So, apparently, we have gotten all wrong. For all of these years, we have thought that Judas betrayed Jesus and now it turns out that he was not only innocent but was the hero of the story. Amazing! I know my belief system is thoroughly shaken.
Okay...pardon the sarcasm but after watching National Geographic's presentation of "The Gospel of Judas" I'm still a little 'put off.' I know it shouldn't upset me but I know that a lot of people will watch this special and assume that having 'Princeton' next to your name means that everything they say must be true. The fact of the matter is that this was an extremely slanted show with an obvious agenda tied to a multi-million dollar manuscript. I mean just look at who they interviewed (Elaine Pagels, Bart Erhman, etc) versus Robert Schuller on the other. If you saw it, you know exactly what I mean. Robert's rebuttal to the gospel of Judas was: "Well, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were good enough for me..." (at this point, I think I threw my remote control across the room)
Right.
What was lacking was a good Biblical scholar (like a Tom Wright) to put some of these issues to rest. But, then, I guess that would be counter-intuitive to a document that has a lot of money tied in to it. They gave the impression that Iranaeus laid out 30 gospels and he picked out Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and destroyed and suppressed the rest as if in a way to manipulate what people believed. The way they did this made it almost seem arbitrary. What they didn't say as much was how these other gospels came considerably later and imported ideas that would have been radical departures from first century Judaism. It doesn't take many sayings from this so-called gospel of Judas to see how foreign these ideas would have been to Palestinian Judaism. (Btw, the gospel of Judas is a great name for the document except for the fact that it's not a gospel (good news) and it wasn't by Judas, but other than that...)
Also, they were very deliberate in their attempts to try and show how the writers of the gospels changed their versions of history as they pleased. The big example given was how Judas was portrayed in each of the gospels. I'll grant that there are different pictures given of this character but that certainly doesn't mean that a writer was importing his own ideas into the story. Clearly, the writers of the gospels are working on different themes and issues and character developments will, of course, look different given how these ideas play out.
I could go on but I just needed to vent a little bit, especially since this is just the beginning of what will be an interesting year debating these issues. The Da Vinci Code will, no doubt, spark many conversations on these issues. I, for one, am actually looking forward to the opportunity to engage with people on these spiritual matters. I know that God can and will use these discussions to draw people to Himself!
Posts
14 comments:
Welcome back to bloggerdom! I would like to know more about this stuff, but I know I'll get pretty ticked off. Still, I gotta learn more sometime. Just know, it might inspire me to start carrying around a hatchet.
Yeah...I'm not violent by nature, but after watching this 'unbiased' program, I'd be more than happy to go hatchet shopping with you.
Do you think Walmart carries hatchets? I buried mine years ago and I don't remember where...
why do Judas and Jesus look like they're gonna kiss each other head one???
Timmy...glad to see you bloggin
Freddy T!!! We miss ya up here man! Hope all is well south of the border....
Hey Timmy!
I just want you(and the rest of The Point crew) to know that there is hardly a Sunday where all you guys are not mentioned in Sunday School. We pray for you guys. It's fun for me to have a little of my "past" connected with who I worship with weekly now. We've already started collecting clothing for November. I would love to get to come up... we'll have to wait and see. Let us know if we can ever do anything for any of you. We all of you at The Point.
Susan
MAKE JUDAS STOP KISSING JESUS!!!
I have to say that I don't buy into any of the "Gospel of Judas" ideology, but I always feel there is something more to Judas than we know. I'm not saying anything in particular at all, and I could be totally off, but the issue just bothers me sometimes. I guess a lot of it has to do with the fact that I want to believe that there is still good left in all people, even a man that turned Jesus over to murderers. Like I said, I have no theories or ideas. It's just how I feel.
Matt, As to whether there is any good left in people: I submit that unless man has had a fundamental evolution of the heart toward's goodness apart from the regenerating work in Christ since Moses recorded what God said about man in Genesis 6:5, and 8:21...then no, there is no good left in people. I would argue that the rest of the council of scripture confirms that there has been and will not be any evolution toward goodness apart from the Spirit of God. Of coarse then we may have to define good or goodness, but I think you probably follow.
Matt and Timmy, I'm adding you to my blog roll!
I may have not been as clear as I should of been, but I also think this may be a point where our theologies differ on. I believe there is something within us that has to answer Jesus's call. I believe Jesus and God are the initiaters of this call out of pure grace and mercy, but I still think we have a decision as to whether we will answer that call. So, when I said I want to believe there is some sort of "good" left in people, I am referring to the choice to respond to God's grace and accept Jesus as our personal Saviour.
