I found this story today in The New York Times and was curious what folks thought…
‘Gospel of Judas’ Surfaces After 1,700 Years
By John Noble Wilford and Laurie Goodstein
An early Christian manuscript, including the only known text of what is known as the Gospel of Judas, has surfaced after 1,700 years. The text gives new insights into the relationship of Jesus and the disciple who betrayed him, scholars reported today. In this version, Jesus asked Judas, as a close friend, to sell him out to the authorities, telling Judas he will “exceed” the other disciples by doing so.
Though some theologians have hypothesized this, scholars who have studied the new-found text said, this is the first time an ancient document defends the idea.
The discovery in the desert of Egypt of the leather-bound papyrus manuscript, and now its translation, was announced by the National Geographic Society at a news conference in Washington. The 26-page Judas text is said to be a copy in Coptic, made around A. D. 300, of the original Gospel of Judas, written in Greek the century before….
Re: NYT - 'Gospel of Judas' Surfaces After 1,700 Years
The media has tried to inject a bit of cheap sensationalism into the issue of this manuscript, and in the accompanying article Elaine Pagels hands it to them on a plate with the soundbite that it ‘explodes the myth’ of a monolithic religion. Only piecemeal in the article, and media reporting generally, does it become apparent that the document has been known about since the time of Irenaeus. The earliest conjectured date of the composition of the original is c. 130 AD - ie nearly 100 years after the events it describes; and possibly 140 years afterwards. It is much later than the four gospels of the NT, and, apparently, much more gnostic in its style and interests.
The event raises the question of how the NT as we have it came to be formed. The conspiracy theorists will want to argue that it was foisted on us by the likes of Irenaeus, who condemned the so-called Judas gospel, and the church hierarchy, who suppressed documents which did not conform to their preconceived dogma. The reality is much more likely that the gospels, in particular, as we have them, obtained their authority (and were found to be authoritative) through their usage in the church community (just as they do today) and at a very early stage - ie when people were still around who could attest to the events they describe. It is usually fairly easy to see why some documents were not regarded as ‘canonical’ - simply by comparing them with the so-called canonical documents. I imagine that the same will prove to be seen with the ‘Judas gospel’.
I’m personally not convinced that Jesus consciously chose Judas to be the one who would betray him, though he appears to have known about him early on - John 6:70-71. I’m still less convinced that he was so chosen by God (the ‘son of perdition’) to be the one who would betray Jesus, as a kind of inescapable destiny. Rather, it was a destiny that Judas walked into. There seem to have been flaws in Judas to do with his attitude to the common purse, and his exercise of responsibility as the holder of it - John 12:6. There also seems to have come a particular time when Judas took offence at Jesus - when Jesus was anointed with the expensive perfume - Mark 14/John 12. This seems to have been the decisive moment - as taking offence so often is in many contexts and situations. But no doubt Judas could have avoided this destiny by making different choices at appropriate moments.
Re: NYT - 'Gospel of Judas' Surfaces After 1,700 Years
A good explanation of what is happening. You can go to the National Geographic website and listen to 4 Bible scholars discuss the Gospel of Judas. Craig Evans in particular has some good comments. The dating seems to be even a little later than you suggest around 180 AD.
Describing Elaine Pagels as a Bible scholar is taking the term rather loosely. She has made a name for herself through making outrageous claims concerning Gnostic Christianity. Having read extensively on the Historical Jesus research and in New Testament history, I’ve never come across a scholar who actually uses her material. She has the role primarily of a news phenomenon to throw jabs at traditional Christianity. We’ve all got our idiosyncracies.
The Gospel of Judas and the community that produced it, seemed to be as much anti-Christianity as they were a form of Gnostic Christianity. It doesn’t seem to have been part of the Dag Hammadi grouping of Gnostic writings where the Gospel of Thomas as well as others were found, which throws more suspicion on its relationship to even mainstream Gnostic thought.
Mike
Re: NYT - 'Gospel of Judas' Surfaces After 1,700 Years
Sunshine50
I found the show very enjoyable, especially seeing how they handle those ancient manuscripts - piecing them together and carbon dating them, for example. And I think the show gives some interesting insight into the world of antiquities dealing.
