The four canonical Gospels have been scrutinized for centuries. Every word, every letter of every page of each Gospel has been examined. Seminars have been held where so-called scholars vote on which words and phrases were actually said by Jesus. Amazingly, the Gospels have held their own for all of these centuries. The scrutiny has only demonstrated their resilience and I would say further corroborate their inspiration.
However, when a 2nd (possibly 3rd) century gnostic ‘Gospel’ is found that discounts the accounts of the highly scrutinized and well testified canonical Gospels, the world is eager to accept it as truth and fact with very little scrutiny. Liberals and unbelievers who don’t want to accept the canonical Jesus are eager for any alternative. And now they have one.
The Gospel of Judas makes Judas out to be a hero – a man helpful in fulfilling Jesus’ personal plans for the cross. It is interesting to listen to the well educated scholars speak of this ‘Gospel.’ They immediately begin pointing to the idea that the canonical Gospels are stories told through the propaganda of the early Christians and is therefore not historically reliable. However, this new ‘Gospel’ dating at least one hundred to one hundred and fifty years after the last apostle (who personally knew Jesus), is immediately portrayed as a more objective and less ‘Christianized’ (understood as distorted) account of what ‘really’ happened.
Once again, we have evidence of the effects of the Fall on the will of mankind. Evidence and objective criteria for rational belief are not the elements missing for most people that would drive them toward belief. No, they do not want to believe. As a matter of fact, if anything contrary to the Bible comes out it is readily affirmed, simply because it contradicts the ‘progaganda’ of the Bible. The Gospel of Judas is not a display of modern scholarship. It is merely a display of modern modes of unbelief.
Some thoughts and resources regarding The Gospel of Judas:
