So Judas is a bad guy, after all
Sunday, December 02, 2007
Sometime ago, National Geographic came out with a sensationalistic story arguing that the Gospel of Judas, a Gnostic text dating from the 3rd century A.D., reveals that Judas wasn't actually a dirty, rotten betrayer of Jesus. As the "Lost Gospel of Judas" website says, "this newly discovered Gospel portrays Judas as acting at Jesus' request when he hands Jesus over to the authorities."
Like most sensationalistic, media-driven stories about new Jesus "discoveries", this one is turning out to be way over-blown. In an interesting NY Times op/ed piece, Rice University biblical scholar April D. DeConick explains several serious translation errors on the part of the National Geographic team that led to significant misinterpretations of the text - some of them the exact opposite of what the gospel actually means. (Read Prof. DeConick's article here.) For instance, the gospel, while Gnostic in flavor and not friendly to an orthodox Catholic cosmology, nevertheless calls Judas a demon who is separated from the holy generation of Jesus' followers and who is informed of the mysteries of the kingdom only so he can endure suffering appropriate to his crime. All of this, properly revealed by Prof. DeConick's translation, runs counter to the version National Geographic put forward.
I haven't read the National Geographic issue on the Gospel of Judas, nor have I read the gospel itself. I've just got too many other things on my list. But I do appreciate it when a responsible scholar speaks up to correct the hasty mistakes of a media source desperate to make a buck off of sensationalistic reporting.
posted by Andrew C. Thompson at 10:48 PM
2 Comments:
I read DeConick's excellent article on the Judas fiasco yesterday in the New York Times. I was particularly interested in what she said about the Dead Sea Scrolls:
"The situation reminds me of the deadlock that held scholarship back on the Dead Sea Scrolls decades ago. When manuscripts are hoarded by a few, it results in errors and monopoly interpretations that are very hard to overturn even after they are proved wrong."
From what I understand, the consequences of the Scrolls monopoly are indeed still continuing today, in a misleading exhibit taking place in a "natural history" museum in San Diego. See this article for details:
http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/did-christian-agenda-lead-biased-dead-sea-scrolls-exhibit-san-diego
Thus, I would suggest that an important question confronting us today is whether liberal Christian scholars -- by which I mean scholars of Christian faith who, like April DeConick, proceed in accordance with fundamental scientific principles rather than any religious agenda -- will part company with their Evangelical-minded colleagues and frankly condemn what is going on with the Dead Sea Scrolls in one museum exhibit after another.
i'll have to check out the article - it'd be funny to see what opposite translations were approved.
i guess i've never really felt like my position on judas has been taken seriously - but for a while now i haven't been as willing to vilify him as it seems everyone always has. i guess the central issue concerns the cross and whether or not it was God's will for Christ. if it was, it seems a vehicle was needed to get Jesus to the cross. so why couldn't judas be acting in the same way as joseph's brothers? i guess i'm just not as willing to condemn him for acting in a way that ultimately fulfills God's purposes (if the cross was in God's plan - which some days i'm not sure of). it also seems misdirected that peter and all the disciples betrayed jesus but only judas catches all the heat. isn't the point of all the disciples (who personify israel - and now the church) to show the bumbling incoherence of God's purposes and presence among them?
this was way longer than i intended. i don't worship judas or anything.
Post a Comment
<< Home