|
Search this Blog:
Subscribe to Blog:
| << |
July 2008 |
>> |
| S |
M |
T |
W |
Tr |
F |
Sa |
| |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
| 6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
| 13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
| 20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
| 27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
|
|
This blog sponsored by:
The views represented on this blog are not necessarily those of Higher Things, nor does Higher Things necessarily endorse them.
|
|
|
|
Posted At: 1:10pm by Rev. William M. Cwirla
|
National Geographic is hyperventilated over the recent publication of the so-called “Gospel of Judas,” a gnostic gospel which vindicates Judas, the betrayer of Jesus.
Timing, of course, is everything in our media age. The National Geographic special announcing the blessed event will be aired on Palm Sunday, the start of Holy Week. This puts National Geographic in the same category as that great scholar and social critic Bill Maher who took delight in bashing Christians on Christmas Eve on his moronic talk show “Politically Incorrect.” The LA Times, southern California’s leading supplier of bird cage lining, gives The Gospel of Judas front page first column coverage this morning. Given the media’s penchant for being “fair and balanced,” I will look for a special from National Geographic on the immorality of Mohammed around the start of Ramadan.
For those who think the Da Vinci Code is scholarly and who get their historical theology from National Geographic specials, let me remind you that the Gospel of Judas is not exactly news in Christian circles. Irenaeus (AD 130-202), the bishop of Lyon and a student of Polycarp (who studied under the apostle John), mentions it in his encyclopedic “Against All Heresies,” where he writes:
Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.
Irenaeus goes on to describe a bit of Cainite theology for the unenlightened:
I have also made a collection of their writings in which they advocate the abolition of the doings of Hystera. Moreover, they call this Hystera the creator of heaven and earth. They also hold, like Carpocrates, that men cannot be saved until they have gone through all kinds of experience. An angel, they maintain, attends them in every one of their sinful and abominable actions, and urges them to venture on audacity and incur pollution. Whatever may be the nature of the action, they declare that they do it in the name of the angel, saying, "O thou angel, I use thy work; O thou power, I accomplish thy operation !" And they maintain that this is "perfect knowledge," without shrinking to rush into such actions as it is not lawful even to name.
The Gospel of Judas is one of many “gospels” written under the name of an apostle, like the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Philip. They may as well be the Gospel of Moe, Larry, and Curly for all their authenticity. These are the works of various sects of gnosticism, a pernicious heresy that crept into Christianity like a virus in the latter part of the first century and turned into a full blown disease in the second and third. The Gospel according to St. John (I’m talking about the actual Gospel according to the real St. John) has the beginnings of gnosticism in full view, as do the later epistles of Paul along with Jude and Peter.
The Cainites were a fun bunch whose hero was Cain, the murderer of his brother Abel. It only stands to reason that they would come up with a Gospel of Judas, making the cursed betrayer of our Lord into a martyr for the cause. The caustic lawyer turned theologian Tertullian of Carthage turned his acidic pen on the Cainites in the opening paragraph on his treatise “On Baptism” where he writes:
Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life! A treatise on this matter will not be superfluous; instructing not only such as are just becoming formed (in the faith), but them who, content with having simply believed, without full examination of the grounds of the traditions, carry (in mind), through ignorance, an untried though probable faith. The consequence is, that a viper of the Cainite heresy, lately conversant in this quarter, has carried away a great number with her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim to destroy baptism. Which is quite in accordance with nature; for vipers and asps and basilisks themselves generally do affect arid and waterless places. But we, little fishes, after the example of our Ichthus Jesus Christ, are born in water, nor have we safety in any other way than by permanently abiding in water; so that most monstrous creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, knew full well how to kill the little fishes, by taking them away from the water!
Apparently, the Cainites didn’t think much of Baptism. I especially like how Tertullian refers to believers as little fish swimming in baptismal water with their Great Fish, and he calls the Cainite female preachers “vipers, asps, and basilisks” who hang out in dry, waterless places. Darned good writer, that Tertullian.
