little i have seen about it, it's interstinghow it completley changes the character ofJudas from betrayer to the one who 'got' Jesus' message the most, and was CHOSEN to turn him over to authorities... really changes the whole intent...

but there are several gospels that are not included in the bible and are generally ignored and have never been accepted as canonical by the Church... http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/apo/index.htm this will just be the latest in a long list.
Saint Kurt
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 3:43 am
Title: Derelict Landlord
Location: Watch out for that cow pie!

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Saint Kurt »

It's been said before that without Judas their would have been no crucifixion and with the crucifixion, no resurrection, and thus no sacrifice - There would be no Christianity.

This sounds awfully simplistic to me, but it does explain why there would be extreme interest in new information about Judas' story.

-e
Image
chicory
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 365
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 4:50 pm

The Gospel of Judas

Post by chicory »

I read about this Judas thing before somewhere - though I forget where.

I don't mean to be offensive or anything - but what do people think about the idea that the early Christians (first 200 years before the crackdown that unified the religion) were really excited about this new religion, all these new ideas, and a lot of those gospels (like this Judas one) were kind of like fanfiction?

The thing I read before was about the followers of Judas and some analysis about their motivations for writing something like that.

I'm surprised it's getting so much attention now.
For those who believe, no explanation is neccessary. For those who do not, no explanation is possible. ~Gino Dalpiaz
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Angelique »

That's actually not too far-fetched a comparison. What we have are four accounts of what Jesus did, what he taught, and why we should believe, and a whole lot of Jesus fanfiction.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
idsunki
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 3:05 am
Title: NARC!!!!!
Location: united states
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by idsunki »

I've always found the adversaries in the Bible much more interesting than the protagonists.

This would help corroborate this new book out that tells about da Vinci's The Last Supper having all sorts of hidden crazy meanings. Apparently Peter is the only one holding a knife with meat on his plate, and the knife is pointed at Jesus. Since the Supper is supposed to be the moment Jesus reveals the traitor... well, maybe history had the wrong guy this whole time.

It would certainly make for a better story.
You always know where the X-Men have been
Image
because it's always on fire.
User avatar
kladyelf
Deck Swabber
Deck Swabber
Posts: 581
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 2:46 am
Location: Australia

The Gospel of Judas

Post by kladyelf »

Well here's my ten cents (dang inflation! :D)

I doubt it Id, that's even presuming that Leonardo a man who had lived in and around Italy even knew about this as (correct me if i'm wrong) Coptic(sp?) Christians lived around Greece, in addition to the fact that this thing has only been translated recently... it may be reading a bit much into that painting.

Also i saw one of the stories on this saying that it was 300 odd years after the crucifixion, where other canon gospels were a good deal more recent (eg: gospel of Mark which was written 30 or so years after the crucifixion) does add credence to the whole "fan-fiction" idea.

Actually in relation to that - wasn't that the time where Romans were persecuting Christians? I forget.

In any case, it is just another one of a whole bunch of "gospels" that are not canonical (eg: gospel of Thomas, gospel of Mary, etc) because of factors like age, and really *really* contradictory/out of character stuff like claiming Jesus said you have to be a man in order to be saved.
meddle not in the affairs of ficcers for you are malleable and easily .... O_o *stares* ooh is that a cookie?

Love your enemies - It will drive them nuts!

Crazy.... but in the nicest possible way....

To Stupidityyyyy - and beyond!

*after reading the latest gory/depressing "mainstream" comic* ....*sigh* that's it, I'm packin' up and moving back to the Eighties...
StarChild
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:06 am
Title: Banned
Location: Lost in a maple leaf-help!

The Gospel of Judas

Post by StarChild »

Originally posted by chicory
I read about this Judas thing before somewhere - though I forget where.

I don't mean to be offensive or anything - but what do people think about the idea that the early Christians (first 200 years before the crackdown that unified the religion) were really excited about this new religion, all these new ideas, and a lot of those gospels (like this Judas one) were kind of like fanfiction?