I agree that the text of Judas is probably not the way it actually happened (although who knows). But I do find it interesting that in the second century, there were obviously some followers of Jesus who were sympathetic to Judas.
Re: NYT - 'Gospel of Judas' Surfaces After 1,700 Years
A very fascinating read, indeed (the English translation of the Gospel of Judas, and articles and resources that are available online). Do check out Roger Pearse and Tektonics (especially on NT Canon). Although GoJ is likely to be Gnostic in tradition, but not being in the same collection (‘Nag Hammandi) as the rest of the Gnostic writings definitely adds less weight to its truth claims.
I think it is possible that GoJ was written by one of Judas’ disciples, attempting to clear his name. The document is definitely genuine, but its truth claims are hard to validify. Considering that the Vatican is about to clear his name too (Judas the Misunderstood), i think there is more implication from GoJ than what it seems on the surface. Check out also Sympathy for the Devil!
The one question which i have not been able to get a convincing answer to is, “If it is God’s plan for Jesus to die on the cross for all our sins, is it also His plan for Judas to betray Jesus?” What are your thoughts?
Matt 26:20-25
Mark 14:21
Matt 26:49-50, 56
Matt 26:56
Re: NYT - 'Gospel of Judas' Surfaces After 1,700 Years
Why do the storytellers of the gospels mention this betrayal at all and why do they make such a big deal out of it? Jesus was making public protests all over the place, so finding him wasn’t really a problem. All Judas did was tell them where he was and point him out. It is not like he revealed some secret or made a public testimony in court about something that Jesus was not willing to admit. I hardly call that a betrayal. He was really just identifying him not betraying him, but the storytellers seem to find a need to make it into an important aspect of the story. Something is a bit fishy about this and I think it is worth more study. This new finding may shed some light into the thinking of the 1st / 2nd century Christians even it isn’t historically factual.
Maybe the current versions of the biblical gospel stories written after decades of oral storytelling inflate this aspect of Judas’ betrayal to deflect blame away from either the Jewish leaders or the Roman authorities. Even if that was not an intentional artificial deflection, it certainly was a natural unintentional deflection of blame. Jesus didn’t come to Jerusalem that week to speak out against Judas. You have to admit that we seem to have lost the atmosphere of protest that must have been present in the conflicts during Holy Week. Maybe the real betrayal of Judas is what his character did as a byproduct of later interpretations of the story to keep us from focusing on the conflict between Jesus and empire. Jesus wasn’t crucified because the authorities finally "found him". He was crucified because of what he said and did that week in the face of the authorities. If the character of Judas made us forget what Jesus was saying then he definately was a traitor but for a completely different reason.
30 pieces of silver
The relation of the Judas story to Zechariah 11:4-17 might be worth looking at. Matthew seems to regard the business with the 30 pieces of silver as primarily a fulfilment of Zech. 11:12-13, though he attributes the prophecy to Jeremiah. The whole thing is confused, to say the least, but it appears that Judas plays the part of the shepherd (11:15) of a ‘flock doomed to slaughter’ (11:7), who becomes impatient with the sheep, is detested by them (11:8), who sells them to sheep traders for 30 pieces of silver (11:12) and is then instructed by the Lord to throw the money back into the temple, ‘to the potter’ (11:13). The narrative also includes the breaking of two staffs, representing the annulment of the covenant between the shepherd and ‘all the peoples’ (11:10) and of ‘the brotherhood between Judah and Israel’ (11:14).
Does this make any sense? Thematically it is all relevant - especially if we allow that Jesus represents in himself the helpless sheep without a shepherd sold into the hands of the chief priests (cf. Zech. 10:2-3). But what is the nature of Judas’ participation in this acted prophecy - almost an acted parable? Could we say that Jesus exploited his greed and disillusionment not simply to have himself betrayed but to act out this drama about the betrayal of helpless Israel by its leaders? Matthew 26:31 certainly suggests that the Zechariah shepherd texts were on Jesus’ mind at this time:
In Zechariah the striking of the shepherd and scattering of the sheep is followed by judgment on the people - destruction of two thirds and the refining of one third by fire:
Re: 30 pieces of silver
Zecharaiah 11:4-17 with its Judas reference is certainly an interesting passage - all the more so since the shadowiness of the meaning invites imaginative speculation. Maybe that was Zechariah’s intention.
