What's your opinion on the Gospel of Judas?
401241
I found the presentation on NGC interesting. While the jury is out on the authenticity of the document, it does present a different perspective held by Christians of the time. Diversity in beliefs and expressions is nothing new to the Church, and we should be open to new ideas based upon new information coming to light.\n\nThe idea of Judas acting on behalf of Jesus is also nothing new, and has been present throughout Christian history.\n\nNew ideas do not threaten my beliefs or weaken my faith.
231392
We would be well to let the Bible interpret itself, and gather all verses on a subject. I would like to encourage everyone to do this.\n\nHere are a few to take a look at:\n\nDaniel 1:8- Daniel refuses wine because he has purposed not to defile himself. I doubt this was new wine, as the fresh juice of the grape does not defile.\n\nIsa. 5:11- Woe to those who drink intoxicating drinks.\nProverbs 23:29-30-More woe...\n\nAlcohol has lead to alot of shame in the Bible. Noah naked (Gen. 9:21), Lot sexually active with his own daughters (Gen. 19:33), The Golden Calf (Ex. 32:6, 25), Amnon rapes his half-sister (2 Sam. 13:28)\n\nWhen you take an honest look at the Biblical record of fermented drink, it is apaulling to think how Christians would try to endorce alcohol as righteous even in moderation!\n\nThe win, grape juice, represented Christ's Blood, and the bread his Body. Just as the bread was "unleavened", leaven representing sin, his blood ought to be considered pure, free from fermentation.\n\nThe Bible is clear on this point, for more info please read:
551030
in my opinion?\n\nIt was a perfect example of the true way to obtain eternal life- through grace and faith- not through works.\n\nHere you have two criminals- being persecuted for some crimes- and one of them is hurling insults at Jesus- yelling "If you're the King of Kings and the Son of God- why don't you save us and save yourself?"\n\nBut the other one- the other one turns to Jesus and defends Jesus and asks Jesus to forgive him and remember him in Heaven.  And Jesus says: "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise"\n\nThis to me- is absolutely amazing.  Here are two absolutely opposite sinners.  Both of whom sinned and were being punished for their crimes- one who repents- one who doesn't.\n\nThe one who repents- the one who truly believes in Jesus as the Lord and Saviour- is saved right there on the cross.\n\nEternal life and being saved is by the Grace of God alone- through faith and belief in Jesus Christ as His Son.\n\nIt's an incredible story!!!
649454
I just checked out the Gospel of Judas the other day @ the local B&N. Wow. It felt like a part of history jumping into my hands.\n\nKnowing what Judas was to become; reading what depictions he'd written of Jesus; the pieces of text felt so raw with emotion. They felt so real. Knowing the ending of the story of course, did make some of the pre-betrayal friendliness tough to swallow.\n\nThis brought me to the realization that these newer books need to be included, don't they? I haven't asked my priest at church, but a newer version has to be in the works.\n\nForget about red tape, just order the entries and publish the thing.\n\nWith the Da Vinci Code getting more publicity than the Dead Sea Scrolls, now'd be a pretty good time to release a newer, fuller edition of The Bible.\n\nThanks for answering my last question,\n\n-Justin
475472
the gospel of judas was written in 300 ad in egypt, it a gnostic gospel , judas had nothing to do with writing this gospel. the gnostics also wrote other gospels like nathans stevens and marys among others, gnostics could be compared to new age believers today who think knowledge is the ultimate goal of humanity. theyve turned satan, in the garden of eden, into good character , now you want me to believe a gospel from the gnostics about judas is true when they believe satan is a good guy because of his knowledge .. come on
865845
Dear ES,\n\nI agree with you and I enjoy reading it and giving away copies of the Bible.\n\nLong before I read the Bible from cover-to-cover I intended to re-write the Bible and take out all of the sexist language.  What a joke that was!  When I finally read it I didn't change it but it sure did change me!\n\nOne wonderful thing I noticed was that I had the feeling that it was written directly to me, even though I know it was written long before I was born.  It reminds me of looking at a photograph when it seems as though the subject is looking right back at you.\n\nEven though there have been several translations of the Bible they all say just about the same thing.  However I've seen a few that are not divinely inspired and there is no sense of the Living Word of God.\n\nYes, it is fascinating to look at the prophecies and realize that Jesus was the only person who ever had his biography written before He was born!
