What Does “Judas” Say?

The much-heralded “Lost Gospel of Judas” is now available for all of us to read. It is an interesting document, though not for the reasons that those hyping it as a revelation about the beginnings of Christianity seem to imagine.

The text is short, just seven pages in English translation, the remnant of what was evidently a longer work. Contrary to what a careless reader of press reports might believe, it is not a first person account of Our Lord’s ministry from Judas’s point of view. It is in the third person, supposedly reproducing “The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot during a week three days before he celebrated Passover”. Such narrative as it contains is brief, telling first of Jesus’s earthly ministry, then of His betrayal:

When Jesus appeared on earth, he performed miracles and great wonders for the salvation of humanity. And since some [walked] in the way of righteousness while others walked in their transgressions, the twelve disciples were called.

He began to speak with them about the mysteries beyond the world and what would take place at the end. Often he did not appear to his disciples as himself, but he was found among them as a child.

* * * *

Judas lifted up his eyes and saw the luminous cloud, and he entered it. Those standing on the ground heard a voice coming from the cloud, saying, […] great generation […] … image […] [—about five lines missing—].

[…] Their high priests murmured because [he] had gone into the guest room for his prayer. But some scribes were there watching carefully in order to arrest him during the prayer, for they were afraid of the people, since he was regarded by all as a prophet. They approached Judas and said to him, “What are you doing here? You are Jesus’ disciple.” Judas answered them as they wished. And he received some money and handed him over to them. [lacunae in original]

Here the manuscript breaks off. The last words may or may not be its conclusion. Given the tenor of the rest, we can be quite sure that it included no account of the Resurrection.

Between these snippets of narrative are discussions between Jesus and the twelve disciples and Jesus and Judas. These dialogues are cryptic – partly because portions are missing, partly because that was the style of Gnostic writers – but a number of points are tolerably clear.

Judas is not merely Jesus’ favorite disciple but the only one who understands Him even slightly. The others serve “your god”, a deity quite clearly distinguished from the true god from whom Jesus, temporarily clothed in a human body, has emanated. Judas says of Jesus, “I know who you are and where you have come from. You are from the immortal realm of Barbēlo. And I am not worthy to utter the name of the one who has sent you.” “Barbēlo” is, in various Gnostic pseudepigraphia, a direct emanation of the Uncreated Godhead, separated from our world by many generations of aeons.

By contrast, the writer places “[S]eth, who is called Christ” (presumably the disciples’ god) much further down in the hierarchy. I don’t know enough about the Sethians to determine how closely the new “gospel” fits into their tradition. The divine genealogies that Jesus reveals to Judas (not always clear owing to the state of the text and the obscurity of the use of pronouns – I make no claim to have every lineage right) run like this:

(i) The “great invisible . . . never called by any name” » “the enlightened divine Self-Generated” » four attendant angels and a being whose name is lost in a lacuna (Barbēlo?) » two “luminaries” with attendant angels and aeons

(ii) Adamas (who “was in the first luminous cloud that no angel has ever seen among all those called ‘God’”) » one or more beings lost in lacunae » “the incorruptible [generation] of Seth” » “the twelve” and “the twenty-four” » 72 luminaries (“heavens”) » 360 luminaries (“firmaments”)

(iii) The Cosmos – “that is, perdition” – (apparently consisting of the 360 firmaments), which is ruled by an angel named “El” » twelve angels, including “Nebro, which means ‘rebel’; others call him Yaldabaoth” and “Saklas” » six angels created by Nebro » “twelve angels in the heavens, with each one receiving a portion in the heavens” » “the five who ruled over the underworld, and first of all over chaos”, namely, “[S]eth, who is called Christ” (not identified with the previous “Seth”, but who knows what is really meant?), Harmathoth, Galila, Yobel and Adonaios

At long last, we get to the creation of mankind:

Then Saklas said to his angels, “Let us create a human being after the likeness and after the image.” They fashioned Adam and his wife Eve, who is called, in the cloud, Zoe. For by this name all the generations seek the man, and each of them calls the woman by these names. Now, Saklas did not com[mand …] except […] the gene[rations …] this […]. And the [ruler] said to Adam, “You shall live long, with your children.”

While the writer’s cosmology is hard to decipher, his polemical intent is transparent: He condemns those who have followed the other disciples and the underworld deity “Christ”. The disciples are portrayed as having a troubling dream about a temple in which –

[some] sacrifice their own children, others their wives, in praise [and] humility with each other; some sleep with men; some are involved in [slaughter]; some commit a multitude of sins and deeds of lawlessness. And the men who stand [before] the altar invoke your [name].

