The Forbidden Gospel of Judas?

Interesting. They've been showing some programmes about this gospel on tv lately here in DK.
Appearantly theologians more or less agree, that the first gospels were not written until some 60 to 100 years after Jesus is said to have died.
There were countless texts in circulation in the early days of Christianity, and it wasn't until some couple of hundred years later that the so-called Church-fathers decided what gospels to put into the Bible and which ones to leave out.

By this time, obviously, ALL the Christian texts had been copied and rewritten countless times already. According to the tv-programme the gospel of Judas was left out for being too gnostic (that is, among other things claiming women could lead congregations just as well as men) and forthe claim that Judas "betrayal" was a little more complicated.
The same church-fathers smeared Mary Magdalenes reputation by MAKING her a sinner. Appearantly Mary Magdalene was not a prostitute, but since more than one Mary appeared in the Bible they were all mixed into one -

All of this should be of no concern to more open-minded Christians, only to those who take the Bible literally.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
the ROMANS killed jesus, god, i wish someone would punch mel gibson in the face

The "Gospel of Judas" and similar Gnostic texts were rejected by the early Christian Church not because of their unfavorable portrayal of Jesus of Nazareth, but because Church leaders knew they were not written by the original disciples, but fabricated much later by splinter groups, who incorporated heretical teachings and false historical claims into those documents. The content of the "Gospel of Judas" clearly indicates that its origin derives from second or third century Gnostic teachings, which incorporate both Greek mythology and Far East philosophy in an attempt to hijack Christianity's rising popularity. The theology in the "Gospel of Judas" is polytheistic, which is why it was labeled as heretical by early church leaders. Such aberrant theology was clearly outside the mainstream of both Christianity and Old Testament writings. The fact that the National Geographic promoted the "Gospel of Judas" manuscript as an authentic early Christian document testifies to their unscholarly attempt to discredit Jesus of Nazareth as worthy of worship.

The content of the "Gospel of Judas" clearly indicates that its origin derives from second or third century Gnostic teachings, which incorporate both Greek mythology and Far East philosophy in an attempt to hijack Christianity's rising popularity

Well the writings of Paul also mimic Mithra teachings that were going on at the same time period and earlier.

debbiejo: what verses do you base that on?

If you look at the teachings of Paul and study the teachings of Mithra, you see the similarities. Also, Paul lived at the same time period when Mithra worship was popular. There are many other religions also....

http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa.htm
http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/mithras/index.htm

There is also the fact the earlier manuscripts of Josephus didn't mention Jesus. http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/paul/j_myth.htm#h2_2

It was later edited in....

hmm well I would need verses from the actual Bible.

You need to read and compare the teachings of Paul with Mithra and other god teachings that came earlier. Besides Paul taught against the OT god. What I mean is that he changed or contradicted what the OT god had said....This is why many Jews today accept Jesus as a teacher, but Paul as a heretic.

Originally posted by MARCMAN
The fact that the National Geographic promoted the "Gospel of Judas" manuscript as an authentic early Christian document testifies to their unscholarly attempt to discredit Jesus of Nazareth as worthy of worship.

The Gospel of Judas is an early Christian document. Christ, some people. It is

1) Early. Not first century early, or even second century early, but early.
2) Christian. What with all of the Jesus stuff and all.

When you have a text that is early, and Christian, what do you get? An early Christian document, of course. And the Gospel of Thomas was probably around before the Gospel of John, so there's no use pretending that Christian Gnosticism isn't an early movement--it existed before the "Jesus is God" movement was around.

But, some people are intent on being offended by every thing, I guess.

Oh God, why do you always keep your promise?

First, Lord Jesus Christ came to introduce to all men that you are the ONLY true God.

Now, things are coming clear. You're introducing to these men who Lord Jesus Christ really is.

After centuries of hiding the truth, true things always prevail.

Let all things be according to Your will, oh God.

After, Gospel of Judas, what's next?

Gospel of Philip?
Gospel of Bartholomew?
Gospel of Thomas?
Gospel of Jesus Christ Himself?

✅ That would be cool.

Originally posted by Jury
Oh God, why do you always keep your promise?

First, Lord Jesus Christ came to introduce to all men that you are the ONLY true God.

Now, things are coming clear. You're introducing to these men who Lord Jesus Christ really is.

After centuries of hiding the truth, true things always prevail.

Let all things be according to Your will, oh God.

After, Gospel of Judas, what's next?

Gospel of Philip?
Gospel of Bartholomew?
Gospel of Thomas?
Gospel of Jesus Christ Himself?

✅ That would be cool.

Um, is your post laced with Sarcasm, or are you being serious? Because with some people and religion, you really can't tel the difference.

But as of the Gospel of Thomas, I believe the bible should add it.

Gospel of Jesus Christ Himself?

It would make sense to me. I mean Jesus is the one person you would expect to write something down, and for it to be at the head of all gospels. I mean, after all, he was apparantly entrusting his divine message to mankind, and we know what they can be like.

Originally posted by Darth Macabre
Um, is your post laced with Sarcasm, or are you being serious? Because with some people and religion, you really can't tel the difference.

But as of the Gospel of Thomas, I believe the bible should add it.

If the Gospels were preserved in its entirety, we will all have different history. I also believe that if they are only complete and unedited up to this date, they should have been added to the modern day Bible.

🙂

Originally posted by debbiejo
Why not?.....You would think he would have written at least one paragraph himself...One page, maybe even 2. Makes you wonder why doesn't?

You didn't get my point. 🙂 I am saying that these are not new. These are original history. History hidden in centuries by corrupt and useless Church officials of the second century.

Now, I am saying that these should have been included in the Bible for they are telling us who the Lord Jesus Christ really is, not the one almost every Christians believed to be.

These Gospels, plus other inspired Epistles, are telling us that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah... not the true God. For there is one true God - the Father.

Apostolic Fathers couldn't uphold this truth because of the persecution. They hid the truth that Jesus, the Christ, is not a true God.

As I was saying, God is making a way on how to restore this truth. As prophesied, the truth will be corrupted but it will prevail afterall.

🙂

It has been fulfilled. And yet, there are still a lot to fulfill.

As I was saying, God is making a way on how to restore this truth. As prophesied, the truth will be corrupted but it will prevail afterall.

Originally posted by debbiejo
You would think he would have written at least one paragraph himself...One page, maybe even 2. Makes you wonder why doesn't?

Maybe he was illiterate. Most people of his class probably were.

Paul never contradicted the OT and was actually scholar of the OT, debbiejo. I would need to read about Mithra but even if they are similarities (not sure IF there are any) it still does not make the gospel of judas valid.

Originally posted by MARCMAN
Paul never contradicted the OT and was actually scholar of the OT, debbiejo. I would need to read about Mithra but even if they are similarities (not sure IF there are any) it still does not make the gospel of judas valid.

Time will be the judge.

The Gospel of Judas is divinely inspired, of course, any more than the other gospels. But it's just as "valid."

(Gnosticims was always my favorite early heterodox Christian doctrine)

I wonder what else the church has tried to hide.