Lost Gospel of Judas

Lost Gospel Revealed; Says Jesus Asked Judas to Betray Him

This is kind of old news, really. However, I've been amused by people's reactions to it over the past few weeks. There are a lot of ancient Christian texts which the early Catholic church rejected during the formation of an official Christian dogma. A variety of early church fathers, starting in the late 2nd century AD, took up the cause of denouncing various early Christian wiritings for one reason or another. The Gospel of Judas was on of those early texts. The early Church fathers were very picky about what they accepted and didn't accept. I am unclear how much of that was due to theology and how much can be attributed to protecting their power. I suppose after 2,000 years we are unlikely to ever know.

The idea that Judas was not actually a traitor isn't that much of a reach, however. One of Jesus's best known speeches (coincidentally, a reading in church today) is his "I am the good shepard" speech. He says, "The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father." (John 10:17-18) Now this speech ocurs well before the prediction of his death which occurs in John 12:23. So, is it possible for Judas to betray him if Jesus has willingly laid down his life? Can we call that a betrayal?

To further back up the concept John also recounts the events of the last Supper in which Jesus predicts his "betrayal." When asked who will betray him, "Jesus answered, 'It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.' Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon. As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him." (John 13:26-27) The question is, if Judas had not taken the bread, would he have betrayed Jesus? The implication here is that Judas had no intention of betraying Jesus until this moment.

Control of the church is a huge motivation in the interpretation of these texts. By the year 200 Christianity was becoming a force to be reconned with in the Roman Empire. By the 300s the Emperor himself would be protecting the church and later would join it and have a hand in its final formation. Writers of texts like the Gospel of Judas were generally accepted during the first hundred years of the church. Internal politics are very suspicous as rivals to the same bishop's position seem to wind up as heretics as did Valntinus in 175AD. e are told that Peter was designated as the foundation of the church, which could be viewed as somewhat odd. Peter was not the sharpest of the disciples. He was rash and often didn't get the meaning of Jesus's words at first blush. I mean, Jesus called the rock. But he was given the keys to the church and it would be built on him.

Peter's successors had to work pretty hard to maintain authority in the church. Each of the other disciples had followers, as did Jesus's mother and Mary Magdalene. Basically everyone who knew Jesus had some unique bit of wisdom he had passed on to them. Why would his words to Mary Magdalene or Judas be of less value than those he gave to Peter or Luke or Mark? What we see is that there is an "official Jesus" and then everything else about him. The Gnostic writings called gospels, usually begin with somehting like, "This is the secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with _________." And it continues with the story. Personally, I have to believe that as often as Peter or any of the other apostles missed Jesus's meaning in the official Gospels and had Jesus there to explain things, surely there have continued to be misinterpretations without Jesus (or by 200AD, any of the people who knew him personally) around to correct them. If Judas was a traitor then we have to suspect his motives, but what about Thomas, or Mary, or Joseph... or the many other apostles with written accounts of Jesus's life and words? It must also be acknowledged that the 3 apostles wrote the official Gospels, do not even constitute a majority of the 12 apostles and the rest of Jesus's entourage.

The National Geographic article describes much of what is present int eh Gospel of Judas, but I cannot find a full translation of it. I expect one is due out shortly... probably in book form and probably after the Davinci Code movie revives interest in Gnosticism...