New translations of a Coptic "Gospel of Judas" were released Thursday by the National Geographic Society, which apparently paid for its restoration after it had been discovered by looters in the Egyptian deserts in the 1970s.
The 1700-year-old age of the ink and paper used was confirmed by "extensive analysis" of both them and of the writing style and the very text, according to the Los Angeles Times. This "Gospel of Judas" itself translated an earlier, Greek document written around 140 A.D. The Coptic translation was made by scribes of the Gnostics, an early Christian sect whose beliefs were not favored by the founders of the "official" church.
Why do we care? Well, for starters, this gospel claims that Judas was in reality Jesus's most trusted apostle, and that Jesus asked Judas to turn him over to the authorities to fulfill Jesus's mission on Earth.
The gospel also said that Jesus told Judas he would be reviled by everyone, but that he would ultimately be vindicated.
Early church fathers rejected this gospel for inclusion in the New Testament. They also ensured that the original Greek copies of this gospel were destroyed. [Surprise, surprise.--Ed.]
I remember the first time I read the official gospels, back in junior high school. I never could wrap my head around the notion that Judas was condemned for doing the one thing that seemed necessary to get Jesus into the Judaic and Roman legal systems, so that He could be crucified and then resurrected as foretold in older scriptures.
Assuming you believe that that's what happened, that is. My own beliefs are not entirely settled. I will say that I know that something momentous happened to the surviving apostles. Nothing else explains why they went from cowering in hiding after Jesus's death to preaching their "Good News" boldly and willingly becoming martyrs for their beliefs.
I also know that Mary Magdalene played a much greater role in Jesus's life and ministry than early church fathers wanted to admit--because even they could not suppress the fact that she was the first to learn that Jesus had risen from the dead.
I also know that Jesus was far, far from the prissy, intolerant, right-wing WASP a lot of Christian fundamentalists want you to think He was. They seem to have missed several key points of Jesus's teachings. To name just four of many: (1) that it is "easier for a camel to get through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to get into Heaven;" (2) that His mission was to afflict the comfortable and comfort the afflicted; (3) that He would have been out amongst the "sinners" (gays, profligates, you-name-it) helping them, not sitting around raising money by condemning them; (4) that faith is faith, civil government is civil government, and the two should not be intertwined ("render unto Caesar . . .").
Not that any of this matters. People generally will believe what they want to believe, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Just as Lincoln would not be a Republican if he were alive today, so Jesus would not be a "Christian" (in the American, right-wing fundamentalist sense of the word) if He were alive today.
If that doesn't get somebody posting comments to this blog, I might as well give up.
4 comments:
Well, now I feel like I have a duty to make some sort of comment. It won't be exciting, but here goes: Are you telling me that Jesus would not be in awe of the giant praying hands at the Oral Roberts University?
By the way, thanks for "showing me your blog," as they say. (You know they say that.) Now I have something else to read on the "Internets," as W calls it.
Welcome, Taffy! And thank you for commenting. I keep telling everyone that what I want to do is get a dialogue going . . . it doesn't have to be profound, or even sensible . . . just interactive!
Well, you can rest assured that you won't get anything even remotely sensible from me.
Good! Stuff and nonsense is what I'm all about!
Post a Comment