Posted on 04/13/2006 8:12:35 AM PDT by Mr. Silverback
Welcome to Holy Week, American style. Just as millions of Christians are preparing to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus, the media is once again out to debunk historical Christianity.
Just last weekend I was in an airport bookstore and saw the new book counter filled with numerous editions of The Da Vinci Code. Then I picked up the New York Times, and there I was greeted with the headline on the front page that read, “In Ancient Document, Judas, Minus the Betrayal.”
You probably have seen the hype, including a one-hour National Geographic TV spectacular: After seventeen hundred years, the story goes, the long-lost text of the so-called “Gospel of Judas” has re-surfaced. It claims that Jesus secretly told Judas to betray Him; so Judas is really a good disciple.
Well, it’s not a new discovery. This “new gospel” and the heresy it espouses—Gnosticism—were rejected as fiction by Christian leaders and the Church as early as 180 A.D.
Gnosticism was an attempt to add to Christianity an essentially Eastern worldview dressed up with Christian language. It was presented to the Roman world as the true Gospel—complete with endless mysteries that only those with secret knowledge could unravel. Many unsuspecting people were enthralled with Gnostic writings, particularly their sometimes gory and salacious initiation ceremonies. Christian pastors and theologians repeatedly rejected all forms of Gnosticism, until, by the middle of the third century, it had all but disappeared.
But now it is back with a vengeance, with supposed discoveries and works like Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code. It provides the means for Christianity’s detractors to debunk the historical Jesus, and it certainly sells books. Seven million copies of The Da Vinci Code is testimony to that. Gnosticism has particular appeal today because of the postmodern age, which has rejected historical truth. So you can find God any way you wish, through your own group. This, of course, is the belief that is at the root of the spreading New Age movement.
The danger is that we have a biblically illiterate population. People today don’t know—maybe don’t care—whether there is a difference between the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel of John. They are unfamiliar with the work of the ancient canonical councils of the Church (which rejected the Gnostic “gospels” time and again) or even of the basic creeds or confessions of the Christian Church. Sadly, people are as gullible today as ever.
Now it is tempting to get angry at National Geographic and the liberal press for unleashing this fraudulent “gospel” at the beginning of the holiest week of the year. But don’t. Instead, let’s use the media attention to debunk the debunkers, to point out to friends that this regurgitated Gnosticism—the Da Vinci Code and the “gospel” of Judas included—is nothing more than historically unsupportable fantasy.
Then we can point them to the knowledge that is accessible to all people that has been accessible to Christians for two thousand years and proven historically accurate. It’s called the Bible.
But whatever you do, get informed first. Come to our website (see further reading below) or call us here at “BreakPoint” (1-877-322-5527) and find some of the resources that we are offering. And get busy because millions can be suckered in—unless you and I set the record straight.
Uh Dude, we know it's fiction...but it is fiction with an agenda...you know, like NBC, CBS, ABC, and NPR.
The artist should probably have a tailor measure him for a lightning rod....
"John 15:
18 If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you.
19 If you were of the world, the world would love its own. Yet because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you."
"If the world hates you, you know that it hated Me before it hated you. "Please know this, I do know
The Da Vinci Code is fiction as so many people have pointed out.
But getting all lathered up about it or the Gospel of Judas makes as much sense as beliving reading Potter will turn you into a witch.
I agree that most Americans know precioous little about theology. Ask the average person why they are they Catholic or Presbyterian or Orthodox Greek and they'll probably tell you because they were raised that way.
Coleson's statements about the Gnostics seem biased. I'm not a Gnostic, but I don't think their initiation rituals were "gory". As a matter of fact, I believe the only thing we may know about their rites comes from their theological enemies. Gnosticism was stamped out in the early years of Christianity by the established Orthodox/Catholic Church, along with its followers and most of its writings.
From what I can gather about the Gospel of Judas, it doesn't contradict the main theme of the other Gospels where Judas is a minor character, like Mary Magdalen.
It merely presents another view of the reality of the situation: that Christ had to be betrayed and die and that Judas was a close confidant of His and He consequnetly knew He could rely on him to carry out what God had ordained. It might be true and it might not.
