The Missing Gospels by Darrell Bock is a discussion of the “lost gospels” discovered at Nag Hammadi which have received so much media attention. Dr. Bock, and expert in the field, compares and contrasts viewpoints appearing in these “missing gospels” with the viewpoints contained in “traditional” sources.
These traditional sources include the documents eventually collected in our New Testament, as well as other sources not in the New Testament: Clement of Rome, Ignatius, Polycarp, the Didache, Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, etc. Bock generally confines his discussion to documents written in the first and second centuries AD.
Bock compares these two categories of sources in four areas: 1) The Nature of God and Creation, 2) Jesus: Divine and/or Human 3) The Nature of Humanity’s Redemption and 4) Jesus’ Death: Knowledge, Sin and Salvation.
1) The nature of God and creation: The traditional sources teach that there is only one God who is the creator of the universe. Originally, the creation was good but became “fallen” though sin and rebellion. While the Gospel of Thomas also refers to just one God, most of the “missing gospels,” refer to numerous gods and divine beings, and the material creation is presented as a fundamentally evil mistake from the very beginning.
2) Jesus: Divine and/or human: Contrary to The DaVinci Code, none of the ancient texts— whether traditional or “missing gospels”—present Jesus as merely an ordinary human being. All of the “missing gospels” present Jesus as some kind of exalted or heavenly figure. In fact, some go so far as to say that he wasn’t really human at all—he just appeared to be human. By contrast, the traditional sources consistently refer to Jesus as both human and divine at the same time.
3) The Nature of Humanity’s Redemption: The “missing gospels” consistently present the material world of creation as fundamentally defective and “fallen.” Mankind is divided into two classes: those who understand and embrace the spiritual nature of the world and those who hang on to the physical. Only the former will be redeemed with “the ascent of the spiritual one back into the perfect nonmaterial world.” (146). The flesh will eventually be destroyed. By contrast, the traditional view believes not only in a spiritual world, but the redemption and resurrection of the body as well.
4) Jesus’ Death: Knowledge, Sin, and Salvation: Generally speaking the “missing gospels” present Jesus’ work as leading people out of their “ignorance and forgetfulness” (i.e. ignorance of the fact that they are really spirit creatures trapped in a defective material world) and into future “rest and immortality.” By contrast, the traditional view teaches that Jesus not only showed the way, but is the way. He came to die as an atoning sacrifice for our sins.
Many biblical critics and members of the media present these “missing gospels as evidence for the diversity of ancient Christianity—often implying that the “missing gospels” have just as much right to be considered “truth” as the traditional sources. The fact is, however, that the earliest traditional sources date back to the first century whereas (with the possible though extremely improbable exception of the Gospel of Thomas), the “missing Gospels all date from the second, third, or even fourth centuries AD.
Far from being family disputes within Christianity, Bock demonstrates that the “missing gospels” present views that are not even in the same ballpark as traditional Judeo-Christian thought. Traditional Christian sources show a striking similarity to the Jewish ground from which Jesus and the apostles came.
The “missing gospels,” on the other hand, appear to be attempts to twist this original Jewish message of Jesus and his earliest followers to make it more palatable to second-fourth century Greco-Roman religious and philosophical speculations which, to those who actually take time to read the “missing gospels” will appear much more bizarre, unbelievable and even offensive than anything found in the New Testament.
Unfortunately, by the very nature of a summary, I have oversimplified Darrell Bock’s arguments and outstanding study. Please read The Missing Gospels for a more detailed and accurate assessment.
Showing posts with label Gnosticism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gnosticism. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
The Gospel of Judas; Introduction
Yesterday (April 6, 2006), the discovery of the ancient Gospel of Judas was announced with much fanfare. It was a leading story on one of the TV news shows this morning and will be the subject of a National Geographic documentary this weekend.
Although the particular manuscript copy actually discovered was carbon dated to the 3rd/4th century AD, the original document was written as early as AD 140-180. Discovered in 1978, this ancient papyrus document may be the same Gospel of Judas referred to by Irenaeus.
In the 180's AD, Irenaeus wrote extensively on numerous ancient religious cults. One of these groups, known as the Cainites, thought they were descendants of “Esau, Korah, [and] the Sodomites.” Irenaeus wrote that “They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.”
Writing fictitious gospels was the “in” thing in the second to fourth centuries AD. Numerous second to fourth century gospels and documents were discovered in 1945, including “The Gospel of Thomas.” These documents, not including the Gospel of Judas, have been translated in a book called, The Nag Hammadi Library, edited by James Robinson.
Anyone who has actually ever read the Nag Hammadi documents knows that they are usually so absurdly bizarre that they have virtually no claim to historical reliability—unless, of course, you think that women must become men in order to be saved, or that being female is a "defect," an "illness," or “madness” or that Jesus never suffered in any way and, in fact, was laughing at everyone while on the cross. Or perhaps you believe that the androgynous god "Death" begot seven androgynous female offspring named "Wrath, Pain, Lust, Sighing, Curse, Bitterness, [and] Quarrelsomeness." Hmmm, I wonder why no early church leaders considered these Nag Hammadi documents as part of their New Testament?
Still, the media is having a great time with this, partly out of their lack of knowledge and partly, no doubt, for ratings.
Although the particular manuscript copy actually discovered was carbon dated to the 3rd/4th century AD, the original document was written as early as AD 140-180. Discovered in 1978, this ancient papyrus document may be the same Gospel of Judas referred to by Irenaeus.
In the 180's AD, Irenaeus wrote extensively on numerous ancient religious cults. One of these groups, known as the Cainites, thought they were descendants of “Esau, Korah, [and] the Sodomites.” Irenaeus wrote that “They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.”
Writing fictitious gospels was the “in” thing in the second to fourth centuries AD. Numerous second to fourth century gospels and documents were discovered in 1945, including “The Gospel of Thomas.” These documents, not including the Gospel of Judas, have been translated in a book called, The Nag Hammadi Library, edited by James Robinson.
Anyone who has actually ever read the Nag Hammadi documents knows that they are usually so absurdly bizarre that they have virtually no claim to historical reliability—unless, of course, you think that women must become men in order to be saved, or that being female is a "defect," an "illness," or “madness” or that Jesus never suffered in any way and, in fact, was laughing at everyone while on the cross. Or perhaps you believe that the androgynous god "Death" begot seven androgynous female offspring named "Wrath, Pain, Lust, Sighing, Curse, Bitterness, [and] Quarrelsomeness." Hmmm, I wonder why no early church leaders considered these Nag Hammadi documents as part of their New Testament?
Still, the media is having a great time with this, partly out of their lack of knowledge and partly, no doubt, for ratings.
Gospel of Judas and critical scholarship
I watched National Geographic’s special on the Gospel of Judas last night (April 9, 2006) and was stunned. To understand my reaction, you need to understand something about critical scholarship and the biblical gospels.
For years critics and skeptics have argued incessantly that we really can’t trust the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, because they are supposedly filled with decades of encrusted tradition (To get the effect you need to emphasize the part about decades of encrusted tradition as if 40-70 years were an eternity)!
The Gospel of John especially falls under the critics’ scorn since it was written last, probably 60-70 years after Jesus’ death, and is more theological in nature than Matthew, Mark and Luke. The infamous "Jesus Seminar," for example, dismissed almost the entire Gospel of John as being unhistorical.
Enter the Gospel of Judas. Unlike the biblical gospels, the Gospel of Judas takes Jesus out of his historical Jewish context, is even more esoteric in nature than the Gospel of John, and was written 30-80 years after the Gospel of John—100-150 years after Jesus death! Surely any scholars who were so skeptical of the biblical gospels would have much more reason to be skeptical of the Gospel of Judas, wouldn’t they?
Although I suspected that this program was going to be a snow job (it was) I was still amazed to see scholars who are so critical of the historical reliability of the biblical gospels, treating the Gospel of Judas as if it should be taken seriously! In fact, one scholar who spoke so glowingly about the Gospel of Judas had actually been a member of the same Jesus Seminar that did such a hatchet job on the biblical gospels! Could it be that something other than objective scholarship is going on here? More specifics on this tomorrow.
For years critics and skeptics have argued incessantly that we really can’t trust the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, because they are supposedly filled with decades of encrusted tradition (To get the effect you need to emphasize the part about decades of encrusted tradition as if 40-70 years were an eternity)!
