Gospel of Judas

Perhaps the other gospels are not saying that they alone were those who understood, but that what is told in those texts is actually what they understood about Jesus' message. I am not against a deeper understanding of Jesus' message. Life's experience and your personal connection to the spirit realm and the physical realm determines how you perceive the information. You can be with a group and develop a like mind of the group or you can find a group who is in like mind with you. Somehow, it is okay to find a group who is in like mind with you when you are talking about a sewing circle or a book club but then it is a problem when you are talking about a religious ritual or a political group. Who comes out and says that it is not okay for someone and maybe even others to identify with their own reality? Only those who can not identify.

Anyhow,
I don't agree with the Gospel of Judas not because it doesn't agree with the canonized gospels, but because of the cunnery that it displays in the relationship between Jesus and his disciples. Example shows that students generally do not pick up the very best of the lesson taught by the teacher if the teacher is insulting the level of learning.
Not only that, the darkness and secrets therein doesn't promote Jesus as being 'the light of men' - as John described Jesus, and that is how I have identified with Jesus - as most other Christians have as well.

I've always thought of the union between God and man is one of a spiritual nature. This world and this realm is made suitable for flesh and I don't think you can take flesh to the next. I don't question the thing about Jesus ascending in the flesh because maybe he did and I don't understand it. There are plenty of things going on that can not be explained in scientific method. But for that which can be explained, I don't think it should be denied. Just because it can be explained doesn't mean that it ceases to be a manifestation of the Divine. When it gets down to the breakdown, the finest element of our being is energy. I think energy is manifest as light. Light brings life. Those of us who are not manifest as light are confined to the darkness. I mean that literally and metaphorically. There is something in the lesson taught by Jesus that brings his followers closer to the light, that gives his followers life. The words of this Judas text is just full of darkness.
 
If, all these "apocrypha" have even some merit of validity to them as to the original authors being associated with their content, then what we have to conclude, is that in the beginning of Christianity, there were many different view points on the concept...before a group of clergy decided to narrow the field and make for Christianity a sactified official version (as they designed it), in addition to declaring all the rest heretical, and worthless.

Sort of like Wal-Mart corporation putting all the mom and pop stores in the area out of business, by underselling and lawsuits. It could be considered that as far as Religious faiths go, Christianity is one of the largest "monopolies" in corporate history...:eek:

my thoughts

v/r

Q
 
Q, I have obliterated many paragraphs of text and an hour's worth of writing, because I just now caught up and read your "Wal-Mart" post. And rather than ticking anyone off, I will summarize my response in one word, even though you didn't ask for it ...

AMEN ;)
(yeah yeah, gee, how original ... I know :p)

taijsai
 
taijasi said:
Q, I have obliterated many paragraphs of text and an hour's worth of writing, because I just now caught up and read your "Wal-Mart" post. And rather than ticking anyone off, I will summarize my response in one word, even though you didn't ask for it ...

AMEN ;)
(yeah yeah, gee, how original ... I know :p)

taijsai
Click to expand...

...NOT that I have anything against Wal-Mart, or Christianity (as ya'll know I do not). :D I just found the correlation strikingly similar.

Oh, and sorry Taj, for messing up the birth of your thesis...not my intent at all. :eek:

v/r

Q

p.s. Isn't "AMEN" latin for "agreed"?...
 
From what I've read your Wallmart analogy is somewhat correct...I think I read there were over 300 potential texts reviewed prior to narrowing the field to 66. It was a fairly obvious power move...forming the 'universal' church, is sort of like the Patriot Act...who can vote against it...the name says it is good for all of us, and if we disagree we are against the 'union'.

Look at all the books written about the Watergate affair, or any major point in history....two things prevail...a. there are disparate viewpoints and understanding depending on where you stood/stand during the affair, and b. the winners get to write and maintain history. With 2000 years of book burning and eliminating dissedent factions...the archeological research into our history is really just now beginning...

If G-d's hand is in everything, now is the time for the Gospel of Judas to come to light...
 
wil said:
From what I've read your Wallmart analogy is somewhat correct...I think I read there were over 300 potential texts reviewed prior to narrowing the field to 66. It was a fairly obvious power move...forming the 'universal' church, is sort of like the Patriot Act...who can vote against it...the name says it is good for all of us, and if we disagree we are against the 'union'.

