Comments on: The Cainites and the Gospel of Judas

By: Robin Pen

Robin Pen — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 05:27:39 +0000

I’m pretty sure it’s also raised by a character in John Steinbeck’s ‘East of Eden’.

By: Stephen Dedman

Stephen Dedman — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 14:01:59 +0000

The idea that Judas was doing Christ’s bidding certainly isn’t new, having been suggested by Goethe, among others.

Of course, if it’s true, then Judas would have had no reason to commit suicide; it’s much more likely that he was murdered by one or more of the other disciples…

By: the truth

the truth — Sun, 09 Apr 2006 02:48:51 +0000

Simple logic tells you that in order for jesus to redeem the world of its sin his death and rebirth must occur, if jesus was not betrayed then the world will still be rolling in sin. therefore judas saved the world by handing over jesus to be slaughtered for his redeeming blood. judas should be worshiped greater than how the catholics worship mary, thing is tradition and what others think is more important than truth and knowing god. the gospel of judas confirms this now.

the formation of catholicism was roman control over the peoples, book burning was the norm, likking so called heritics and then later proclaiming them as saints.
the catholic church and mainstream christianity are evil. yet the minions who are encapsulated in the cult are not even aware or care of the lies.

By: Deane Stuart

Deane Stuart — Fri, 07 Apr 2006 11:03:16 +0000

Thanks for the interesting posting. There is an English summary of a German article by Hermann Detering, who argues that Judas Iscariot was not a historical person, but a creation of the early church, at http://www.hermann-detering.de/Jude2.htm (The English is very poor). I must say I don’t find the argument very convincing. I wish I knew German so I could read Detering’s full argument myself. It is at http://www.radikalkritik.de/judev.pdf.

By: Nick

Nick — Mon, 03 Apr 2006 06:04:45 +0000

The provenance isn’t clear, Rob, and probably won’t ever be properly establised (although the book’s publication should clear up some of it).

It seems probable, however, that the manuscript was originally part of the Nag Hammadi collection – a number of those manuscripts were seperated from the original find and sold on the black market, from memory. It certainly fits with the rest of the collection, anyway.

As far as I’m aware, there has never been an extant copy of the Gospel of Judas available before, even in fragmentary form. The only references to it are from Ireneus, Tertullian et al, and there aren’t any quotes from it in their works.

If, and it is an if, it is the work referred to by Ireneus, it will be a significant addition to the Gnostic Canon – we don’t have much at all from the Carpocratian end of theology. We have enough Valentinian, Basiledean, Marcionite and Manichean texts to build up a reasonable theological picture of their beliefs, but very little from groups like the Cainites.

By: Robert Hood

Robert Hood — Sat, 01 Apr 2006 21:20:09 +0000

The existence of apocryphal gospels is hardly a big secret or a new revelation — nor is discussion as to whether Judas is to be blamed for his actions if they were, in fact, predestined. I read many of the Apocrypha back in the 70s, for an ancient history course (non-theological) on New Testament history at university, so of course the Gnostics played a large role. I can’t recall if there was a Gospel of Judas among the texts I read. So is this publication supposed to be some new discovery? Or is it someone resurrecting an old controversy on the coat-tails of Da Vinci?
(Your posting is excellent, Nick, by the way.)

By: Nick

Nick — Sat, 01 Apr 2006 05:00:03 +0000

It may be a couple of days – I have an article to do for Wednesday.

But early next week for sure.

By: Sean Williams

Sean Williams — Fri, 31 Mar 2006 23:13:49 +0000

Great post, Nick. I look forward to the next instalment. And the Anne Rice novelisation, if she ever undergoes a reverse conversion.