Posted on 04/07/2006 6:38:55 AM PDT by presidio9
The National Geographic Society released the manuscript of what is called "The Gospel of Judas" yesterday. By National Geographic's own account, a team first assembled by the Maecenas Foundation has been working on the text since 2001. As a result of press releases tied to publication of the text, widespread coverage has repeated the claim that this is an authentic and unique representation of the historical relationship between Jesus and Judas, and that Jesus encouraged Judas to betray him.
Despite the careful work by scholars that has gone into a document of obvious interest, I have to express disappointment when I see National Geographic stoop so low into hyperbole as to distort the significance of this discovery.
In its release, National Geographic repeatedly states that it has "authenticated" the document. Several press outlets have simply repeated those claims. But "authentic" turns out to be a slippery term as used by the National Geographic Society. No scholar associated with the find argues this is a first century document, or that it derives from Judas. The release says the document was "copied down in Coptic probably around A.D. 300," although later that is changed to "let's say around the year 400." This amounts to saying that "The Gospel of Judas" is an authentic fabrication produced by a group of Gnostics in Egypt. Gnostics believed that their direct knowledge of heaven permitted them to understand what no one else knew, or could know by historical knowledge. For ancient Gnostics to believe in their own powers of divination is charming; for their flights of imagination to be passed off as historical knowledge in our time is dishonest or self-deceived.
During the second century, a theologian of the Catholic Church named Irenaeus referred to a writing named "The Gospel of Judas." Was that
(Excerpt) Read more at nysun.com ...
There was a funny interview yesterday with a "Church spokesman." The reporter breathlessly asked if the Church was "suppressing" the Gnostic "gospels" out of "fear" that they would "undermine" the faith. The priest answered: "Not really. You can buy them in any Catholic bookstore."
heh heh heh
Absolutely. The evidence against their 1st century provenance is extremely tenuous, consisting of quibbles over vocabulary, the perceived "tone" of the letter and circular reasoning - i.e. "They must have been written later because my preconceived timeline of Paul's career excludes them from being written earlier, and my timeline of Paul's career is based on my assumptions about the dating of the Pauline corpus."
The historical argument that the community addressed is too "organized" to be a 1st century community is easily refuted, as I pointed out earlier.
This does not support your accusation of "gross exaggeration."
I think you are referring to Ms. Rice's current bestseller, "Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt." Ms. Rice has undergone a profound conversion experience, returning to the Catholic faith of her youth. Her Afterward in the novel chronicles her journey to Christ. It's quite inspiring.
No contemporary scholar is closer to the situation than Irenaeus was.
No, real but inaccurate. Just more gnostic BS.
There is no indication it existed "well before" - since we know from external sources that many of Irenaeus' criticisms in the Adversus Haereses were directed at newly-minted groups as well as older ones.
For all we know the Cainites were just as likely the hot new cult on the scene.
While we are on the subject of "fake but accurate" Bill Berkett has a bull for sale.
We're looking for one, my husband came across this on the interent. Bill Burkett in Baird TX. Didn't want to take the chance that he had forged the register papers.
Add Acts and Luke to that list, which you have no good reason not to, and you have roughly 88% of the NT right there.
Dontcha know that any book that sells 40 million copies turns into non-fiction ?
Perception is 90% of reality...
BUMP
bttt
Is this the Gospel where Jesus warns against global warming, and denounces Bush?
The case for dating any document later than 100 AD is predicated on debates over vocabulary, the exactly nuanced meaning of words in certain contexts, etc.
There is not one piece of hard evidence to the contrary.
It's written in proportional Coptic - they didn't have the ability to do that back then!
Sounds like something Judas would say.
"Nobody believes that the disciple Matthew wrote the gospel of his name, either." ~ Dog Gone
Being dubious about the "written directly" claims is one thing, but when some of them question the "authorship" of the canonical gospels, that's where they go off the deep end.
"With these general considerations http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/gospdefhub.html , we now offer these mini-essays on each Gospel."
Matthew http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/mattdef.html
Mark http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/markdef.html
Luke http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/lukedef.html
John http://www.tektonics.org/ntdocdef/johndef.html
I agree, that this truly is a tempest in a teapot. There have always been gnostic gospels and I've been amazed at recently so many fiction writer have been doing mysteries that "seek to twist and claify Christian values". The Da Vinci Code--everyone knows is fiction, but what does it do to belief systems. Dave Barry's The Third Secret does a smiliar thing that attacks the Catholic Church's belief that priests cannot marry. I just call tomes like these Today's Gnostics. I read some of these gnostic texts years ago. My favorite one to snicker about was the one where it was purported Judas and Jesus played together as children in Egypt. There's also a Gnostic gospel devoted to Mary Magdalene. Take it with a grain of salt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.