They ask Jesus for the meaning and receive this interpretation:

Jesus said to them, “Those you have seen receiving the offerings at the altar—that is who you are. That is the god you serve, and you are those twelve men you have seen. The cattle you have seen brought for sacrifice are the many people you lead astray before that altar. […] will stand and make use of my name in this way, and generations of the pious will remain loyal to him. After him another man will stand there from [the fornicators], and another [will] stand there from the slayers of children, and another from those who sleep with men, and those who abstain, and the rest of the people of pollution and lawlessness and error, and those who say, ‘We are like angels’; they are the stars that bring everything to its conclusion. For to the human generations it has been said, ‘Look, God has received your sacrifice from the hands of a priest’—that is, a minister of error. But it is the Lord, the Lord of the universe, who commands, ‘On the last day they will be put to shame.’”

None of the reprobate disciples is deemed worthy of hearing the gnosis imparted to Judas, yet it is not entirely clear that even he is a hero. Every commentator that I have so far seen has stated that Judas is shown as betraying Jesus at the latter’s behest, a conclusion derived partly, I suspect, from preconceived ideas (founded on what St. Irenaeus wrote about the “gospel of Judas” known to him), partly from the prediction that Judas “will be cursed by the other generations—and you will come to rule over them”, and partly by inference from a single logion: “But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.” Then, after a gap-ridden passage, “Judas lifted up his eyes and saw the luminous cloud, and he entered it.”

The problem with interpreting all this as a divine commission to Judas is, first, the unhappily fragmented sentences that precede the logion:

Jesus said, “Truly I say [to you], this baptism […] my name [—about nine lines missing—] to me. Truly [I] say to you, Judas, [those who] offer sacrifices to Saklas […] God [—three lines missing—] everything that is evil.”

– and then the verse passage that immediately follows:

Already your horn has been raised,
your wrath has been kindled,
your star has shown brightly,
and your heart has […].

When Jesus says, “But you will exceed all of them”, could that not mean “exceed all of them in everything that is evil”? Are the raised horn, the kindled wrath and the bright star emblematic of the right or the wrong path? Are they related to Jesus’s earlier words, “Judas, your star has led you astray”? We have no way to be sure. What we do know is that the extant text contains no explicit assertion that the betrayal is a praiseworthy act commanded by the Jesus figure.

Another confident assertion by almost everyone is that this “Gospel of Judas” is the same one described by Irenaeus. Here is what the heresiologist says:

Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas. [Refutation of All Heresies I.XXXI.1]

The first part of this description corresponds to nothing in the new “gospel”. Cain and the rest do not appear as defiers of “the Creator” (i. e., of the lesser aeon who rules the created world), or at all, and Sophia is mentioned only (in yet another passage too fragmentary to parse) as “corruptible Sophia”. Maybe all that shows up in the lost sections, but maybe it doesn’t.

From this overview, a few conclusions can be drawn:

1. The writer’s primary purpose, so far as it can be inferred from the remnant at hand, was to denounce mainstream Christianity by associating it with the slanders that appear in other hostile sources. It is unlikely that he regarded himself as a Christian in any sense. There is no sign that his “Judas” left a line of successors or that his “Jesus” was to be worshiped or followed. In other words, the book is not the spoor of a “lost Christianity” but simply a tirade against the Christianity that we already know.

2. The work was written after Christians became an identifiable community and before the 4th Century, to which the manuscript is radiocarbon dated. Within that broad range, we have no other signposts, unless we can make use of Irenaeus, who wrote before 180 A.D. For the reasons already noted, the identification of this “Gospel of Judas” with his rests more on supposition than fact.

3. If there is any information here about the teachings of the historical Jesus, it is so overlaid by other material as to be unrecoverable. The contrast between the luminous sayings recorded in the Church’s Gospels and the bitterness, mockery and incoherent mysticism of this one will be plain to every honest reader. Whoever thinks that he can build a newer and better religion on “Judas’s” foundations is welcome to try.

As an aside, I can’t help but wonder whether the writer’s claim that his Christian opponents are “slayers of children” and “those who sleep with men” will lead Andrew Sullivan to declare that the early Church was all for abortion and homosexuality, only to be later led astray by medieval puritans.

So, what are we to make of this work? Most of the commentary that I have so far seen in the secular press is irritatingly sensationalist, which may inspire a certain unwarranted defensiveness among Christians. If someone demands that you drop Matthew, Mark, Luke and John in favor of this fresh revelation, I recommend sending him a copy and insisting that he declare which parts bear the imprint of divine inspiration. For scholars, the “Gospel of Judas” is important and fascinating; for those in the pew, about as significant as the vaporings of a New Age guru or the rants of a street corner atheist.

Further reading: Philip Jenkins, “All Gospels Are Not Created Equal”
David Kopel, “The Judas Gospel”
Mollie Ziegler, “The Gospel of Ignorance” (on media coverage of “Judas”)

Update: Amy Welborn watched the National Geographic special on “The Judas Gospel”, so we don’t have to (hurrah!). She finds it about as dishonest and exploitative as the pre-publication publicity campaign led one to expect.

