Is Judas an Antagonist in the New Testament?
360264
Not an antagonist but a betrayer. He had hoped that Jesus would be an earthly deliverer who would be this great hero and save the Jews from the Romans (like so many others thought). But when He realized that He was not what he had expected he turned Jesus in.
381429
It's baloney! (Bologna for you German members :) They can say Jesus walked on Ice, rather than Water. They can say that Jesus asked Judas to betray him. They can say anything they want and even back it up with their scientific propaganda but what they can never change is faith and Christianity. It states in the Bible that nothing should be taken away or added to His Word, I'm stickin' to that.
495380
I don't think so.  I don't pretend to know what would have happened had Judas repented and not betrayed Jesus.  But we all have 'free will'.  If Judas was merely programmed to betray Jesus, then his 'free will' would have been negated.  And I don't think Jesus' death on the cross would have been valid if someone had to lose their 'free will' to bring the crucifixion about.\n\nThis is all too confusing for me to reason out.  Jesus was God and knows the past, present and future.  He knew Judas would betray him.  Does that mean Judas did not posess free will?  But if Jesus knew the past, present and future, why did he pray to His Heavenly Father for "this cup to pass from me, but not my will, but thine be done."  He knew the cup couldn't pass.\n\nI'm not smart enough to figure this stuff out.  A friend of mine asked me once if God could do anything.  I said with a very smug look on my face, "Of course he can!"  That's when my friend said "No he can't.  He can't make a rock so big that he couldn't lift it!"\n\nOK, my smug look disappeared in a flash.  My friend is right, God can't make a rock so big that he couldn't lift it.  So God can't do everything.  See why I don't rely on my brain, but rather my FAITH in the Lord?
544828
I don't think we'll ever be able to make a good judgement because we'll never see all the evidence about the Gospel of Judas. Those who want to use it to change Christianity are only going to show what they can use to help them. Also, so much of the Gospel is gone, it is like trying to read the bible skipping every 2 paragraphs or so.
448181
and my christian friends should thank Judas also ....because if he hadnt betrayed Jesus ....there wouldnt have been any salvation possible .... why is he always titled as  a satan...By the way lets see if Gospel of Judas bring some truth .......\nI am a Muslim and Quran tells us that Jesus never died neither did he wished so .....some person (may be Judas) betrayed him ...and he was crucified inplace of jesus because God made him look like jesus...Jesus has been raised up alive in the heavens and he will return ..
1080776
#1.  It was written too late to have been written by an apostle or a companion of an apostle.\n\n#2. The content contradicts the rest of the New Testament.\n\n#3.  It was never accepted by the early church.\n\nThe New Testament was in its complete form before the end of the first century, long before Constantine or the Roman Catholic Church.  There never was any reason to accept "The Gospel of Judas."
350946
No. But then i dont believe in anything Christian either. \n\nThe Gospel of Judas shows that the gospels were written not about historical facts, but from the theology of the authors. If a gospel author believed something, he wrote a story to 'prove' what he believed. The author of the gospel of Judas believed Judas was doing the will of Jesus, so he wrote a story to 'prove' it. The same is true with the other gospels in the Christians' New Testament.
27681
The new guy has obviously been influenced by the _da_Vinci_Code_ or other, similar works that posit that Jesus was married (most likely to Mary Magdalene), and likely had children through that union.\n\nThere are a couple verses in the gospels (depending on your translation - I'm looking at the New International Version) where Jesus is referred to as having brothers; I'd look specifically at Matthew 13:54-56, which says \n\n"54 Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. "Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?" they asked. 55 "Isn't this the carpenter's son? Isn't his mother's name Mary, and aren't his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? 56 Aren't all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?"\n\nWhile scholars have argued that "brother" might actually mean "cousin" or "other close male relative", the text wouldn't directly support that.\n\nThe wife and children thing can't be disproved Biblically - but neither can it be proven.  Some take the absense of direct reference to a wife as proof, while say that any man referred to as a rabbi/teacher would need to be married to have that status (as per the culture of the time).  Either way, there isn't anything that can be used definitively either way.
1139634
"The Gospel of Judas, however, gives a very different account. \n\nThe text begins by announcing that it is the "secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot during a week, three days before he celebrated Passover." \n\nIt goes on to describe Judas as Jesus' closest friend, someone who understands Christ's true message and is singled out for special status among Jesus' disciples. \n\nIn the key passage Jesus tells Judas, "'you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.'" \n\nKasser, the translation-project leader, offers an interpretation: "Jesus says it is necessary for someone to free him finally from his human body, and he prefers that this liberation be done by a friend rather than by an enemy. \n\n"So he asks Judas, who is his friend, to sell him out, to betray him. It's treason to the general public, but between Jesus and Judas it's not treachery." \n\n-------\nhttp://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0406_060406_judas_2.html\n\nread it , its very interesting. Judas did love Jesus, but most accounts see him as opposite. He was not a traitor as we see in plain eyes, but the carrier of what Jesus knew had to happen in order to die for us. The kiss yes its a symbol, saying goodby and leading the executors to fullfill prophecy. Christ redemption of our sins.
