A reader writes:
I had the TV on last night on a BBC channel (I’m in Italy right now on vacation and its one of the few English channels I have) and I saw an ad for a TV show on the Gospel of Judas Iscariot and how it could shake the foundations of Christianity and turn everything we know about Jesus upside-down (I’m paraphrasing). Its obvious that this is shameless sensationalism in the vein of the Da Vinci Code, but I was wondering what you know about the text they are refering to?
I’ve been aware of the so-called "Gospel of Judas" for some time, and rumor is that it’ll be released by Easter.
In fact, the National Geographic Channel is going to be doing a special on it on April 9th at 8 p.m. (Eastern?), apparently.
Here’s the scoop:
In the second century there was a non-canonical work that was known as "the Gospel of Judas," and it was used by a sect of Gnostics called the Cainites who Irenaeus attacked in his work Against Heresies. According to Irenaeus,
Others [i.e., the Cainites] again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas [Against Heresies 1:31:1].
Despite being mentioned here, the Gospel of Judas was lost to history, but a copy of it (or, rather, of most of it) turned up on the antiquities market in the latter half of the 20th century. It was finally purchased and has been undergoing translation and preparation for publication in the last few years.
With Da Vinci madness in the air, I’m sure that the Gospel of Judas will be all over the airwaves and the Net once it’s finally published (possibly next week), so the time is ripe to do a heads-up on it.
It’ll all be much ado about not much, though, because this thing ain’t written by the historical Judas. It’s a second century forgery (assuming that it’s not a 20th century forgery of a forgery) that will tell us more about hte beliefs of certain Gnostics than it will about the events of Christ’s life.
It has historical value insofar as it is used to learn more about early Gnosticism. But the press’ll misrepresent the story, breathlessly wondering "What if it’s true?" when it just ain’t true. The press’ll try to press it into service as a window into the ministry of Jesus, and that’s precisely what it’s not.
So, forewarned is forearmed.
breathlessly wondering “What if it’s true?”
…and whether it means there should be women priests.
And I already heard an ad for it on NPR promising to “change all you know about Jesus”
“…breathlessly wondering “What if it’s true?”
Hold on!
If they are going to ask that question of this text, shouldn’t they ask the same thing of the four Canonical Gospels?
Like Chesterton said, “Important, If True”.
Some people will believe any gospel except the four Gospels.
Why would this second century gnostic gospel “change all that we know about Jesus” when all the other second century gnostic gospels haven’t (except for the tin foil beanie crowd)?
So I’m guessin’ Dan Brown’s next book will be called “The Iscariot Code”?
IIIIIIIIII’m yooooooour tuuuuuuurbo lover!
Sorry. Saw the word, couldn’t resist the obscure reference.
Aeons? Check.
Speshul leet knowledge? Check.
Super speshul protagonist disciple? Check.
Denigration of God’s creation? Check.
Justification to do whatever you feel like? Check.
Yep, sounds like your typical Gnostic Mary Sue (or Larry Stu, in this case) biblical fanfic to me. Doesn’t matter when it’s written; it won’t get any better.
Maureen, that made my night. 😀 I was thinking along the same lines (after I read the fragments at that site), but you put it much more brilliantly. Won’t get any better is right, the True Catholic Faith is much more Beautiful.
Oh yes, this will definetely re-define Catholicism as we know it, as did the Protestant Reformation, the Great Schism, all the ancient Heresies, Mormonism, and every other crazy theory about Jesus.
Why is it that whenever some gnostic gospel or apocalypse or what have you is found with a name like Judas, Peter, Mary, etc. attached to it, the press leaps all over it going “Look what this intimate acquaintence of Jesus has to say about the events surrounding His life” and yet you never hear the same questions asked about the canonical gospels. There’s at least as much (in fact, a whole lot more) evidence that Matthew wrote his gospel, Mark wrote his, etc. as there is that Judas wrote this new thing, and yet the assumption is that the canonical works must have had later authorship whereas uncovered heretical works must have been written by the person whose name is attached to them.
This is just another example of the academic and popular tendency to hold the canonical Biblical texts to a higher textual-critical standard than other works.
That is very true, Mike.
Question anything that the Catholic church says, but everything in the Da Vinci Code is true. Opes Dei Albino Assasin Monks…sheeesh..