The Gospel of John especially falls under the critics’ scorn since it was written last, probably 60-70 years after Jesus’ death, and is more theological in nature than Matthew, Mark and Luke. The infamous "Jesus Seminar," for example, dismissed almost the entire Gospel of John as being unhistorical.
Enter the Gospel of Judas. Unlike the biblical gospels, the Gospel of Judas takes Jesus out of his historical Jewish context, is even more esoteric in nature than the Gospel of John, and was written 30-80 years after the Gospel of John—100-150 years after Jesus death! Surely any scholars who were so skeptical of the biblical gospels would have much more reason to be skeptical of the Gospel of Judas, wouldn’t they?
Although I suspected that this program was going to be a snow job (it was) I was still amazed to see scholars who are so critical of the historical reliability of the biblical gospels, treating the Gospel of Judas as if it should be taken seriously! In fact, one scholar who spoke so glowingly about the Gospel of Judas had actually been a member of the same Jesus Seminar that did such a hatchet job on the biblical gospels! Could it be that something other than objective scholarship is going on here? More specifics on this tomorrow.
Anti-semitism and the Gospel of Judas
No doubt about it, the Christian Church has a terrible and shameful record of anti-Semitism. Much of this anti-Semitism comes from people who, while claiming to be Christian, were actually no more Christian—in the New Testament sense—than Osama Ben Laden! For example, it is nonsense to imagine that the Nazi generated holocaust was in any sense “Christian." True Christians were those who risked their lives hiding Jews from the Nazis.
The sad fact remains, however, that many genuine Christians, like Martin Luther, for example, were guilty of anti-Semitism. This is certainly inexcusable, but to blame anti-Semitism on the New Testament--as did some of the scholars interviewed on the Gospel of Judas documentary--is a misguided (or deliberate?) misunderstanding of the New Testament.
The fact is that Jews have been critiquing themselves since the very earliest times. The Jewish prophets, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and others, were merciless in their criticism against their fellow Jews. In fact, even Moses was particularly critical against his own Jewish followers. None of these Jewish prophets, however, attacked the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac or Jacob—they criticized their fellow Jews for departing from their own God to serve other gods, or for living lives of corruption and immorality, or for piously going through the rituals of sacrifice but then continuing to oppress their neighbor.
Far from being anti-Semitic, the portrayal of Jesus in the biblical Gospels fits precisely the pattern of these earlier prophets. Far from being anti-Semitic, St. Paul, the former Pharisee, writes that he would willingly go to hell if it would save his own Jewish countrymen! That is certainly not anti-Semitism.
On the other hand the Nag Hammadi documents—you know, the ones rejected by those terrible fourth century Christian bishops—have a lot to say about the God of the Jews. In fact, they launch a full frontal attack against the core of Judaism itself. Over against the monotheism of both Christianity and Judaism, these documents are essentially polytheistic! They espouse a world view filled with gods and goddesses, archons, aeons, totalities, etc. In fact, they repeatedly teach that the god of the Jews is an ignorant, evil low order god! Talk about anti-Semitism!
The point of all this is to highlight some amazing hypocrisy. Some biblical critics who attack the New Testament for anti-Semitism—most recently exemplified in the documentary on the Gospel of Judas—are often the same ones who are glorifying the Nag Hammadi documents that are positively vile in their anti-Semitic denunciations of Jewish belief. And yet these critics have the nerve to attack early Christian bishops for rejecting these anti-Semitic documents!
The sad fact remains, however, that many genuine Christians, like Martin Luther, for example, were guilty of anti-Semitism. This is certainly inexcusable, but to blame anti-Semitism on the New Testament--as did some of the scholars interviewed on the Gospel of Judas documentary--is a misguided (or deliberate?) misunderstanding of the New Testament.
The fact is that Jews have been critiquing themselves since the very earliest times. The Jewish prophets, Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Hosea, Amos and others, were merciless in their criticism against their fellow Jews. In fact, even Moses was particularly critical against his own Jewish followers. None of these Jewish prophets, however, attacked the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac or Jacob—they criticized their fellow Jews for departing from their own God to serve other gods, or for living lives of corruption and immorality, or for piously going through the rituals of sacrifice but then continuing to oppress their neighbor.
Far from being anti-Semitic, the portrayal of Jesus in the biblical Gospels fits precisely the pattern of these earlier prophets. Far from being anti-Semitic, St. Paul, the former Pharisee, writes that he would willingly go to hell if it would save his own Jewish countrymen! That is certainly not anti-Semitism.
On the other hand the Nag Hammadi documents—you know, the ones rejected by those terrible fourth century Christian bishops—have a lot to say about the God of the Jews. In fact, they launch a full frontal attack against the core of Judaism itself. Over against the monotheism of both Christianity and Judaism, these documents are essentially polytheistic! They espouse a world view filled with gods and goddesses, archons, aeons, totalities, etc. In fact, they repeatedly teach that the god of the Jews is an ignorant, evil low order god! Talk about anti-Semitism!
The point of all this is to highlight some amazing hypocrisy. Some biblical critics who attack the New Testament for anti-Semitism—most recently exemplified in the documentary on the Gospel of Judas—are often the same ones who are glorifying the Nag Hammadi documents that are positively vile in their anti-Semitic denunciations of Jewish belief. And yet these critics have the nerve to attack early Christian bishops for rejecting these anti-Semitic documents!
Gospel of Judas; A short summary
So what does the Gospel of Judas really say? Because of copyright laws, I can’t reproduce the Gospel of Judas here, but I can provide a detailed summary in my own words. The following, therefore, is my detailed summary of The Gospel of Judas, based on the account published in The Gospel of Judas, edited by Rodolphe Kasser et al., Washington DC : National Geographic, 2006). Phrases below in quotes are direct quotations from this book. My explanatory comments are in brackets.
The Gospel of Judas begins by saying this is a secret account that Jesus revealed to Judas just days before Jesus’ death. Jesus appeared, doing great miracles for people's salvation. He chose twelve disciples and would sometimes appear to them as a child. One day Jesus found his disciples praying [in context, probably a reference to the Last Supper] and he laughed, saying they were just trying to praise their god. His disciples say that he is the Son of God and he responds by saying that no one really knows him.
This infuriates the disciples and they begin thinking blasphemous thoughts against him. Jesus says that their God within them has provoked them to anger, and challenges any of them to stand before his face. Judas alone rises to the challenge and tells Jesus that he knows Jesus is really from the immortal aeon of Barbelo [a virgin god mentioned constantly in 2nd-4th century Gnostic literature]. Jesus calls Judas away from the rest of the disciples to tell him the secret mysteries. Jesus tells Judas that someone will replace him so the disciples can “come to completion with their god." Jesus then goes away.
The next day, Jesus explains that he went away to another realm. When asked about this realm, Jesus laughs and says that no one of this aeon, of mortal birth, will see that generation.
On another day, the disciples tell Jesus about a dream they had, in which twelve priests commit many sins, such as sacrificing their children and sleeping with men. These priests invoke Jesus’ name as they stand before the altar. Jesus responds saying something about the “generations of the stars” [part of the text is missing] and that they “have planted trees without fruit…in a shameful manner.” Jesus tells his disciples that they are the twelve priests and that the cattle they sacrifice are the men they lead astray. Jesus says other men will come after them, who kill children, sleep with men, and assure people that God has received their sacrifice from the priest [possibly a reference to the offering of Eucharist]. Jesus says they will be put to shame on the last day and commands them to stop sacrificing and “struggling” with him.
Judas asks what kind of fruit this generation produces and Jesus responds saying that people’s body will die but their souls will be taken up. Judas asks about the rest of humanity and Jesus says fruit cannot be harvested from seed sown on rock. Jesus says this is the way of the “corruptible Sophia.” Then Jesus left.
The next thing that happens, without transition or explanation, is that Judas tells Jesus that he has seen a vision. Laughing, Jesus calls Judas “You thirteenth spirit” and says he will listen. In Judas’ vision, the twelve disciples were stoning Judas. Judas came to a huge house with many people around. Jesus tells Judas that Judas’ star has led him astray and that no one “of mortal birth” was worthy to enter that house because it was only for the holy. Jesus says he has explained the “mysteries of the kingdom and has taught “about the error of the stars,” and something about “the twelve aeons” [the text is defective].
