So! What if Jesus wasn't the only Messiah.What if there was a fifth gospel according to Judas?
398397
Um, there IS a gospel of Judas, and it says NOTHING about Judas being the Messiah. You can read it for yourself at the link. What's with the disdainful way you phrase your questions? I know it has little to do with beliefs, because I've met many a respectful and tolerant atheist and agnostic on this site.
355886
I watched the Discovery Channel show all about it, and all I can say is God help us. It is NOT right by any means. Jesus would NEVER say that Judas would surpass the rest of the apostles and enter Heaven that "no angel has ever set eyes on" (which is what is said in this Gospel). This Gospel scares me, nothing good has surrounded it's finding (after finding it, it has been stolen and sought after greedily, and twisted peoples morals in a bad way), and nothing good will come from it. That is my opinion.\nTake care and God Bless
1007207
Calm down take a deep breath there. And Jesus did actually exist He is spoken of in Greek manuscripts of the day not only the bible. He is confirmed as existing, what You wish him to be is your choice free will and all, but he existed. Hope that helps ~A~
1082970
Why did you add Jesus to the end? Curious.
539491
Its interesting in that it claims Judas was the one crucified, and that Jesus ascended into heaven.\n\nit also claims that jesus foretold of a final prophet for all men, "the blessed one" - the blessed one, when translated into arabic becomes "Muhammad".
483126
Well...\nWe'd probably be all Jewish and still waiting for the Messiah.\n\nGoodluck!
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.
286041
Here it is another 15 year old sermon from an unbeliever . . . and for an unbeliever . . . I am more familiar with the scriptures and historical documents than some of these believers.\n\nWHO IS JESUS CHRIST?\n\nSince Jesus Christ (Yeshua the Messiah) walked this earth as a human 2,000 years ago, there has been a controversy over who he really was. The Bible tells us in many places that there is only one true God (Deu. 6:4; Mal. 2:10; Mark 12:32; Rom. 3:30; Jam. 2:19; etc.). So where does Yeshua fit into the Godhead? \n\nMost modern Christians have been taught that Jesus is the second co-equal "person" in a triune Godhead composed of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. However, many (if not most) Christians don't really understand the Trinity. Other believers today, perceiving problems with the Trinity doctrine, have adopted a belief in the "Oneness" of God which is similar to the ancient doctrine of Modalism. \n\nBefore we can truly understand who the Messiah is, we need to look at the historical background of first-century Jewish religion and subsequent philosophical/religious doctrines that arose to explain his identity. This is going to examine the beliefs of first-century Jews regarding the Godhead and present the succeeding theories put forth to define who Yeshua is. Then we will discuss by harmonizing the Scriptures with this information to better understand what the Bible really says about the identity of the Messiah. \n\nFirst, let's start by looking at what first-century C.E. Jewish religion believed about the Godhead. There has been a tendency by scholars to define first-century orthodox monotheistic Judaism in rather restrictive terms. Jewish literature or beliefs from that time frame that seem to stray from the accepted norm have been reinterpreted to accommodate Trinitarianism or used to prove that Judaism was derived from the polytheistic religions surrounding Israel. \n\nRegarding how modern scholars tend to view first-century Jewish religion as either totally monotheistic or essentially polytheistic, University of Manitoba Professor Larry W. Hurtado wrote: \n\nI suggest that on both sides of the issue . . . there has been a tendency to proceed deductively from a priori presumptions of what monotheism must mean, instead of building up a view inductively from the evidence of how monotheism actually operated in the thought and practice of ancient Jews. There seems to be an implicit agreement on both sides that more than one transcendent being of any significance complicates or constitutes a weakening of or threat to monotheism. Those who see first-century Jewish religion as monotheistic tend, therefore, to downplay the significance and attributes given by ancient Jews to any transcendent beings other than God. For these scholars often, ancient Jewish monotheism must mean that the descriptions of such beings are largely rhetorical. Though I am convinced regarding some examples, I am not sure that the descriptions are always purely rhetoric . . . \n\nThose on the other side of the issue tend to emphasize the honorific ways in which transcendent beings other than God are described and the prominent positions they occupy in the religious conceptions reflected in ancient Jewish texts, alleging that first-century Jews were not really monotheists after all. It is clear that ancient Jews were not characteristically monists or unitarians, but does this mean that they were not monotheists? That is, on both sides there is a tendency to proceed as if we can know in advance what "monotheism" must mean, which turns out to be a very modern, monistic form of monotheism, and can accordingly evaluate ancient Jewish texts and beliefs as to whether or how closely they meet an a priori standard of "pure" monotheism. ("What Do We Mean by 'First-Century Jewish Monotheism'?," Journal for the Study of the New Testament) \n\nAs the above quote shows, Profe
195434
Each Gospel was writen by a diferent person into a diferent reality, they are no chronological and don't tell the same things to people. Each one show a diferent angle of this person called Jesus to other people. They were writen also in diferent times (The gospel of John is the latest, writen about 100 years after Jesus' death). So, Mark and Luke, didn't considered important tell that part to the people they have writen for
731180
Judas and the same if they were transexuals
455033
I don't believe this so called "Gospel of Judas". I don't doubt that it exists, or that it was written when it was supposedly written, but I do believe the writer skewed the text to reflect his/her thoughts and that it is not an accurate account of the facts. Yes, Judas betrayed Jesus and yes it was a part of the grand design that God had planned for the salvation of man. I don't think Judas necessarily betrayed Jesus because Jesus told him to though, I think Judas didn't realize at the time of the betrayal that it would end in the crucifixion of his Lord. That's why Judas tried to get the Pharisees to take back the 30 pieces of silver and why he ultimately committed suicide. This is simply another example of how satan tries to confuse the truth and turn people away from God.
469221
Historically, yes Jesus spread a message of love and peace, whether it was of god's love is debatable (I know I probably pissing of a lot of Christians right now, but I really don't care). Jesus never wanted to be "the son of god" or "a messiah" all he wanted to do was spread love, peace and goodness to those he knew; so what happened to him? He was crucified. What the hell kind of message is that? If I were a Christian I would be ashamed to believe in a religion where being peaceful and spreading love ended in death; and if Jesus could actually see how Christians have misinterpreted his intentions than I'm sure he would hang his head in shame as well.
577321
There probably is missing Gospel. What relevance? It would have the same message, no?
1158827
No, Judas was set up to make it appear that he betrayed Jesus. He was framed.
356254
No, I don't think it is possible. Jesus said that he would come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, so if this guy hasn't been heard and seen by everybody, he's just a Messiah-wannabe. Jesus said, "Many will come in My name and deceive many."
332874
The literal meaning of the word gospel mean "good news". Four gospel were included in the Bible's new testiment. Their are the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.  There are some three dozen other gospel about the life and teachings of Jesus that were not included into the bible including the newly discovered Gospel of Judas.
657134
Regardless of whether Jesus was a real guy, I think that the meme we see today was started by Peter and Paul.  It seems unlikely that Jesus could have come up with all of that stuff about eternal salvation on his own.