Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 01-06-2007, 03:34 PM

The LA Times Column One has a long tabloid style story on a scholarly rift over the treatment of the Gospel of Judas: virtue or betrayal?.

Quote:

When the gospel was released last spring, another book appeared, "The Secrets of Judas," which sneered at the notion that the new gospel was revolutionary or that it revealed anything new about Jesus. Author James M. Robinson, a giant in the world of early Christian studies, also accused National Geographic of sensationalizing the gospel "in order to make as large a profit as possible."

Robinson, who had long railed against scholars who tried to restrict access to biblical texts, was especially dismayed that the Judas project was conducted largely in secret with the help of Marvin Meyer, Robinson's friend and former student at Claremont Graduate University.

Without directly invoking the payment Judas received from the Romans, Robinson made his point: National Geographic and its team of translators had received their 30 pieces of silver.

In the months to come, the specialized field of Coptic translation dissolved into public bickering and dark whispers by scholars who spoke of the jealous graybeard with a tender ego or the younger, irresponsible grandstander seduced by the prospect of celebrity.

Meyer, 58, felt misunderstood. Robinson, 82, felt betrayed.

Near the end of the article, we learn that there are charges that there are errors in the translation which might have been avoided with a more open process, that Meyers wonders if his own personal preference for peace has influenced his ideas on Judas, and that Dennis MacDonald believes that Judas is a mythical figure based on Greek mythology. And that Meyers and Robinson have patched up their differences.

neilgodfrey · 01-06-2007, 05:16 PM

I wonder if the idea of Judas handing Jesus over for a sacrifice potentially offers a different perspective on the 30 pieces of silver/Judas was a thief motif.

Is there any suggestion anywhere that the Temple priests were not so much paying a bribe as paying the price of the sacrificial victim? Compare the canonical gospel's indignation over money-changers in the Temple -- money exchanges being the norm for purchase of sacrificial victims.

Neil Godfrey

http://vridar.wordpress.com

S.C.Carlson · 01-06-2007, 06:00 PM

Important background information missing in the LA Times article is that, when the Gospel of Judas was being shopped around in the early 1980s, Robinson was on the team to publish it but the deal fell through.

Stephen

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-06-2007, 05:16 PM	#2
neilgodfrey Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Darwin, Australia Posts: 874	I wonder if the idea of Judas handing Jesus over for a sacrifice potentially offers a different perspective on the 30 pieces of silver/Judas was a thief motif. Is there any suggestion anywhere that the Temple priests were not so much paying a bribe as paying the price of the sacrificial victim? Compare the canonical gospel's indignation over money-changers in the Temple -- money exchanges being the norm for purchase of sacrificial victims. Neil Godfrey http://vridar.wordpress.com

01-06-2007, 06:00 PM	#3
S.C.Carlson Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 1,307	Important background information missing in the LA Times article is that, when the Gospel of Judas was being shopped around in the early 1980s, Robinson was on the team to publish it but the deal fell through. Stephen

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.