Los secretos de Judas: La historia del discipulo incomprendido y de su evangelio extraviado

by James M. Robinson

Reveals the unvarnished truth of the controversial discovery and scandalous sale of the lost Gospel of Judas and how it changes one's view of the "Evil" disciple.

Genres: Religion, History, Christianity, Nonfiction, Theology, Gnosticism, Spirituality

233 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2006

About the author

James McConkey Robinson (born June 30, 1924) is Professor Emeritus of Religion, Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, California. He is a member of the Jesus Seminar and arguably the most prominent Q and Nag Hammadi library scholar of the 20th century. He is also a major contributor to The International Q Project, acting as an editor for most of their publications. Particularly, he laid the ground for John S. Kloppenborg's foundational work into the compositional history of Q, by arguing its genre as an ancient wisdom collection.

Reviews

[Erik Graff · Rating 2 out of 5]

This slight book was published prior to the publication of The Gospel of Judas by The National Geographic Society. Most of it is devoted to a rather confusing attempt to detail what was known at the time of the document's provenance, transmission and contents. That wasn't much and the sketchy accounts available at the time were often contradictory.

A shorter, more interesting, essay introduces the text, it detailing how, historically speaking, Judas has not always been viewed as negatively as traditional translations of the gospels appear to make him out to be. Part of this argument depends upon the translations themselves, author Robinson pointing out alternative translations which are true to the Greek. Part of it depends upon examples of more sympathetic portrayals of Jesus' treasurer made by Christians over the centuries.

The furor about the Judas document is two fold. First, if this is the text referred to by Irenaeus in c.180, then it has significance as regards our understanding of the early church. Second, because it represents Judas as a positive figure, fulfilling prophecy, Jesus' commands and thereby ensuring salvation it has obvious theological significance within the Christian context.

Overall, however, this book, so critical of those who aimed to make a bundle out of this codex, is itself a poor attempt to capitalize on the discovery. Several books about the gospel have appeared since the publication of the original Coptic text. They are to be preferred.

[kaweewah dabest · Rating 3 out of 5]

This audiobook was nice because I had forgotten what it’s like to listening to a CD that skips

[Frank · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book is interesting and has a lot of information in it but not about the Gospel of Judas. In other words I don't feel he accomplished what his title promised. He puts a lot of history in the book, maybe half, of the intrigue and finding and profiteering of the document as well as other old documents within the package being offered. But no real details of what is in the "gospel" itself. He spends a lot of time on what the evangelists were doing when they wrote their gospels and including how it might affect what was included on Judas. Was Judas a traitor or a hero? This is really interesting information as far as background goes but again it doesn't really deal with Judas as much as I thought it would. It certainly includes some but....

He talks about terms and thoughts behind scripture including the mysterious Q Gospel which is great general information but not Judas specific. Although he does include information about where Judas' name might have come from and in fact one chapter really does deal with Judas specifically. He also spends time on Gnostic writings which is what this gospel is.

But I found the authors opinions being presented too much as facts and began to find his information less authoritative. For instance - Did Jesus "really know as much scripture as modern scripture scholars ascribe to him? Certainly not!" He makes this bold statement with absolutely not basis of fact to support it. And there are other such opinions given which for me taints the validity of many of his conclusions about the evangelists as well as Jesus.

There is some good information on the Gospels and early writings as well as peddling antiquities and especially old documents. The read is worth it just for that information alone. But I don't feel he revealed "the secrets of Judas" or specifically "His lost Gospel" which obviously was not "his" gospel at all.

[Katherine 黄爱芬 · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hanya satu kata utk buku ini : KACAU.

Pertama, tidak jelas awal atau akhir, flashback atau bukan. Di paro awal buku saya dicekoki oleh rentetan ayat² Injil yg berhamburan dimana-mana (entah maksudnya utk apa, sbg perbandingan atau tanda bhw Anda sangat cerdas mengutip ayat²).

Yg paling mencengangkan saya, author tidak bisa menjelaskan (kepada saya) sekelumit pun ttg Kitab Yudas ini. Boro² definisi, dalil, argumen apalagi analisa, gak ada yg bisa saya tangkap. Kalimat² dan paragraf² berkejar-kejaran gak nyambung saking semangatnya author menulis. Selain semangat tanpa arah ini, saya menemukan secercah sikap atheis dari author (saya gak masalah Anda mau atheis atau bukan) dan terkadang argumen Anda terasa mengintimidasi (entah pada pihak siapa).