354507
The "gospel of Judas" is an oxymoron. Gospel means "good news". What is so great about the man who was possessed by Satan, betrayed Jesus Christ for 30 pieces of silver, then hung himself when it was all over????
304021
The Gospel of Judas was written many many years after the apostles lived and their associates (Timothy and Luke). Where did you get your historical research? \nGive me a break. \n\nThe gnostic gospels are from beliefs that began in the 2nd and 3rd century, which meens that the writings come from a time period more than 100 years after Jesus ministry, far later than any New Testament book. Why in the world should we believe that these later documents tell us more about events than the earlier documents? They are simply not useful for trying to understand Jesus ministry and the shape of very early Christianity. (1)\n\nThe gnostic gospels were late arrivals, which is ONE reason why church leaders rejected them ... they lacked authority since their authors were neither (a) apostles of Jesus nor (b) persons associated with apostles of Jesus... and no one knows who wrote those gnostic gospels. (2)
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.
302209
If you understand the nature of the "Gospel of Judas" and related works, I think you'll agree that the New Testament gospels are a better bet by far.  (By the way, there are FOUR of them, and all tell of Judas's betraying Jesus.) \n\nThe "Gospel of Judas" was one of a host of "Gnostic gospels" that began to pop up in the second century (decades after the four gospels in the New Testament).  The Gnostics believed that they were a very special elite  (beyond the common, 'run of the mill' Christians) who had been given a very special, secret knowledge that was withheld from everyone else.\n\nWhat that implies is that the REAL truth must be something hidden, a secret that 'ordinary' people (or ordinary Christians) do not and cannot get, only the initiated. \n\nWhat the Gnostic gospels have in common is that they pick ONE person to whom Jesus is supposed to have told "the REAL plan", which was different from what everyone else thought.\n\nInteresting implications of this are\n1) ONLY Thomas, or Judas, or whichever person supposedly had been given this special truth and passed it on, had the truth.  So only ONE of these gospels can be correct. ALL the other gospels (including all the other Gnostic gospels!!) had to be mistaken!\n2) Because it was a SECRET, revealed on the sly to just one person (initially), you could not DISprove it by pointing to all the evidence and teaching that did not fit in with it!\n\nAs for Judas.  Since this "gnosis" or '(hidden) knowledge' was a secret NOT revealed to anyone else, and was beyond the understanding of ordinary 'unenlightened' folk (Gnostics wer real spiritual elitists!) it makes sense for it all be a big surprise (not at all what you would expect from general Christian teaching).  That would make Judas an ideal choice.   You see, the ordinary people THOUGHT that Judas chose to betray Jesus.   Only the enlightened knew the truth!\n\nBASIC GNOSTIC BELIEFS in short: \nElitist (not accessible to most people), can only have ONE gospel (all others false), the special knowledge CANNOT be proven false (historical evidence does not count), and incidentally, thinks VERY negatively about the physical world (Christian view, like the Hebrew was that the physical world was created good... believed in a REAL physical incarnation of Jesus, the hope of a physical resurrection  vs. Gnosticism which holds that the spiritual world is good, the material world is evil)\n\nDo people understand that THIS is what the "Gospel of Judas" and the rest are about??   Is that really what folks want to believe?  (Or maybe the information they are being fed about it doesn't tell them some of these things?)
94885
I have read this book a couple of times and am looking forward to the movie.\n\nI think it is a great piece of fiction.  Sure, there are some truths in it, but for the most part it is pure fiction.  I have been to many of the sites that he pointed to in the book and some just aren't the way he stated.\n\nI think that it makes baseless claims about Jesus being married and having a child, and a few other things, but that is his perogotive as a writer of fiction.\n\nI am Catholic and am not in a hissy or upset or mad that the book was written, but I am upset and mad when people use it as a basis to trash my Catholic faith.  It is FICTION!  He says so himself!  But regardless of being true or not, I look at it this way, if Jesus was married and had a child, what better roll model for me, as a Catholic father to have?