Judas asks if “his seed” could be under control of the archons. Jesus says that Judas “will become the thirteenth,” and “will be cursed” but will eventually “rule over the other generations. Jesus then invites Judas to learn about secrets no one has ever seen. Jesus tells Judas about “a great and boundless realm” in which there is a “great invisible Spirit,” using language very similar to First Corinthians 2:9. Then “the enlightened divine Self-Generated” comes out of a “luminous cloud” and creates “myriads” of angelic beings and “enlightened aeons.” Someone [Adamas, or Adam is mentioned in the context, but the text is defective] makes the incorruptible aeon of Seth appear, as well as seventy-two luminaries. The seventy-two incorruptible luminaries cause “three hundred sixty” incorruptible luminaries to appear. Then there are “twelve aeons, and “six heavens for each aeon” for a total of “seventy-two heavens for the seventy two luminaries.” Each of them have five “firmaments” totaling three hundred sixty firmaments.
Then out of a cloud appears “Nebro” or Yaldabaoth [in other Gnostic writings, Nebro mates with Saklas, resulting in twelve aeons. Yaldabaoth is often associated, in one way or another, with the God of the Bible]. “Nebro creates six angels as his assistants. One of these is Saklas [Aramaic for “fool,” a reference to the God of the Bible]. These six angles produce twelve more angels. Five angels rule over the underworld: Christ, Harmathoth, Galila, Yobel and Adonaios. “Then Saklas said to his angels, ‘Let us create a human being after the likeness and after the image.” They then create Adam and Eve.
Judas then asks Jesus how long people will live and Jesus responds saying that God ordered the angel “Michael to give the spirits of people to them as a loan” but he ordered the angel of Gabriel to give spirits to the “great generation” apparently as a gift.
Judas asks what those generations will do. Jesus says “the stars bring matters to completion” and when Saklas’ time is completed, “their first star will appear with the generations,” and that they would fornicate in Jesus’ name and kill their children. Then Jesus laughs because the “six stars wander about with these five combatants, and they will be destroyed….”
Judas then asks about those baptized in Jesus’ name. Jesus’ response is unclear due to defective text, but he apparently says something about those who offer sacrifices to Saklas and something about “everything that is evil.”
Then comes one of the key passages in the whole gospel: Jesus tells Judas that Judas will “sacrifice the man that clothes me.” After this, Judas sees a “luminous cloud” and enters it.
Finally, Jesus goes into the upper room for prayer and the high priests murmur. The Scribes want to arrest Jesus but are afraid to do so because all the people regard him as a prophet. Then, without transition or explanation, they ask Judas what he was doing there, Judas told them what they wanted to know, received his money, and handed Jesus over to them. Thus ends the Gospel of Judas.
If you think the summary is confusing, the original is just as confusing. Come back tomorrow for some commentary and explanation of this nonsense.
The Gospel of Judas begins by saying this is a secret account that Jesus revealed to Judas just days before Jesus’ death. Jesus appeared, doing great miracles for people's salvation. He chose twelve disciples and would sometimes appear to them as a child. One day Jesus found his disciples praying [in context, probably a reference to the Last Supper] and he laughed, saying they were just trying to praise their god. His disciples say that he is the Son of God and he responds by saying that no one really knows him.
This infuriates the disciples and they begin thinking blasphemous thoughts against him. Jesus says that their God within them has provoked them to anger, and challenges any of them to stand before his face. Judas alone rises to the challenge and tells Jesus that he knows Jesus is really from the immortal aeon of Barbelo [a virgin god mentioned constantly in 2nd-4th century Gnostic literature]. Jesus calls Judas away from the rest of the disciples to tell him the secret mysteries. Jesus tells Judas that someone will replace him so the disciples can “come to completion with their god." Jesus then goes away.
The next day, Jesus explains that he went away to another realm. When asked about this realm, Jesus laughs and says that no one of this aeon, of mortal birth, will see that generation.
On another day, the disciples tell Jesus about a dream they had, in which twelve priests commit many sins, such as sacrificing their children and sleeping with men. These priests invoke Jesus’ name as they stand before the altar. Jesus responds saying something about the “generations of the stars” [part of the text is missing] and that they “have planted trees without fruit…in a shameful manner.” Jesus tells his disciples that they are the twelve priests and that the cattle they sacrifice are the men they lead astray. Jesus says other men will come after them, who kill children, sleep with men, and assure people that God has received their sacrifice from the priest [possibly a reference to the offering of Eucharist]. Jesus says they will be put to shame on the last day and commands them to stop sacrificing and “struggling” with him.
Judas asks what kind of fruit this generation produces and Jesus responds saying that people’s body will die but their souls will be taken up. Judas asks about the rest of humanity and Jesus says fruit cannot be harvested from seed sown on rock. Jesus says this is the way of the “corruptible Sophia.” Then Jesus left.
The next thing that happens, without transition or explanation, is that Judas tells Jesus that he has seen a vision. Laughing, Jesus calls Judas “You thirteenth spirit” and says he will listen. In Judas’ vision, the twelve disciples were stoning Judas. Judas came to a huge house with many people around. Jesus tells Judas that Judas’ star has led him astray and that no one “of mortal birth” was worthy to enter that house because it was only for the holy. Jesus says he has explained the “mysteries of the kingdom and has taught “about the error of the stars,” and something about “the twelve aeons” [the text is defective].
Judas asks if “his seed” could be under control of the archons. Jesus says that Judas “will become the thirteenth,” and “will be cursed” but will eventually “rule over the other generations. Jesus then invites Judas to learn about secrets no one has ever seen. Jesus tells Judas about “a great and boundless realm” in which there is a “great invisible Spirit,” using language very similar to First Corinthians 2:9. Then “the enlightened divine Self-Generated” comes out of a “luminous cloud” and creates “myriads” of angelic beings and “enlightened aeons.” Someone [Adamas, or Adam is mentioned in the context, but the text is defective] makes the incorruptible aeon of Seth appear, as well as seventy-two luminaries. The seventy-two incorruptible luminaries cause “three hundred sixty” incorruptible luminaries to appear. Then there are “twelve aeons, and “six heavens for each aeon” for a total of “seventy-two heavens for the seventy two luminaries.” Each of them have five “firmaments” totaling three hundred sixty firmaments.
Then out of a cloud appears “Nebro” or Yaldabaoth [in other Gnostic writings, Nebro mates with Saklas, resulting in twelve aeons. Yaldabaoth is often associated, in one way or another, with the God of the Bible]. “Nebro creates six angels as his assistants. One of these is Saklas [Aramaic for “fool,” a reference to the God of the Bible]. These six angles produce twelve more angels. Five angels rule over the underworld: Christ, Harmathoth, Galila, Yobel and Adonaios. “Then Saklas said to his angels, ‘Let us create a human being after the likeness and after the image.” They then create Adam and Eve.
Judas then asks Jesus how long people will live and Jesus responds saying that God ordered the angel “Michael to give the spirits of people to them as a loan” but he ordered the angel of Gabriel to give spirits to the “great generation” apparently as a gift.
Judas asks what those generations will do. Jesus says “the stars bring matters to completion” and when Saklas’ time is completed, “their first star will appear with the generations,” and that they would fornicate in Jesus’ name and kill their children. Then Jesus laughs because the “six stars wander about with these five combatants, and they will be destroyed….”
Judas then asks about those baptized in Jesus’ name. Jesus’ response is unclear due to defective text, but he apparently says something about those who offer sacrifices to Saklas and something about “everything that is evil.”
Then comes one of the key passages in the whole gospel: Jesus tells Judas that Judas will “sacrifice the man that clothes me.” After this, Judas sees a “luminous cloud” and enters it.
Finally, Jesus goes into the upper room for prayer and the high priests murmur. The Scribes want to arrest Jesus but are afraid to do so because all the people regard him as a prophet. Then, without transition or explanation, they ask Judas what he was doing there, Judas told them what they wanted to know, received his money, and handed Jesus over to them. Thus ends the Gospel of Judas.
If you think the summary is confusing, the original is just as confusing. Come back tomorrow for some commentary and explanation of this nonsense.
Gospel of Judas; Part 1
Over the next few days I’ll provide a very tentative commentary on selected parts of the Gospel of Judas based on my summary (yesterday’s post). To read the actual translation of the Gospel of Judas, see The Gospel of Judas, edited by Rodolphe Kasser et al., Washington DC : National Geographic, 2006). Phrases in quotes below are quotations from this translation.
The Gospel of Judas begins by saying this is a secret account that Jesus revealed to Judas just days before Jesus’ death.