Padahal Anda adalah seorang professor tetapi tampaknya pemikiran Anda hanya bisa dipahami oleh segelintir orang saja (termasuk murid Anda, Steve Emmel). Intinya, Anda yang menulis dan cuma Anda yg bisa mengerti. Gak heran rating buku ini jeblok.

[Joan · Rating 3 out of 5]

As others have noted, this book isn't really about Judas or his secrets, but rather the 'begats' concerning ancient papyrus documents (fragments) that may describe the early church environments. It was impossible to keep straight all of the linkages, twists and turns of these documents in the audio version. It felt that Prof Robinson was pulling together all of his insight and shared in one place for others to consult. I appreciated the opportunity to have a quick peak at this interesting area of scholarship.

[David]

A Gnostic-Christian text rediscoved, 20 Jan 2007
By Ralph BlumenauThis review is from: Gospel of Judas, The (Hardcover)

The New Testament portrays Judas as the corrupt disciple who betrayed Christ, and this negative portrait of him, with additional hateful characteristics, has prevailed for centuries. Only in recent times has the figure of Judas been seen in the context of very ancient Hellenic cults in which gods have to be killed by a `sacred executioner' to be reborn, after which this sacred executioner is disowned by and driven out of the community.

These ideas were then incorporated into the teachings of the Gnostics, where the god becomes a Saviour figure who would descend from the Realm of Light into the Realm of Darkness to redeem mankind and then to return to the Realm of Light. Such and similar Gnostic ideas had an influence on certain groups of pre-Christian Judaism and then on early Christianity also.

So far these influences have been deduced by comparing parts of the Dead Sea Scrolls and parts of St John's Gospel with Gnostic works; but the rediscovery of the Gospel of Judas gives us a text that is so explicitly Gnostic that it actually wholly subverts the message of the Gospels in the New Testament. As a result it was of course declared heretical by Bishop Irenaeus in 180 and suppressed. Its text was lost until a manuscript of it in Coptic, dating to around 300 AD, was found in Egypt in around 1978; its fragments, making up 85% of the original, were painstakingly reassembled; and the work was finally published in 2006. The book under review gives us a translation of the reconstituted text, followed by four illuminating essays of explanation and commentary. That by Bart D. Ehrman gives a lucid account of the basic teachings shared by the various Gnostic schools; and a more difficult chapter by Martin Meyer links the teaching of the Judas Gospel with other Gnostic texts, notably the Secret Book of John, in which some of the ideas of the Judas Gospel are more fully developed.

The basic and most startling feature of the Judas Gospel is that Judas was the only disciple who really understood Jesus. Jesus chastizes in the most forthright terms the other disciples for worshipping a false God. This false God - the God of the Old Testament - is the Demiurge (this Gospel refers to his helpers Nebro, the `rebel' and Saklas, the `fool') who created this very imperfect world - an idea basic to Gnosticism. The true God is not a Creator God, but a (male) Spirit with a female emanation called Barbelo and a Self-Generated emanation who is Jesus. The Jesus emanation is pure Spirit but appears on earth in a human envelope, so that he only appears to be human (a doctrine known as docetism); but he needs to be free from this envelope, and he tells Judas that it is to be the latter's mission `to sacrifice the man that clothes me'. It is in obedience to this command that Judas hands over Jesus to his enemies.

Jesus has told Judas that humans are divided into those who also have a spark of the divine in them - and they, like Judas, will live on after death - and those, like the disciples and others who worship the false God, who lack the divine spark and will not live on after death.

All this is mixed up with a complex cosmology which owes something to Plato's linking of individual souls with individual stars.

Gnosticism is an interesting attempt to explain that the existence of imperfection in the created world by attributing this creation to an inferior deity. By proscribing Gnosticism (and, later, Manicheism), Christianity, like Judaism and Islam, was left with the problem of explaining how a Creator God could have created such a flawed world

[Louise · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quirky. Yes. Quirky.

The first part about the character of Judas is very good. Robinson's knowledge of languages and Biblical scholarship shines. He shows us how the gospels differ in their text on Judas and how they created his infamy.

After this, we get some high level education on scrolls, codices, papyrus and conservation. It's quirky because it's told with exclamation points on almost every page. Robinson is clearly enthusiastic about this material.

There is also a tale on par with the best spy vs. spy of how this material has been shopped around and the damage that has resulted from poor caretaking and perhaps thievery. The first irregularity of this project was "Hannah" of Egypt's desire to get the material out of the country before s/he was overwhelmed with demands for bakseesh (my term not Robinson's, who does allude to the uncertain environment for getting things out of the country). From this point on, more people, (from Robinson's point of view) of equally secretive modus operandi got involved. This has the exclamation point quirkiness, plus Robinson's (also quirky) penchant for analysing the linguistic derivation of names (i.e. Iscariot, Hannah, Thomas, Mia, Freida, Tchacos...).