The thing I read before was about the followers of Judas and some analysis about their motivations for writing something like that.

I'm surprised it's getting so much attention now.
If you listened to the rest of the report, it was written in the third century, and is probably the work of a heretic. A text must agree with the canon of Scripture in order for it to be accepted. Matthew 18:15-20 especially:
16 But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.

The concept of witnessing the Word of God is prevalent in Scripture, and if a book does not witness (agree with accepted canon) it is rejected as truth. Anyone could have written this text with any motive on their heart-up to and including fanfic. This Judas book is a sham...a piece of fiction indeed.
Image

Ah, yes...lover at heart and along comes the ultimate romantic! Fox hunt ala Nightcrawler
Saint Kurt
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2151
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 3:43 am
Title: Derelict Landlord
Location: Watch out for that cow pie!

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Saint Kurt »

Well now with regards to Christianity the new gospel may not have meaning, but historically it is still valuable.

I didn't quite understand what the big deal was with this new gospel, why everyone was saying things like it would "change Christianity forever" and that "finally the truth that the church is hiding has been uncovered!" etc. I think it's some kind of weird guerrilla marketing for the DaVinci Code movie because by this time next week this new gospel is going to be of interest to historians and theologians and just about nobody else.

I did some reading and while this might not be news to some, it was new and interesting to me.

First: there are a lot more than four gospels about the life and ministry of Jesus and the apostles. These were gospels rejected by the early Christian church as heretical or otherwise containing a message that was not part of Christian philosphy. These rejected gospels are known as the "Gnostic Gospels" and you can go to any bookstore and pick up a copy of them right now to read. There are over twenty of them and so far Christianity has managed to remain intact. So I'm feeling pretty certain about its ability to overcome this new one.

The Gnostic Movement is a religious/philosophical movement that splintered out of Christianity during the 2nd and 3rd centuries and has, in various forms flourished throughout history. Psychologist Carl Jung, author William Blake, and philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche are just a few modern scholars influenced by Gnosticism. The dark side of Gnosticism was most evidient in WWII as much of political theory behind the rise of the nazi party comes from Gnosticism.

The core belief of Gnosticism is a struggle for balance between light and dark (or good and evil) forces with a middle "material realm" inbetween. For early Christian Gnostics, this worked out that God created both good and evil and that humankind on earth would be forever caught trying to balance the two. A lot of Asian spirituality uses this concept as well (think of the yin and the yang). The Jedi and the Sith sound pretty Gnostic...

But Christianity doesn't teach this. The core teaching of Christianity is that God only created what is good. Evil comes not from God, but from bad choices or situations. (In other words God didn't create things like illness or murder - these things came from us. Gnosticism teaches that God created all of it, good or bad.) In rejecting the idea that God created evil, Christianity is then free to teach that God is more powerful than the suffering and evil present in the world and that He will ultimately overcome it creating a world of universal peace and love. (The Gnostic teaching is that the fight to balance good and evil will be eternal. Personally, the universal peace and love thing sounds like a better deal.)

So what does this have to do with this Gospel of Judas?

The main theme of the Gospel of Judas was that his traitorous act was divine mandate. God needed someone to betray Jesus in order to save the human race from sin and thus kick off Christianity so He chose Judas, Jesus' best loved apostle. By changing the story this way, by taking the blame from Judas and giving it to God the Gospel goes against the central message of Christianity. In this Gospel, God commits evil rather than Judas.

So even if this Gospel had been written by an author who lived at the time of Jesus (Matthew and John were apostles, Luke and Mark were also alive while Jesus was alive) it doesn't matter, because it has a theological flaw.

However, from a historical and philosphical point of view, it is an interesting retelling of the story of Judas - visibly demonstrating the way the Gnostic veiwpoint changed the role of a major figure in Christian history with incredible theological implications. This is why the Gnostic Gospels are important. They may not teach Christianity, but they give an invaluable lesson in the history of the creation of one of the world's major religions.