This idea of secret knowledge communicated by Jesus to Judas is a recurring theme in the Gospel of Judas. In the second century AD, Irenaeus argued that we Christians could trace our core teaching about Jesus back to those taught by the apostles, to the apostles themselves and ultimately to Jesus. This succession of teaching was apparently so well known that, generally speaking, the Gnostics didn’t even try to dispute it. What they did was to simply side-step the issue by claiming that Jesus had privately revealed secret knowledge to a particular disciple or associate of Jesus--knowledge that the rest of the disciples (and, therfore, the church) didn’t have.
In other words, these Gnostic groups would argue that the church was teaching essentially what Jesus taught publicly to his disciples and to the people, but in private he taught something entirely different to one of his followers. The Gospel of Mary, or the Gospel of Judas, or the Gospel of Thomas, or the Gospel of Philip, etc. was supposedly that secret revelation. Of course, the content of the teaching in these Gnostic gospels was often very different not only from the biblical Gospels, but from each other. What many of the Gnostic writings did agree on was that we live in an essentially polytheistic universe and that the God of the Old Testament was an evil, ignorant, and malevolent god. This raises a couple of questions:
First, why do many of the more radical Jesus scholars insist on calling these Gnostic groups “Christian” when the entire worldview of most Gnostic writings was decidedly polytheistic, anti-Christian and anti-Jewish? (It would be like calling Muslims “Christians” just because Muhammad had good things to say about Jesus—come to think of it, Islam’s view of God is closer to Christianity than were these Gnostic groups. At least Islam is monotheistic and claims to worship the God of Abraham. The answer to my question is that many of these scholars apparently want to re-write Christian history in an attempt to make orthodox Christianity appear to have no more historical legitimacy than any of these second century Gnostic groups.
Second, since most of the Gnostic documents present an entirely different worldview from that Christianity or the Judaism from which Christianity grew, why should anyone be surprised that Christians never even considered these anti-Semitic, anti-Christian documents as part of their New Testament? And why do some scholars try to pretend this was all part of some conspiracy by supposedly powerful Christian bishops in the fourth century? The answer is that many modern academics want you to think that the collection of the New Testament was entirely about power and had nothing to do with the reliability of the tradition about Jesus.
Surely something other than honest, objective scholarship is going on in the recent attacks against Jesus and orthodox Christianity.
The Gospel of Judas begins by saying this is a secret account that Jesus revealed to Judas just days before Jesus’ death.
This idea of secret knowledge communicated by Jesus to Judas is a recurring theme in the Gospel of Judas. In the second century AD, Irenaeus argued that we Christians could trace our core teaching about Jesus back to those taught by the apostles, to the apostles themselves and ultimately to Jesus. This succession of teaching was apparently so well known that, generally speaking, the Gnostics didn’t even try to dispute it. What they did was to simply side-step the issue by claiming that Jesus had privately revealed secret knowledge to a particular disciple or associate of Jesus--knowledge that the rest of the disciples (and, therfore, the church) didn’t have.
In other words, these Gnostic groups would argue that the church was teaching essentially what Jesus taught publicly to his disciples and to the people, but in private he taught something entirely different to one of his followers. The Gospel of Mary, or the Gospel of Judas, or the Gospel of Thomas, or the Gospel of Philip, etc. was supposedly that secret revelation. Of course, the content of the teaching in these Gnostic gospels was often very different not only from the biblical Gospels, but from each other. What many of the Gnostic writings did agree on was that we live in an essentially polytheistic universe and that the God of the Old Testament was an evil, ignorant, and malevolent god. This raises a couple of questions:
First, why do many of the more radical Jesus scholars insist on calling these Gnostic groups “Christian” when the entire worldview of most Gnostic writings was decidedly polytheistic, anti-Christian and anti-Jewish? (It would be like calling Muslims “Christians” just because Muhammad had good things to say about Jesus—come to think of it, Islam’s view of God is closer to Christianity than were these Gnostic groups. At least Islam is monotheistic and claims to worship the God of Abraham. The answer to my question is that many of these scholars apparently want to re-write Christian history in an attempt to make orthodox Christianity appear to have no more historical legitimacy than any of these second century Gnostic groups.
Second, since most of the Gnostic documents present an entirely different worldview from that Christianity or the Judaism from which Christianity grew, why should anyone be surprised that Christians never even considered these anti-Semitic, anti-Christian documents as part of their New Testament? And why do some scholars try to pretend this was all part of some conspiracy by supposedly powerful Christian bishops in the fourth century? The answer is that many modern academics want you to think that the collection of the New Testament was entirely about power and had nothing to do with the reliability of the tradition about Jesus.
Surely something other than honest, objective scholarship is going on in the recent attacks against Jesus and orthodox Christianity.
Gospel of Judas; Part 2
The Gospel of Judas says that Jesus appeared, doing great miracles “for the salvation of humanity.”
Did anyone notice that all the hype surrounding the Gospel of Judas centered on Judas’ betrayal—or lack thereof—while none of the hype mentioned a lost gospel that supported the idea that Jesus did great miracles for the salvation of humanity?
The Gospels of Judas says that Jesus chose twelve disciples and would sometimes appear to them as a child.
While the biblical Gospels agree that Jesus is “God with us,” they also present Jesus as thoroughly human. By contrast, the Gnostic writings all agree that Jesus was some kind of divine being, but they tend to deny his humanity (note that this is contrary to the Da Vinci Code which says that these writings affirm only his humanity and not his divinity). In some of these writings Jesus is kind of a shape-shifter who can appear as a child or in various other forms. The theme of the child appears often in Gnostic writings—they apparently viewed children as closer to the ideal androgynous state.
According to the Gospel of Judas, one day Jesus found his disciples praying and he laughed, saying they were just trying to praise their god.
The key phrase here is “their god.” This is not an accident. Just a few lines later in the Gospel of Judas, Jesus tells the disciples that their god has provoked them to anger. In the Gospel of Judas, the God of the disciples, i.e. the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is their God, not his. The historical choice is clear. Either the New Testament documents (written in the first century), are right that the God Jesus called “Father” is the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or the Gnostic writings (written from the 2nd to 4th centuries), are right that the god Jesus referred to was not the Jewish God. Frankly, none of the critical Jesus’ scholars think the Gnostic Gospels are historically reliable. The critics just want to undermine the biblical Gospels and traditional Christianity.
Did anyone notice that all the hype surrounding the Gospel of Judas centered on Judas’ betrayal—or lack thereof—while none of the hype mentioned a lost gospel that supported the idea that Jesus did great miracles for the salvation of humanity?
The Gospels of Judas says that Jesus chose twelve disciples and would sometimes appear to them as a child.
While the biblical Gospels agree that Jesus is “God with us,” they also present Jesus as thoroughly human. By contrast, the Gnostic writings all agree that Jesus was some kind of divine being, but they tend to deny his humanity (note that this is contrary to the Da Vinci Code which says that these writings affirm only his humanity and not his divinity). In some of these writings Jesus is kind of a shape-shifter who can appear as a child or in various other forms. The theme of the child appears often in Gnostic writings—they apparently viewed children as closer to the ideal androgynous state.
According to the Gospel of Judas, one day Jesus found his disciples praying and he laughed, saying they were just trying to praise their god.
The key phrase here is “their god.” This is not an accident. Just a few lines later in the Gospel of Judas, Jesus tells the disciples that their god has provoked them to anger. In the Gospel of Judas, the God of the disciples, i.e. the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, is their God, not his. The historical choice is clear. Either the New Testament documents (written in the first century), are right that the God Jesus called “Father” is the Jewish God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, or the Gnostic writings (written from the 2nd to 4th centuries), are right that the god Jesus referred to was not the Jewish God. Frankly, none of the critical Jesus’ scholars think the Gnostic Gospels are historically reliable. The critics just want to undermine the biblical Gospels and traditional Christianity.
Gospel of Judas; Part 3
According to the Gospel of Judas, when Jesus challenges his disciples to stand before him, only Judas rises to the challenge. Judas tells Jesus that he knows Jesus is really from the immortal aeon of Barbelo.
Barbelo is often referred to in 2nd to 4th century Gnostic literature. In the Apocryphon of John, for example (which was written about 100 years or more after the Gospel of Mark), Barbelo is the forethought of the great Monad, the invisible, virginal spirit who is over all (it will become clear later in my commentary, that this great Monad is absolutely not the Jewish God). With the “pure light” and “spark” from the invisible virginal spirit, Barbelo conceived and brought fourth an only-begotten child, Christ, the divine autogenes (or “self-generated,” another term found in the Gospel of Judas).