Robinson cannot accept the capitalistic aspects of the antiquities market. Perhaps, his attitude towards antiquities investors is why he was not tapped for the project. It is clear he has the experience and expertise to do the work and probably should have been hired. He speculates about the processes being used and wonders if the researchers have the keys to work in the lab late at night. This part is almost like a personal journal (complete with exclamation points).

The book needs an index.

Someone else said 3 1/2 stars and gave it 3. Since I agree I'll give it 4 and the average will right the situation for us both.

[Dorothy · Rating 3 out of 5]

Dr. James M. Robinson, noted Coptic scholar and editor of The Nag Hammadi Library, has written an interesting history of the discovery of The Gospel of Judas and the convoluted dealings of various antiquities dealers and scholars in handling it, sometimes mishandling it, and eventually bringing it to the attention of the public.

Robinson begins his book with a review of the ideas about Judas Iscariot as perpetrated in the New Testament and the dogma of early Christianity. He explores some of the inconsistencies of those views, ideas that conflict with Gospel accounts. After this introduction, he goes on to discuss The Gospel of Judas and its ramifications.

Obviously, this work was not written by Judas Isacariot, any more than Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were necessarily written by those men. However, it was written by someone with a sympathetic view of Judas and it offers an alternative to the idea that he was simply a traitor to Jesus. In this telling, he was a devoted follower of Jesus and was simply doing what he had been instucted to do. Indeed, without his actions, the will of God could not have been fulfilled. There would have been no Easter.

The story of how this gospel was shopped around the world of antiquities and how it finally came to rest in the hands of scholars makes up the greater part of Robinson's book. It is a fascinating story.

[Davidmcdonnell · Rating 2 out of 5]

The author, James M. Robinson, is primarily know as one of the specialists responsible for translating the Nag Hammadi gospels, a collection of early Christian texts discovered near the Upper Egyptian town of Nag Hammadi in 1945. Among these gospels are the gospels of Thomas, Mary Magdalen, as well as others attributed to John, Paul, and other disciples not found in the New Testament. Apparently the early Church decided to include the gospels now know as the New Testament, but chose to leave many others out. As one of the experts responsible for translating these alternative gospels, Robinson brings a very relevant point of view to the topic of the "newly uncovered" and "secret" gospel of Judas. Unfortunately, and Robinson makes this very clear in the book's preface, he has never seen the gospel of Judas. This book is written as a perfect lead-up to the text, but stops short of actually discussing it. Robinson contends he has been excluded from the process of translating the codex (old book) because the owners are primarily motivated by profit, not knowledge dissemination. Unfortunately, the book was all lead-up and no punch, was somewhat unfairly titled, and generally dissatisfying.

[Michele Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Review by Jason Lush

Read it for the information about archeology and the people who study coptic writings, but not to learn any thing of Judas or the document "The Gospel of Judas".

Simply put, this is an informative and interesting book, but it has nothing to do with its sensational title. The man Judas is mentioned briefly, but the remainder is about the documents' procurement and the people involved with its translation and preservation.

Nothing...nothing of the document itself or any of its content. The spiritual content of this book is no more than any thinking reader of the New Testament could surmise on their own.

Good book, over blown title.

[Katherine · Rating 3 out of 5]

No surprises in the content of the gospel, and none in the numerable theories regarding Judas' real purpose, but the actual acquisition of the gospel once again shows human beings at their greedy worst: "Over the decades [since its initial discovery], the manuscript had been handled with less than sympathetic care: some single pages may be loose on the antiquities market (one half page turned up in Feb. 2006, in New York City); the text is now in over a thousand pieces and fragments, and is believed to be less than three-quarters complete."

What a shame from an historical perspective.

[Mike Davis · Rating 3 out of 5]

Written prior to the National Geographic publication of the translated text of "The Gospel of Judas," this book outlines the questions still surrounding the mystery of Judas, and covers in exhaustive detail the acquisition and significance of this singular Coptic codex. It does not paint a rosy picture of the process during which significant deterioration took place. It also does not deal with the actual translated contents of the codex. It is nevertheless a valuable look at the discovery of yet another ancient document of very early Christian history.

[Miles Nilsson · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Secrets of Judas: The Story of the Misunderstood Disciple and His Lost Gospel.