Look at all the books written about the Watergate affair, or any major point in history....two things prevail...a. there are disparate viewpoints and understanding depending on where you stood/stand during the affair, and b. the winners get to write and maintain history. With 2000 years of book burning and eliminating dissedent factions...the archeological research into our history is really just now beginning...

If G-d's hand is in everything, now is the time for the Gospel of Judas to come to light...
Click to expand...

Bringing today's politics into a discussion about how religion started yesterday, wasn't exactly what I had in mind. In that light I am sorry I brought up Wal-Mart as an analogy.

v/r

Q
 
According to what data we have, from Irenaeus, Origen and Clement, the Gospel of Judas is an account according to the Cainites, a sect that worshipped Cain as a hero. The Cainites, like a large number of Gnostic groups, were dytheist - believing that God is the source of good and evil, and this stands in stark contrast the the Eutheism is the orthodox canon, in which God is good without reserve or limitation.

Furthermore the Cainites believed a form of maltheism, in which the God of the Old Testament is the same as the gnostic Demiurge, a lesser being either mad, bad, or possibly both. God the Creator and Father of Jesus is distant and unknowable.

In the case of the Gospel of Judas, the premise is that Judas acted as he did in order that mankind might be redeemed by the death of Jesus' mortal body. The suggestion is Judas, in common with the other disciples, looked for a temporal kingdom of the Messiah ("the anointed one"), and wished to precipitate a political crisis and hasten the hour of triumph, thinking that the arrest of Jesus would provoke a rising of the people who would set him free and place him on the throne. In support of this, they point to the fact that, when Judas found that Jesus was condemned and given up to the Romans, he immediately repented of what he had done.

The orthodox churches always held that Jesus underwent his passion and death freely, out of infinite love, in order that all could have the opportunity to reach salvation. Thus, Judas' betrayal of Jesus, even from an orthodox viewpoint, can be looked at as only a personal betrayal and can have no doctrinal implication.

Thomas
source: Wikipedia
 
Thomas said:
According to what data we have, from Irenaeus, Origen and Clement, the Gospel of Judas is an account according to the Cainites, a sect that worshipped Cain as a hero. The Cainites, like a large number of Gnostic groups, were dytheist - believing that God is the source of good and evil, and this stands in stark contrast the the Eutheism is the orthodox canon, in which God is good without reserve or limitation.

Furthermore the Cainites believed a form of maltheism, in which the God of the Old Testament is the same as the gnostic Demiurge, a lesser being either mad, bad, or possibly both. God the Creator and Father of Jesus is distant and unknowable.

In the case of the Gospel of Judas, the premise is that Judas acted as he did in order that mankind might be redeemed by the death of Jesus' mortal body. The suggestion is Judas, in common with the other disciples, looked for a temporal kingdom of the Messiah ("the anointed one"), and wished to precipitate a political crisis and hasten the hour of triumph, thinking that the arrest of Jesus would provoke a rising of the people who would set him free and place him on the throne. In support of this, they point to the fact that, when Judas found that Jesus was condemned and given up to the Romans, he immediately repented of what he had done.

The orthodox churches always held that Jesus underwent his passion and death freely, out of infinite love, in order that all could have the opportunity to reach salvation. Thus, Judas' betrayal of Jesus, even from an orthodox viewpoint, can be looked at as only a personal betrayal and can have no doctrinal implication.

Thomas
source: Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Thomas,

In my reading of the Gospel of Judas, I get the distinct impression that Jesus wanted to be rid of his material body (to be released from his corporial form), and "needed" help in doing that. Something I find rather odd, for a God/man. I also get the impression that the "God" who made the world, is not the "Supreme God", nor Father of the Son "Jesus". Very strange stuff.

None the less, it is in keeping with certain gnostic concepts, which we both know the church hiearchy of the ages as all but quashed.

However, we both know the concept still exists in certain areas of the world...even today.

