Views on the Gospel of Judas?
544828
I don't think we'll ever be able to make a good judgement because we'll never see all the evidence about the Gospel of Judas. Those who want to use it to change Christianity are only going to show what they can use to help them. Also, so much of the Gospel is gone, it is like trying to read the bible skipping every 2 paragraphs or so.
904291
Before it reminded me of Jewish religion. \nNow it's Judasrabbi....I hope God isn't mad at me for thinking that...lol\n☺
478838
I can't say if it's real or not.  But I think whatever religion you follow, you should check out it's scriptures.  It's important to be able to control your own mind and not rely so much on an outside source.  What's more important than a religion's history is how you practice. I have read that around three dozen or more books were left out of the bible.  It might be interesting to learn what they read and why they were left out.  Maybe it was felt they were unimportant or redundant.  I don't know.  I have read this Gospel of Judas and I don't see anything negative about it.  But this is only my opinion.
307607
There are four "accepted" Gospells, that you will find in the King James Version of the New Testement.  If you want to get into the Gnosstic Gospells ~ there are as many as 30 KNOWN Gospells, to include the Gospell of Mary, The Gospell of Thomas, and now the much publisied Gospel of Judas. \n\nHowever, if you really want to tie things up, I would recommend a book entitled "The Arm of Hiram" \n\n*WARNING*  Should you read the "Arm of Hiram" ~ you're NOT going to like what you're going to read.  In it, it ties the Shroud of Turin, the Knights Templar, The Freemasons, the Gnosstic Gospels, the story of Christ up in one neat little package.  \n\nThe Roman Cahtolic Bible, the Orthodox Bibles, and the King James version of the Bible was meant for the un-educatd, illiterate masses.  The Gnosstic Gospels were meant for the more initated, educated, and informed ~ that is to say the more enlightened people ~ thus the Illuminati.  Be careful of where you thread with this ~ The more your dig ~ the deeper you get.  And, it is deep.  Pity that the Libary of Alexander was destroyed by the Romans ~ which if you study Roman strategty ~ goes against everything that they did when the conquered a city.  The first thing they did ~ was NOT to burn a city's library ~ but to seize it and make it safe ~ so why did they burn the library of Alexander?  \n\nEverything in the Bible is indeed true ~ however its like reading the Cliff Notes version or at best the Reader's Digest condensed version.  Its as I said intended for the un-educated, the illietrate, the common man, the masses.  \n\nWhen you see the most base of televanglist on television ~ this is the most base of people appealing to the simplest of people ~ which is why Jessie Ventura ~ the former Governor and Navy Seal was quoated as saying "Christian's are simple-minded people"\n\nTo give you but a taste ~ we're not earthly beings having a spiritual expiernce ~ we're spiritual beings having an earthly experience.  Who we are ~  what we are ~ is not of this Earth.  We are all children of God, and therefore gods ~ which is why Christ spoke of having but the faith of a mustard seed ~  and you can move mountains.  (The Book of Seth)  We come to this world~ to learn, to grow, to experience ~ but the experiment has gone awire ~ and we have forgotten who and of what we are.  What we truly are. \n\nIt can be proven mathematically ~ that an person who is of an eighth dimesion can walk through solid walls, solid objects.  This isn't speculation, nor falacy. Its pure math. Which is the absolute language of the universe.  An eigth dimesional person (Discory Magazine ~ I forget the year and edition) can walk through solid object in a three dimesional world.  \n\nThere is also the "Physics of Immortainlity"  another book I've read. Probally out of print.  A physicist, with a PhD in Nuclear Physics, who was trying to complete Einstien's "Unified Field" theory and who started out as an atheist ~ became a Christian based upon pure mathematics and physics.  \n\nYOU THREAD WHERE ANGELS FEAR TO GO!