The earliest of the canonical Christian writings (that is, those recognized by their inclusion in the New Testament) 14those that survive more or less intact 14are the epistles of Paul, written around the middle of the first century. Afterward, within a couple of decades, came the first of the four canonical Gospels, Mark, followed, a decade or so later 14possibly almost simultaneously, by Matthew and Luke who rewrote Mark and then added material that, while unknown in Mark, undoubtedly was based on traditions as old or older than Mark, but which do not survive (among these, the famous, hypothetical Gospel of Q 14which, for reasons I will not go into here, I prefer to call 1Cproto-Matthew 1D). Finally, the Gospel of John was written near the end of the first century.

Meanwhile, other epistles were being composed, which came to be attributed to Peter, James, John and others. A modern skepticism has led many scholars to look closely at all of these writings and conclude that while Paul was probably the real author of four out of the thirteen canonical epistles attributed to him, all of the other writings of the New Testament are pseudepigraphal 14that is, merely attributed to some highly respected person as the supposed author in order to bring the benefit of that person 19s recognized authority upon the book.

Some early churchmen openly recognized that some of the books that wound up in the Bible actually had been forged. For example, there was a blind churchman who led the faction that wanted to keep the Second Epistle of Peter out of the New Testament. He declared that there is no way that Peter wrote this letter. Many modern scholars agree, dating 2nd Peter to as late as the year 125, long after Peter 19s death 14thus allowing us to say that 2nd Peter was so obviously a forgery that a blind man could see it. (I wish I could claim this jest, but I think that I must have stolen it from Prof. Bart Ehrman.) But the books of the New Testament were not chosen based on scholarly evidence of their origins, but rather based on whether they expressed a theological viewpoint that conformed to what a given church or group of churches considered theologically useful and therefore theologically correct.

During the first century, the greatest division in the new Christian movement was between those Christians who remained practicing Jews and those who were gentiles or who preferred to live as gentiles. The leaders of the former included Peter and James, who made Jerusalem their headquarters, while the later group was led by Paul, who, though evidently Jewish by birth, virtually renounced Judaism and advocated the acceptance of gentiles into Christianity without requiring them to observe any Jewish customs. By the early second century, Christianity was dominated by non-Jews, and the Jewish Christian movement, having lost power, became marginalized and even came to be denounced as heretical.

Yet the gentiles did not agree among themselves what Christianity is supposed to be. From early in the second century there were several competing interpretations 14probably based on schisms that traced back into the first century, which only grew further apart as the second century wore on. Near the end of the second century, Irenaeus, bishop of Lyon, wrote a book, Against Heresies, in which he demonstrated against the variety of Christianities then in existence but which differed from his interpretation. Among these betes noirs was the Gnostic heresy, a wide range of heresies that Irenaeus found particularly repugnant, but within this movement few sects were so repugnant as the Cainites, whom, Irenaeus said, had composed for themselves a book titled The Gospel of Judas. This is the earliest known mention of this book, and though it was condemned once again two centuries later by Bishop Epiphaneus, The Gospel of Judas subsequently disappeared from history until a relatively late, fourth century copy was uncovered in Egypt in the 1970s, only to wander from owner to owner for a couple of decades before any competent scholar got a good enough look at it to recognize it for what it was. It is interesting to note that, as the book under review here tells us, the French scholar Henri-Charles Puech gave, as the earliest possible date for the composition of the Gospel of Judas, the year 130 14only five years after the latest possible date for the composition of the 2nd Epistle of Peter. Both books were written long after their supposed authors had died, so that they stand almost equal as forgeries, yet one is in the New Testament while the other is not.

Professor James M. Robinson, an expert on early Christianity, draws on all of the lore surrounding Judas and the development of the early Church to guess at what is in The Gospel of Judas, despite the fact that Robinson published his book before The Gospel of Judas was published; so although he is only able to guess at what is in it, yet his guesses turn out to be quite accurate. (This is what is meant by the term 1Ceducated guess. 1D) As an outsider with knowledge of the subject, Robinson can tell us a lot about The Gospel of Judas without being connected with its publication. Compared to Herbert Krosney 19s The Lost Gospel, including its introduction by Prof. Bart Ehrman, Robinson goes into more detail about the questions that they only mention.