So, in essence, what we have is a program that essentially very aggressively promotes the “many Christianities” school of early Christian studies, that gives absolutely no alternative paradigm, that cannot be bothered to suggest that the attachment to what became the New Testament canonical gospels had anything to do with, you know, what happened or the strength of the apostolic witness . . . , and completely discounts the possibility of knowing anything about 1st century events with any degree of historical certainty. The program is all about different “interpretations” but fails to take a hard look at what the canonical Gospels say about Jesus’s life and ministry, how that is different from the gnostic interpretation and in what universe, exactly, these could be reconcilable. The Diatessaron was simple. These guys want to harmonize everything.

Plus, it sensationalizes and mischaracterizes the reaction to the G of J and other gnostic works. These are not “secrets” that Christians were “afraid” would be revealed. They were condemned because they were wild misrepresentations of what [Christians] embraced as the authentic apostolic witness and were, among other things, an unbalanced portrait of Jesus. Among other things. A lot of other things.

Comments

[ren von dietk]

NON NOBIS DOMINE, NON NOBIS SED NOMINE TUO DA GLORIUM.

Veritas vos liberabit! Beauseant!!!

[Anon Ymous]

For all of the comments I read from the "impartial critics", it seems clear to me that an awful lot of effort is being made to marginalize the work. All admit the, "well, it's interesting if you are into really old pieces of paper, but not much else". But, to get to the heart of the matter, we have the New Testiment which is a bold faced edit/hack job. One cannot compare today's bible apples for apples with a document like this from 1700 years ago. Today's bible is a copy of a copy of a copy, and is riddled with contradictions of its own. Just try to reconcile the ways Judas supposedly died in each gospel.

Is it any wonder that this account would contradict even more, considering that it didn't have the "advantage" of being rewritten and editted every few years?

After reading this, I don't find Jesus portrayed as evil. The only link here is because a Gnostic-bashing pursecutor (much in the line of Paul, but without the "revelation" midway through his life) said that's what they believe, not from the actual text. Also, Jesus routinely had a laugh at his disciples. Not even the whitewashed New Testament could completely remove the implications that Jesus was the equivilant of an adult telling 4 year olds not to put dirt in their mouths, and constantly asking, to paraphrase, "Why are you being so dense? Have you no ears?"

'These are not “secrets” that Christians were “afraid” would be revealed. They were condemned because they were wild misrepresentations' - Ah, so they had better reasons for censorship and burning people at the stake for heresy then: Do whatever it takes to stop 'wild misrepresentations'!

Yeah, right. People disagree over the bible so much today, but say that even the disciples themselves wildly disagreed, and one party has to be "right" and one has to be "wrong". That has no real bearing, except as a matter of faith. And the only thing that says the Gnostics were wrong... are anti-gnostics. Considering that Gnostics may have been the most hunted group of the time (both mainstream Christians and anti-Christians attacking them for heresy), it's no wonder their ideas are only trickling out.

The NT talks about persecution for their faith. For the mainstream christians, this stopped once the Roman empire adopted Christianity. For Gnostics, it continues even today. According to the NT, that actually would lend Gnostics more credibility than mainstream Christians, as persecution isn't to stop until the second comming. But, who am I to argue such minor theological details when we have a Church "industry" raking in billions in tax-free money so they can buy out another cable channel. Silly Judas, saying that Jesus wouldn't approve of churches of the future. Why, I bet Jesus would be right up there flying on jets with the Pope, and wearing rings on all his fingers right next to Televangelists. WWJD, he'd run a telethon, and he'd pray for you for a small donation of $50!

Not.

[Maureen]

Given names like Harma_thoth_, is "Seth who is known as Christ" perhaps identifying Christ with the (usually seen as evil or chaotic) Egyptian god Set/Seth? I mean, that sounds right up the Cainite alley, and it is a text in Coptic....

[slaveofone]

How very true the last sentence of your post has been.

I was hesitant to publish pieces of the translation on my blog because of the copyright in the prolegomena. Did I misread it?

Me: As explained in this U. S. Copyright Office fact sheet, the quotation of short passages of a work for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and the like is permitted by the doctrine of “fair use”. Obviously, it would be impossible to say anything intelligible about the “Gospel of Judas” if one could not show the reader what it says. Besides, the National Geographic Society has posted the complete text on its Web site, so it is hardly likely to complain about the appearance of a few paragraphs elsewhere.

[Joseph T Major]

In other words, just your basic Gnostic pseudoepigraphia.

I remember reading a translation of some of the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, and after a moment realized where I'd heard that before.

If you've ever seen "Monty Python's Life of Brian" you may remember the scene with the street of prophets, each guarded by a bored Roman soldier, each describing some apocalyptic scene with images and details and meanings obvious only to himself. That's what those read like.

I suspect that what this amounts to is the general belief that anything contrary to orthodox (small-"o") Christianity is therefore good. The passage from the end of the Gospel of Thomas -- the previous candidate for Suppressed Gospel That Will Destroy Christianity As We Know It -- that Sandra Miesel & Carl Olson quoted in _The Da Vinci Hoax_ should show the lack of actual attention paid. It has Jesus saying, "For every woman who shall make herself male shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven."