bleubird

Color me stupid,but I can not find much on the Gospel of Judas.
He is why there are Christians,right.
Help me.

Toto

You mean the manuscript that was discovered a few years ago, and was the subject of a National Geographic special? There are some old threads in the archives.

I think scholars are still disagreeing over the proper translation, and there is some suspicion that it is a forgery.

What do you want to know about it?

bleubird

yes.Is the Nat History crap or what?

bleubird

So christian faith means no thing with out Judas.

Toto

Gospel_of_Judas is a good summary of the Nat Geo case.

The main critic has been April DeConick, who has challenged the translation of a few key terms, and who published a book, The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says (or via: amazon.co.uk).

But there hasn't been much on this since 2006.

Not sure where you want to go with this. The gospel of Judas does not represent standard Christian theology at any point in time.

Toto

Archived threads on the Gospel of Judas

From 2004:
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives...ad.php?t=91079

Most comprehensive thread from 2006:
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives...d.php?t=161241

others
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives...d.php?t=164066
http://www.freeratio.org/thearchives...d.php?t=163317

mountainman

The Press Release UA Radiocarbon Dates Help Verify Coptic Gospel of Judas is Genuine of March 30, 2006 states that the C14 testing at UA yielded a date of 280 CE plus or minus 60 years (that is between 220 and 340 CE.) and then went on to report that ...

There are at least three problems with this propaganda:

(1) It is not at all clear that the manuscript dates to before the Council of Nicaea since the upper bound 340 CE is after Nicaea.

(2) The final report for the C14 test (of 2005 - 8 years ago) has not seen the light of day (NatGeo may have subsumed the publishing rights).

(3) A report by Peter Head states that one sample of five, C14 dated to 333 CE +/- 60 years was ignored in the final result published (ie: 280 CE +/- 60 years)

Roger Pearse

A quick summary:

Around 30-40 years ago a Coptic manuscript was discovered, under unknown circumstances, somewhere in Egypt. It contained a text calling itself the "gospel of Judas". After a colourful career it was published very recently.

The text itself contains ideas belonging to the heresy of the gnostics, who mixed ideas from pop-paganism with Christian teaching. The original text was in Greek, and perhaps belongs to the 2nd century AD. It may have belonged to a rather fringe group, since we have very little in the way of references to it in ancient literature.

At some point it was translated into Coptic, perhaps in the 3rd century AD (since literary Coptic itself doesn't develop that early). It may also have been edited at that time to increase the gnostic element, for all we know. The physical handwritten copy (=manuscript) of the text probably belonged to a Coptic monastery, as these were notorious for collecting offbeat apocryphal literature. The book was probably buried or hidden away during one of the purges ordered by bishops like Shenoute from the 4th century onwards, and forgotten; and probably found by a peasant tilling a field.

Nothing in this text has any connection with Jesus or first century Christianity. Indeed the composition of spurious gospels by outside groups, presumably to win converts from Christian groups, commences in the 2nd century AD and has continued even to our own day in a small way.

But part of the interest of very early texts of this kind, however, is the possibility that the authors of them might have had some contact with the oral tradition about the life and teachings of Christ, which perhaps did not make it into the canonical texts. In general there is unfortunately very little evidence of such, however. The possibility has been enough to get quite a bit of funding, however.

I hope that helps. :-)

All the best,

Roger Pearse

Littlejohn

.
.
Before addressing the question 'Gospel of Judas', it is absolutely necessary to clarify (or reiterate) that 'jesuan' Gnosticism (namely, concerning the Jesus' figure) and the Christianity - more correctly 'catholic-christianity' - they were two cults entirely distinct from one another.

In practice, the 'gnostic-jesuanism' was the true ORTHODOXY, as the historical Jesus was a KNOWN Gnostic teacher of his time. (together with other 'things', of course). Ergo, the real HERESY it was the Catho-Christianity! (or simply 'Christianity', if you prefer). The forger fathers of the origins, namely those who founded the Catho-Christianity, they 'plundered' to the jesuan Gnostics their charismatic figure, Jesus of Nazareth, by bringing he with strength in worship that they were in founding: namely the CATHO-CHRISTIANITY. (catho: abbreviation for catholic)

While there are gospels genuinely Gnostic and other gnostic apocryphal documents (see Gospel of Philip, of Thomas, Pistis Sophia, etc..), the Gospel of Judas is, at present, a specimen quite unique in its kind. In fact, it contains inside elements both Catholic that Gnostic. This could mean that the community who used this gospel, may have been born from a community of catho-christian hereticals, which later merged with a gnostic-jesuan community.

.

aa5874

Your claim is mere speculation and without a shred of evidence. There is no mention of Jesus of Nazareth as human or a Gnostic teacher in the entire writings of all existing non-apologetic writings.

Plus, in the very Jesus cult Canon itself it was PUBLICLY argued in the Roman Empire and documented that JESUS was born after a VIRGIN was made PREGNANT by a Ghost.

These arguments were DOCUMENTED and manuscripts have been recovered and dated.

See the Codex Sinaiticus---It is documented. Jesus Walked on the sea of Galilee AFTER he was born of a Ghost.

If I am not mistaken, it is documented in the same Codex that he TRANSFIGURED with Moses and Elijah who were supposed to be ALREADY dead hundreds of years earlier.

What we have before us is clear Mythology--Not a figure of history.