Revealed: The Gospel of Judas

[Victor]

By Linda Morris
April 7, 2006 - 8:08AM

A 1700-year-old papyrus manuscript suggests history has misjudged the greatest villain of Christianity: Judas was under orders when he betrayed Jesus.

The only known surviving copy of the lost gospel of Judas portrays the treacherous disciple as a loyal deputy acting at the behest of his leader.

In fact, Judas sold Jesus out as an act of obedience not treachery, thereby fulfilling his theological destiny. Key passages from the third or fourth century Coptic manuscript were released by its publisher, the National Geographic Society, last night, a week before Easter, the holiest time of the Christian calendar.

The society, which is rumoured to have purchased publishing rights for more than $1 million, plans magazine articles, television specials and book deals amid concerns about the ethics of ancient acquisitions.

The society's panel of scholars has submitted the document to radiocarbon dating, ink analysis and spectral imaging and has declared it authentic.

The gospel of Judas is believed to be the work of gnostic Christians, a stream of Christian thinking declared heretical by early church fathers. It is a companion text to ancient scriptures unearthed in 1945, which have formed the basis of some assertions in Dan Brown's controversial bestseller The Da Vinci Code.

Australian biblical scholars said the document would be likely to provide a window on early Christianity, but did not threaten Christian teachings because while it was old, it did not date to the time of the Bible's Gospels.

"The text bears witness that to some people Judas was a misunderstood character," said Dr Malcolm Choat, a specialist in early Christianity at Macquarie University. "It fills in the picture but it doesn't make the picture."

But the Coptic Orthodox Church dismissed the document as "non-Christian babbling resulting from a group of people trying to create a false 'amalgam' between the Greek mythology and Far East religions with Christianity They were written by a group of people who were aliens to the main Christian stream of the early Christianity," the church's theological leader, Metropolitan Bishoy, said.

"These texts are neither reliable nor accurate Christian texts, as they are historically and logically alien to the main Christian thinking and philosophy of the early and present Christians."

The Judas gospel is a third or fourth century Coptic manuscript discovered in the desert near El Minya, Egypt, in the 1970s. It was sold to a dealer in illicit antiquities and languished in a safe deposit box in the US before falling into the hands of a Swiss foundation.

The Bible says Judas betrayed Jesus to the Romans for a purse of 30 pieces of silver in the Garden of Gethsemane. He later hung himself.

According to limited extracts of the gospel of Judas offered to the Herald, Jesus explains Judas his role in the crucifixion: "You will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me."

In other key passages released to the public, Jesus confides: "Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom. It is possible for you to reach it, but you will grieve a great deal."

For his role Judas would be despised by the other disciples: "You will be cursed by the other generations and you will come to rule them." The gospel ends: "They [the arresting party] approached Judas and said to him. 'What are you doing? You are Jesus's disciple'. Judas answered them as they wished. And he received some money and handed over to him.

As well as the gospel of Judas, the newly discovered 66-page document also contained a text titled James, a letter of Peter to Philip, and a fragment of a fourth text scholars are provisionally calling Book of Allogenes.

[Hugh R]

Not a Bible scholar by any means, but I would question the historical accuracy of most documents written several hundred years after an event. Especially from that long ago. A lot of word of mouth, handed down generation-to-generation. But I offer no opinion on the subject or the conclusions.

[tabs]

I guess U had to be there to know what really happened huh......

[jriera]

Must be Bush fault too .... go figure

[Milu]

There was similar theory by Donovan Joyce in the Jesus scroll. Joyce was simply speculating and working from available biblical data. Came up with some interesting ideas in a small book.

[Moneyguy1]

How did this morph into a political thread? Does everything have to orbit around "us vs them" politics?

Hugh, I think you have a grasp. The Gnostics are responsible for a number of alternative gospels..The Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Mary (Magdelene) and a few others I cannot recall at the moment. All were written over one hundred years after the biblical events happened. AS far as the four primary Gospels, they too are pieced together and some scholars claim that at least one of them is based primarily on one of the other three. It is too darn late to do deep research. If it were not for some Jewish and Roman historians of the time, there would be little verifiable proof that Christ even existed. That is part of religion...basing faith on events and recollections that require faith in order to be a true believer.

