Found: Gospel of Judas

There were many crucifixions at the time of Christ and for the same reasons Christ was crucified -- about 200 years later the writers of the Passion decided on one figure over the others. He's barely mentioned in the actual historical writings of that period. I wouldn't doubt that Judas was given a bum wrap, mainly because these writers were novelists of the first order and needed yet another villain besides Herod and Pontius Pilate.

0 Replies

Look at all my trials and tribulations
Sinking in a gentle pool of wine
Don't disturb me now, I can see the answers
'Til this evening is this morning, life is fine.

Always hoped that i'd be an apostle
Knew that i could make it if i tried
Then when we retire, we can write the gospels
So they'll all talk about us when we've died . . .

0 Replies

Well, edgar, you may think this is a crazy notion, but I always thought of Judas as a PR person. You know, trying to get Jesus to be a man at the top? Still think everything is mostly political.

0 Replies

Dan Brown just won his case of the lawsuit claiming he plagerized by doing ordinary research for "The Da Vince Code." At least he admits he's written a fiction. St. Mathew and St. John were the Dan Browns of their time.

0 Replies

Miss Lettybettyhettygetty, i think you've been listenin' to that ol' Jesus Christ Superstar again . . .

(Judas:)

Every time I look at you
I don't understand
Why you let the things you did
Get so out of hand
You'd have managed better
If you'd had it planned
Now why'd you choose such a backward time
And such a strange land?

0 Replies

I did a little reading on this Gospel of Judas but will do more. Here is some of what I read:

Quote:

Sometime in the 1970's, in a cave in Egypt, a copy of the "gospel of Judas" was discovered. The circumstances of the discovery have been described as shady, with those who possessed the copy asking for exorbitant amounts of money for the codex. For decades, no institution was willing to pay for the purchase due to its dubious origins. Eventually the codex of the gospel of Judas was purchased by a foundation in Switzerland. The existence of the gospel of Judas codex was made public in 2004, but the actual release of the content of the codex has been repeatedly delayed, with the now expected release date of April, 2006. The dating of the gospel of Judas codex is likely the 5th century A.D. Up to one-third of the codex is missing or illegible.

Prior to this discovery, the only reference to the gospel of Judas was in the writings of a 2nd century Christian named Irenaeus. Irenaeus essentially wrote that the gospel of Judas was the "invented history" of a long line of heretics and rebels against God. The essential message of the gospel of Judas is that Jesus wanted Judas to betray Him because it was necessary to fulfill Jesus' plan. If it was Jesus' plan for Judas to betray Him, why would Jesus label Judas the "son of perdition" (John 17:12), and state that it would have been better if Judas had never been born (Matthew 26:24). If Judas was simply following Jesus' instructions, why would he commit suicide once he saw that Jesus was condemned (Matthew 27:5)?

http://www.gotquestions.org/gospel-of-Judas.html

John 13:27: Then after [he had taken] the bit of food, Satan entered into and took possession of [Judas]. Jesus said to him, What you are going to do, do more swiftly than you seem to intend and make quick work of it.

0 Replies

Right -- John witnessed Satan entering and taking possession of Judas. Not without some clever CGI.

0 Replies

Exactly what I meant Lightwizard, some will accept the Gospel of Judas but not the Gospel of John?

0 Replies

For anyone not willing to do the research themselves, or unaware of how to do it, i provide the following information about the source which MOAN linked:

GotQuestions-dot-org, in the 'About Us' section, wrote:

Mission Statement of Got Questions Ministries:

"Got Questions Ministries seeks to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ by providing Biblical, applicable, and timely answers to spiritually-related questions through an internet presence."

Therefore, anyone reading MOAN's quotes, or going to the site she linked should know that it is a biased source which has a stake in supporting a conventional, doctrinally orthodox view of ancient documents, and not a reliably unbiased source.

0 Replies

It is so obvious that MOAN did not understand LW's comment.

0 Replies

Lightwizard, if I did not understand the comment, would you mind expounding on it so that I could understand it?

Setanta, that is only one source I am looking at. It's not the only site I have come across that has said virtually the same thing. I would imagine that the sites that are accepting this Gospel as truth could be considered biased by some also.

0 Replies

Which is precisely why one careful examines the stake a source has in an answer before swallowing it whole--such as naively accepting that "GotQuestions" is going to be an unbiased source.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Exactly what I meant Lightwizard, some will accept the Gospel of Judas but not the Gospel of John?

It is safe to guess that this is not about accepting the gospel of Judas or the gospel of John. This is about skepticism of either. And yes: if the gospel of Judas bears a relationship to Judas's view of the story, it does add to the contradictions that already exist between the canonic gospels, confirming the skeptics in their skepticism. (Of course, the gospel of Judas may well not reflect Judas's perspective. After all, up to 300 years could have passed before the gospel was put in writing.)

0 Replies

Believe it or not, Setanta. "I don't know how to love him" had nothing to do with my interpretation. <smile>. Still believe Jesus had one agenda and Judas another. Ever since the Baptist faith scared the hell outta me, I have looked at the Christian bible with different eyes. I think where we all differ is on the divinity part.

0 Replies

I'm as fascinated by this discovery as I was when I first read the four gospels in college (Bible as lit course) and thought, "From this they concocted a religion?"

As others have noted, this newly discovered info sheds new light on the origins of Christianity. The believers can reject it, that's fine, though denying its validity because "Jesus would never lie" seems just plain silly...

0 Replies

Setanta,

I would imagine that if I posted from every site that vitually said the same thing as the one I posted, you would find none of them credible.

I would also imagine that some you could post for the "pro" postiion on this I would not find credible. That's the way it all works. You, me, and everyone else has their reasons for what they believe, what they accept, etc.

0 Replies

all of this is borderlne interesting but, in essence, pretty much devoid of historical reality.. Ok, on with the show.

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

Jesus stated His knowledge of what would happen, where and when, and by whom, if you believe the Bible.

He followed the path that he knew would lead to His death.

What scriptural reference do you base your statement: "The lie would be that it wasn't Satan that made Judas do what he did " Did Christ say Satan made Judas do what he did?

MOAN, if you assert that the Gospel of Judas calls Jesus a liar, the scriptural reference you cite to prove this must have Jesus stating that Satan made Judas betray Him.

Can you prove your assertion? The reference from John only shows that John imagined something he could not have seen and does not prove. Moreso, Jesus didn't say it.

LW said it better.

0 Replies

Momma Angel wrote:

Setanta,

I would imagine that if I posted from every site that vitually said the same thing as the one I posted, you would find none of them credible.

I would also imagine that some you could post for the "pro" postiion on this I would not find credible. That's the way it all works. You, me, and everyone else has their reasons for what they believe, what they accept, etc.

Typical MOAN horsie poop . . . read THomas' post, and then read Dys' post . . . no, i am unlikely to find your preferred distributors of religious propaganda to be credible. Given that i have little reason to believe that it is demonstrated that the so-called Jesus even existed, the concept of a "gospel of Judas" is just as silly as is the concept of a "gospel of John" from where i sit. Therefore, your attempt to put things in idiotic dichotomous terms of pro and con is completely meaningless, and irrelevant to my core reaction to this tempest in a teapot.

I strongly urge you to read Dys' post.

0 Replies

You wouldn't find yourself in such a defensive position over this if your fear of losing your religion didn't force you to make so many claims you can't support.

If your faith is strong at all, factual discoveries couldn't shake it.

You're afraid. What does that say about your faith?

0 Replies

Found: Gospel of Judas

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know