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

Re: Quick Thoughts on Gospel of Judeas (GofJD - to avoid confusion)

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 11 , Dec 9, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      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 2 of 11 , Dec 9, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- 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.