Your thoughts?

v/r

Q
 
Some of the most intriguing lines in this entire Gospel, for me, are those starting the section in which Jesus teaches Judas about cosmology:
Jesus said, “[Come], that I may teach you about [secrets] no person [has] ever seen. For there exists a great and boundless realm, whose extent no generation of angels has seen, [in which] there is [a] great invisible [Spirit],
which no eye of an angel has ever seen,
no thought of the heart has ever comprehended,
and it was never called by any name.
​
Perhaps we might glimpse for a moment the inmost, reverent heart of the faithful followers of Muhammad, the Jewish Kabbalists with their Ain Soph, as well as the Taoists, who would all agree that no one has yet "seen God." This portion of the Gospel of Judas resonates with such a notion, as Jesus himself confirms it.

To portray the Divine in a form comfortable (and comforting) to us, is natural. To personify the Divine, by ascribing human - even animal - attributes, may be inevitable ... helpful at times, misleading at others. To confuse the Divine, with any aspect of Creation, even the greatest agencies thereof, is to fall short of understanding these "secrets" of which Jesus speaks - which secrets, apparently pose a threat to some.

Midway between confidence, and pride, lies humility. Knowledge is power, Wisdom is its right use, and Love is always the gauge that lets us know how well we're doing at applying what we've learned. That's the best I can do without being Q, I'm afraid. ;)

taijasi
 
taijasi said:
Some of the most intriguing lines in this entire Gospel, for me, are those starting the section in which Jesus teaches Judas about cosmology:
Jesus said, “[Come], that I may teach you about [secrets] no person [has] ever seen. For there exists a great and boundless realm, whose extent no generation of angels has seen, [in which] there is [a] great invisible [Spirit],
which no eye of an angel has ever seen,
no thought of the heart has ever comprehended,
and it was never called by any name.

​
Perhaps we might glimpse for a moment the inmost, reverent heart of the faithful followers of Muhammad, the Jewish Kabbalists with their Ain Soph, as well as the Taoists, who would all agree that no one has yet "seen God." This portion of the Gospel of Judas resonates with such a notion, as Jesus himself confirms it.

To portray the Divine in a form comfortable (and comforting) to us, is natural. To personify the Divine, by ascribing human - even animal - attributes, may be inevitable ... helpful at times, misleading at others. To confuse the Divine, with any aspect of Creation, even the greatest agencies thereof, is to fall short of understanding these "secrets" of which Jesus speaks - which secrets, apparently pose a threat to some.

Midway between confidence, and pride, lies humility. Knowledge is power, Wisdom is its right use, and Love is always the gauge that lets us know how well we're doing at applying what we've learned. That's the best I can do without being Q, I'm afraid. ;)

taijasi
Click to expand...

Then again we can look at another visionary: (in all seriousness, it sounds similar)

Space:
The final frontier
These are the voyages of the Starship, Enterprise
Its 5 year mission
To explore strange new worlds
To seek out new life and new civilizations
To boldly go where no man has gone before​
 
Thomas said:
In the case of the Gospel of Judas, the premise is that Judas acted as he did in order that mankind might be redeemed by the death of Jesus' mortal body. The suggestion is Judas, in common with the other disciples, looked for a temporal kingdom of the Messiah ("the anointed one"), and wished to precipitate a political crisis and hasten the hour of triumph, thinking that the arrest of Jesus would provoke a rising of the people who would set him free and place him on the throne. In support of this, they point to the fact that, when Judas found that Jesus was condemned and given up to the Romans, he immediately repented of what he had done.

Thomas
source: Wikipedia
Click to expand...

Interesting.

Since I had started reading the Gospels on my own some years ago, I always had the idea that Jesus' death was more political than anything else. I mean, with my small understanding of the historical/political circumstances surrounding the rise of Jesus' ministry.
 
Quahom -
That's a big question, the first being 'what are we looking for in the apocryphal texts' and its corollary ... 'why?' ... it cannot be denied that for many the apocryp[hal texts are a means of 'bashing' orthodoxy, not principally for its content, but primarily as a way of disputing its authority.

truthseeker -
I always had the idea that Jesus' death was more political than anything else.
And in a sense it is, the politics of power, and with it, culpability.

