Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XTalk] More on the Gospel of Judas... Oops. Maybe it was misread.

Expand Messages
  • Jeffrey B. Gibson
    ... What makes you think this isn t included? Jeffrey Gibson -- Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon) 1500 W. Pratt Blvd. Chicago, Illinois e-mail
    Message 1 of 7 , Dec 4, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Robert Griffin wrote:

      > PS I'm somewhat surprised that the argument between the scholars
      > doesn't include the question of whether this book is the Gospel of
      > Judas used by the Cainites.
      >

      What makes you think this isn't included?

      Jeffrey Gibson
      --
      Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
      1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
      Chicago, Illinois
      e-mail jgibson000@...
    • Robert Griffin
      ... The CBC News story at http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/04/judas- scholars.html entirely ignores the fact that if this is indeed the Gospel of Judas
      Message 2 of 7 , Dec 5, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey B. Gibson"
        <jgibson000@...> wrote:
        >
        >
        >
        > Robert Griffin wrote:
        >
        > > PS I'm somewhat surprised that the argument between the scholars
        > > doesn't include the question of whether this book is the Gospel of
        > > Judas used by the Cainites.
        > >
        >
        > What makes you think this isn't included?
        >
        > Jeffrey Gibson
        > --
        > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
        > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
        > Chicago, Illinois
        > e-mail jgibson000@...

        The CBC News story at http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/04/judas-
        scholars.html entirely ignores the fact that if this is indeed the
        Gospel of Judas mentioned by Irenaeus, Judas is likely to be
        presented as a spiritual revolutionary and hero rather than as a
        villain or a dupe. If we have enough of the document, and if it is
        indeed the Cainite Gospel of Judas, then I would expect to find some
        clearer evidences of Cainite (or at least Gnostic) teachings.

        Nearly the whole discussion presented on the CBC page treats the
        document as if there were no connection between it and the document
        mentioned by Irenaeus. Irenaeus is fairly clear on what to expect
        from the Cainite Gospel of Judas, so discovery of an actual copy of
        the Cainite gospel shouldn't be expected to give us many surprises.
        Rather it would add depth to our knowledge about this particular
        Gnostic group.

        In some ways, it appears many people are treating this document as a
        new 'Gospel of Thomas', which it clearly is not. I would posit that
        the Gospel of Judas is no more historical (and perhaps no less
        historical) than the Drasha dYahya used/preserved by the Mandaeans.
        If someone suddenly becomes interested in the Drasha dYahya, will we
        soon be seeing debates over whether or not IT supports or rejects
        Christian tradtion?

        To redundantly reiterate--if this is the Cainite Gospel of Judas, we
        should expect, given Irenaeus' description, both a presentation of
        Gnostic doctrine and a presentation of Judas in a positive light. If
        either Judas is presented as a dupe or a villain, or if there is no
        trace of Gnostic doctrine in the document, then we most likely don't
        have the aforementioned Cainite gospel. If the presentation of Judas
        is unclear, but if there are clear evidences of Cainite teachings,
        then the secondary evidence (Cainite doctrines) would support a pro-
        Judas interpretation of the controversial sections.

        Be Well,
        Bob Griffin
      • Jeffrey B. Gibson
        ... All this does is point out that relying on what the media says as the source of your claims for what scholars have or have not said with respect to the
        Message 3 of 7 , Dec 5, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Robert Griffin wrote:

          > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey B. Gibson"
          > <jgibson000@...> wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Robert Griffin wrote:
          > >
          > > > PS I'm somewhat surprised that the argument between the scholars
          > > > doesn't include the question of whether this book is the Gospel of
          > > > Judas used by the Cainites.
          > > >
          > >
          > > What makes you think this isn't included?
          > >
          > > Jeffrey Gibson
          > > --
          > > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
          > > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
          > > Chicago, Illinois
          > > e-mail jgibson000@...
          >
          > The CBC News story at http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/04/judas-
          > scholars.html entirely ignores the fact that if this is indeed the
          > Gospel of Judas mentioned by Irenaeus, Judas is likely to be
          > presented as a spiritual revolutionary and hero rather than as a
          > villain or a dupe. If we have enough of the document, and if it is
          > indeed the Cainite Gospel of Judas, then I would expect to find some
          > clearer evidences of Cainite (or at least Gnostic) teachings.