Robinson notes that nothing in the New Testament exonerates Judas even if some Gospel writers are harsher on him than others. Mark goes easiest on Judas, describing events in the sparest terms, so that when Jesus says that it would have been better for the one who turns him over to the authorities 1Cnot to have been born 1D (Mark 14:21) one can almost wonder if Mark 19s Jesus means to imply an added 1C 14unfortunately. 1D The vilification of Judas proceeds through an intermediate stage with Matthew saying that Judas did it for money. It is left to Luke and John, however, to attribute Judas 19s betrayal to Satanic intervention. But why, asks Robinson, did Jesus or the other disciples not recognize that Judas had been possessed by the Devil and cast the Devil out just as they are reported to have done with other demoniacs? Further, why did Jesus choose as an elite disciple (one of the twelve) someone he knew would betray him? On the other hand, how else did Jesus expect to be taken and killed in order to fulfill his mission if someone did not facilitate his arrest? Wasn 19t Judas 19s action necessary to fulfill the prophecy? The vilification process did not stop there, however, as Judas became a favorite figure of contempt for centuries of preachers, all too often intensifying the effect by using their diatribes against Judas as a jumping off point for anti-Semitism.

To this day, the popular meaning of Judas is 1Ctraitor, 1D and yet, attempts to rehabilitate Judas are perennial. Robinson quotes churchmen, contemporaries of the more influential vilifiers of Judas, who tried to hold out the possibility that if Judas truly repented in the afterlife he might yet be saved and go to heaven. From the twentieth century, Robinson cites at least three novels and at least two scholarly books that would rehabilitate Judas. Thus the idea of rehabilitating Judas might seem like a new idea, but it is not.

Would The Gospel of Judas contain a narrative or would it consist of a dialogue? Each of these styles are used in ancient books that have been called 1Cgospels. 1D Robinson guesses that it could be either or both. (It turns out to be a bit of both.) Part of the problem, he explains, is that the titles of ancient books were often made up by the scribes who copied them rather than by the authors. Few authors of so-called gospels meant for their works to fit into a genre called 1Cgospels. 1D After all, since the word 1Cgospel 1D 14in Greek 1Ceuaggelion 1D (compare the Spanish 1Cevangelio 1D) 14simply means 1Cgood news, 1D shouldn 19t every book in the entire New Testament be called a gospel?

Robinson begins his book with striking hostility: 1CThe Gospel of Judas 26. Has been kept under wraps until now, to maximize its financial gain for its Swiss owners. 1D It 19s publication by the National Geographic Society has been 1Ctimed for the greatest public impact, right at Easter. Those on the inside have been bought off (no doubt with considerably more than thirty pieces of silver), and sworn to silence on a stack of Bibles 14or on a stack of papyrus leaves. 1D

Obviously, Robinson is right that sensationalist marketing motivated setting Easter as the publication date, but it seems rash of Robinson to voice his impression that the owners are motivated ONLY by financial gain because this speaks to things that only they and God can know for certain, and the bit about people being bought off with more than thirty pieces of silver is particularly nasty, not least of all because Robinson will subsequently tell us that some of those 1Con the inside 1D are or have been his friends and respected colleagues. Does Robinson feel that they have betrayed him? Is he spiteful because he is jealous that they are on the inside of this business while he, a respected scholar of early Christianity, has been left to press his nose against the window? Showing how close he almost is to being included in the inner circle, Robinson relates that more than once, he emailed colleagues to ask what they knew about The Gospel of Judas only to be told 1Csorry 1D they had just signed confidentiality agreements with the owners of the Gospel and were no longer free to comment. Robinson recognizes that the chief translator, Rodolphe Kasser, as well as other scholars latterly brought on board to deal with the Gospel of Judas, are genuinely respectable scholars. This gives him hope that the Gospel will eventually be made available to all scholars without secrecy or prejudice 14an ideal for which Robinson has been a life-long champion.(His detractors might call him a self-proclaimed champion, but I think that a champion of an ideal is genuine if he practices what he teaches.)

Robinson 19s evaluation of the hoopla surrounding the Gospel seems more sober than Herbert Krosney 19s conceit that the publication of the Gospel of Judas could change Christianity or improve Jewish-Christian relations. Robinson quotes a Vatican official who patiently tells reporters that the Catholic Church has already been working on improving relations with Judaism. As to the new gospel 19s potential impact on Christianity, Robinson can almost be seen to roll his eyes over the sensational treatment in the press. Two reporters, he says, 1Cinterviewed me by phone from Zurich and London while preparing their articles, without my answers to their questions seeming to have much effect on what they wrote. 1D For example, he quotes one reporter 19s suggestion that The Gospel of Judas is as old as the four Gospels in the New Testament, which is hardly the case 14it is at least decades younger.

He shows the least respect for the non-scholars who owned The Gospel of Judas, whom he disdains, never having heard their names before they came up in connection with this ancient text; but perhaps he does not fully appreciate that, given the state of antiquities laws in many countries 14paradoxically almost requiring tomb-robbing to bring antiquities to light but then keeping them hidden from those who might know what they are, it was only the interest of the relatively sophisticated antiquities dealer Frieda Tchacos Nussberger that saved the Gospel of Judas from finally turning into a pile of worthless dust. Scholars like Robinson tried to rescue it before she came along, but they failed because they are too unfamiliar with the ins and outs of the grubby real world. 1CProps 1D should be given to each kind of professional where they are due.

[Steven H · Rating 5 out of 5]

AN SURVEY OF THE BACKGROUND AND POSSIBLE IMPACT OF THIS MANUSCRIPT

Author James M. Robinson wrote in the Preface to this 2006 book, “‘The Gospel of Judas,’ a long-lost second-century fictional account that elevated Judas to hero status in the story, had been rediscovered! But it has been kept under wraps until now, to maximize its financial gain for its Swiss owners. The grand exposé is being performed by the National Geographic Society, timed for greatest public impact, right at Easter… But it is amazing how much can be known about it by those of us on the outside looking in. This little book… has been written by an outsider who is not privy to the details about how ‘The Gospel of Judas’ is being published. Many of you will read my book because you have … heard about…what the National Geographic Society is doing. But there is a distinct advantage that I have over you… For my narrative is not expurgated, sanitized, cleaned up to make it an appetizing story. What has gone on in this money-making venture is not a pleasant story---about how all this has been sprung upon us, the reading and viewing public---and you have a right to know what has gone on. I wrote as a scholar, and… I have been involved to a very large extent over the past generation in this adventure. Yet you will also see me, in my capacity as scholar, expressing dismay, even disgust, over much of what has gone on…” (Pg. vii-viiii)

He surveys the portrait of Judas in the four canonical gospels (“It is decidedly the Gospel of John that bears most of the responsibility for discrediting Jesus completely”; pg. 26), and summarizes, “they are the genesis of the horrible image of Judas down through the centuries, and the sense that upon inspection they do not present that image as being as horrible as we have usually assumed. To be sure, they do not … make him into the hero, as apparently the ‘Gospel of Judas’ would try to do… the canonical texts also pronounce a woe on him for his evil deed, and present him in such remorse that he kills himself…. But a presentation in which Judas is to be praised, not blamed, calls for a rather complete reversal of values, such as we await in ‘The Gospel of Judas.’” (Pg. 31)

He states, “Maybe Judas Iscariot needs to be rehabilitated! After all, the Evangelists presented the Twelve as quite dull about Jesus’s mission, yet they have become honorific names… Thus the dubious characters in the story have all become saints---except for Judas Iscariot! Has his time not come? I have used with much appreciation the … scholarly book by Mennonite theologian William Klassen… he has argued convincingly that the translations ‘betray,’ ‘betrayal,’ and ‘traitor’ are simply not what the Greek term means. Rather it means ‘give over,’ ‘hand over,’ ‘turn in.’” (Pg. 48)

He suggests, “The argument has been made that Judas may have thought that having the official Jewish authorities investigate Jesus’s claims was the appropriate thing to do, for they would surely understand his message and endorse his ministry… To be sure, Matthew and the Book of Acts report Judas’s remorse, hurling back the thirty pieces of silver to the Jewish authorities… and then taking his own life. Does this not help some to exonerate him? Perhaps the most fruitful way to go at giving Judas a better place in our minds and hearts is to recall what Jesus himself said about forgiveness…” (Pg. 49)

He recounts, “The first thing we hear about Judas after the New Testament is---his vindication! In the middle of the second century, a ‘Gospel of Judas’ was written by a Gnostic sect called Cainites. Of course it was promptly suppressed, but apparently it is this same document that has been rediscovered in our own time. But what did we already know about ‘The Gospel of Judas’ from the heresy-hunting church fathers who condemned it[?]… ‘The Gospel of Judas’ is first mentioned by Irenaeus [in his] ‘Refutation of All Heresies’…” (Pg. 53)

He continues, “Very little is known about ‘The Gospel of Judas’. But more can be known about the sect that is said to have produced the text, the Cainites. Irenaeus classified them as Gnostics… This is of course guilt by association. But at least it shows how they were seen by the early church fathers.” (Pg. 59)

He suggests, “The Gnostics might well have said: We who are in the know, who think for ourselves, and see through the sham, have been enlightened by a hidden God far above, who is free of all this impossible system under which the world suffers. The hidden God frees us, he does not enslave us! And if you read… the Christian scriptures this way, whom do you light upon as the defamed hero that is damned for doing the only decent thing, namely seeing to it that prophesy is fulfilled… Well, Judas, of course!.... We will see…” (Pg. 65)

After surveying various authors on Judas, he comments, “It seems that the attempt to understand Judas’s betrayal, to give him the benefit of the doubt and perhaps even redeem him, has a long-standing and continuing tradition.” (Pg. 87)

He devotes two chapter to the story behind the rediscover of the Gospel, and ‘The PEDDLING of the Gospel of Judas.’ He summarizes, “With ‘The Gospel of Judas’ lost for almost 1,800 years, the discovery and selling of it is a colorful story, replete with smugglers, black market antiquities dealers, religious scholars, backstabbing partners, and greedy entrepreneurs, meeting secretly over the course of two decades across the borders of two or three continents…. But what will this lost and then found ‘Gospel of Judas’ reveal to us?... will it exonerate Judas? Will it turn Christianity on its head? … in the next chapter I … speculate with others on the meaning and significance of this remarkable discovery.” (Pg. 156-157)

He argues, “it is not simply a matter of scholars being able to choose whichever one prefers, ‘pre-Easter events in the year of Jesus's death’ or ‘something in early church history.’ They do not have the choice between what their research convinces them is historically accurate and what is just sensational. ‘The Gospel of Judas’ is a second-century apocryphal Gospel that in all probability tells us about the Cainite Gnostics of the mid-second century, not about what happened in AD 30!” (Pg. 176-177)

He concludes, “Once [the Gospel] becomes available, one will find that it does not shed light on what happened during Jesus’s trip to Jerusalem (which is what the sensationalists imply), but rather will shed light on a second-century Gnostic sect. This will be important for scholars, but not for the sensationalists. But by then … They can turn ‘The Gospel of Judas’ over to the scholarly community, to achieve the other objective stated there: … ‘the manuscripts involved being of potential importance to a major part of mankind imposes an approach substantially different to an ordinary business transaction.” (Pg, 183-184)

This early book will be of keen interest to those studying ‘The Gospel of Judas.’

[Michael · Rating 2 out of 5]

When I checked this book out from the library, I originally thought this was going to contain the lost “Gospel of Judas.” This was not the case. It does have some interesting material though, about what was already known about the Gospel of Judas at the time.

The book came out prior to the release of the lost “Gospel of Judas.” It is highly critical of the group producing that work. I get the feeling that the author had his feelings hurt that he wasn’t invited to participate in the effort to bring forth that work. He repeatedly belittles that group for their sensationalism and entrepreneurial efforts regarding that work. Yet he himself is attempting to make money off his own book on the subject at the same time.

My biggest complaint with the book is that to me the author comes across as a “Pompous Blow-hard.” He goes so far as to quote himself, which I found ridiculous. Every few sentences he seems compelled to need to remind the reader that he was involved in the preservation of the Nag Hamadi codices. I found his blowing of his own horn tiresome. The best word I can think of to describe this book is “meh.”

[Jim Kilson · Rating 1 out of 5]

I began reading this book back in 2006 when it first came out, but I never got around to finishing it. I was planning on preaching a sermon on Judas as part of my Easter Series this year so I thought I'd pull it out and finish it. Since it had been so long since I had previously dug into it, I started over. On completion, my initial thoughts about the book from all those years ago hadn't changed. While it was an easy read (not written for academics) the book is pop-Christian history at its worst, outside of a few insightful historical facts about Judas the book is nothing more than a tome of conjecture and long-discredited theories rehashed and rebranded, and presented as new scholarship.

[Kathi · Rating 1 out of 5]

I am not a theologian, nor a student of theology, and several parts of the dissertation were over my head. I gave up half way through -- too much repetition, the same Bible [New Testament] passages over and over.

Others slammed this for not including the contents of the "recently discovered" Gospel according to Judas, but the author never claimed that he intended to include it -- his purpose was to discuss Judas. And Cain. And the Cainites. And the Sethites ... and just about anything other than Judas.

[Charlie · Rating 1 out of 5]

The first fifty pages were promising... but then the whole thing went stale. And so it remained: croutons insinuating a salad.

One wonders if this publication was meant as a joke, or it just happened that way?... Whatever the intention, the book is a disappointing 'flop'.































.