These three are called “The Father, the Mother, and the Son” in the Apocryphon of John and other Gnostic writings. As a side-note, I am personally convinced that it is from Gnostic groups calling themselves “Christian” that Muhammad, much later, came to think that Christians believed that God the Father had sex with God the Mother and produced God the Son. Muhammad rightly thought this idea was repulsive—but he was completely unaware of what true Christians really taught about the Trinity. I seem to recall Muhammad also referring to Allah as a “monad” in the Qur’an but I could be mistaken.
Anyway according to the Apocryphon of John, Christ requested that “it” (the Christ is referred to as “it”) asked for a fellow worker, and “mind” came forth. Then “word” appeared with “mind” and Christ, the divine Autogenes, created the world because of the word. After that numerous other aeons are created to attend Christ, Barbelo, and the virginal spirit. Some of these aeons include “will,” “thought,” life,” understanding,” “grace,” perception,” “prudence.” Then various “lights” were created, including Armozel, Oriel, Daveithai, Eleleth, etc. Then the divine Seth is placed over these lights. (Seth is also mentioned in the Gospel of Judas).
The point of this little essay on Barbelo is to show that while many of these Gnostic writings engage almost entirely in weird, heavenly, philosophical speculations about the origin and actions of a huge multitude of divine, and semi-divine beings, the biblical Gospels all talk about the earthly ministry of a human Jesus who, according to the biblical Gospels, had the extraordinary idea that he was the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, not only about a coming Messiah, but about God visiting His people.
You may think that such an idea is insane, and you’re not alone. Most of Jesus’ own countrymen thought he was a blasphemer, insane, or even demon possessed Hmm, why would this be if Jesus was just thought of as a good teacher or a Jewish Cynic?. Anyway, those of Jesus’ followers who believed in Jesus apparently did so for several reasons. Some of those reasons are 1) because they were genuinely convinced that he really had fulfilled Jewish prophecies, 2) they were convinced that his miracles were genuine and far beyond what the magicians of his day or even the prophets of old had ever done before (as far as we know, no one denied that Jesus did miracles. His opponents just said he did them by the power of the Devil or that he was a great magician), and 3) because they were absolutely convinced that Jesus really had bodily risen from the dead--even the world-renowned Jewish scholar, E.P Sanders, and the secular scholar, Bart Ehrman (who was involved in the Gospel of Judas documentary) concede that it is historical fact that the disciples of Jesus were convinced that Jesus really had risen from the dead, though both of them would say that dead people simply don’t come back to life—ever.
Regardless of which side you come down on, it is clear that the biblical Gospels swim in an entirely different worldview ocean than most of these Gnostic gospels, including the Gospel of Judas.
Barbelo is often referred to in 2nd to 4th century Gnostic literature. In the Apocryphon of John, for example (which was written about 100 years or more after the Gospel of Mark), Barbelo is the forethought of the great Monad, the invisible, virginal spirit who is over all (it will become clear later in my commentary, that this great Monad is absolutely not the Jewish God). With the “pure light” and “spark” from the invisible virginal spirit, Barbelo conceived and brought fourth an only-begotten child, Christ, the divine autogenes (or “self-generated,” another term found in the Gospel of Judas).
These three are called “The Father, the Mother, and the Son” in the Apocryphon of John and other Gnostic writings. As a side-note, I am personally convinced that it is from Gnostic groups calling themselves “Christian” that Muhammad, much later, came to think that Christians believed that God the Father had sex with God the Mother and produced God the Son. Muhammad rightly thought this idea was repulsive—but he was completely unaware of what true Christians really taught about the Trinity. I seem to recall Muhammad also referring to Allah as a “monad” in the Qur’an but I could be mistaken.
Anyway according to the Apocryphon of John, Christ requested that “it” (the Christ is referred to as “it”) asked for a fellow worker, and “mind” came forth. Then “word” appeared with “mind” and Christ, the divine Autogenes, created the world because of the word. After that numerous other aeons are created to attend Christ, Barbelo, and the virginal spirit. Some of these aeons include “will,” “thought,” life,” understanding,” “grace,” perception,” “prudence.” Then various “lights” were created, including Armozel, Oriel, Daveithai, Eleleth, etc. Then the divine Seth is placed over these lights. (Seth is also mentioned in the Gospel of Judas).
The point of this little essay on Barbelo is to show that while many of these Gnostic writings engage almost entirely in weird, heavenly, philosophical speculations about the origin and actions of a huge multitude of divine, and semi-divine beings, the biblical Gospels all talk about the earthly ministry of a human Jesus who, according to the biblical Gospels, had the extraordinary idea that he was the fulfillment of Jewish prophecies, not only about a coming Messiah, but about God visiting His people.
You may think that such an idea is insane, and you’re not alone. Most of Jesus’ own countrymen thought he was a blasphemer, insane, or even demon possessed Hmm, why would this be if Jesus was just thought of as a good teacher or a Jewish Cynic?. Anyway, those of Jesus’ followers who believed in Jesus apparently did so for several reasons. Some of those reasons are 1) because they were genuinely convinced that he really had fulfilled Jewish prophecies, 2) they were convinced that his miracles were genuine and far beyond what the magicians of his day or even the prophets of old had ever done before (as far as we know, no one denied that Jesus did miracles. His opponents just said he did them by the power of the Devil or that he was a great magician), and 3) because they were absolutely convinced that Jesus really had bodily risen from the dead--even the world-renowned Jewish scholar, E.P Sanders, and the secular scholar, Bart Ehrman (who was involved in the Gospel of Judas documentary) concede that it is historical fact that the disciples of Jesus were convinced that Jesus really had risen from the dead, though both of them would say that dead people simply don’t come back to life—ever.
Regardless of which side you come down on, it is clear that the biblical Gospels swim in an entirely different worldview ocean than most of these Gnostic gospels, including the Gospel of Judas.
Gospel of Judas; Part 4
According to the Gospel of Judas, Jesus takes Judas away from the rest of the disciples to tell him the secret mysteries. Jesus tells Judas that someone will replace him so the disciples can “come to completion with their god”
Note the recurring themes of “secret mysteries” and “their god.” The god of Jesus in the Gospel of Judas is not the Jewish God of the disciples or the Christian church.
The Gospel of Judas seems to contain several allusions to the New Testament. The reference to replacing Judas is apparently an allusion to the replacement of Judas recorded in the Book of Acts. Just a few lines later the Gospel of Judas makes reference to “generations of stars,” and “trees without fruit and “in shameful manner." Wandering stars, fruitless trees and shame are all concepts mentioned in the very short letter of Jude 12-13. Later in the text, the Gospel of Judas makes reference to Jesus’ parable of the sower from the Gospel of Matthew. The Gospel of Judas also contains an allusion to First Corinthians 2:9. Matthew, Acts, First Corinthians and Jude are all, of course, in the New Testament.
Like so many Gnostic texts, the Gospel of Judas borrows ideas from the emerging core of the New Testament—The Gospels and Paul’s letters were recognized as sacred from as early as the late first century. The Christian leader, Irenaeus (AD 180) was so exasperated with these Gnostic groups—not because they rejected the New Testament, but because they pulled New Testament words and phrases out of context and twisted them to say things they couldn’t possibly have meant in their original contexts! This is exactly what we find in many of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts.
According to the Gospel of Judas, Jesus tells his disciples that they are the twelve priests in their dream and that the cattle they sacrifice are the men they lead astray. Jesus says others will come after them who kill children, sleep with men, and assure people that God has received their sacrifice from the priest.
The reference to sacrifices of priests is possibly a reference to the second century Christian priests and to the Eucharist. The derogatory reference to sleeping with men may possibly be an attack against the increasing avoidance of marriage by Christian priests. According to the Gospel of Judas, the bad guys in this story are the disciples of Jesus, and those who followed after them (i.e. church leaders). In fact, just a few lines later Judas reports a dream in which the disciples of Jesus were stoning and persecuting him. This is important. The Gospel of Judas portrays those who follow the teachings of Jesus as handed down through Jesus’ disciples, as the bad guys! Only Judas supposedly has the secret knowledge! To imagine that this comes from a Christian group (just because it talks about Jesus, Judas and the disciples) is absurd—ahh, but wait until Monday! That’s when the real absurdity begins!
Note the recurring themes of “secret mysteries” and “their god.” The god of Jesus in the Gospel of Judas is not the Jewish God of the disciples or the Christian church.