          All this does is point out that relying on what the media says as the source of
          your claims for what scholars have or have not said with respect to the Gospel of
          Judas (or any other topic) is as hazardous as it is methodologically unsound.

          I suggest that before you make such global claims about what scholars have and
          have not said, you avoid relying for your claims on second hand reports of what
          they have or have not said, and instead go straight to the works of the scholars
          themselves.

          Jeffrey Gibson
          --
          Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
          1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
          Chicago, Illinois
          e-mail jgibson000@...
        • Robert Griffin
          ... scholars ... Gospel of ... http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/04/judas- ... is ... some ... the source of ... the Gospel of ... methodologically
          Message 4 of 7 , Dec 6, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey B. Gibson"
            <jgibson000@...> wrote:
            >
            >
            >
            > Robert Griffin wrote:
            >
            > > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Jeffrey B. Gibson"
            > > <jgibson000@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Robert Griffin wrote:
            > > >
            > > > > PS I'm somewhat surprised that the argument between the
            scholars
            > > > > doesn't include the question of whether this book is the
            Gospel of
            > > > > Judas used by the Cainites.
            > > > >
            > > >
            > > > What makes you think this isn't included?
            > > >
            > > > Jeffrey Gibson
            > > > --
            > > > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
            > > > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
            > > > Chicago, Illinois
            > > > e-mail jgibson000@
            > >
            > > The CBC News story at
            http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/12/04/judas-
            > > scholars.html entirely ignores the fact that if this is indeed the
            > > Gospel of Judas mentioned by Irenaeus, Judas is likely to be
            > > presented as a spiritual revolutionary and hero rather than as a
            > > villain or a dupe. If we have enough of the document, and if it
            is
            > > indeed the Cainite Gospel of Judas, then I would expect to find
            some
            > > clearer evidences of Cainite (or at least Gnostic) teachings.
            >
            > All this does is point out that relying on what the media says as
            the source of
            > your claims for what scholars have or have not said with respect to
            the Gospel of
            > Judas (or any other topic) is as hazardous as it is
            methodologically unsound.
            >
            > I suggest that before you make such global claims about what
            scholars have and
            > have not said, you avoid relying for your claims on second hand
            reports of what
            > they have or have not said, and instead go straight to the works of
            the scholars
            > themselves.
            >
            > Jeffrey Gibson
            > --
            > Jeffrey B. Gibson, D.Phil. (Oxon)
            > 1500 W. Pratt Blvd.
            > Chicago, Illinois
            > e-mail jgibson000@...
            >
            Correction taken to heart. Since I don't work in the field, and am
            short on both money and time, I will ask the list community if the
            current discussion over re-assessment of the role of Judas in the
            betrayal of Jesus in the Gospel of Judas involves also a re-
            assessment of whether a) this manuscript is indeed a copy of the
            Cainite Gospel of Judas and/or b) Irenaeus et al. actually
            misunderstood the Cainite Gospel of Judas.

            My own observations are as follows:
            The three characteristic Gnostic figures in the text of the Gospel of
            Judas (Barbelos, Saklas, Ialdabaoth) are not specifically Cainite,
            and I found no occurence of the word/name 'Hysteros' (referring to
            the prime Cainite diety, according to Irenaeus, if I read him
            correctly). So, from that point of view, this work might not be the
            same that Irenaeus wrote about. On the other hand, it is clearly a
            Gnostic document, and equally clearly treats Judas in roughly the
            same manner as Thomas is treated in the Gospel of Thomas.

            Thanks for any input.

            Be Well,
            Bob Griffin
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.