Kosh, You might want to revisit your history. The Protestant Reformation did have a profound impact on Roman Catholicism. Haven’t you heard of the counter reformation? And be careful about lumping Protestantism with “every other crazy theory about Jesus”. Your triumphalism is showing!
Yeah… if these things were so important then why the **&%^* were they lost in the first place? Geez… give me a break, the New Testament writings were copied and copied and copied and copied and made their way through the whole world. But somehow the following fell through the cracks:
The Gospel of Peter
The Gospel of Judas
The Gospel of Mary Magdline
and a host of other writings…
And these were deemed so unconvincing that they were not copied and copied and copied and copied (you get my meaning)
My mom used to say that there is nothing new under the sun….
I am going to expand this and say that there are no new Heresies… just recycled old ones…
Well that didn’t take long! This article was posted on Yahoo News this morning.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060406/ts_alt_afp/usegyptreligion_060406173145
Here in India, the National Geographic Channel has swallowed this load of garbage big-time. On previous Easters and Christmases, NGC would always show that wonderful National Geographic Special “Inside The Vatican”. No heterodoxy involved whatsoever. During Christmas 2005, however, NGC telecast some tripe show featuring Dan Brown himself with some clueless female interviewer uncovering the “truth” about Christ Jesus. Now for Easter, NGC is showing the re-run of that “documentary” as well as premiering the Gospel of Judas special.
Quoth Kosh:
“Oh yes, this will definetely re-define Catholicism as we know it, as did the Protestant Reformation…”
Quoth Reformed Protestant:
“Kosh, You might want to revisit your history. The Protestant Reformation did have a profound impact on Roman Catholicism. Haven’t you heard of the counter reformation?”
Quoth Franklin Jennings:
“‘Redefinition’ and ‘Profound Impact’ are not remotely the same thing. Someone’s lax reading skills and judgemental tendencies are showing. Triumphalism, indeed!”
New York Times had an article on that that did mention that it was from Gnostic heresies, but failed to take into account that it was made up, oops, “found” by the Gnostics, instead claiming that Mark and John had Jesus encouraging Judas to betray him as well. NYT needs to read the bible more carefully.
And I apologize, Reformed Protestant, Protestantism, I think, does fit into my category of ancient heresies and schisms. It, as others did, denied crucial truths about Jesus and the Church, some deny the True Presence, most (if not all) deny the authority of the church. Is this different from denying, say, the Manhood of Jesus? Or the assumption of Mary? (most protestants do that too) How ’bout Jesus’ Godhood? They’re all crucial truths/mysteries.
I confess that I am grieved at the assertion that, because I do not share the same belief regarding the papacy, I and those of my tradition are branded as schismatics and heretics — or even simply “separated bretheren”. If that manifests itself as judgmentalism, then I apologize and beg your forgiveness. It is not my intention to widen the chasm that already divides Christians of different traditions. It may surprize you to know that, through several years of deep, pointed and sometimes heated conversations with my best friend — a Roman Catholic, we have both come to realize that we share an amazingly similar set of beliefs.
To stay on topic for this page, we should be working together, as fellow members of the Body of Christ, to combat the real heresies and those that propagate them — such as the so-called Gospel of Judas and the attention the media is giving to it. Forums like this are good. They sharpen us all (Proverbs 27:17). Now let’s do something about it. Let’s let the world know that we are Christ’s disciples by our love for each other. (John 15:12)
I’m curious, Reformed Protestant, but on what authority do you declare what is or is not “real heresy”?
I know the Church claims that Her founder, the Christ, gave Her this authority to make such distinctions. IOW, She claims Her authority comes directly from the God of All Creation.
I just wish to know where your authority comes from?
obviously the horned one himself?
-first time here. but had to ask, what kind of question is that?