The Gospel of Judas seems to contain several allusions to the New Testament. The reference to replacing Judas is apparently an allusion to the replacement of Judas recorded in the Book of Acts. Just a few lines later the Gospel of Judas makes reference to “generations of stars,” and “trees without fruit and “in shameful manner." Wandering stars, fruitless trees and shame are all concepts mentioned in the very short letter of Jude 12-13. Later in the text, the Gospel of Judas makes reference to Jesus’ parable of the sower from the Gospel of Matthew. The Gospel of Judas also contains an allusion to First Corinthians 2:9. Matthew, Acts, First Corinthians and Jude are all, of course, in the New Testament.
Like so many Gnostic texts, the Gospel of Judas borrows ideas from the emerging core of the New Testament—The Gospels and Paul’s letters were recognized as sacred from as early as the late first century. The Christian leader, Irenaeus (AD 180) was so exasperated with these Gnostic groups—not because they rejected the New Testament, but because they pulled New Testament words and phrases out of context and twisted them to say things they couldn’t possibly have meant in their original contexts! This is exactly what we find in many of the Nag Hammadi Gnostic texts.
According to the Gospel of Judas, Jesus tells his disciples that they are the twelve priests in their dream and that the cattle they sacrifice are the men they lead astray. Jesus says others will come after them who kill children, sleep with men, and assure people that God has received their sacrifice from the priest.
The reference to sacrifices of priests is possibly a reference to the second century Christian priests and to the Eucharist. The derogatory reference to sleeping with men may possibly be an attack against the increasing avoidance of marriage by Christian priests. According to the Gospel of Judas, the bad guys in this story are the disciples of Jesus, and those who followed after them (i.e. church leaders). In fact, just a few lines later Judas reports a dream in which the disciples of Jesus were stoning and persecuting him. This is important. The Gospel of Judas portrays those who follow the teachings of Jesus as handed down through Jesus’ disciples, as the bad guys! Only Judas supposedly has the secret knowledge! To imagine that this comes from a Christian group (just because it talks about Jesus, Judas and the disciples) is absurd—ahh, but wait until Monday! That’s when the real absurdity begins!
Gospel of Judas; Part 5
According to the Gospel of Judas, “Nebro” or “Yaldabaoth” appears out of a cloud and creates six angels as his assistants. One of these is Saklas,” a reference to the God of the Bible. These six angles produce twelve more angels. Five angels rule over the underworld: Christ, Harmathoth, Galila, Yobel and Adonaios. “Then Saklas said to his angels, ‘Let us create a human being after the likeness and after the image.” They then create Adam and Eve.
Names like Yaldabaoth and Saklas (Aramaic for fool) are well known from other 2nd to 4th century Gnostic literature. For example, in the Apocryphon of John, the divine Sophia, one of the aeons from the great, invisible, virginal Monad, decides to conceive a child without the aid of a consort or, more importantly (gasp!), without the approval of the great virginal Monad. The result was dissimilar to “its” mother. It immediately changed in form to that of a lion-faced serpent, so Sophia put it in a luminous cloud so no one could see it except the mother of the living (Barbelo). She called it Yaldabaoth, also known as Saklas and Samael.
Note that Saklas is the God of the Bible in both the Gospel of Judas and in the Apocryphon of John, but in the Apocryphon of John, Yaldabaoth and Saklas are the same, where as in the Gospel of Judas Saklas is an angel-assistant of Yaldabaoth, but with so many gods to look after, I’m sure it’s hard to keep them straight. For example, Yobel and Adonaios are also found both in the Gospel of Judas and in the Apocryphon of John. In the Gospel of Judas, they are angels who rule over the underworld with Christ. In the Apocryphon of John they are aeons created in arrogance by Yaldabaoth.
Anyway, the Apocryphon of John portrays Yaldabaoth/Saklas as an arrogant, impious, ignorant being who thinks he is the only God. Yaldabaoth/Saklas is supposedly the Jewish God of the Old Testament. The writer of the Gospel of Judas, as well as the writers of other Gnostic writings, present God, the Father of Jesus, the God of the apostles and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as an evil fool, and the critics have the audacity to call these Anti-Christian, Anti-Semitic groups “Christian.” Although they sometimes thought of themselves as Christians, they have about as claim to being Christian as Muhammad who also had a lot to say about Christ.
The interesting thing is that the scholars who keep referring to these groups as "Christian" are not stupid—they know full well how anti-Christian and anti-Semitic many of these groups were. Clearly something other than objective scholarship is going on with these attacks.
Names like Yaldabaoth and Saklas (Aramaic for fool) are well known from other 2nd to 4th century Gnostic literature. For example, in the Apocryphon of John, the divine Sophia, one of the aeons from the great, invisible, virginal Monad, decides to conceive a child without the aid of a consort or, more importantly (gasp!), without the approval of the great virginal Monad. The result was dissimilar to “its” mother. It immediately changed in form to that of a lion-faced serpent, so Sophia put it in a luminous cloud so no one could see it except the mother of the living (Barbelo). She called it Yaldabaoth, also known as Saklas and Samael.
Note that Saklas is the God of the Bible in both the Gospel of Judas and in the Apocryphon of John, but in the Apocryphon of John, Yaldabaoth and Saklas are the same, where as in the Gospel of Judas Saklas is an angel-assistant of Yaldabaoth, but with so many gods to look after, I’m sure it’s hard to keep them straight. For example, Yobel and Adonaios are also found both in the Gospel of Judas and in the Apocryphon of John. In the Gospel of Judas, they are angels who rule over the underworld with Christ. In the Apocryphon of John they are aeons created in arrogance by Yaldabaoth.
Anyway, the Apocryphon of John portrays Yaldabaoth/Saklas as an arrogant, impious, ignorant being who thinks he is the only God. Yaldabaoth/Saklas is supposedly the Jewish God of the Old Testament. The writer of the Gospel of Judas, as well as the writers of other Gnostic writings, present God, the Father of Jesus, the God of the apostles and the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as an evil fool, and the critics have the audacity to call these Anti-Christian, Anti-Semitic groups “Christian.” Although they sometimes thought of themselves as Christians, they have about as claim to being Christian as Muhammad who also had a lot to say about Christ.
The interesting thing is that the scholars who keep referring to these groups as "Christian" are not stupid—they know full well how anti-Christian and anti-Semitic many of these groups were. Clearly something other than objective scholarship is going on with these attacks.
Gospel of Judas; Part 6
One of the key passages in the Gospel of Judas comes when Jesus tells Judas that Judas will “sacrifice the man that clothes me.” After this, Judas sees a “luminous cloud” and enters it.
Many years ago, critics of the biblical Gospels came up with numerous criteria with which to separate information in the biblical Gospels that was historically reliable from that which supposedly was not. For example: It is widely accepted that 1) the closer the event or saying was recorded to the time of Jesus, the more likely it is to be historically reliable, 2) events or sayings that are attested in more than one independent document are more likely to be reliable, and 3) if the information is contextually credible, that is, it “fits” with the historical, cultural, and religious background of first century Palestine and Judaism in which Jesus lived, it is more likely to be reliable.
First, the idea that Jesus collaborated with Judas is attested (actually, only hinted) in only one document (strike one) written 110 to 150 years after the time of Jesus (strike two). When the radical Jesus Seminar scholar, John Dominic Crossan was evaluating evidence about Jesus, either one of these "stikes" would have been enough for him to dismiss the evidence completely!
It was amazing, therefore, to see critics on the National Geographic documentary hyping the Gospel of Judas as if it had any credibility.
For decades the critics have rejected the Gospel of John as being historically unreliable, in part because it was written up to 70 years after the time of Jesus and was more abstract in nature than the other Gospels. The notorious Jesus Seminar, for example, rejected almost the entire Gospel of John as historically unreliable. The Gospel of Judas, on the other hand, is far more "abstract" than the Gospel of John, and was written much later, yet some biblical critics hype it up as if it had credibility!
Second, the idea that Jesus was betrayed by Judas comes from Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts—at least two of these, Mark and John, are independent and all of these were written long before the Gospel of Judas.
Third, the Gospel of Judas is not contextually credible at all because it completely removes Jesus from his Jewish context. So by the critic’s own criteria, the weight of historical probability comes down strongly against the Gospel of Judas presentation of Judas as the hero.
In the last part of the Gospel of Judas, Jesus goes into the upper room for prayer and the high priests murmur. The Scribes want to arrest Jesus but are afraid to do so because all the people regard him as a prophet. Then, without transition or explanation, they ask Judas what he was doing there, Judas told them what they wanted to know, received his money, and handed Jesus over to them. Thus ends the Gospel of Judas.
