Judas Saves; Why the lost gospel makes sense (Christopher Hitchens)

slate ^ | Ap 13 06 | Christopher Hitchens

[churchillbuff]

the idea of a sacred Judas always seemed rational to me, at least in Christian terms. The New Testament tells us firmly that Jesus went to Jerusalem at Passover to die and to fulfill certain ancient prophecies by doing so. How could any agent of this process, witting or unwitting, be acting other than according to the divine will? ...[snip]

Now we have, recovered from the desert of Egypt, a 26-page "Gospel of Judas," . ...[snip]

The Judas gospel puts legend's most notorious traitor in a new light—as the man who enjoyed his master's most intimate confidence, and who was given the crucial task of helping him shed his fleshly mortality. And you can see why the early Christian fathers were leery of such texts. This book has the same cast but a very arcane interpretation. Right before Passover, as the disciples are praying, Jesus sneers at their innocence. Only Judas has guessed the master aright—and has discerned that he comes from the heavenly realm of the god "Barbelo." In the realm of Barbelo, it seems, earthly pains are unknown and the fortunate inhabitants are free from the attentions of the God of the Old Testament. The Judas gospel would make one huge difference if it was accepted. It would dispel the centuries of anti-Semitic paranoia that were among the chief accompaniments of the Easter celebration until approximately 30 years after 1945, when the Vatican finally acquitted the Jews of the charge of Christ-killing. ...[snip]let us all therefore give thanks for our deliverance from religion, and raise high the wafer that summons us to the wonders and bliss of the faraway realm of Barbelo and brings us the joyous and long-awaited news that Judas saves.*

[Stentor]

Favoring the Iraq invasion dosn't make you a conservative

You should re-state your position on the liberation of Iraq.

[Stentor]

I apologise. I have seen the later posts.

[gondramB]

It would be better if he had never been born.

And I see where you are going with this but I am reminded of the story of Clovis the first French King who ordered his men to convert to Christianity. Clovis said that if he and few of his men had been on the crucification hill that things would have gone differently.... but they wouldn't have - this was God's plan. why he chose Judas and how Judas decided, I don't know but i believe this was God's plan.

As for this Gospel, I have now idea how real it is , if its real at all. But i know it wasn't until 400 AD that the Catholic church decided which gospels to include and that Mathew, Mark and Luke are not simply gospels written by an apostle - they can be, for linguistic reasons.

It doe not seem impossible that the catholic church judged a Gospel to be false when there was some truth in it.

[JohnnyZ]

You're been reading too much Da Vinci Code.

[JohnnyZ]

But here was a woman who was the most extreme fanatic, who was distrusted by many in her own church for her utter dogmatism , and she was accepted by people who have no religious belief at all as if she was doing, so to speak, God's work ..... she said that there was a great threat to peace in the world and that the greatest threat - and I'll repeat, the greatest threat to peace in the world was the tendency of women to resort to abortion and to contraception -- Christopher Hitchins

Wow, what an exceedingly hateful man! Apparently the reason he hates Mother Teresa is because she's a believing Catholic.

[gondramB]

"You're been reading too much Da Vinci Code."

I've only recently read that - great fiction -very entertaining - I can see why people compare it to Harry Potter.

But the church deciding about 400 AD (I could look up the exact date) which gospels were authentic and picking only those 4 is an established historical fact.

I'm not a linguist and cant lay out in technical detail the problems with the gospels but in essence the wording is too similar to be independent - at the very least parts were copied from a common source.

[fortunecookie]

Is this any different than GW telling us that all these illegals want is to come here & get a job that NOBODY else will do / Islam is a religion of peace? And yes, Hitchins IS unhitched.

Weellll, yes and no. I do agree that some illegals who come here work at jobs some legal Americans turn their noses up at. Like janitorial work. That being said, how many of those illegals quickly look for other, better work once here? Yeah, lots. As for the religion of peace ... stuff, well, I'm no longer holding my breath to hear a majority of our nation's Muslims speak out categorically against such acts of terror and the shielding of such individuals. (A few have.) So, those 2 statements contain bare nuggets of truth. I do agree that it is no different than the twistings of truth you mentioned for Hitchens. But the supposed 'gospel' of Judas contains no nugget of truth.

So I'm sure the lefties and CINO's will run with it, wheeee!!!