481875
Jesuit scholar says Gospel of Judas does not merit name 'Gospel'\n\nBy Cindy Wooden\nCatholic News Service\n\nROME (CNS) -- The Gospel of Judas was unimportant to most Christians when it was written hundreds of years ago and it is unimportant today, said a Jesuit professor who has convoked a series of ecumenical studies of the historical Jesus. \n\nJesuit Father Gerald O'Collins, a longtime professor of Christology at Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University, said the text, like the gospels of Mary Magdalene and Philip, "does not merit the name 'Gospel.'" \n\nThe National Geographic Society unveiled the document April 6, posting a copy of it on the society's Web site, www.nationalgeographic.com, and releasing English translations of portions of the text.\n\n"A 'Gospel' is a literary genre -- established by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- focusing on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus," Father O'Collins said. \n\nWhile including events supposedly related to the life of Jesus, the Gospel of Judas and the others really are texts "attempting to bolster the importance" of the personalities they are named after, not of Jesus, the priest said. \n\n"They are not summaries of the good news," he said.\n\nThe texts come from the gnostic tradition, a religious-philosophical current popular in the second, third and fourth centuries. The gnostics claimed to have secret knowledge unavailable to the vast majority of people and focused so strongly on the spiritual and intellectual that they despised material creation, including the human body. \n\nIn the year 180, St. Irenaeus condemned the gnostics, mentioning particularly a Gospel of Judas.\n\nFather O'Collins said the most important thing about the text released in early April is that "it shows just how right Irenaeus was in saying the gnostics were against mainstream Christianity and Judaism, they were against our God." \n\n"To give Judas greater credit," the Jesuit said, the gnostics "portray Jesus giving him secret knowledge. It was a nice try," but there is no evidence to support the claim.\n\n"It was junk then and it is junk now," he said .\n\nFather O'Collins, who between 1996 and 2003 convoked a series of ecumenical, interdisciplinary summits for scholars on the historical Jesus, said it was "ridiculous" for anyone to claim publication of the Gospel of Judas will challenge mainstream Christianity. \n\nEND
1025430
Because Judas was dead.
540393
JUDAS COULD NEVER BE A HERO.\nJESUS IS THE HERO.
889490
judas iscariot!!! the betrayer!!
534521
That is an interesting question.  I have always assumed Mark was one of Jesus' disciples, and he probably was, but not one of the original 12 Apostles.  Luke 6:12-16 lists The Twelve as Simon Peter, Andrew, James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas, James son of Alphaeus, Simon the Zealot, Judas son of James, and Judas Iscariot who became the traitor.  Jesus had many followers and the crowds did follow Him.  Mark had to have had some close contact with the disciples to have been able to write first hand about the life of Jesus.  \nYou have given me something to think about and investigate.  Thank you.
475306
While millions were celebrating the memory of the passion and death of the savior the National Geographic Society unveiled the first modern translation of the third-century Coptic translation of the Gospel of Judas on April 6 in Washington. \nThe Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John focus on the life, death and resurrection of Jesus, and include events supposedly related to the life of Jesus. \nHowever, the Gospel of Judas and the others, the text of which was always been known, in whole or in part, really are texts attempting to bolster the importance of the personalities they are named after, not of Jesus. It is therefore really amazing that it is being given such a level of credence.\nWe are in the age of the media and the media are more interested in novelty and money but least in truth. Consider the media reports regarding the Pope’s Homily on Maundy Thursday. The headlines screamed “POPE BANISHES GOSPEL OF JUDAS, PORTRAYS HIM AS DOUBLE-CROSSER.”\nDid they expect him to adopt the Gospel of Judas forthwith and banish the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in a jiffy!!!\nDoes it really matter the circumstances that surround the death of Jesus? Does it change who He was or what He did for us? \nThere are some people around the world who seem to be constantly seeking to discredit the Church in some form or the other. The challenges before the Church today are no different from those faced by the early Christians after Jesus died.\nFalse/sensationalistic reports spread like wildfire, fuelled by unprincipled journalism.\nHowever, responding to such malicious slander is not productive. But it doesn’t mean that one should never respond. The important thing is how one responds. If your response is of anger and in self-defense then you are only walking into the trap but your response should be gentle, firm, respectful, and in defense of the truth.
667420
Allegorical?  Metaphorical?  Yeah, probably so.  The story of Jesus represents what the Jews wanted out of a Messiah, but never got.  More times than not, many new testament stories are political in nature, representing how they felt about the Roman government that was oppressing them.
611788
This is only a theory, \nbut when Constantine and the Council of Nicaea canonised the Bible, they weren't too kind to the Jews. They didn't want anything to do with them as they felt Jews were beneath them. So they made it known, separated Easter from Passover, introduced the death penalty for ministering Judaism, same for those listening, coined the term 'Christ Killers' and basically treated them like dirt, and the same went for their Prophet and Book. \nAfter changing words in the Bible, adding to it (words like 'begotten' meaning to sire or father), calling Jesus a son of God - which was more powerful than having a Prophet who was only spoken to by God, they then started to regain their power back away from the people.... and all because some guy called Jesus had stirred up plenty of trouble for Rome by giving out free medicals and telling them to believe in One God that created all of us.\nThey set out to burn any Bible that didn't match their own and kill anyone who wouldn't accept the new doctrine - crusades. \nThe God of Constantine in the NT would certainly be more merciful than the God of the Moses in the OT.... it says so, as written by powerful political men of the 4th Century.\n:)