What is interesting is not that the powers sought to crucify Him, but rather they did not wish to be held culpable for his death. Neither Rome nor Judea wanted to be identified as His executioner - the Jews had the authority from Rome to execute blasphemers by stoning, as they opted to do to Stephen; Rome had ther authority to execute those who threatened the Roman hegemony, yet Pilate washed his hands of the affair.

In the end the culpability lies with man - or rather the mob. Had the mob not insisted on his crucifixion, Pilate would have refused the Sanhedrin. The Sanhedrin, in turn, used the power of the mob to coerce Rome.

taijasi -
Some of the most intriguing lines in this entire Gospel,
Agreed indeed, all the apocryphal texts offer intriguing insights into the 'spiritual quest' - as do the non-apocryphal, eg the writings of the Platonists, Stoics, and so forth. For a text to be considered orthodox it must conform to the oral tradition of Christ as handed down by the Apostles.

But from a strictly orthodox and doctrinal perspective, in studying a document one must seek to understand its epistemology - what it holds to be true - and its subsequent hermeneutic - how it expresses what it holds to be true.

It is here that orthodoxy and the G of Judas must part company, as it were. The general tenor, the background of its understanding - does not accord with that of the Orthodox oral tradition and its subsequent canon - not in the mode of its Revelation, nor in the historicity - Judas' betrayal and suicide was the oral tradition of Christianity from its very outset.

Thomas
 
Trying to reconcile...
Quahom1 said:
If, all these "apocrypha" have even some merit of validity to them as to the original authors being associated with their content, then what we have to conclude, is that in the beginning of Christianity, there were many different view points on the concept...before a group of clergy decided to narrow the field and make for Christianity a sactified official version (as they designed it), in addition to declaring all the rest heretical, and worthless.

Sort of like Wal-Mart corporation putting all the mom and pop stores in the area out of business, by underselling and lawsuits. It could be considered that as far as Religious faiths go, Christianity is one of the largest "monopolies" in corporate history...:eek:

my thoughts

v/r

Q
Click to expand...
with...
Quahom1 said:
Originally Posted by Dor
Actually I always saw it more as people tried to add to the Bible to support their beliefs rather than take away stuff to support there beliefs.


The general Apocrypha consists of these fifteen books.
  1. .The First Book of Esdras
  2. .The Second Book of Esdras
  3. .Tobit
  4. .Judith
  5. .The Rest of the Chapters of the Book of Esther
  6. .The Wisdom of Solomon
  7. .Ecclesiasticus or the Wisdom of Jesus Son of Sirach
  8. .Baruch
  9. .A Letter of Jeremiah
  10. .The Song of the Three
  11. .Daniel and Susanna
  12. .Daniel, Bel, and the Snake
  13. .The Prayer of Manasseh
  14. .The First Book of the Maccabees
  15. .The Second Book of the Maccabees
Though these books were considered non-canonical, slowly over the years they came to be regarded by the Roman Catholic Church as part of the Bible, and were finally officially labled as such. But the Historical Hebrew Religion, and the Historical Christian Religion growing from it, understood that these writings were non-canonical.

It is quite clear that those who would like to have these books considered Holy Canon do so because of their own traditions, and are not facing the facts objectively. Their beliefs are not supported by either the fundamental facts, by what the Old Testament Saints themselves historically called scripture, nor by early New Testament Church History. If the Jewish Theologians of the Old Testament Congregation of God (Who of course were used of God to write that Old Testament) didn't have the Apocrypha books in their Old Testament text, why would any Christian Church growing from that very same Old Testament Hebrew Congregation, consider adding these Apocryphal books as part of the Old Testament Hebrew? It makes no sense. Nor is it's presence in copies of the Masoretic Text. Not only this, but Roman catholics attempt to add them as part of Old Testament Canon, in New Testament times, despite all available evidence that they were not inspired Hebrew text? If they were not God inspired writings to the very people of God's Israel that they were written to, then why would any Church growing from this very same Religion (on their own), consider adding them later?

The Catholics are not the only people who use extra books he just specifically mentioned purgatory.
Click to expand...

Purgatory is a Jewish concept in origin... <not according to most Jews, wil>

Maccabees, Jubilees, Enoch, forgot them?

Gospels according to whom...Mary, Peter, Thomas?