[Tervuren]

To me, its an obviously just a way to make a lot of money by creating hype. I am not going to pay a thing to find out about it.

There are already far too many people using "christianity" to fleece people of their money.

[djmcmath]

I'm with Hugh and Bob (at least partially). If it's earliest possible date is hundreds of years later, then it falls into the prime window for legendary text. The four primary gospels date to within about 30 years, which doesn't even compare to this. I'll also be curious as to the textual analysis. The guys who study ancient texts talk a lot about writing styles, dates that certain words appeared, that sort of thing. While carbon dating and ink analysis are good, the textual analysis is a big one, in my mind.

It is an interesting speculation item, though. Consider this brief theological train of thought: God knew that Judas would betray Jesus -- God is all-knowing, and is never surprised. God also directs all things, so at some level, he must have _told_ Judas to betray Jesus. Jesus is God. So remove the middle-man, and you get Jesus telling Judas to betray him. (shrug) I don't know why it would take 300 years to generate that legend, but it isn't hard to make a logical path for it's production.

[IROC]

Originally posted by Moneyguy1
If it were not for some Jewish and Roman historians of the time, there would be little verifiable proof that Christ even existed.

Who were these historians? I've not seen anything (from secular history) that gives anything close to "verifiable proof" that Jesus was a real person.

I'm not bashing here - seriously interested.

Mike

[not sharp]

IROC'

Can't agree more. The new testament was written 80+ years after the time of jesus. the quaran was written 80+ years after mohamad, moses did not write the books attributed to him. What's the deal? Power as the religions grew those in power must find a way to keep it. so they begat these strange texts, that, sorry to say, people believe today.

When if fact all the "religion" one needs is right in front of them!

[bigchillcar]

you will grieve a great deal."

god actually revealed this message to me..is it too late for the 'book of bigchillcar'??
ryan

[sammyg2]

This theory is not new, it has been going around for several decades at least.
The idea that Judas was following orders from Jesus may or may not be true but the idea is not contrary to the bible.

The bible does not say it isn't true. If you read between the lines in the first 4 books of the new testiment then the story might be true. In fact there are lines in the bible that might support the theory depending on how you interpret them.

To the rest of you who have this irrational need to say negative things about Jesus or Christianity, I can't help but wonder what kind of character flaw causes that sort of action.

[sammyg2]

Oh, and if you really study the history of this "new" gospel of judas, you will discover that the paper was indeed written about 300 years after Jesus, but it is a copy of an earlier Greek text which may have been a copy of an earlier manuscript.
How old was the original? No one knows. it very well could have been written at the same time as the gospels of Mark, Luke, John, etc.

You don't know and I don't know, but saying it is not credible just because of it's age is a bit misinformed.

I have a bible that was printed just a few years ago. does that mean it has to be legend because it is so new?

[Groesbeck Hurricane]

Just for informational sake, I will input what a friend of mine had to say as we were discussing this same subject yesterday:

The Gnostics were a group of misdirected philosophers who built their lives in denial of the divine paradox of Christ's very existence...the fact that their opinion on Judas directly contradicts Christ's own words about him should at the very least cause one to consider the source. The Gnostics believed that all spirit was good and that all flesh was evil, and denied the corporeal existence of the person of Christ. Since, they said, a perfectly good being cannot inhabit sinful flesh, Christ cannot have been a physical being, but must have been a benevolent apparition. They missed the point entirely, that Christ was God, and came in the flesh to redeem fallen Man from its inherited sinful nature by sacrificing the very flesh he put on as an atonement for the sins of everyone, in accordance with Jewish law.