This particular document is getting attention because it was lost in a safe deposit box in New York for like 30 years, found in crumbling condition, restored, and recently translated. So, it's new and contains some new information. The National Geographic site describes the restoration and is really fascinating.

Cool links Slarti.

-e
Image
idsunki
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 423
Joined: Wed Nov 06, 2002 3:05 am
Title: NARC!!!!!
Location: united states
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by idsunki »

Like I said, sympathy for the devil. It's like something I've heard at some point that God created Lucifer to rebel. If nothing else, it makes for a good story.
You always know where the X-Men have been
Image
because it's always on fire.
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Bamfette »

Originally posted by StarChild


The concept of witnessing the Word of God is prevalent in Scripture, and if a book does not witness (agree with accepted canon) it is rejected as truth. Anyone could have written this text with any motive on their heart-up to and including fanfic. This Judas book is a sham...a piece of fiction indeed.
Anyone could have writen Matthew, Mark, Luke and John "with any motive on their heart-up to and including fanfic." they are the same thing, they just got lucky and were picked to be included over the thirty other gospels floating around at the same time. You have to forget for a second what's in the bible and consider the history and the events which LED to the creation fo the bible for a second. As it is, you're using the 'the bible says what's contained in it is true, so it must be' which is just circular logic, and makes no sense especially in this case.

Okay, here's how I see it. At the time these various gospels were circulating, before they were collected into the NT, none were inherently considered to be right or wrong, or against canon. They were all takes on the same events. Some didn't mesh with others, and people disagreed with some, and agreed with others, obviously. But they were all on about equal footing. Then Irenaeus chose four books out of 30 to include in the New Testament. One man. He chose four becuase there were 'four points on a compass' according to the National Geographic special, and he personally did not agree with the Gnostic teachings. Nearly 200 years after the events had transpired, no less. Who was he to decide, really? It's not like he had even witnessed the events, he wasn't even BORN when it was all supposed to have happened, so he wasn't actually in a terribly good position to judge which one was actually correct. Better than us, 2000 years later, sure, but he couldn't go 'Oh, I was there, I saw what happened, that's just wrong...' he was judging on the accounts of the events, the same gospels we have available to us, plus a few others which were lost to time, of which there were over 30, as mentioned. And John was written abou the same time as the Judas gospel, possibly even a bit later, so it's not like he even just chose all the oldest ones. There were many which came before John chronologically.

The Gospel of Judas goes against canon because Irenaeus didn't choose it, that's the only reason. He could have chosen it. If he had chosen it, IT would be the canon story. And if say, John was left out, then John would be considerd heretical. If Irenaeus had Gnostic leanings, Christianity, and likely your beliefs, would probably be pretty different today.

and Emily, that's why *I* find it interesting. I look at this and I see an alternate path that history could have taken. I think that's fascinating.
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Angelique »

But see, the Gospels and the non-canonical accounts were not on equal footing. At the time, the Old Testament was already in writing. So a book that contradicts a fundamental commandment or prophecy will not be accepted as canon.

And again there is the witness. When four sources say Judas Iscariot was a traitor, and only one said he had some special inside information nobody else had and was not a real traitor, even if all other things are equal, the four accounts should be taken as more reliable.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Bamfette »

but you don't know what the other thirty said. sure, four disagreed (and one it's a bit iffy, his motivations are not really explored. It's mostly John that paints him as a bad guy.) but what about all the others?

And I don't see how this goes agaisnt prophecy, necessarily. the only thing that changes is Judas's motivations and emphasis placed more on the events leading up to the crucifixion, not the crucifixion/resurrection itself. The basic events are the same with a few differences. but there are differences between the gospels in the bible, so....
StarChild
Butt Monkey
Butt Monkey
Posts: 288
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 12:06 am
Title: Banned
Location: Lost in a maple leaf-help!

The Gospel of Judas

Post by StarChild »

Originally posted by Bamfette
but you don't know what the other thirty said. sure, four disagreed (and one it's a bit iffy, his motivations are not really explored. It's mostly John that paints him as a bad guy.) but what about all the others?