How do we account for them? Dismiss? Then we are no different than our fore ancestors who did the same, based on political whims of the time. <empahsis added by me, wil>

v/r

Q
Click to expand...
 
I read the Gospel of Judas last night and found it to be very enlightening. Many of the questions which I had been looking for answers for were found in the essays by the four scholars that translated the gospel. I had often questioned Judas' betrayal because it seemed strange that Jesus and the Disciples would hang around waiting and waiting for what. I also questioned the teachings of the church in the 4 Gospels because I felt that there had to be more than what was being reiterated to me four times over. The church accepted the 4 Gospels determined by Iranaeus of Lyon (180ce) and his rejection of the multiple other gospels, i.e. Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Thomas, Secret Book of John to name a few in the Nag Hammari texts. These Gospels hold the teachings of the Gnostics and did not conform to Christian canon. In the Gospel of Judas he says to Jesus, "I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbelo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you"(pg 148). The "knowledge was given to Adam and those with him, so that the kings of chaos and the underworld might not lord it over them", (pg 139). It is pointed out that those seeking salvation do so through through knowledge, the self knowledge of the divine light within (pg139).
I hope those of you interested in the Gospel of Judas will read it and find many of the answers you are searching for. (didn't realize that this had been posted before writing 2nd posting)
 
I read the Gospel of Judas last night and found the writing to be very interesting. To have a conversation regarding the book would be very enlightening to many of us on this site. I believe that the gospels found in the Nag Harammi texts would also broaden many of the writings in Judas.

Iranaeus of Lyon, 180 ce, selected the texts to be entered into the NT - those being the Four Gospels and with argument against Gnosticism (Cainites) left out the Gospels of Judas, Thomas, Mary Magdalene, and John. If those gospels had been put into the NT what a different world in which we would live. But the mysticism which is held in those gospels scared Iranaeus and obviously many of the other church figures. The conversation that Judas has with Jesus in which Judas states:
I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barelo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you. (Gospel of Judas 35)
​
Judas got it, he knew what Jesus was teaching even though the other apostles did not. And it is because of this that the god of the OT still has reign over this world and the "Great One" (for lack of a better name) was dismissed due to the ignorance of a scribe in the year 180.

The Secret Book of John also embraces the Gnostic knowledge. It is the next book I am going to read after the Gospel of Mary. I believe that you will find the Gospel of Judas enlightening and will help guide you on your journey to the One True God.​

​
 
This post does not relate to the last post accept to say to Q that in rereading I see you were...just took a year for me to find your note.

But a new question on the topic....to which disciple did Jesus say, 'Get behind me Satan'? I don't ever see him saying anything close to that to Judas (I am referring to THE gospels here, not this gospel)
 
wil said:
But a new question on the topic....to which disciple did Jesus say, 'Get behind me Satan'? I don't ever see him saying anything close to that to Judas (I am referring to THE gospels here, not this gospel)
Click to expand...

I think He was talking to anyone that attempted to persuade him otherwise, but was looking at Peter when he said it. The statement had to do with Satan's request to sift him like wheat.
 
taijasi said:
Perhaps we might glimpse for a moment the inmost, reverent heart of the faithful followers of Muhammad, the Jewish Kabbalists with their Ain Soph, as well as the Taoists, who would all agree that no one has yet "seen God."
Click to expand...

Well glimpsed taijasi.

What a fascinating thread everyone and as an outsider a real eye opener on what we are prepared to accept, given our existing beliefs. I imagine it would be the same for someone reading a long thread in the Islam board?!
Peace
 
Muslimwoman said:
Well glimpsed taijasi.

What a fascinating thread everyone and as an outsider a real eye opener on what we are prepared to accept, given our existing beliefs. I imagine it would be the same for someone reading a long thread in the Islam board?!
Peace
Click to expand...

Perhaps we might glimpse for a moment the inmost, reverent heart of the faithful followers of Muhammad, the Jewish Kabbalists with their Ain Soph, as well as the Taoists, who would all agree that no one has yet "seen God."
Click to expand...

Christians KNOW He has been revealed by the birth, crucifixion, and resurrection of His son, Jesus Christ. I accept that not everyone can accept this, right now. But I also accept what Jesus asked and one thing He asked is to encourage unaccepters to accept.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top