The authority of Protetantism comes from the Bible, those teachers that one trusts, and many think personal guidence from the Holy Spirit. I hope we can agree that denial of revealed truths is heresy, and so Protestantism is a heresy if Catholicism is true and Catholicism if not a heresy per se at least adds a bunch of untrue stuff if Protestantism is true. This is a worthy topic for discussion (and I think Catholicism has an overwhelming argument) but meanwhile let’s acknowledge that a we Catholics can’t accuse someone brought up in Protestantism of being a heretic in the subjective sense, and acknowledge that as regards the cannon of the New Testament, doctrines about Christ and the Trinity, the goodness of the physical world and human body, and a disgust towards esoterism, faithful Catholics and most Protestants are on the same page. Let’s take Pope John Paul the Great’s example and work together with different faith traditions on common goals, while not dismissing important diffences either and constantly working to bring all God’s children to the fullness of truth and life in His Church. We should always keep in mind that the purpose of religion is to draw each individual into ever deeper union with God. Defects of faith frustrate that goal, whether they be Gnostic or Protestant (the former being far worse than the latter of course), but so does bitter or haughty arguing, or deliberate refusal to understand another point of view.
Why be so offended on the Gospel of Judas? Sure he is the one who turned Christ over to be Crucified, but he also walked and talked with the Son of God. He learned from Christ the way to the Kingdom. There will always be found writings from ancient scrolls. When you read it, use the power of the Holy Ghost to decide what is true and what is not true. Through that power you can know the truth of all things
Chris:
1) I don’t see anyone evincing offense. I see people standing up for revealed truth and against falsehoods.
2) The “Gospel” of Judas was not written by Judas; it was written by a second century Gnostic. The Gnostics were not Christians.
3) None of us, on his own, can ever be sure that the Holy Spirit is speaking to us. That’s why we need the Church. Jesus guaranteed us that the Holy Spirit would always prevent the Church from teaching error in its doctrinal pronouncements. St. Peter tells us that we are not to engage in private interpretation (2Peter 1:20).
4) It is impossible for anyone but God to know all things.
The authority of Protetantism comes from the Bible,
That merely raises the question of how they know that the four Gospels are in the Bible and the Gospel of Judas is not.
Mary,
Precisely. I agree with you.
I’m saying what Protestants believe their authorities are. My protestant sister says God simply wouldn’t let the Bible contain any ininspired texts. This is essentially acknowledging Sacred Tradition in the one area of the Cannon of the New Testament (and of the Old Testament except the parts Martin Luther took out). The logic is fishy but we can still love and work with our Protestant brothers and sister, who unlike the Gnostics have maintained most of what is most essential to Christianity.
bill912,
“None of us, on his own, can ever be sure that the Holy Spirit is speaking to us. That’s why we need the Church. Jesus guaranteed us that the Holy Spirit would always prevent the Church from teaching error in its doctrinal pronouncements. St. Peter tells us that we are not to engage in private interpretation (2Peter 1:20).”
True, and we might point out how many vastly different things are taught by those protestants who think they are guided by the Holy Spirit, but it is ultimately by the gift of faith that we accept the authority of the Magisterium. I believe that the Holy Spirit was responsible for my conversion to Catholicism from Protestantism. There are parellels here with the Protestant perspective. We disagree on much, but we agree on more and should acknowledge that and work together to fight this “Gospel of Judas” nonsense. For those few like Cris seemingly, weep and pray and hope they will be given the gift of discernment, and thus reject these false Gnostic texts.
Man-o-man! First time on this site. It would behoove every Catholic to understand that THEIR BIBLE IS THEIR CATECHISM, plain and simple. They go over, around, under and through God’s holy word and pick and choose that which they want included and then, that which never was BECOMES ALWAYS HAS BEEN. Wake up people. You either follow God’s Holy Word or you don’t. It’s very simple. We are not, for instance, God’s children upon our birth. We need to be adopted into the family of God. Read the first chapter of Ephesians if you don’t believe me. And that’s only one falsehood perpetrated upon Roman Catholic followers, however, a very important and revealing one. There’s also purgatory and Mary’s ascension into Heaven and good works getting one into Heaven .. good grief, WHY DID JESUS DIE if we have all these catch alls?
The Bible tells us in no uncertain terms that Judas betrayed Jesus for money. Period. Stop making him some sort of victim.
“Stop making (Judas) some sort of victim.” No one did that. Please read more carefully.
“We are not…God’s children upon oour birth. We need to be adopted into the family of God….And that’s only one falsehood perpetrated upon Roman Cahtolic followers.” Actually, the Catholic Church teaches exactly what you assert.