And I don't see how this goes agaisnt prophecy, necessarily. the only thing that changes is Judas's motivations and emphasis placed more on the events leading up to the crucifixion, not the crucifixion/resurrection itself. The basic events are the same with a few differences. but there are differences between the gospels in the bible, so....
The point is that in the Judas manuscript it says Jesus asked Judas to do it, which conflicts with the truth that Judas Iscariot hung himself after committing the act. Why would a man who was given permission to betray Christ hang himself? He could justify his actions then and would feel no guilt in what he did. As for the other four Gospels, they have been taken as fact for over 2000 yrs! Why doubt their credibility now? They are fact...it just depends on where you place your faith...
Image

Ah, yes...lover at heart and along comes the ultimate romantic! Fox hunt ala Nightcrawler
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Angelique »

Well, if the four canonical gospels were exactly the same, that would also cast doubt as to their reliability.

As for the other 30 or however many noncanonical gospels, if I recall correctly, none of them disagreed with the four canonical gospels regarding Judas' role. What makes this one so remarkable is that it's the first, and its claim is not supported by any other text, Biblical or historical.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
Bamfette
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 3278
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2002 9:41 pm
Location: Calgary
Contact:

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Bamfette »

That's where our points differ. You have faith that they are the TRUTH. I do not. I am looking at this from an outside persepctive, and see them objectively, you can't seem to distance yourself enough to do the same. And how does the fact that the 4 biblical gospels have discrepenceis between them make them more reliable somehow, but the discrepencies between them and Judas make Judas LESS reliable? That logic doesn't follow.

And we have lost several of the over 30 gospels, we only know what a handful of them say, notably Mary, Thomas, Philip, Truth, Nicodemus, and now Judas. We don't KNOW that Judas was the only one to say these things. And even Matthew for instance doesn't actually disagree. It omits things that are found in the gospel of Judas, namely the private meetings between Jesus and Judas. But as I said, it doesn't actually paint him strictly as a bad guy, his motivations are very cloudy. It's entirely possible he could have been doing it for any number of reasons, including at Jesus' request. It's the motivation that changes the meaning, not the events, which don't conflict. (well... there comes a point about halfway through where he starts talking, very specifically, about Heaven and angels and the mechanics of it all in a private discussion with Judas, that has some overt differences... but the actual events like the betrayal. stuff that takes place on earth. that's... greatly simplified, but the same) If the motivation is not explored, it can be interperted either way. I'm sure many other gospels walk the line and could be interperted either way, as well.
Originally posted by StarChild

The point is that in the Judas manuscript it says Jesus asked Judas to do it, which conflicts with the truth that Judas Iscariot hung himself after committing the act. Why would a man who was given permission to betray Christ hang himself? He could justify his actions then and would feel no guilt in what he did. As for the other four Gospels, they have been taken as fact for over 2000 yrs! Why doubt their credibility now? They are fact...it just depends on where you place your faith...
If Judas was asked to 'betray' Jesus, and he did so out of loyalty, that doesn't mean he wouldn't hang himself. (or leap to his death, the gospels disagree on that. Sometimes his death is not mentioned at all.) especially given what the Gnostics believed about death being a release. They considered death to be a GOOD thing. And Jesus says to him repeatedly in the gospel things like this (after a vision he had about entering a great temple, and Jesus said to him only the 'holy' could enter the place he saw) :
Judas said, "Master, could it be that my seed is under control of the rulers?"
Jesus answered and said to him, "Come, That I [two lines missing], but that you will grieve much when you see the kingdom and all its generation."
When he heard this, Judas said to him, "What good is it that I have recieved it? For you have set me apart for that generation."
Jesus answered and said, "You will become the thirteenth, and you will be cursed by the other generations - and you will come to rule over them. In the last days they will curse your ascent to the holy generation."
Jesus made it pretty clear that the action he would have to preform would not be pleasant, that he would grieve greatly, and would be reviled for it. Just because he was asked to do this thing does not mean he mourned the passing of someone he admired and even worshipped any less. (even if he did rise from the grave) That being said, this being a Gnostic text, from their perspective, he also saw it as his great purpose in life, the thing he had to do before he could shed his corporeal form - die. Once completed he probably saw little reason, especially given how reviled he was by many followers and former friends, to stick around in this life, since his task was completed.

