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

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

Expand Messages
  • Horace Jeffery Hodges
    Thanks, Jim, you must be right. I d been reading the posts, but perhaps not closely enough. Jeffery Hodges Jim West wrote: ... I think
    Message 1 of 11 , Dec 8, 2006
      Thanks, Jim, you must be right. I'd been reading the posts, but perhaps not closely enough.

      Jeffery Hodges

      Jim West <jwest@...> wrote:


      Horace Jeffery Hodges wrote:
      > David Hindley wrote:
      >
      >>> I'd agree that the GoJ is Gnostic (capital "G") ...<<
      >
      > Maybe this is not the proper listserve to ask, but why do you think that the Gospel of John is Gnostic?
      >
      > Jeffery Hodges

      I think GofJ = Gospel of Judas in this instance. Not Gospel of John.

      Best

      Jim


      --
      Jim West, ThD

      http://web.infoave.net/~jwest -- Biblical Studies Resources
      http://drjimwest.wordpress.com -- Weblog


      The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/

      To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

      List managers may be contacted directly at: crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com


      Yahoo! Groups Links






      University Degrees:

      Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
      (Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and Gnostic Texts")
      M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
      B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University

      Email Address:

      jefferyhodges@...

      Blog:

      http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/

      Office Address:

      Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Department of English Language and Literature
      Korea University
      136-701 Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu
      Seoul
      South Korea

      Home Address:

      Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
      Sehan Apt. 102-2302
      Sinnae-dong 795
      Jungrang-gu
      Seoul 131-770
      South Korea

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Robert Griffin
      ... clearly treats Judas in roughly the same manner as Thomas is treated in the Gospel of Thomas. ... what you mean by the latter half of your statement
      Message 2 of 11 , Dec 8, 2006
        --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "David Hindley" <dhindley@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Bob Griffin said:
        >
        > <<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.>>
        >
        > I'd agree that the GoJ is Gnostic (capital "G") but I'm not sure
        what you mean by the latter half of your statement above. The GoT is
        not clearly Gnostic (capital "G"). Although it employs some terms
        popular in Gnostic literature, it does not seem to employ any of the
        Gnostic myths. Thomas is hardly mentioned other than in the first
        saying. Do you mean he is treated as a revealer of secret things?

        I mean he is treated as the recipient of secret knowledge, which was
        not revealed to the other disciples.
        In other words, even if we ignore the title, we are presented with a
        Gnostic gospel which treats Judas as the special recipient of secret
        knowledge. This suggests to me the probability that we are looking
        at a recension of the Cainite Gospel of Judas to which Irenaeus
        referred.

        >
        > Besides, should we take Irenaeus' descriptions too seriously? He
        wasn't lampooning them to the extent that some other heresy critics
        of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, but he did seem to take delight in
        scoffing at their teachings in a fairly superficial manner.
        >
        > Then again, he seems to have fairly accurately described
        Valentinian teachings. Was he as equally aware of other Gnostic myths
        as he was Valentinian ones? Still, I do not believe any of the
        recently recovered documents contain myths that match those he
        describes in any but a general way.
        >
        > Respectfully,
        >
        > Dave Hindley
        > Cleveland, Ohio USA
        >
        I noticed definite differences between the cosmology/cosmogony in the
        Gospel of Judas and that attributed to the Cainites by Irenaeus, but
        didn't take the time to analyze the differences.
        I am wondering whether just as we have differences between the
        Oxyrhyncus Greek version of the Gospel of Thomas, there were also
        varying recensions of other works, such as the Gospel of Judas. A
        modern parallel would be the variations in New Age/Aquarian teachings
        both between various New Age teachers and by a particular teacher
        over a period of time.

        Be Well,
        Bob Griffin
      • David C. Hindley
        Jeffrey, That stood for Gospel of Judas, the subject of the post. THAT gospel, I m sure, most everybody will agree is Gnostic . Dave ...
        Message 3 of 11 , Dec 8, 2006
          Jeffrey,

          That stood for Gospel of Judas, the subject of the post. THAT gospel,
          I'm sure, most everybody will agree is "Gnostic".

          Dave

          --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, Horace Jeffery Hodges

          <<Maybe this is not the proper listserve to ask, but why do you think
          that the Gospel of John is Gnostic?>>
        • Horace Jeffery Hodges
          Thanks. Jim also pointed this out. I guess that I m not as alert this weekend, having gotten a cold. Jeffery Hodges David C. Hindley
          Message 4 of 11 , Dec 8, 2006
            Thanks. Jim also pointed this out. I guess that I'm not as alert this weekend, having gotten a cold.

            Jeffery Hodges

            "David C. Hindley" <dhindley@...> wrote:
            Jeffrey,

            That stood for Gospel of Judas, the subject of the post. THAT gospel,
            I'm sure, most everybody will agree is "Gnostic".