There really was a Jesus. He really had disciples, one of whom was Judas who handed Jesus over to the authorities. Otherwise, Irenaeus (AD 180) was right. The Gospel of Judas is pure fiction. But what can you say? There are actually people who take the Da Vinci Code seriously too.
Many years ago, critics of the biblical Gospels came up with numerous criteria with which to separate information in the biblical Gospels that was historically reliable from that which supposedly was not. For example: It is widely accepted that 1) the closer the event or saying was recorded to the time of Jesus, the more likely it is to be historically reliable, 2) events or sayings that are attested in more than one independent document are more likely to be reliable, and 3) if the information is contextually credible, that is, it “fits” with the historical, cultural, and religious background of first century Palestine and Judaism in which Jesus lived, it is more likely to be reliable.
First, the idea that Jesus collaborated with Judas is attested (actually, only hinted) in only one document (strike one) written 110 to 150 years after the time of Jesus (strike two). When the radical Jesus Seminar scholar, John Dominic Crossan was evaluating evidence about Jesus, either one of these "stikes" would have been enough for him to dismiss the evidence completely!
It was amazing, therefore, to see critics on the National Geographic documentary hyping the Gospel of Judas as if it had any credibility.
For decades the critics have rejected the Gospel of John as being historically unreliable, in part because it was written up to 70 years after the time of Jesus and was more abstract in nature than the other Gospels. The notorious Jesus Seminar, for example, rejected almost the entire Gospel of John as historically unreliable. The Gospel of Judas, on the other hand, is far more "abstract" than the Gospel of John, and was written much later, yet some biblical critics hype it up as if it had credibility!
Second, the idea that Jesus was betrayed by Judas comes from Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Acts—at least two of these, Mark and John, are independent and all of these were written long before the Gospel of Judas.
Third, the Gospel of Judas is not contextually credible at all because it completely removes Jesus from his Jewish context. So by the critic’s own criteria, the weight of historical probability comes down strongly against the Gospel of Judas presentation of Judas as the hero.
In the last part of the Gospel of Judas, Jesus goes into the upper room for prayer and the high priests murmur. The Scribes want to arrest Jesus but are afraid to do so because all the people regard him as a prophet. Then, without transition or explanation, they ask Judas what he was doing there, Judas told them what they wanted to know, received his money, and handed Jesus over to them. Thus ends the Gospel of Judas.
There really was a Jesus. He really had disciples, one of whom was Judas who handed Jesus over to the authorities. Otherwise, Irenaeus (AD 180) was right. The Gospel of Judas is pure fiction. But what can you say? There are actually people who take the Da Vinci Code seriously too.
Gospel of Judas and critical scholarship
I watched National Geographic’s special on the Gospel of Judas last night and was stunned. To understand my reaction, you need to understand something about critical scholarship and the biblical gospels.
For years critics and skeptics have argued incessantly that we really can’t trust the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, because they are supposedly filled with decades of encrusted tradition (To get the effect you need to emphasize the part about decades of encrusted tradition as if 40-70 years were an eternity)!
The Gospel of John especially falls under the critics’ scorn since it was written last, probably 60-70 years after Jesus’ death, and is more theological in nature than Matthew, Mark and Luke. The infamous "Jesus Seminar," for example, dismissed almost the entire Gospel of John as being unhistorical.
Enter the Gospel of Judas. Unlike the biblical gospels, the Gospel of Judas takes Jesus out of his historical Jewish context, is even more esoteric in nature than the Gospel of John, and was written 30-80 years after the Gospel of John—100-150 years after Jesus death! Surely any scholars who were so skeptical of the biblical gospels would have much more reason to be skeptical of the Gospel of Judas, wouldn’t they?
Although I suspected that this program was going to be a snow job (it was) I was still amazed to see scholars who are so critical of the historical reliability of the biblical gospels, treating the Gospel of Judas as if it should be taken seriously! In fact, one scholar who spoke so glowingly about the Gospel of Judas had actually been a member of the same Jesus Seminar that did such a hatchet job on the biblical gospels! Could it be that something other than objective scholarship is going on here?
For years critics and skeptics have argued incessantly that we really can’t trust the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, because they are supposedly filled with decades of encrusted tradition (To get the effect you need to emphasize the part about decades of encrusted tradition as if 40-70 years were an eternity)!
The Gospel of John especially falls under the critics’ scorn since it was written last, probably 60-70 years after Jesus’ death, and is more theological in nature than Matthew, Mark and Luke. The infamous "Jesus Seminar," for example, dismissed almost the entire Gospel of John as being unhistorical.
Enter the Gospel of Judas. Unlike the biblical gospels, the Gospel of Judas takes Jesus out of his historical Jewish context, is even more esoteric in nature than the Gospel of John, and was written 30-80 years after the Gospel of John—100-150 years after Jesus death! Surely any scholars who were so skeptical of the biblical gospels would have much more reason to be skeptical of the Gospel of Judas, wouldn’t they?
Although I suspected that this program was going to be a snow job (it was) I was still amazed to see scholars who are so critical of the historical reliability of the biblical gospels, treating the Gospel of Judas as if it should be taken seriously! In fact, one scholar who spoke so glowingly about the Gospel of Judas had actually been a member of the same Jesus Seminar that did such a hatchet job on the biblical gospels! Could it be that something other than objective scholarship is going on here?
On writings suppressed by bishops
One of the underlying themes of the Gospel of Judas documentary was that powerful Christian bishops in the fourth century selected the four gospels that agreed with their theology, and kicked out all the rest. Although this idea is remarkably misleading, let’s pretend for a minute that this is really what happened. Exactly what was it that these powerful Christian bishops were rejecting (and that the modern critics seem so determined to support)? Here’s a small sample:
Gospel of Truth
Therefore, all the emanations of the Father are pleromas, and the root of all his emanations is in the one who made them all grow up in himself
Gospel of Thomas
Jesus said, ‘When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garment and place them under your feet like little children and tread on them, then [will you see] the son of the living one, and you will not be afraid
Gospel of Philip
Echamoth is one thing and Echmoth another. Echamoth is Wisdom simply, but Echmoth is the Wisdom of death with is the one which knows death which is called ‘the little Wisdom”
Gospel of the Egyptians
…the aeons of light of the unrevealable, unmarked, ageless, unproclaimable Father, the aeon of aeons, Autogenes, self-begotten, self-producing, alien, the really true aeon. Three powers came forth from him; they are the Father, the Mother, (and) the Son
The second ogdoad-power, the Mother, the virginal Barbelon epititioch [….] ai, memeneaiment[…who] presides over the heaven…”
Then the great Seth gave praise to the great, uncallable, virginal Spirit, and the male virgin Barbelon, and the thrice-male child Telmael Telmael Heli Heli machar Marhar Seth…
Gospel of Mary
When the soul had overcome the third power, it went upwards and saw the fourth power, (which) took seven forms. The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance, the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom, the seventh is the wrathful wisdom. These are the seven powers of wrath.
Apocryphon of John
…the glory of Barbelo, the perfect glory in the aeons, the glory of the revelation, she glorified the virginal Spirit and it was she who praised him…she became the womb of everything for it is she who is prior to them all, the Mother-Father, the first man, the holy spirit, the thrice-male, the thrice powerful, the thrice-named androgynous one and the eternal aeon…
On the Origin of the World
After the natural structure of the immortal beings had completely developed out of the infinite, a likeness then emanated from Pistis (Faith); it is called Sophia (Wisdom).