[sara :] · Rating 3 out of 5]

un altre lectura universitaria però aquest cop per un assaig. no és un llibre tan revelador com pensava que seria però tampoc ha sigut una decepció ni molt menys. es repeteixen algunes coses i crec que robinson ha explicat el dilema d’una forma decent però sí, res nou si saps tres coses del Nou Testament…

[Gary Froseth · Rating 1 out of 5]

Very tedious book. It has little relevance other than the author's pique at not being at the center of the discovery and revelatipn of this "gospel."

[Jamie · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book is more about provenance of the original documents than the name would imply. It’s kinda fun if you like the reading academics arguing but otherwise wasn’t what I was curious about.

[Chuck · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a difficult book to rate. While it had a lot of fascinating information, it was difficult for me to figure out exactly what his primary thesis was. I like to rate books based on whether they met their purpose, but I wasn't sure exactly what the purpose of this book was. Many times he seemed to be whining that he was not part of the team chosen to preserve and translate The Gospel of Judas. I may just not have sufficient background to fully appreciate this book. What I did get out of it was a bit of information about how ancient texts are restored, insight on the purposes of the synoptic gospels, and an outstanding bibliography to investigate.

[Kristopher Swinson · Rating 1 out of 5]

In short, Irenaeus was right, so this is a waste of time other than insight into higher criticism’s fallacies and the eagerness with which heresies arise in attempts to lionize factual villains. Downright derogatory for its zeal to convert to any alternative model which can be proposed, and rife with the accolades of man as well as their quarrels. The belated statement on 176-177 is actually at variance with how he spent the first half of this book: “The Gospel of Judas is a second-century apocryphal Gospel that in all probability tells us about the Cainite Gnostics of the mid-second century, not about what happened in AD 30!” With that, I certainly rest my case.

[Karen · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book will make you disgusted by the greed that abounds in the world of rare manuscripts. Although the Judas codex belongs to the country of Egypt, it passed through the hands of people who have no respect or reverence for writings in the time of Christ. Because of its ill treatment, we can not know the full story of the writings that were once contained in this manuscript. You have to wonder at the sheer entitlement of those who seek to grow richer by trading a treasure that they have neither the knowledge or desire to properly care for.

[Jon Ciliberto · Rating 2 out of 5]

A strange book, more about the shenanigans surrounding the discovery, sale, and promotion of the "lost gospel" than the writing itself. One has the impression that Robinson was personally bothered that he, himself, didn't get the chance to present the lost work to the world, and is using this book to express that. The author, while an expert in the field, is not a very good writer. And, it is very curious that his editor didn't remove more (any?) of the hundreds of sentences that end in exclamation points.

[Michelle victoria · Rating 4 out of 5]

Satu buku yang sangat sulit untuk dimengerti... hampir mampus gw buat nyoba memahami isi ni buku... sampe sekarangpun gw blom selesai bacanya padahal dari natal 2006 kemaren:p

ni buku berhasil ngebuat gw pusing tujuh keliling, berhasil ngebolak-balik perasaan gw dari percaya sampe ngga percaya, dari ngga percaya sampe percaya lagi dst...

ni buku sama sekali bukan buat temen disaat lo lagi ngopi2 atau saat lo mau tidur..!! :)

[Greg · Rating 1 out of 5]

Sorry Bub, but this book was lousy! It wasn't even about anything! This is just a bunch of conjecture about a text the author had very little knowledge about at the time of the writing. This was published to capitalize on the sensationalism around the topic (of which the author himself is critical!). Not to mention, he uses way too many exclamation points, similar in nature to the one I just used. Don't waste your time.

[Christine · Rating 2 out of 5]

Disappointing. I expected more analysis of the actual document, especially by the editor of the Nag Hammadi Library, but got very little. The first half of the book seemed dedicated to pointing fingers over the shoddy treatment of the text by sellers. It was so argumentative that I lost some interest in what the author was saying.

[Vanessa · Rating 2 out of 5]

First part is an unconvincing opinion of how history could be misunderstanding meaning behind the role that Judas played as the betrayer of Jesus Christ. Then the bulk of the book is about the nag hamadi and other papyrus documents found in history, owners and bidding for the gospel of Judas, and the politics that play in to this. Kind of interesting, but not what I was expecting from the book.

[LindaJ^ · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was looking forward to this book, thinking I was going to hear what was in the Gospel of Judas. Wrong. While this book provides some interesting information about how the Gospel of Judas came to light and who was preparing the translation, it's tone is that of a scorned scholar. The author spends more time establishing his bona fides than on the "secrets of Judas."