[ARridgerunner]

fyi

[JohnnyZ]

But the church deciding about 400 AD (I could look up the exact date) which gospels were authentic and picking only those 4 is an established historical fact.

The four were regarded as special very early on, ~ 200 AD, and while this was later codified, it's very well established by Christian scholars even looking back today that the four are legit and the others have problems.

link

Of course you can choose to believe whatever you want to. I'm sure you have a better perspective than the saints of the first few centuries.

[gondramB]

>>Of course you can choose to believe whatever you want to. I'm sure you have a better perspective than the saints of the first few centuries.<<

Here we are having a discussion and you get ugly about it. That's unfortunate.

I'm actually familiar with the link you gave and give it great weight - there is more to discuss here but it doesn't sound like it would be useful. I would just close by saying you ought to read your own link.

[sasportas]

[I didn't write this]

There is a lot of hype in the media right now about "The Gospel of Judas." As it turns out, there is absolutely nothing new here. This supposedly "lost" gospel was known to, and rejected in the early years of Christianity.

Irenaeus, who lived from 120-202 A.D., pastor in Lyons, France, who claimed to have been taught by Polycarp who in turn had been taught by the apostle John, wrote five books entitled “Against Heresies.” In these books, he documented and refuted the many Gnostic groups that had sprung up to attack the faith.

One of these groups was called the “Cainites.” This was a particularly despicable group known for its extreme immorality. They believed that for a person to ascend to perfect “Gnosis” (which was their concept of salvation), he must experience everything that can possibly be experienced including every imaginable sort of immorality.

They celebrated the worst men in the Scriptures (including Cain, the men of Sodom, Korah and Judas) as proper role models. They believed that these persons were actually the good guys. They had access to hidden knowledge and wisdom and that is why they did the things they did. They also taught that these men were persecuted by God because He feared their knowledge. They called by the name of “Hystera,” and urged the abolition of His works and commands.

The so-called “Gospel of Judas” is the product of this sect. I find it fascinating that in these last days before the Lord’s return, Satan is attacking the church with so many of the very same devices that he used to attack it in its infancy. And this is a prime example. If we are going to protect ourselves and our children from his devices and the coming apostasy, then we need to be as vigilant as Irenaeus. Here is what Irenaeus said about the Cainites and the “Gospel of Judas.”
………………………………………….

Irenaeus:

1. They 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. 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.

2. I have also made a collection of their writings in which they advocate the abolition of the doings of Hystera. Moreover, they call this Hystera the creator of heaven and earth.

[sasportas]

Concerning the so called gospel of Judas, I forgot to higlight Irenaeus' key words:

They produce a fictitious history of this kind, WHICH THEY STYLE THE GOSPEL OF JUDAS.

[gondramB]

I have no idea whether there is any truth is the work they are calling ther gospel of judas. My comments go to the following

1. I don't know the exact method by which God caused his will to be carried out or how Judas made his decisions.

2. I think it is entirely possible that the church did not include every scrap that contained some truth about Jesus's life and sayings

3. The existence or lack thereof of a Gospel of Judas doesn't change my basic view of the bible - I already know it is the message and the salvation that are important rather than the authors and wording, this is reinforced by the authors not being who most people think.

[Allan]

The theme that Judas was faithfully following the commands of Jesus is not new.

Kazantzakis used it in "The Last Temptation of Christ"

[ARridgerunner]

Barbelos.

[raygun]

beep

[Allan]

'The Body of Christ' seems to have some profound significance.
Unfortunately I do not know enough about Gnosticism
to know what importance it had to them.

[Ditto]

To avoid a pissing contest, just have it your way. I guess you guys have a low definition of evil.

I don't confuse flaws, foibles or obsessions with true evil..

I know evil walks this planet. True evil is rare, but it is very real and it does disguise itself very cleverly.

If you define a misguided but well meaning person such as Hitchens as "evil", I think you totally trivialize the nature and danger of evil. Evil is totally nonpartisan. It is multi cultural. It is ecumenical and it is deadly. It can be any race, religion, philosophy, or political persuasion it chooses.

[Petronski]

You call that avoiding a pissing contest?    LOL

[1000 silverlings]

The bible says that Satan entered into Judas. Now if you say that Satan and Christ were working together, you are getting into some very very dangerous territory.