I actually don't believe any of the gospels are true. I am not sure if Jesus ever existed. He may have, but there isn't really any historical evidence for it. I just find it interesting that it could be interperted in so many ways, and I find it strange to disreagrd anything not already in the bible out of hand based on circular logic. To not even consider that, (especially given the number of discrepencies between the gospels that ARE in the bible) even if this disagrees, that there is nothing of value in it. If it DID happen, it was actually probably somewhere in the middle. Judas probably wasn't a horrific bad guy, nor was he Jesus's most trusted and loyal disciple. The truth, assuming it all hapened, is probably somewhere in the middle, and as such reading both takes, understanding they BOTH could say something of the truth, should be valuable.

"These writings are of inestimable importance in drawing aside the curtain of later perspectives behind which Christian beginnings lie, and exposing the vitality and diversity of early Christian life and reflection. They demonstrate that reading the story of Christian origins backwards through the lenses of canon and creed has given us an account of the formation of only one kind of Christianity, and even that only partially. The fuller picture lets us see more clearly how the later Christianity of the New Testament and the Nicene Creed arose out of many different possibilities through experimentation, compromise and very often, conflict." -- Karen King author Mary of Magdala: Jesus and the First Woman Apostle (2003)

*edit -I've now read the gospel in its entirety. quite interesting. I actually agree with it in many regards, when it's not going on about angels and stuff. I find it interesting that many people today are actually following the teachings of the gospel inadvertently. It basically says (a very gnostic thought) that organized churches will become corrupt, and will do things in Gods name that were never intended, evil things, so that it is best to seek a personal relationship with God. very interesting.

[Edited on 13/4/06 by Bamfette]
Angelique
Dread Pirate
Dread Pirate
Posts: 2882
Joined: Mon Aug 22, 2005 7:27 am
Location: sailing under the Jolly Wagner

The Gospel of Judas

Post by Angelique »

Originally posted by Bamfette
That's where our points differ. You have faith that they are the TRUTH. I do not. I am looking at this from an outside persepctive, and see them objectively, you can't seem to distance yourself enough to do the same. And how does the fact that the 4 biblical gospels have discrepenceis between them make them more reliable somehow, but the discrepencies between them and Judas make Judas LESS reliable? That logic doesn't follow.
Sure it does, because there's a difference between a discrepancy and an outright contradiction. When the Gospels give different accounts of just who was where and did what that don't perfectly mesh, those are discrepancies. Also, when different witnesses give accounts of the same events that don't contain discrepancies, that is typically an indicator that they conspired together in developing their stories.

But a contradiction is when, as in the case of Judas, Jesus says in one Gospel that this must happen, but "woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is to be handed over. It would be better for him if he had never been born," and the other basically says either Jesus never said that, never meant it, or deliberately asked one of his closest friends to put himself in that terrible position.

It is possible to acknowledge the reliability of the canonical gospels without believing they're actually true. Flavius Josephus, a historian from that time who did not by any verifiable stretch believe Jesus was the Messiah (though some manuscript allegedly by him indicated it was possible he might, that has been dismissed) verified that Jesus did indeed exist and really died on that cross around Passover that year. (Many Gnostics believed that Jesus actually did not die, and some go so far as to insist that the crucifixion was some grand hoax. So they're contradicted by secular historical accounts, too.)

As for people claiming to follow Jesus and doing terrible things in His name, that's also in the Bible. You don't need to look outside of it to find Jesus' roundly condemning that sort of stuff.
Meddle not with the heartstrings of fans, for we are powerful and hold your pursestrings.

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=6 ... &ref=share

www.heroesfallenstudiosinc.webs.com

http://hubpages.com/hub/characterdriven
Post Reply