The lost Gospel of Judas

[CMC122]

I caught this on National Geographic last night and found it very interesting. How do you guys feel about it? Has it changed your train of thinking comparing it to the other gospels?

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/?fs=www9.nationalgeographic.com

 

[CMC122]

I saw that one, definetly changes what the original thinking is/was about Judas.
But the defense will be they couldnt find that Gospel in the Bible

Do you think it was convienantly left out?

 

[dustin]

The newly revealed gospel document, written in Coptic script, is believed to be a translation of the original, a Greek text written by an early Christian sect sometime before A.D. 180

 

[brendar buhl]

There are several ancient texts that have been talked about for awhile. There's the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Barnabas, Judas, Mary etc. Historically some of these books are very good, some are awful, but none of them were canonized by the early Church. These books were not considered to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is also important to remember that we didn’t become Christians simply because of words in a book but because we (most of us) have had an experience where we met Jesus Christ in some spiritual way. Some people allow their faith to be shaken by the talk of these ancient books but it's important to keep them in perspective.

 

[Penn]

I saw that documentary on Apr. 9th, this last spring.

I was curious over a few facts/suggestions the National Geographic Channel offered in their movie, so I sent off a letter to them at lostgospel@ngs.org.


"There were some interesting theories put forth tonight in
your program concerning the Gospel of Judas. I am intrigued, however, that
no mention of who the possible author of this Gospel was. It was supposed to have been a Gnostic author, but who was it?

Who would have written the Gospel? How would they have even known what was purported to have been told to Judas by Jesus, or when it was supposed to have been done?

In the testimony I saw tonight in the Gospel of Judas, as soon as he realized the outcome, and the magnitude of his deed(s), he went and did away with himself, and there, by your own account, that is where the story ends.

The Gospel does not contain an account of the Crucifixion,
thereby, in my opinion, validating the idea that Judas did in fact commit
suicide in very short order, after that night when he gave Jesus up to the
Roman guards.
By all accounts, even in the other Four Gospels, Judas did
exactly that - he killed himself. There is no mention of him ever recounting
his thoughts to another individual, be it a Disciple, or Roman, or a
Sadducee, or any other Jewish authority.
So, I ask again, who would have had knowledge of what Jesus
was to have supposed to have told Judas, and then sat down and scribed a
interesting but somewhat incomplete document?"



The only answer I got from them was to the point that "they had received many replies/requests concerning this documentary, and were unable to answer my letter at this time."

They never did any follow up to that reply.

 

[pixiegirl]

There are several ancient texts that have been talked about for awhile. There's the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Barnabas, Judas, Mary etc. Historically some of these books are very good, some are awful, but none of them were canonized by the early Church. These books were not considered to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. It is also important to remember that we didn’t become Christians simply because of words in a book but because we (most of us) have had an experience where we met Jesus Christ in some spiritual way. Some people allow their faith to be shaken by the talk of these ancient books but it's important to keep them in perspective.

And who exactly decided this but men? There is nothing that I've read in these documents that argues with most of what is in the bible. Different accounts and perspectives yes but no direct opposition to what the bible teaches us. Which by the way in my opinion is ENTIRELY perseption anyway. Faith to be shaken? I don't think so. I think for most it strengthens faith by giving a different and more understandable view. That's my beef with organized religion in general. It's a very "My way or the highway" attitude.

 

[brendar buhl]

Not really, no. Keep them in perspective meaning that if you have faith in Jesus it is bigger than a book. Authenticating any ancient text is a tenuous affair. Most of these texts generally support the events of the canonized gospels. The Books that don't support the traditionally accepted historical events are books that stand alone. I don't think that it is responsible for a Greek scholar of ancient historian to discount centuries of works based on one outlying text.
Further more, my relationship with God is not souly dependent on scripture. Likewise, God is not limited by our understanding of scripture. His Holy Spirit is capable of maintaining me.