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...

Sports Challenged?

Seriously, is this a word?

I have an insatiable love of words. Ask my wife, she's caught me reading a dictionary before. As a bonifide linguafile, I am fascinated with new words and I suscribe to several word-a-day type mailing lists. One of them is in fact called "A Word A Day" and is managed by the very competent Anu Garg. The list is usually loads of fun if your in to learning new words or if you just enjoy the English language. I say "usually" because every so often something inane pops up that sails through my anti-irritation filters and scores a direct hit.

At the end of every week, AWAD sends out a digest of feedback from the week's words. Usually these are clever additions, anecdotes, asides, or ponderings, filled with puns and clever word games... I mean, true, it's on the level of people who don't usually descend to the mortal realm to commune with the average English speaker and so, is somewhat socially awkward. Not the kind of things you'd say and get a laugh from in a typical bar. for example. In any case, I usually enjoy these digests as much as the daily words.

Today, the very first comment is from someone named Walter (actually I have his full name and email address) and he writes:

I am likewise "sports-challenged"...

I've often thought that if we, as a society, valued teachers as we value sports "heroes" and paid them accordingly, we might actually make something of ourselves as a nation. So, perhaps being "sports-challenged" is not a bad thing. Certainly it saves time for reading and PC-gaming.

Now, maybe I'm just in a grumpy mood, but I am kinda gettign sick and tired of the "poor teachers" routine. I am likewise getting sick of the sports bashing our enlightened society has picked up over the last 25 years. I'll admit, there are a lot of jackass athletes out there giving sports a bad name. They get paid a lot, yes. However, in much the same way you can't be a super model forever, sports heroes fade with time and in a few short years, they're out of a job. So a couple of million dollars per year sounds like a lot to you and me, but if that's your whole career... well, you better make enough to live on after it's over. They're idiots... well again, some of these "heroes" are just kids. In teh NBA there are guys pulling down big money and they can't even get into a bar. I'm willing to expect the same behavior from them as I would from any college kid.

But sports aren't evil. Competition isn't evil. Winning is great but, losing has its benefits too. The people who complain about sports are not only "sports challenged," but also sore loosers. I knew lots of kids without a prayer of ever playing a sport past the 8th grade PE level who adore sports. Losing never faded that love. I've been to a lot of events with large groups of people in my life, but my first Baltimore Ravens game in Baltimore changed everything I thought I knew about large groups of people interacting. The sensation of being with 80,000 people who all want pretty much the same things to happen is awe inspiring. I've sat next to people who I would otherwise never interact with and occasionally even been hugged my them during a game. Not many activities go so far in "bringing people together."

Now back to Walter, what's his problem? Well, he has a pretty bad additude for one. He's blaming athletic activities for something that is, in itself, not even true. When, oh when will The United States make something of itself as a nation? LOL. Kinda stupid when you're talking about a lone super power. It's like wondering when Alexander the Great is going to make a name for himself. Beyond that bit of sniping, Walter is also blaming sports hero worship for the plight of teachers in the U.S. The two just aren't connected. Here's why:

Professional Athletes get paid based on talent or ability. The most talented athletes command the highest salaries. Sporting events bring people together and most people enjoy that, especially if the home team wins (most people like to be behind a winning team.) To win you have to have the best players and they cost money. The sytem drives itself.

Teachers get paid based on union negotiating. All teachers make prety much the same regardless of talent, or ability, or the number of wins they get. So you will not get more from teachers if you pay them more. You might attract people to teaching who would have considered a different career path, but not all of those will be better teachers. Now if a city (or school) wanted to have a winning faculty that outperformed other schools, they'd have to put together a talented team. They'd have to recruit talented teachers and get rid of bad teachers. Private schools do this with their faculty. They do it with salaries and they do it with other incentives as well, like better facilities, environment, teaching opportunities. Competition for teaching positions ensures the best teachers are present. Makes sure the teachers present are giving their all to the job. The better they teach the better the pay and the more opportunities they get. Since, public schools are not run this way, there is no incentive to excel. The guy graduating students who can't read is going to keep his job and make the same amount of money as the girl who graduates 90% of her students with college futures.

In many ways that comparison illustrates basic differences between a socialized system and a capitalixed system. Teaching is a socialized activity (as in socialism) and therefore, performs only as well as it needs to. Sports operates under a capitalistic system that rewards excellence and therefore inspires people to seek it. In almost every instance, socialism in the world has failed. It expects an enightened view of work, and personal value that cannot exist in our world. Not as long as material resources are finite.

So to respond to poor, misguided Walter, teachers will need to increase their value to society accordingly to be raking in the bucks that sports heroes do. In my life teachers have been of little value for the most part. They come and go, and I can't remember half of they're names. Now, don't jump to conclusions... there have been a handfull of teachers in my life that I think did more than all the rest combined for me. I value them like professional athletes... and if it were up to me they would be compensated with the salaries of every other teacher I've been subjected to. However, it's not up to me. There is no marketplace for excellent teachers... there's definitely a market... but no marketplace. Teachers should put themselves on the bidding block and see what each one will bring in. Maybe we should have Teacher drafts? and teacher agents? and teacher no-competition contracts? Teacher recruiters going around to universities looking for the up-and-coming. Then we'd see the United States make something of itself!