And thus the number of the six authorities of chaos was achieved. Then Death, being androgynous, mingled with his (own) nature and begot seven androgynous offspring. These are the names of the male ones: Jealousy, Wrath, Tears, Sighing, Suffering, Lamentation, Bitter Weeping. And these are the names of the female ones: Wrath, Pain, Lust, Sighing, Curse, Bitterness, Quarrelsomeness. They had intercourse with one another, and each one begot seven, so that they amount to forty-nine androgynous demons
The Apocalypse of James
The Lord said, ‘James, do not be concerned for me or for this people. I am he who was within me. Never have I suffered in any way, nor have I been distressed
The Apocalypse of Adam
The tenth kingdom says of him that his god loved a cloud of desire. He begot him in his hand and cast upon the cloud above him (some) of the drop, and he was born. And the eleventh kingdom says that the father desired his [own] daughter. She herself became pregnant [from] her father
The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
Therefore I command that this teaching be carved on stone, and that you place it in my sanctuary. Eight guardians guard it with[…] of the sun. The males on the right are frog-faced, and the females on the left are cat-faced. And put a square mild-stone at the base of the turquoise tables and writ the name on the azure stone tablet in hieroglyphic characters
The Paraphrase of Shem
And when Darkness had acquired the likeness of the mind, it resembled the Spirit. For Nature rose up to expel it; she was powerless against it, since she did not have a form from the darkness. For she brought it forth in the cloud. And the cloud shone. A mind appeared in it like a frightful, harmful fire. It (i.e. the mind) collided against the unbegotten Spirit since it possessed a likeness form him. In order that Nature might become empty of the chaotic fire, then immediately nature was divided into four parts. They became clouds which varied in their appearance. They were called hymen, Afterbirth, Power, (and) Water
And when her forms returned, the rubbed their tongue(s) with each other; they copulated; they begot winds and demons and the power which is from the fire and the Darkness and the Spirit. But the form which remain alone cast the beast from herself. She did not have intercourse, but she was the one who rubbed herself alone. And she brought forth a wind which possessed a power from the fire and the Darkness and the Spirit
But the winds, which are demons from water and fire and darkness and light, had intercourse unto perdition. And through this intercourse the winds received in their womb foam from the penis of the demons. They conceived a power in their womb
Zostrianos
She was called Barbelo because (of her being) thought; the triple [race] (which is) male, virginal (and) perfect and her knowledge through which she came into being…
Marsanes
For [the power] is attending [to me, leading] me into [the Aeon which] is Barbelo, [the] male [Virgin]. For this reason the Virgin became male, because she had been divided from the male
Trimorphic Portennoia
I am androgynous. [I am Mother (and) I am] Father since [I copulate] with myself. I [copulated] with myself [and with those who love] me [and it is through me alone that the All [stands firm]. I am the Womb [that gives shape] to the All by giving birth to the Light that [shines in] splendor. I am the Aeon to [come…
(The quotes above come from The Nag Hammadi Library edited by James Robinson, San Francisco : HarperSanFrancisco, 1988. The reader is encouraged to purchase a copy to see that the above quotes are not just isolated examples of such nonsense)
Can any honest, intelligent human being seriously question why early Christian churches might have left such dung out of their New Testament? Can you imagine the additional scorn and ridicule that that critics would heap on Christians if any of this nonsense were included in the Bible? You see, it’s a matter of “damned if you do and damned if you don’t." The critics act as if these so-called powerful Christian bishops were in some kind of conspiracy to keep the “truth” from people, but if the Church had included these documents, you can bet the house that the critics' scorn would have known no bounds! Do you suppose that something other than serious, objective scholarship is going on in the radical critical attacks on Jesus and the New Testament?
Ahh, but it gets worse. Come back tomorrow to find out how these rejected writings portrayed women.
Gospel of Truth
Therefore, all the emanations of the Father are pleromas, and the root of all his emanations is in the one who made them all grow up in himself
Gospel of Thomas
Jesus said, ‘When you disrobe without being ashamed and take up your garment and place them under your feet like little children and tread on them, then [will you see] the son of the living one, and you will not be afraid
Gospel of Philip
Echamoth is one thing and Echmoth another. Echamoth is Wisdom simply, but Echmoth is the Wisdom of death with is the one which knows death which is called ‘the little Wisdom”
Gospel of the Egyptians
…the aeons of light of the unrevealable, unmarked, ageless, unproclaimable Father, the aeon of aeons, Autogenes, self-begotten, self-producing, alien, the really true aeon. Three powers came forth from him; they are the Father, the Mother, (and) the Son
The second ogdoad-power, the Mother, the virginal Barbelon epititioch [….] ai, memeneaiment[…who] presides over the heaven…”
Then the great Seth gave praise to the great, uncallable, virginal Spirit, and the male virgin Barbelon, and the thrice-male child Telmael Telmael Heli Heli machar Marhar Seth…
Gospel of Mary
When the soul had overcome the third power, it went upwards and saw the fourth power, (which) took seven forms. The first form is darkness, the second desire, the third ignorance, the fourth is the excitement of death, the fifth is the kingdom of the flesh, the sixth is the foolish wisdom, the seventh is the wrathful wisdom. These are the seven powers of wrath.
Apocryphon of John
…the glory of Barbelo, the perfect glory in the aeons, the glory of the revelation, she glorified the virginal Spirit and it was she who praised him…she became the womb of everything for it is she who is prior to them all, the Mother-Father, the first man, the holy spirit, the thrice-male, the thrice powerful, the thrice-named androgynous one and the eternal aeon…
On the Origin of the World
After the natural structure of the immortal beings had completely developed out of the infinite, a likeness then emanated from Pistis (Faith); it is called Sophia (Wisdom).
And thus the number of the six authorities of chaos was achieved. Then Death, being androgynous, mingled with his (own) nature and begot seven androgynous offspring. These are the names of the male ones: Jealousy, Wrath, Tears, Sighing, Suffering, Lamentation, Bitter Weeping. And these are the names of the female ones: Wrath, Pain, Lust, Sighing, Curse, Bitterness, Quarrelsomeness. They had intercourse with one another, and each one begot seven, so that they amount to forty-nine androgynous demons
The Apocalypse of James
The Lord said, ‘James, do not be concerned for me or for this people. I am he who was within me. Never have I suffered in any way, nor have I been distressed
The Apocalypse of Adam
The tenth kingdom says of him that his god loved a cloud of desire. He begot him in his hand and cast upon the cloud above him (some) of the drop, and he was born. And the eleventh kingdom says that the father desired his [own] daughter. She herself became pregnant [from] her father
The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth
Therefore I command that this teaching be carved on stone, and that you place it in my sanctuary. Eight guardians guard it with[…] of the sun. The males on the right are frog-faced, and the females on the left are cat-faced. And put a square mild-stone at the base of the turquoise tables and writ the name on the azure stone tablet in hieroglyphic characters
The Paraphrase of Shem
And when Darkness had acquired the likeness of the mind, it resembled the Spirit. For Nature rose up to expel it; she was powerless against it, since she did not have a form from the darkness. For she brought it forth in the cloud. And the cloud shone. A mind appeared in it like a frightful, harmful fire. It (i.e. the mind) collided against the unbegotten Spirit since it possessed a likeness form him. In order that Nature might become empty of the chaotic fire, then immediately nature was divided into four parts. They became clouds which varied in their appearance. They were called hymen, Afterbirth, Power, (and) Water
And when her forms returned, the rubbed their tongue(s) with each other; they copulated; they begot winds and demons and the power which is from the fire and the Darkness and the Spirit. But the form which remain alone cast the beast from herself. She did not have intercourse, but she was the one who rubbed herself alone. And she brought forth a wind which possessed a power from the fire and the Darkness and the Spirit
But the winds, which are demons from water and fire and darkness and light, had intercourse unto perdition. And through this intercourse the winds received in their womb foam from the penis of the demons. They conceived a power in their womb
Zostrianos
She was called Barbelo because (of her being) thought; the triple [race] (which is) male, virginal (and) perfect and her knowledge through which she came into being…
Marsanes
For [the power] is attending [to me, leading] me into [the Aeon which] is Barbelo, [the] male [Virgin]. For this reason the Virgin became male, because she had been divided from the male
Trimorphic Portennoia
I am androgynous. [I am Mother (and) I am] Father since [I copulate] with myself. I [copulated] with myself [and with those who love] me [and it is through me alone that the All [stands firm]. I am the Womb [that gives shape] to the All by giving birth to the Light that [shines in] splendor. I am the Aeon to [come…
(The quotes above come from The Nag Hammadi Library edited by James Robinson, San Francisco : HarperSanFrancisco, 1988. The reader is encouraged to purchase a copy to see that the above quotes are not just isolated examples of such nonsense)
Can any honest, intelligent human being seriously question why early Christian churches might have left such dung out of their New Testament? Can you imagine the additional scorn and ridicule that that critics would heap on Christians if any of this nonsense were included in the Bible? You see, it’s a matter of “damned if you do and damned if you don’t." The critics act as if these so-called powerful Christian bishops were in some kind of conspiracy to keep the “truth” from people, but if the Church had included these documents, you can bet the house that the critics' scorn would have known no bounds! Do you suppose that something other than serious, objective scholarship is going on in the radical critical attacks on Jesus and the New Testament?
Ahh, but it gets worse. Come back tomorrow to find out how these rejected writings portrayed women.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)