Expect the usual blather from the ignorati who pass themselves off as religion editors in the media, not to mention enough hot air emanating from anti-Christian circles to ween us from dependence on foreign oil. The LA Times glowingly reports, “Many consider it the most important archaeological find since the Dead Sea Scrolls were unearthed in the 1940’s.” That might be a bit overstated.
In general, the gnostics believed that the material world was created by a bunch of lesser gods who imprisoned the spirit in a material body, from which one must escape through the acquisition of secret knowledge (gnosis, hence “gnostic”) from certain “enlightened” teachers in order to ascend to the Divine. Most gnostic were ascetics, denying the body every possible pleasure. Some practiced a form of “spiritual marriage” in which they did not have sex, though a few managed to produce “spiritual” children nonetheless. They drank water only and abstained from wine, even at their version of the Lord’s Supper. (This was before the days of grape juice, which was invented by Dr. Thomas Bramwell Welch in the 19th century). Now you see why Paul advised Timothy “No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for the sake of your stomach and your frequent ailments.” (1 Timothy 5:3).
In the same letter, Paul referred to the early gnostics (proto-gnostics, actually), when he wrote:
Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving; for then it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer. (1 Tim 4:1-5)
Gnostics were very “spiritual,” in all the wrong senses of the word. They saw the body as a pop can from which the real you has to escape in order to become united with the divine. I’ve heard similar sentiments at “Christian” funerals. Gnosticism is by no means dead in our day; it just masquerades as various “spiritualities,” none of which are of the Holy Spirit.
In the Gospel of Judas, Judas is the only disciple “in the know” (gnosis) while the other eleven are in the dark. Jesus tells Judas, “Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom. It is possible for you to reach it, but you will grieve a great deal.” So Judas is the enlightened one. Now you understand why John tells us “it was night” when Judas went out to betray Jesus.
Jesus also is purported to have said to Judas, “You will exceed all of them [the other disciples]. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me.” There’s the old body as a pop can business. Jesus had to die in order to escape the prison of his humanity, and Judas was going to give Jesus a helping hand by handing him over to the religious authorities. Now you understand why John makes such a big deal out of “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.” You also see why everyone is touching the resurrected body of Jesus and making a big deal about His wounds. No disembodied “spirit” on the first Easter Sunday. There is also no mention of Jesus’ death and bodily resurrection on the third day in the Gospel of Judas. What do you need a resurrection for, when you can be pure spiritual gas?
Biblical scholar ("biblical scholar" is academic code language for "people who deconstruct the Christian faith") Marvin Meyer, director of the Albert Schweitzer Institute at that bastion of orthdoxy Chapman University in Orange, CA, notes with scholarly optimism, “Hopefully, this will give us more reason to continue that discussion...and to determine what might be the enduring legacy of Judas.”1 I expect his next work will be entitled “The Enduring Legacy of Benedict Arnold.”
Meyer, who translated the Gospel of Judas into English for National Geographic, found the work to be deeply inspiring. "It says that to follow Jesus means to waken to one's true humanity and to find that spark of what it truly means to be human before God."2 That would be a very gnostic way of looking at it.
Christians need not let such “findings” spoil their Holy Week or dampen their Easter joy. These works were well known in the early centuries and were amply refuted. You may want to spend a little quality time with Irenaeus and check out what he has to say about the various gnostic sects of his day. Also good bedtime reading is Kurt Rudolph’s Gnosis - The Nature and History of Gnosticism.
Findings such as the Gospel of Judas are important historic evidence for the various ways in which the Christian Gospel was perverted in the early centuries following the apostles. Scholars have expressed doubt over the veracity Irenaeus’ catalog of heresies. The finding of a genuine copy of the Gospel of Judas from the second century is a powerful vindication of Irenaeus. Irenaeus wasn’t exagerating. There really were wacko groups that wrote and believed this stuff! But hey, who are we to talk? We have UFO cults and Scientology.