Matt, Based upon your last post, our theologies do differ. Oh how sweet it would be to sit over coffee and discuss these wonderful things in New Brunswick. I believe the scripture is clear, that we are slaves to sin. The verses from Genesis I mentioned earlier, are a statement about the condition of man. Our condition is that the choice of our hearts are evil - every single time. We are free to choose. No doubt. But because we are dead in our sins (Eph 2:1-3) and slaves to sin (Rom 6), we will only choose to sin. We will not choose Christ with the wicked heart (Jer 17:9) the bible says we have. We must be given a new heart (Ez 11:19, Ez 36:26). We must be reborn which is the work of the Spirit (John 3:1-15). God causes this spiritual rebirth (1 Peter 1:3). It is the work of God's sovereign grace. It is only with this new heart that anyone will choose Christ to the glory of God the Father. Obviously, we could both proof text statements all day. Real progress is usually made when the meaning of texts are explained and exposited rather than just sited. However, because of the abundance of texts in scripture about our bondage to sin that are immediately clear without much exposition, I do not hesitate to list a few above. I'm sure this is not the first dialogue you have had concerning these issues. As far as discussing them over coffee with you like I'd really like to do, well I guess Tim will get the pleasure of that.
Ha ha, yeah there have been some discussions previously with Kevin, Tim, and John. Honestly, I don't feel like looking up the scriptures now, as I'm definitely not learned enough to cite them without looking them up again, but I will also say that I look mostly to my own experience and that of what I see. Also, as blasphemous as many would see it, I take some of the words of the Bible with a "grain of salt" meaning that I believe many of the writers were not "all-knowing" and, therefore, may have allowed their own interpretation to shine through in their writing (i.e. I'm not convinced that every word is written directly from the "mouth of God," but that the words were inspired by God and the main and most important parts are all there - just as a preacher's metaphors may not be exactly precise and may break down at some point, but everyone understands the "meat" of the argument). In the end, however, I feel there is not much (or no) practical difference in the way you and I, for instance, would practice our faith, so I don't spend as much time thinking about it anymore. P.S. I really over-simplified my viewpoint with the examples listed above, but you get the idea :)
The thing that makes Judas so interesting to me is that the gospels give absolutely no motive for his actions. We're left to fill in the blanks for ourselves.
We can do that, as some have, by simply saying "He betrayed Jesus because he was evil," but falling back on a Saturday morning morality tale on good and evil does nothing to further our understanding of why a man would betray someone he has known and admired for at least three years.
The gospel of John says that Satan had entered Judas' heart, but even that's an overly simplistic understanding of things. Ha-Satan isn't even necessarily an evil being in the Bible, as much as he is an accuser or prosecuting attorney fulfilling an essential function in God's court.
I rather fear that Judas had what he believed were good reasons for doing what he had done, as we usually do when we do something wrong. Afterward, when he saw what had happened to Jesus, he was struck with remorse, saw his action for the evil it was, and hanged himself.
Motives I've thought of for betraying Jesus:
1) He was trying to force Jesus to act by making it so he had no choice but to rally the people and overthrow the Romans.
2) He had decided that Jesus was not the messiah after all, and so he betrayed him rather than see the Jewish people led astray.
3) He was afraid that Jesus was going to be a militaristic messiah, and realized the Romans would destroy the nation if he led an uprising. Similar to Caiaphas' prophecy, "Do you not know that it is better for one man to die than for a whole nation to perish?"
4) I wrote a drama once where Judas saw that everything had slipped out of control, and that Jesus was no longer atop the wave but about to be swept under it. Rather than see him go the same way as a dozen other messiahs, he chose to betray him so he would be martyred and people would remember him at his height, and hold up his teachings for an age to come.
5) A pettier reason might be found in the gospel of John: Judas was a thief. It's possible that he feared that Jesus was going to kick him off the team -- Jesus did identify him as the betrayer during the seder meal -- and so he saw this as a chance to spare himself the blow to his pride, and get 30 talents of silver, to boot.
I do think the "He did it because people are evil" sentiment is a grievous mistake in hermeneutics, however common a reason it may be. It robs us of any chance to learn from the story, because in identifying Judas as evil, we simultaneously disavow any connection between ourselves and him, as no one outside superhero cartoons ever views herself as evil. We all view our crimes, misdemeanors and sins as perfectly justifiable, because of the exigencies of the situation. Falling back on theology to defend such a position is to misappropriate doctrine for evaluating interpersonal relationships.
Post a Comment