If you are a Christian, you celebrate Easter because you have been saved by Christ's suffering, death and resurrection. If it hadn't have happened, your faith tells you would be damned for eternity.
So, who killed Christ anyway? The Jews? Judas? The Romans?
If you are really a Christian, you believe that our sins killed him. All these other actors were merely the means by which His death was accomplished.
The Gnostics themselves, based on the little we know of them and that coming mainly from their enemies, may have had what some of us perceive to be odd ideas about God, the inherent evilness of all matter, and some other issues, but they still represented a branch of Christianity like it or not.
BINGO!!!
Not meant for me, but interesting site
Gnostics were not Christians, were not supressed by Christianity and long predated the time of Christ. Using Christian terminology no more makes them Christian than it makes a Moslem Christian because the Koran perverts Biblical stories.
The meat of the article.
Yes, there were. There were also many religious books written by Jews which were not accepted into the Old Testament canon (some, but not all, of which are in the Catholic Apochrypha). When an ancient manuscript of one of these books is found-- especially of a book we didn't have before-- it is legitimately news, and of much interest to scholars.
I don't know that one could say that Judas was particularly favored by Christ...scripture states Jesus already knew it was he who would betray him...it may be more like"hold your friends close, hold your enemies closer!"
True. I'm mocking the hyperventaliation on both sides (the media, and the people who see some sort of attack on the Bible).
You're partly correct.
Gnosticism DID predate Christianity.
But I believe some early Christians WERE Gnostics also. The "Gospel of Judas" is but one of a series of other "Gospels" like the "Gospel of Mary (Magdelan)".
They ywere certainly considered "heretics" by the mainstream Christian Church of the time.
See: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htm
I'm not Catholic myself, but this site has a lot interesting information on theology.
The Cathars or Albigensians of southern France had Gnostic connections but they considered themselves Christians also and likewise were considered "heretics".
The entire subject of Gnosticism is a quite interesting one from an academic perspective. The "Gospel of Judas" special on TV didn't really do the subject justice - besides having several politically correct inaccuracies - like Roman legonaries arresting Christ in the Garden of Gethsemene.
Apparently there were various sects of Gnostics with some common beliefs but they differed from each other on others.
Unfortunately, due to persecution by the early mainstream Christian Church, a great deal of their documents have been destroyed so what we can really learn about them and their beliefs is limited and often filtered through the eys of their theological enemies.
We know more about Greek and Roman pagan beliefs than we know about Gnostics and Gnosticism.
What people think about religion and the afterlife, even those I disagree with personally, has always interested me.
The human mind is a fascinating thing.
In addition to the Gospel of Mary; the Magdalene story is supported in Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Philip, Pistis Sophia, and the Gospel of the Egyptians.
I didn't know that the earliest Gospel, Mathew, wasn't written by Mathew, and wasn't written until decades later. Apparently John wasn't written until 60 or more years later. None of the authors for the for Cannonized Gospels are known.
The letters of Paul were the first known writings around ~50CE.
Of the Gospels, Mark was the earliest at ~65-80. Matthew and Luke followed maybe 20 years later ~80-100. John was the last at ~90-120CE.
Scholars are pretty sure that Luke was a real person and author of both his Gospel and Acts of the Apostles. The others are anonymous writings that were produced by independent Christian communities venerated particular disciple. They named the texts according to whichever disciple was that community's hero.
It was interesting that the Gnostism denomination of Christianity believed in a more "personal" relationship with Christ and with God, just as todays funamentalists believe.
Gnosticism, in general, holds that original unknowable God -the Monad, made the spiritual universe. And as part and parcel of the act of creation, certain quot;emanations" or "aeons" were produced automatically, each less godly (or more evil) in sequence.
The last (so far) spiritual Aeon was Sophia. Sophia being further from God than the rest of creation, attempts a creation on her own, but messes it up and makes the 'Demiurge'. The Demiurge creates the physical universe we know and all the evil in it. Some sects taught that the demiurge is Satan, others that it was the OT God of the Jews.
Jesus is another Aeon sent in bodily form to provide the knowledge (gnosis) for mankind to escape the faulty material world and return to the spiritual existence as it was before the Demiurge.