667577
As a firm believer in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior, I must admit, that the book was well written. The cast of the movie is top notch. However the movie is complete blasphemy against our Lord. The Bible clearly shows the Life of Jesus, no where does it mention Him being married or having children. \nIt is sad, but true, that many Christians and non-Christians that watch this movie are going to be shown a perverted view of Jesus Christ.\nIf somebody was really interested in learning about the Lord God, please I encourage you to pick up a Bible. \nCompare how Jesus fulfills all the prophecies about the coming messiah. Some of which were written 500+ years before His birth.\n\nJohn 3:16- For God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten son, that whoever shall believe in Him, shall not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world but that the world through Him might be saved.\n18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believe in the name of the only begotten Son of God
526064
I am shocked and amazed.\n\nI truly had no idea that so many Christians do not know God.  To view this piece of fiction as an opportunity to 'save' or 'win' souls is hypocrosy.\n\nTo not understand what is so blasphemous about the movie, regardless if you are a Catholic or not, just shows laziness.  And, that your relationship with Christ needs to grow deeper.\n\nThe book says that Jesus is not God.  That Jesus was a person not the Son of God.  This is blasphemy to ANYONE who believes that Jesus was their Savior. For, a man cannot save us --- only God.  And, if Jesus was a mere man we, as Christians are idolotors.  Now do you understand why the Catholic church condemning it?  All Christians should be saying the same thing.\n\nYes, I think by condemning it the church is just making it more attractive.  But, they are also standing for what they believe in --- regardless of what the media says.  So, I'm glad someone understands why Jesus has to be divine. And, why this is so important to my faith.  And, is standing up for it on an international level.\n\nBTW, HOW on this Earth could anything be more important to you or your church as Christians than saying your Savior, Jesus Christ, was a man.  He was not divine.  He cannot save your sins.  That Christianity is a farse and stamps it down to idolotry...\n\nFind a new pastor!
715374
I think that verse reveals a lot of modern evanglicalism to be out of step with Scripture. We have a very friendly, easy gospel preached in America where salvation is all up to us. John 6 teaches its not up to us at all in fact we contribute nothing to our own salvation including the will to believe. We are so totally depraved in our sin that we cannot even worship God unless he makes us worshippers. Very humbling.
230320
Many people seem to have a problem remembering that this book is fiction.  Some Christians take offence because it is important to them that Jesus was a virgin all his life.  I think these people somehow see sex -- even in marriage -- as "dirty" -- otherwise, why would it sully Jesus' purity to have a wife and children?  They seem to think the possibility detracts from His perfection.  \n\nFor me, it makes no difference.  Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ, whether He was married or not.  And the possibility of His bloodline continuing seems to me to be important only to those who think His blood contained some special DNA that would be passed down.  Unless that DNA somehow makes people better people, more likely to love others and change the world -- what difference does it make?  And from what I see of the world, any DNA that makes people better has been as diluted as the Truth He brought (sorry, Christians).  It would be nice if His Teachings existed and were followed in their entirety, but if they were, the world would not be in the state it is in now.\n\nI don't read too much into "The Last Supper" -- it's a painting, not a photograph!  It was done centuries after the fact and the people shown *represent* the people who were there but do not look like them -- since no one knows what they looked like.  If the figure to Jesus' left looks feminine, it is only because da Vinci painted it that way -- and reflects da Vinci's beliefs and/or skill -- not reality.  \n\nI enjoyed the book, but really don't understand the furor.  There are so many books that are more interesting and controversial -- but many of them aren't fiction.  :-)
590694
I think it's crazy, considering the book is FICTION!!!!!\nI think the people of Opus Dei are more against it than the Vatican because they think everyone will use the monk as an image to stereotype members of Opus Dei.\nI honestly think there are too many people involved to be able to "hush up" Jesus being married and having a baby, but when reading the book it all makes sense...\nI guess that's the controversy...fiction that is so good, people take it as fact.  But if reading one book makes you change your faith in whatever you have believed all your life, then you were never really a believer in the first place, right?
310344
3rd or 4th-century document called "The Gospel of Judas" was launched upon an unsuspecting world yesterday by no less a biblical authority than the National Geographic magazine in Washington. Its contents were "explosive", according to Mario Roberty, president of the Swiss foundation which now owns the ancient papyrus manuscript. \n\nSo as the heat faded from the television lights at the press conference, has 2000 years of orthodox Christianity been overturned? Well, not quite. But it was all jolly interesting, for those who love that sort of thing.\n\nHalf of the 62-page codex, written in Coptic script, is devoted to an account of the final days of Jesus Christ written from the viewpoint of the man who has for two millennia been excoriated as Christ's deadly betrayer. The text begins: "The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot three days before he celebrated Passover..."
