Rice University Professor Debunks National Geographic Translation Of Gospel Of Judas

Eureka Alert ^ | 11-1-2007 | David Ruth - Rice University

[blam]

Contact: David Ruth
druth@rice.edu
713-348-6327
Rice University

Rice University professor debunks National Geographic translation of Gospel of Judas

A new book by Rice University professor April DeConick debunks a stunning claim by National Geographic's translation of the Gospel of Judas. According to that translation, Judas was a hero, not a villain, who acted on Jesus' request to betray him. DeConick disagrees.

Before releasing her book "The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says," DeConick was intrigued by the original release of the Coptic Gospel of Judas and as a scholar wanted to read it for herself. While researching and translating it, she discovered that National Geographic's translators had made some serious errors.

"Once I started translating the Gospel of Judas and began to see the types of translation choices that the National Geographic team had made I was startled and concerned," DeConick said. "The text very clearly called Judas a 'demon.'"

DeConick contends that the Gospel of Judas is not about a "good" Judas or even a "poor old" Judas. It is a gospel parody about a "demon" Judas written by a particular group of Gnostic Christians who lived in the second century.

"The finding of this gospel has been called one of the most important archaeological discoveries in the past 60 years," DeConick said. "It's important that we get this right."

DeConick said many scholars and writers have been inspired by the National Geographic version.

"It appears to have something to do with our collective guilt about anti-Semitism and our need to reform the relationship between Jews and Christians following World War II," she said. "Judas is a frightening character. For Christians, he is the one who had it all, and yet betrayed God to his death for a few dollars. For Jews, he is terrifying, the man whom Christians associated the Jewish people, whose story was used against them for centuries."

###

DeConick is the Isla Carroll and Percy E. Turner Professor of Biblical Studies at Rice University in Houston. To read more about her teachings, visit http://reli.rice.edu/rice_reli.cfm?a=cms,c,38,1

"The Thirteenth Apostle" (Continuum International Publishing Group) is available to purchase on www.amazon.com.

April DeConick is available nationwide for media interviews. To book an interview, contact David Ruth at 713-348-6327 or druth@rice.edu.

[aruanan]

None of the gospels were written by the apostle they are named after (with the possible exception of Luke / Acts wich were originaly one book). The books of the bible written most closely to thife of Chirst are those written by Paul - the epistles, followed then - chronologically - Mark, Matthew, John, Luke. The word Gospel means good news. The books are titled “the good news according to...” and were written by followers of the particular disciples, often many years later.

There's no valid reason for supposing that the gospels were not written by the one they were named after.

[FormerLib]

It’s the same book created by the Gnostics that was rejected by the Ecumenical Councils over a millenia and a half ago.

[Enterprise]

"I don’t suppose it ever occurred to anyone that Judas didn’t have enough time to write it between the time he betrayed Jesus and the time he committed suicide."

Evidently it occurred to the author.

"It is a gospel parody about a "demon" Judas written by a particular group of Gnostic Christians who lived in the second century."

[Enterprise]

"It’s the same book created by the Gnostics that was rejected by the Ecumenical Councils over a millenia and a half ago."

According to the author, the writers described Judas as being evil. These writers, described as Christians, lived much closer in time to the actual life of Jesus than the council which rejected their writings. If the writers wrote this book a century after Jesus died, what are their other writings which were closer in time or contemporaneous to the actual life of Jesus? If they were right about the nature of Judas, what else were they right about?

[PetroniusMaximus]

“None of the gospels were written by the apostle they are named after ... and were written by followers of the particular disciples, often many years later.”

That is certainly not the case. I can’t stand it when people pawn off liberal theories as if they were, for lack of a better term, gospel.

You would be well served to go back and study the source material more closely. And try to look up some scholars that aren’t as biased as the ones you’ve been reading.

[exit82]

There is no “Gospel of Judas”.

[Vince Ferrer]

While one can debate whether or not the New Testament is absolutely reliable, the idea that extremely obscure texts written more than a century later (by people who had absolutely no first-hand knowledge of any of the events of the life and death of Jesus Christ) should be given any great credibility is just another dogma of politically correct debunkers.

There were many writings circulating in the few centuries after Christ. This created confusion, and people called for the Church to produce a canon of what is accepted scripture. This was done by the fourth century. The reason that the gnostic gospels did not get included in the canon is that they were considered faulty in some way.

It is odd that after 1600 years, people want to consider the gnostic gospels more reliable than the texts the people closest to the events did. And the sole reason they consider them authentic is that the early Church thought they were defective.

[Dick Bachert]

This dust-up misses the point:

Jesus CAME HERE TO DIE FOR THOSE OF US WHO BELIEVE.

If Judas was His betrayer — i.e., the instrument by which Christ’s critical task was accomplished — except to correct error, what does it matter?

[Brucifer]

You may find that humorous, but the Islamifascists will throw a jihad on your a$$ for talking Pig Latin. LOL

[proxy_user]

As I understood it, all the Gnostics wrote in Greek.

However, post 11 explains it.

I wonder what they called him in Coptic, and how that relates to the lost Greek original. A ‘daimon’ could mean many things in Koine, depending on the context.

There are some scholars who are very good at reconstructing what the original Greek text must have been. Textual critics can work with Armenian traslations derived from lost originals to sort out certain stemmas.

[I got the rope]

there are a few

[Grizzled Bear]

You may find that humorous, but the Islamifascists will throw a jihad on your a$$ for talking Pig Latin. LOL

---

If pig latin is wrong I don’t want to be right.

;-)

[Swordmaker]

Are the a lot of Freepers that are fluent in Greek?

Of course, I, myself, as a long time techy, am fluent in Geek... But as for the language spoken and written in Greece, it's all Greek to me!

[Brucifer]

LOL! Thanks.

[fish hawk]

I can’t speak Greek but I do love their food.

[fish hawk]

You are close but not completely right. Jesus came here to die for the “world” (meaning everyone) but ONLY the ones that believe are saved. Paul says that Jesus died so that ALL may be saved.

[Don Corleone]

Has anyone noticed how the “Natl. Geo Channel” has been piling on Christianity lately?

[HereInTheHeartland]

“For Jews, he is terrifying, the man whom Christians associated the Jewish people, whose story was used against them for centuries.”

Silly me, I thought Christ died for the sins of all mankind.
The Jews are no more to blame than anyone else.
And Christ; and most early Christians were Jews.

[Quix]

Though I love to learn a lot of geography etc. via their journal

I’ve long felt that the NG was a major tool of the globalist puppet masters . . .

Felt that way at least 3-4 decades or more.

[infowarrior]

I would not give “The Gospel of Judas” any more credibility than Dan Brown’s “DaVinci Code” (the latter has been thoroughly discredited).

The latter, having been (and indeed labeled as such, by the author) a work of fiction, it is not possible to "discredit" it. Perhaps what you meant to say was that some of the "theory" underlying the fictitious work has been discredited (ie, "Holy Blood, Holy Grail", and the Mary Magdalene as wife/consort of Christ, etc...)

the infowarrior