It wasn't so much a "personal" encounter with God-Monad, but a release from this corrupt material domain into the pure spiritual existence as it was intend.
Sophia and (spiritual) Jesus were equal angel creations greater than man but less than God. (Some sects took a yin/yang approach to their theology to make Jesus & Sophia husband and wife. In this case, Mary was the earthly form of Sophia - and we have the Magdalene legend).
It was for this reason that the early Church adopted the doctrine of the Trinity -- to combat the belief that Jesus was somehow a lesser being than God.
Sounds like you really know a lot about this stuff.
I find it fascinating.
"It was for this reason that the early Church adopted the doctrine of the Trinity -- to combat the belief that Jesus was somehow a lesser being than God."
Wasn't this also related to Arianism?
Have all my fellow FReepers noticed that Christianity is the only major religion in the world whose fundamental beliefs come under such hostile scrutiny? Not Judaism, not Islam, not Buddhism, not Hinduism (heck, not even Shinto).
"The Da Vinci Code" appears to minimize (or even renounce) Jesus' divinity by hitching Him with Mary Magdalene and having children as if He were just another "regular guy". Then we have the "discovery" of this so-called Gospel of Judas where the disgraced Apostle is oh-so-not-to-blame for his betraying the Lord; after all, the Iscariot was "just following orders." Well, by the time the National Geographic Society was founded in 1888, the Church had known about that apocryphal Gospel for centuries.
I am glad a committed Christian like Chuck Colson is making a stand against the Jesus naysayers. As for me, give me that good ol' Nicene Creed anytime!
Actually there are plenty of Gnostic documents available. Elaine Pagels has written extensively about them.
Gnosticism was a grabbag of stuff often mutually exclusive but the Church did not supress it except through ideas. There was no power for the Church to do so and during its early years when Gnosticism died out Christianity itself was often persecuted by state authorities. Certainly the Romans did nothing to repress Gnosticism.
One of the reasons it died out was because it did not believe in marriage or procreation. And believing the world to be the creation of an Evil God it hardly leads one to believe life to be worth living.
(Ecclesiastes 1:9-14 NIV) What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun. {10} Is there anything of which one can say, "Look! This is something new"? It was here already, long ago; it was here before our time. {11} There is no remembrance of men of old, and even those who are yet to come will not be remembered by those who follow. {12} I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem. {13} I devoted myself to study and to explore by wisdom all that is done under heaven. What a heavy burden God has laid on men! {14} I have seen all the things that are done under the sun; all of them are meaningless, a chasing after the wind.
"It was for this reason that the early Church adopted the doctrine of the Trinity -- to combat the belief that Jesus was somehow a lesser being than God."
To be accurate, the early Church did not "adopt" doctrines just like a nation adopts a flag or official anthem. Rather, it acknowledged and then promulgated a doctrine after much prayer, reflection, and careful study of Scripture and other, non-inspired writings. Out of this careful scrutiny, the Church realized that God had revealed Himself in three Persons, which, come to think of it, was quite revolutionary (if not controversial) for those still adhering to the more conventional concept of monotheism we see in the Old Testament. As extremely difficult (or even impossible) as it was to understand, the Trinity was a doctrine the Church Fathers had no choice but to proclaim, and they did so within the framework of an ecumenical (church-wide) council which Nicea was back in A.D. 325.
So, what about Scripture? To this day, Catholics and Protestants disagree on certain books of the Old Testament which the former accept as inspired while the latter do not, although these two branches of Christianity acknowledge the same New Testament books. Centuries before the Reformation, the Catholic Church had already collected a series of writings into the Bible it uses today in prayer and liturgy (thus, traditionally acknowledging the divine inspiration behind these writings), but it was not until the Council of Trent (1545-1563) that the Church officially declared the authenticity of its Old and New Testament books as a dogma of faith, therefore settling the matter of what was inspired and what was not. Those "deuterocanonical" Old Testament books the Protestants took issue with remained in the Catholic canon (list), although it is understood these were the last to be accepted by Rome as authentic, and after much debate at that.
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.