In reality, no single fact "enabled" or "made possible" Christ's crucifixion other than this one: That he willingly gave his life. ("No one takes my life from me. I give it freely." are the words of Christ.) The mechanics are irrelevant, and the fact that an act of betrayal led to his arrest, which led to his mock trial, which led to his beating, which led to...etc. does not mean that the act of betrayal was in fact a good deed. Christ at the last supper said that the one who betrayed him would be lost to him. The line from the Passion of the Christ, when Judas goes and tries to give the money back to the Pharisees, is a reference to Jewish law. (He becomes overwhelmed with grief and cries out, "I have shed innocent blood!" then apparently either gets possessed or goes insane and hangs himself.) Judas' actions were evil. That God made good come out of it does not mean that the act was itself a good act.



That this document is as old as it is demands attention from a historical perspective, I'll be the first to agree. However, examination of its contents, assuming they are truly represented by this article, as I believe they are, will probably show that this is nothing more than a very very old heretical opinion held by a group of heretics (the Gnostics) and should not be considered a "viable alternative to traditional Christian doctrine."



Brian

[IROC]

Originally posted by sammyg2
To the rest of you who have this irrational need to say negative things about Jesus or Christianity, I can't help but wonder what kind of character flaw causes that sort of action.

I think questioning beliefs is a healthy thing to do - not an irrational character flaw. Some people become offended if their beliefs are questioned however (not saying that you're one of them).

I think that any person who makes any sort of claim opens himself up to criticism and ridicule unless he has some logic or evidence to back up the claim. It's just natural human behavior. Christianity leaves alot of people open to ridicule (not that ridicule is politically correct) because alot of it's tenets are not based on any evidence or logic - simply "faith". If you don't have the "faith" then you don't understand. "Faith" works for believers - the rest of us need evidence.

If someone told me that they fully believed that the world was once covered by a global flood and that a guy named Noah built a big boat...etc., I would question their critical thinking skills or assume they were somewhat gullible. Is that ridicule?

Mike

[djmcmath]

IROC -- Cornelius Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Thallus, Mara Bar-Serapion, and of course, Josephus, to name a few. I'm sure I'm missing a few, but those are off the top of my head.

Not sharp -- the current scholarly view is that most of the NT was written between 50 and 100AD, or within 15-65 years of the events. We actually have manusripts that date to before 100AD, so it's tough to argue an 80+ year gap. The Quran was written as it was happening -- Mohammed wrote it down real time -- no comparison, there.

[Moneyguy1]

IROC;

Not that any or all of these can be verified, but a five minute search came up with the following listing of historical writers who refer to "Christ" or to the "Christians" in a historical manner:

Josephus (37-100 AD)

Tacitus (55-117 AD..in his "Annals")

Suetonius (69 140 AD)

Julius Africanus (160 - 240 AD)

Origen (185-254 AD)

Pliny the Younger (62 - 113 AD)

Thallus (Samaritan historian)

Mara-Serapion (in a letter to his son 73 AD)

It would take more effort than I am willing to exert to actually verify any of these as truly authentic, only that they are listed on a number of sites from Christian to athiest, with various interpretations of their meanings which would be expected, given that some want to prove and some want to disprove.

[IROC]

The people listed above did not live during Jesus's time. How can their writings be authenticated? How do we know they are valid? None of these people were eyewitnesses to the events they wrote about - the information had to be passed (orally) from other people. How much weight do we place on what they wrote in that instance?

If Jesus really lived and did all of the things he supposedly did, where are the writings during his time? Surely someone would have noticed the miracles and other happenings and written something down?

Where are those?

FWIW, I am familiar with those historians, etc., listed above. I was hoping for something more.

Mike

[Dantilla]

Originally posted by IROC
The people listed above did not live during Jesus's time. How can their writings be authenticated? How do we know they are valid? None of these people were eyewitnesses to the events they wrote about - the information had to be passed (orally) from other people. How much weight do we place on what they wrote in that instance?

If that is the standard, every history textbook used today would have to be thrown out. Did George Washington really exist? Have you talked to anybody recently that personally listened to Lincoln giving the Gettysburg Address?

The Gnostic way of thinking also gave them a way out of any bad behavior. Rape somebody? "Hey- That was just the evil body. My soul cannot be held accountable for what the physical body did". Wierd thinking.

[bigchillcar]

ahh..the reconcilation of 'faith and reason'..the ultimate question..always an interesting discussion.
ryan