649454
I just checked out the Gospel of Judas the other day @ the local B&N. Wow. It felt like a part of history jumping into my hands.\n\nKnowing what Judas was to become; reading what depictions he'd written of Jesus; the pieces of text felt so raw with emotion. They felt so real. Knowing the ending of the story of course, did make some of the pre-betrayal friendliness tough to swallow.\n\nThis brought me to the realization that these newer books need to be included, don't they? I haven't asked my priest at church, but a newer version has to be in the works.\n\nForget about red tape, just order the entries and publish the thing.\n\nWith the Da Vinci Code getting more publicity than the Dead Sea Scrolls, now'd be a pretty good time to release a newer, fuller edition of The Bible.\n\nThanks for answering my last question,\n\n-Justin
638866
There are many aspects of the book that might prove interesting to debate. One of the most controversial items that the book brings forth is the question of whether Jesus was married and had children. It has NEVER been church doctrine, that such was the case. However, some members and a few leaders back in the early days of the church have speculated on the subject of marriage. In the end, since we do not know, it remains, just that, speculation. \n\nOne of the biggest problems that I, personally, have with the book is that, in the end, Brown's theory seems to be more about Jesus being human rather than divine. I completely disagree with this viewpoint. Members of our church are generally well read. I can't see this book affecting the faith of anyone who has taken the gospel seriously. \n\nDespite Brown's claim that everything is "accurate," people seem to be forgetting that it is just a clever and somewhat interesting piece of entertainment. There may be bits of truth in it, just as in other fictional novels, yet it is still just a work of fiction. \n\nMany religious groups seem to be overly concerned about this book's message or impact. I am of the opinion that while the book may cause some few to doubt, there will be others who may actually start reading the scriptures to find out just what they say. Opposition is not a bad thing. Many people may find their faith strengthened as a result of all of this religious fervor. Is that such a bad thing?\n\nThis is just one "mormon's" opinion on the matter.
1167982
Believed to have been written in the 3rd or 4th century due to the testimonies of the early church fathers, this is a story of Jesus’s trial, execution and brief descent into Hell.\n\nHell in this book is a place where everyone is destined to go and Jesus ventures there to free many of the early church patriarchs and martyrs.\n\nMany scholars, as well as early church leaders, feel it’s a forgery to gain converts by impressing upon an individual the Savior’s power over Satan. Others see it as a redundant compilation of all other stories previously written. Finally, many of the early church fathers deemed its description of the underworld as too speculative because they viewed Hell as a state of mind and not a physical place.\n\nAlthough banned, it is noteworthy that it was a very popular book that was in circulation as recently as the 1500s. Martin Luther and other early Protestant leaders forbade their followers to read it.\n\nThe first half of the book is purported to be an eyewitness account of His trial and execution and it’s the only place where it’s mentioned that Jesus saw his mother while proceeding to his crucifixion. Some scholars feel this text was a catalyst for the Catholic Stations of the Cross processional.
665054
It is a WORK OF FICTION. While the theories he talks about, Mary being the wife of Christ and bearing children, have been around for hundreds, if not thousands of years, there is little historical evidence on either side.\n\nIn 1945 at Nag Hammadi in Egypt, a number of early Christian Gnostic texts were unearthed, some of which are believed to be as old or older than the canonical Gospels. The early church sought to destroy these Gnostic Gospels as heritical. \n\nOne of these texts is The Gospel of Mary. According to this Gospel, it was not Peter who was Jesus' second-in-command, but Mary Magdalene. It was Mary who rallied the despondent deciples after the Crucifixion. \n\nAccording to the Gnostic Gospel of Philip:\n'But Christ loved her more than all the disciples and used to kiss her often on the mouth'. Later in the same Gospel it says 'There are three who always walked with the Lord;Mary his mother, his sister, and Magdalene, who is called his companion. His sister, his mother, and his companion were all called Mary. And the companion of the Saviour is Mary Magdalene'. Where companion implies colleague or friend, the original Greek word actually meant 'consort' or 'sexual partner'.\n\nWere Jesus and Mary married? Did they have children?  That is a question the world may never know the true answer to. But truth is irrellivant where religion is involved. It's all about faith and belief.\n\nSome other books I recommend on this topic are "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and "The Woman with the Alabaster Jar", both of which Dan Brown draws heavily on.