The author of Matthew’s gospel knew Zechariah well enough not to confuse him with Jeremiah - quoting Zechariah in the two passages mentioned (Matthew 26:31 / Zechariah 13:7; Matthew 27:9 / Zechariah 11:12-13), also in Matthew 21:5 - Zechariah 9:9 and in Matthew 24:30 - Zechariah 12:10.
I would like to suggest another narrative which is being sketched out in Zechariah 11, including Zechariah 13:7-9 (where the shepherd is struck, the sheep scattered, two thirds of the inhabitants of the land perish, the surviving one third being refined through the fire of tribulation).
I see Zechariah 11:4-12 as being the history of Israel up to the arrival of Jesus, pastored by God, who is represented by Zechariah. There is a break in the narrative flow here, as I would see Zechariah 11:13-17 continuing Israel’s history, including the divided kingdom (already past history for Zechariah), up to the time of Antiochus IV - the "worthless shepherd" of v.17. The three preceding shepherds of v.8 could represent three pagan empires ruling over Israel prior to Greece, cp. the statue of Daniel 2, the four beasts of Daniel 7.
Israel’s poor, and maybe Israel generally, are treated harshly by these leaders/shepherds, who treat them as commodities to be traded. But the poor, or maybe Israel generally, are little better than their worthless shepherds - "The prophets prophesy lies, the priests rule by their own authority, and my people love it that way" - Jeremiah 5:3 - little had changed since the time of Jeremiah!
Israel’s story leads to the contemptuous price which she, represented by the chief priests and the elders, pays for her messiah, the one God sent - 30 pieces of silver, the same price paid as compensation for the death of a slave - Exodus 21:32.
The silver thrown to the potter in the house of God in Zechariah 11 is echoed in Judas’s action in Matthew 27:5, but there is another echo from Jeremiah 19, where the clay jar, representing flawed and hardened Israel, brought from the potter’s house in Jeremiah 18, is shattered by Jeremiah before the elders and priests at the Potsherd Gate, in the Valley of Ben Hinnom. Ben Hinnom is also called Topheth, the place where child sacrifices were made to Molech, the place "filled with the blood of the innocent". Jeremiah renames this "the Valley of Slaughter" - looking to a greater day of disaster yet to befall Israel.
Judas’s money is used to buy "the potter’s field", which is also called Akeldama - the field of blood. Blood money for the murderous betrayal of the innocent Jesus, but perhaps also blood in a wider sense: the blood of the innocents sacrificed through Israel’s idolatry, and perhaps representing the sum total of Israel’s apostasy, captured in Ben Hinnom as one of its deepest and darkest places, for which a judgement was coming exceeding that of the exile, as described in Jeremiah 19:7-9 and also Zechariah 13:7-9. In the latter passage, the shepherd messiah is killed, as he prophesied using Zechariah’s words in Matthew 26:31. A time of tribulation follows - Matthew 24:9-22 - during which "two-thirds" (a symbolic figure - representing an overwhelming number) of the nation are killed, but "a third" (representing a significant minority, the faithful remnant) are saved, being refined as through fire, and brought out as the new creation.
In this drama, Judas could be said to be a figure representing faithless, treacherous Israel; he took offence at Jesus just as Israel took offence; he bitterly regretted his decision when it was too late to change it; he was ‘shattered’ like the clay jar - Acts 1:18-19, just as Israel was shattered when it was too late for her to change her decision, when the invading Roman armies trampled the nation and laid siege to Jerusalem.
So we have the history of faithless Israel, the coming of the messiah and his betrayal, the disaster which comes on the land, and the emergence of a redeemed remnant through intense suffering, who continue the narrative of the people of God. Sounds just like your narrative, Andrew.