            Dave

            --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, Horace Jeffery Hodges

            <that the Gospel of John is Gnostic?>>





            The XTalk Home Page is http://ntgateway.com/xtalk/

            To subscribe to Xtalk, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

            To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to: crosstalk2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

            List managers may be contacted directly at: crosstalk2-owners@yahoogroups.com


            Yahoo! Groups Links






            University Degrees:

            Ph.D., History, U.C. Berkeley
            (Doctoral Thesis: "Food as Synecdoche in John's Gospel and Gnostic Texts")
            M.A., History of Science, U.C. Berkeley
            B.A., English Language and Literature, Baylor University

            Email Address:

            jefferyhodges@...

            Blog:

            http://gypsyscholarship.blogspot.com/

            Office Address:

            Assistant Professor Horace Jeffery Hodges
            Department of English Language and Literature
            Korea University
            136-701 Anam-dong, Seongbuk-gu
            Seoul
            South Korea

            Home Address:

            Dr. Sun-Ae Hwang and Dr. Horace Jeffery Hodges
            Sehan Apt. 102-2302
            Sinnae-dong 795
            Jungrang-gu
            Seoul 131-770
            South Korea

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • dbockdts
            Message 5 of 11 , Dec 9, 2006
              --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Griffin" <muggleorsquib@...>
              wrote:
              >
              > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "David Hindley" dhindley@
              > wrote:
              > >
              > > Bob Griffin said:
              > >
              > > <<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.>>
              > >
              > > I'd agree that the GoJ is Gnostic (capital "G") but I'm not sure
              > what you mean by the latter half of your statement above. The GoT is
              > not clearly Gnostic (capital "G"). Although it employs some terms
              > popular in Gnostic literature, it does not seem to employ any of the
              > Gnostic myths. Thomas is hardly mentioned other than in the first
              > saying. Do you mean he is treated as a revealer of secret things?
              >
              > I mean he is treated as the recipient of secret knowledge, which was
              > not revealed to the other disciples.
              > In other words, even if we ignore the title, we are presented with a
              > Gnostic gospel which treats Judas as the special recipient of secret
              > knowledge. This suggests to me the probability that we are looking
              > at a recension of the Cainite Gospel of Judas to which Irenaeus
              > referred.
              >
              > >
              > > Besides, should we take Irenaeus' descriptions too seriously? He
              > wasn't lampooning them to the extent that some other heresy critics
              > of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, but he did seem to take delight in
              > scoffing at their teachings in a fairly superficial manner.
              > >
              > > Then again, he seems to have fairly accurately described
              > Valentinian teachings. Was he as equally aware of other Gnostic myths
              > as he was Valentinian ones? Still, I do not believe any of the
              > recently recovered documents contain myths that match those he
              > describes in any but a general way.
              > >
              > > Respectfully,
              > >
              > > Dave Hindley
              > > Cleveland, Ohio USA
              > >
              > I noticed definite differences between the cosmology/cosmogony in the
              > Gospel of Judas and that attributed to the Cainites by Irenaeus, but
              > didn't take the time to analyze the differences.
              > I am wondering whether just as we have differences between the
              > Oxyrhyncus Greek version of the Gospel of Thomas, there were also
              > varying recensions of other works, such as the Gospel of Judas. A
              > modern parallel would be the variations in New Age/Aquarian teachings
              > both between various New Age teachers and by a particular teacher
              > over a period of time.
              >
              > Be Well,
              > Bob Griffin
              >
            • dbockdts
              To all: A few quick thoughts: 1) The G of Jd is a Gnostic gospel as it has the cosmology (a very developed one) and the laughing Jesus (four times)
              Message 6 of 11 , Dec 9, 2006
                To all:

                A few quick thoughts:

                1) The G of Jd is a Gnostic gospel as it has the cosmology (a very
                developed one) and the laughing Jesus (four times) characteristic of
                such texts (to mention 2 key features).

                2) The G of Jd is at the least a Sethian Gnostic text if not a Cainite
                Gnostic text as Seth is listed among the luminaries.

                3) The text is likely the one Ireneaus mentioned or one that is a
                close relative given the take on Judas.

                4) As far as Thomas-Judas comparison, the claim that Thomas is not so
                prominent in Thomas ignores the very important saying 13, where only
                Thomas understands who Jesus is and the other apostles are not being
                told lest they burn.