460563
With anyone on a spiritual quest, anything that will allow them to think and consider the implications of the death of Jesus is a good thing.  It is a provocative movie.\n\nBut, I think it is generally overrated.  I don't think it's very biblically accurate.  The whole thing with Mary cleaning up the blood of Jesus, the demons with Judas at the end, the sparrow flying over Jesus before he dies, the part where Jesus falls while being carried and getting hung up in his chains, all of these were distractions.  I think the gospel is compelling enough without these distractions.\n\nIf you're ready to divide the "extra-biblical" content in the movie, it would be a good discussion starter.  If not who knows what the result will be.
563850
Well I´ve read the book and enjoyed it throughly! But sad to say there is a lot of thingd in the book that is false, \nbut it does makes you wonder. \n\nWhat I can´t understand is that a few years ago there were some old scripures found, but wouldn´d be accepted by the church. These scriptures underwent all the neccassary test to prove its validity(and it was found to be written the time Jesus was alive and 100 after he died).But it was a little bit contridicting to what is in the bible.\n\nAnyway what the da vinci code does is start to put doubt in the minds of people, and why did  the church reacted so strange to this book which is a novel! \n\nAnd okay the thought that Jesus actually has a living heir is strange, but Dan Brown was not the first to write about this there are many other listed books. And ´if´ that were true then the church would clear not want that knowledge to be known because it would loss a lot of credibility.\nSome modern writers,including Dan Brown, have come forward with claims that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus. These writers cite Gnostic writings to support their argument. Sources like the ´Gospel of Philip´ do depict Mary Magdalene as being closer to Jesus than any other disciple. \nHowever, there is no known ancient document that claims she was his wife and Gnosticism was generally non-supportive of sexuality. The closeness described in these writings depicts Mary Magdalene, representing the Gnostics, as understanding Jesus and his teaching while the other disciples, representing the Church, did not.\nMary Magdalene appears with more frequency than other women in the canonical Gospels and is shown as being a close follower of Jesus. Mary's presence at the Crucifixion and Jesus's tomb, while hardly conclusive, is at least consonant with the role of grieving wife and widow, although if that were the case Jesus might have been expected to make provision for her care as well as for his mother Mary. Given the lack of contemporary documentation, this scenario cannot be proven, and although some consider the idea desirable to believe, most scholars do not take it seriously.\n\nAn argument for support of the married status of Jesus is that bachelorhood was very rare for Jewish males of Jesus' time, being generally regarded as a transgression of the first mitzvah (divine commandment) — "Be fruitful and multiply". According to this reasoning, it would have been unthinkable for an adult, unmarried Jew to travel about teaching as a rabbi.\nA counter-argument to this is that the Judaism of Jesus' time was very diverse and the role of the rabbi was not yet well defined. It was really not until after the Roman destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70 that Rabbinic Judaism became dominant and the role of the rabbi made uniform in Jewish communities.\nPaul of Tarsus was an example of an unmarried itinerant teacher among Christians. Jesus himself approved of voluntary celibacy for religious reasons and explicitly rejected a duty to marry: "There are eunuchs, who have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven. He that can take, let him take it." (Matthew 19,12)\n\nThe idea that Mary Magdalene was the wife of Jesus was popularized by books like the pseudo-historical Holy Blood, Holy Grail (1982) and The Da Vinci Code (2003), a novel heavily influenced by the former book. These assertions have found no acceptance from scholarly circles.\n\nAnd secret societcy are meant to be kept secret so I don´t expect the historians to find a lot of concrete information about the Priory of Sion. \n\nAnd maybe Leonardo did discover something and instead of just saying or exposing it out right he decided to be clever and hide it within his works of art. After all he was known as a genuis.\n\nSo I(am born and raised catholic, but was taught to have an open mind about things.) personally an very intrigued by this idea of Dan Browns, but I am neither for it nor against it. I
1080723
I know and to be a gospel it had to be written by one of the disciples or their assistant.  The gos[pel of Thomas, Judas etc, were NOT written by them.  The stuff that people will believe!