I believe you miss my point. I'm saying that the point of the telecast is to promote or manufacture controversy where none exists, not to be a balanced or varied consideration of the theological implications of the document. I submit that few "orthodox" scholars would participate in a show that promotes this kind of hype.
IMHO few scholars, for or against traditional interpretation of the NT, find the Gospel of Judas all that revolutionary.
The National Geographic practices what I would call Gilbert Grosvenor Episcopalianism. They are skeptics, i.e., Pharisees.
You're absolutely right. I stand corrected.
IMHO few scholars, for or against traditional interpretation of the NT, find the Gospel of Judas all that revolutionary.
That's true - the most important question is whether the source text dates from the 2nd century, or whether this 4th century document was a relatively recent composition at the time the text we have is copied.
The one interesting aspect to that is that the text is full of bitter and angry asides describing the orthodox Christians of the time and their institutions - if the source text of the document is as old as Irenaeus suggests, then this Gospel of Judas unintentionally provides insight into the Church of its today.
Also, by directly contradicting the canonical Gospels in a very calculated manner it demonstrates that it is certainly older than the canonicals and that the canonicals were very dear to the Church of the time.
An early dating for the source text would tend to reinforce the orthodox account of the Scriptures.