The Church does not teach that Mary ascended into heaven; it teaches that Mary was assumed, body and soul into heaven, as we all hope to be someday.
The Church does not teach “…good works gettin one into heaven…” Good grief, Patricia! Why didn’t you learn what the Catholic Church actually teaches (say, by reading the Catechism of the Catholic Church) instead of criticizing your own false assumptions of what the Church teaches?
All Glory, Laud, and Honor
Today is Palm Sunday, also called Passion Sunday. It is the beginning of Holy Week, the week leading up to the central Christian holiday, Easter Sunday. The Catholic Mass on Palm Sunday uncharacteristically begins with a reading from the Gospel,
Question, “Who wrote the original GOSPEL OF JUDAS?” Dead men tell no tales, as the saying goes. Has anyone address this? What we have now, is a 200 – 300 A.D. copy/translantion of an original. When was the original written, and by whom? Where did he/she get the info from. Was it Judas himself before he killed himself (what a hero!) Also, if Jesus wanted to be handed over to the Romans to “free his spirit from his flesh” as the gnostics teach, why not just give himself up and not stage a phoney betrayal? This is more garbage to try and shed doubt on the true Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ!
Luis, Miami, Fla. USA
Dear Eric,
Its an important question, I think. I am a former Baptist and a convert to the Catholic Faith. When a man begins to determine what is or is not a “real” heresy, I like to know his credentials, or at least what he claims them to be.
As I said, the Church claims Her authority comes directly from Christ and is all-encompassing. I happen to believe this is true, though you certainly are not obliged to do so.
I merely wished to know where Reformed Protestant’s authority to make such a determination comes from. Considering your answer, which I assume is sarcastic, it seems you dissaprove of such inquiry. Would you mind explaining why?
We have here at least two Protestants coming at this matter from a Sola Scriptura perspective, following the Protestant theological tradition of approaching the Scriptures. Whether they realize it or not this is one of several ways devout Christians have approached the Bible. It a theological tradition that is about 500 years old.
Catholics on the other hand look at the Bible and Apostolic Tradition as both Revelation, and interpret one in light of the other, and in the light of the authoritative teachings of the Magisterium. It would be well for each group (I am thinking especially about Patricia) to understand the outlook of the others before presenting their view like it is the only one possible.
“The fool takes no delight in understanding,
but rather in displaying what he thinks.”
Proverbs 18:2
p.s. in my experience most Protestants will not acknowledge the need for an authority in interpreting the Bible, seeing this as a sort of oppression, but hold that the Bible is clear and complete enough to be interpreted by anyone, with nothing else needed. My own conversion from Protestantism involved the rejection of this idea.
Gospel of Judas being released shortly
National Geographic is reported to do a special related to papyrus documents which they have verified as authentic to those written in the 1st/2nd centuries by Gnostic Christian.
RomanCatholicBlog.com has written about the criticism of Latin American B…
The conclusion of all is simply a question of faith.Like one of the guys throwing opinions in the show says,any religious theory of claims require personal religious judgement rather than judgement by histoical evidence or doccumentations.After all,it is religions we are discussing here,not who was suspicious for the assassination of John Kennedy(no polictical offense here).
It is quite obvious that we are in the end times. We as Catholic Christians must stand firm in our beliefs. Satan is doing his wildest to throw out of wack everything we are grounded in. That is why we are seeing the likes of The Gospel of Judas, and the DaVinci Code–it is trying to make us feel there’s “got to be something more” than what we already have. Perhaps Satan thinks by now, we as a generation are completely bord with God’s teaching, as is. Sometimes I get the feeling from people, that they are. Then these new “findings” come into view and “Bam!” Christians start “wallowing and wondering” if this could be also be true?! Unless we are firmly grounded in our faith and in the Word we will “sway like willows in the wind”. I am more concerned for our children who are not firmly grounded at home and what they are being told in our Catholic Schools! You heard me right! We have teachers out there who are uninformed with what to say to these kids when posed questions on the Gospel of Judas and DaVinci Code–telling our children “We don’t know for sure” or “It is possible…” We must remember what God said in Revelations that no one is to add to the words of this book or His wrath will comes upon them. Let’s be happy with what we have and stand firm in our beliefs – no add-ons are necessary.