230320
Many people seem to have a problem remembering that this book is fiction.  Some Christians take offence because it is important to them that Jesus was a virgin all his life.  I think these people somehow see sex -- even in marriage -- as "dirty" -- otherwise, why would it sully Jesus' purity to have a wife and children?  They seem to think the possibility detracts from His perfection.  \n\nFor me, it makes no difference.  Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ, whether He was married or not.  And the possibility of His bloodline continuing seems to me to be important only to those who think His blood contained some special DNA that would be passed down.  Unless that DNA somehow makes people better people, more likely to love others and change the world -- what difference does it make?  And from what I see of the world, any DNA that makes people better has been as diluted as the Truth He brought (sorry, Christians).  It would be nice if His Teachings existed and were followed in their entirety, but if they were, the world would not be in the state it is in now.\n\nI don't read too much into "The Last Supper" -- it's a painting, not a photograph!  It was done centuries after the fact and the people shown *represent* the people who were there but do not look like them -- since no one knows what they looked like.  If the figure to Jesus' left looks feminine, it is only because da Vinci painted it that way -- and reflects da Vinci's beliefs and/or skill -- not reality.  \n\nI enjoyed the book, but really don't understand the furor.  There are so many books that are more interesting and controversial -- but many of them aren't fiction.  :-)
1177672
He....   darn it.  I thought I had the recipe sitting here but I seem to have lost it.\n\nGeez, what kind of question is that any way?\n\nLet's assume for a minute that you are asking about a just a mundane operation like walking from one town to another.  The inclusion of the word "exactly" in a question about a 2000 year old event makes one wonder what your epistemelogical standard is.   \n\nThe quick and the dirty of the situation is, I don't know.  I think it probably did happen though. I'm not a fundementalist, so therefore it's not necessary for the New Testament accounts, in this case the Gospel of John, to be completly inerrant for me to sign on.  They just have to be generally historically accurate, like any other set of historical documents from the time.\n\nSome people's a priori commitment to pure materialism aside, the story seems to be authentic to me.  It has specific details that a good old propaganda story probably wouldn't contain.  Such as Jesus's disagreement with his mother and his consequent quip at her.  And then he actuallly does what she suggested.  Propaganda created from whole cloth would probably contain less contraversy in it.  \n\nThe Gospel of John is actually the New Testament book that we have the earliest documentary evidence of.  Part of it was found in the Nag Hammadi (sp?) library in Egypt and has been dated to about 130 a.d.   That's pretty darn close to the events described compared to most ancient historical documents that are considered authoritative.
1135587
It is my understanding that:\n\nActually, NONE of the gospels are the direct words of Jesus.  They were all written a couple generations after (Luke and Mark weren't even apostles!).\n\nThe Gnostic Gospels were not included into the bible because they preach a more self-sufficient version of Christianity, where the person, not the church, is responsible for their relationship with God.  They refer to Christianity in a similar sense as modern buddhism.\n\nIt is MY belief (and I emphasize belief, as no one knows for sure) that the gnostic gospels were excluded from the bible because:\n\n- They de-emphasize the church...therefore leaving less influenece, power, and control over the religion for the church\n\n- They emphasize a more "inner religion", where its not about what the religion as a whole wants or believes, but rather the individual person.  This can be deeply fulfilling for an individual, or very unnerving as there would be little unison and coordination in the religion.\n\n- They did not properly imply the possibility that Jesus was God.
1152972
First off, Love this question....  \nSecond, you're too smart for your own good, Blobberty.\nThird.... to answer.\n\nPreaching the gospel and living it are two very different \nthings.  The Church really is who said it; I'd think God\nwould want you to LIVE it, thus your life being the testament\nof it.  Doubt that's really the answer you are looking for, but\nI think that is what keeps me one step up on the food chain\nfrom dog poo.
365679
I watched the special on National Geographic. Have they made the text available to read anywhere?\n\nBased on the information that was given on the National Geographic premiere...I firmly believe that Jesus chose Judas to sacrifice him. Someone had to do it and he wanted Judas to be the one. The thing that gets me is that when Jesus tells Judas that he will be known as deceitful person for many, many years but in the END, the truth will be known. Wow, that means we know now....does that mean that we are really close to the end?\n\nI would love to look at it more in depth when they release it; if you know anywhere it has been published, please let me know.
1080723
I know and to be a gospel it had to be written by one of the disciples or their assistant.  The gos[pel of Thomas, Judas etc, were NOT written by them.  The stuff that people will believe!