                Darrell Bock


                --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "dbockdts" <DBockDTS@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Griffin" <muggleorsquib@>
                > wrote:
                > >
                > > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "David Hindley" dhindley@
                > > wrote:
                > > >
                > > > Bob Griffin said:
                > > >
                > > > <<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.>>
                > > >
                > > > I'd agree that the GoJ is Gnostic (capital "G") but I'm not sure
                > > what you mean by the latter half of your statement above. The GoT is
                > > not clearly Gnostic (capital "G"). Although it employs some terms
                > > popular in Gnostic literature, it does not seem to employ any of the
                > > Gnostic myths. Thomas is hardly mentioned other than in the first
                > > saying. Do you mean he is treated as a revealer of secret things?
                > >
                > > I mean he is treated as the recipient of secret knowledge, which was
                > > not revealed to the other disciples.
                > > In other words, even if we ignore the title, we are presented with a
                > > Gnostic gospel which treats Judas as the special recipient of secret
                > > knowledge. This suggests to me the probability that we are looking
                > > at a recension of the Cainite Gospel of Judas to which Irenaeus
                > > referred.
                > >
                > > >
                > > > Besides, should we take Irenaeus' descriptions too seriously? He
                > > wasn't lampooning them to the extent that some other heresy critics
                > > of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, but he did seem to take delight in
                > > scoffing at their teachings in a fairly superficial manner.
                > > >
                > > > Then again, he seems to have fairly accurately described
                > > Valentinian teachings. Was he as equally aware of other Gnostic myths
                > > as he was Valentinian ones? Still, I do not believe any of the
                > > recently recovered documents contain myths that match those he
                > > describes in any but a general way.
                > > >
                > > > Respectfully,
                > > >
                > > > Dave Hindley
                > > > Cleveland, Ohio USA
                > > >
                > > I noticed definite differences between the cosmology/cosmogony in the
                > > Gospel of Judas and that attributed to the Cainites by Irenaeus, but
                > > didn't take the time to analyze the differences.
                > > I am wondering whether just as we have differences between the
                > > Oxyrhyncus Greek version of the Gospel of Thomas, there were also
                > > varying recensions of other works, such as the Gospel of Judas. A
                > > modern parallel would be the variations in New Age/Aquarian teachings
                > > both between various New Age teachers and by a particular teacher
                > > over a period of time.
                > >
                > > Be Well,
                > > Bob Griffin
                > >
                >
              • dbockdts
                ... 1) The G of Jd is a Gnostic gospel as it has the cosmology (a very developed one) and the laughing Jesus characteristic of such texts (to mention 2 key
                Message 7 of 11 , Dec 9, 2006
                  --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "dbockdts" <DBockDTS@...> wrote:
                  1) The G of Jd is a Gnostic gospel as it has the cosmology (a very
                  developed one) and the laughing Jesus characteristic of such texts (to
                  mention 2 key features).

                  2) The G of Jd is at the least a Sethian Gnsotic text if not a Cainite
                  Gnostic text as Seth is listed among the luminaries.

                  3) The text is likely the one Ireneaus mentioned or one that is a
                  close relative given the take on Judas.

                  4) As far as Thomas-Judas comparison, the claim that Thomas is not so
                  prominent in Thomas ignores the very important saying 13, where only
                  Thomas understands who Jesus is and the other apostles are not being
                  told lest they burn.

                  Darrell Bock


                  > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "Robert Griffin" <muggleorsquib@>
                  > wrote:
                  > >
                  > > --- In crosstalk2@yahoogroups.com, "David Hindley" dhindley@
                  > > wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Bob Griffin said:
                  > > >
                  > > > <<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.>>
                  > > >
                  > > > I'd agree that the GoJ is Gnostic (capital "G") but I'm not sure
                  > > what you mean by the latter half of your statement above. The GoT is
                  > > not clearly Gnostic (capital "G"). Although it employs some terms
                  > > popular in Gnostic literature, it does not seem to employ any of the
                  > > Gnostic myths. Thomas is hardly mentioned other than in the first
                  > > saying. Do you mean he is treated as a revealer of secret things?
                  > >
                  > > I mean he is treated as the recipient of secret knowledge, which was
                  > > not revealed to the other disciples.
                  > > In other words, even if we ignore the title, we are presented with a
                  > > Gnostic gospel which treats Judas as the special recipient of secret
                  > > knowledge. This suggests to me the probability that we are looking
                  > > at a recension of the Cainite Gospel of Judas to which Irenaeus
                  > > referred.
                  > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Besides, should we take Irenaeus' descriptions too seriously? He
                  > > wasn't lampooning them to the extent that some other heresy critics
                  > > of the 2nd & 3rd centuries did, but he did seem to take delight in
                  > > scoffing at their teachings in a fairly superficial manner.
                  > > >
                  > > > Then again, he seems to have fairly accurately described
                  > > Valentinian teachings. Was he as equally aware of other Gnostic myths
                  > > as he was Valentinian ones? Still, I do not believe any of the
                  > > recently recovered documents contain myths that match those he
                  > > describes in any but a general way.
                  > > >
                  > > > Respectfully,
                  > > >
                  > > > Dave Hindley
                  > > > Cleveland, Ohio USA
                  > > >
                  > > I noticed definite differences between the cosmology/cosmogony in the
                  > > Gospel of Judas and that attributed to the Cainites by Irenaeus, but
                  > > didn't take the time to analyze the differences.
                  > > I am wondering whether just as we have differences between the
                  > > Oxyrhyncus Greek version of the Gospel of Thomas, there were also
                  > > varying recensions of other works, such as the Gospel of Judas. A
                  > > modern parallel would be the variations in New Age/Aquarian teachings
                  > > both between various New Age teachers and by a particular teacher
                  > > over a period of time.
                  > >
                  > > Be Well,
                  > > Bob Griffin
                  > >
                  >
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.