The Gospel of Judas, Thomas, Moe, Larry, and Curly also remind us of the importance of the apostolic Word, the record of the first century eyewitnesses to the resurrection recorded in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. You’ll notice that these are called “The Gospel according to...” not “The Gospel of....” There’s a reason for that. There is but one “Gospel” of Jesus the Christ, the Son of God Incarnate, who died for the sin of the world and rose triumphantly and bodily on the third day. The canonical tradition gives us four perspectives on this one Gospel, not four distinct gospels.
There will always be perversions of the Gospel by those who would proclaim another gospel and another way to salvation except through the narrow door of Jesus’ death and resurrection. That’s why we have to be on our toes. Heresies are like viruses. They never really go away. They only go into remission, waiting for an opportune time to flare up again. In these grey and latter days, we can expect the gnostic virus to flare up with a vengeance, along with every other way people have invented to deny that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and to scandalize the little ones of faith. Have no fear. Jesus has overcome the world and its religion. And that’s no secret.
The apostle Paul gets the last word:
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel — not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6-9)
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 2:17pm by dtp |
This week so far I have had 4 people already ask if I will address this "gospel" in a sermon on Sunday morning. My thursday evening Bible Study (on Revelation) actually touched on it for about 35 seconds, noting it was another attempt to by the religious beastie to get us religious types distracted from the victory of the Cross, and the impending judgment of those who do not believe in what was given to us there.
Smart folks they be....sorta like the centurion commanding the troops at the foot of the cross. Earthquake? Torn Temple curtain? Dead people all aournd? Nah, what amazed him was that "Truly this was the Son of God!"
My question - how many pastors in churches in America this weekend will attmempt to trash the show, and forget about the cross? And because they dwell on it - Natl Geoheresy's rating will ascend into the stratosphere?
(Btw really like Tertullian's rabid pen as it trashes the views of the modern evangelical/cainites on the sacrament of Holy Baptism....
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 2:21pm by dtp |
By the way,
Mind if I borrow this one? Would like to put it up on my site for those who are curious about this - will properly cite......
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 3:04pm by revcwirla |
Borrow away. Do me a favor and post up a link. I'm desperate for hits.
Tertullian rocked, until he went Montanist. Bummer.
As you say, it's yet another devilish distraction. (Can we say "Da Vinci Code - The Movie"?) And the mischievous thing about all of it is that it dares the church to "prove it isn't so." That's tough to do when you're making it up. We seem to think that everything we dig up is going to shed "new light" on something.
They'll probably be saying the same thing a thousand years from now when someone digs up a ratty copy of "Left Behind."
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 7:28pm by Mark Steffens |
Rev. Cwirla
I really wasn't going to respond but after seeing that "authorization code" that we have to type in in order to send the post, I thought I would share that with you. It leaves the 'p' and 'r' out of "cheap grace" so it asks me to type chea gace - is that part of the gnostic controversy? Some code I don't get? Do I need more chea gace? Willl more pr result in more cheap grace? Whatever.
I enjoy your blog (it is my home page for the past three months.) I send your sermons anonymously to my pastor...not really...just pulling your chain. I even got out The Confession of St. Patrick (Howlett, ed.) and reread him on March 17 thanks to your post then.
As for your lack of 'hits', I told both of my friends about that and they both promised to look into that when they get a computer.
The Peace of the Lord be with You.
Mark Steffens
(groupie from Michigan)
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 9:18pm by revcwirla |
Yes, you've discovered that the comment authorization code is actually an secret encoded message to the Blogosphere illuminati. This will all come to light in the heretofore unknown Gospel of Barney, in which it is revealed that dinosauers actually were purple in the Garden of Eden.
Thanks for the two additional hits. You've doubled my April quota.
|
Posted On: April 07th, 2006 at 10:27pm by dtp [ + ] |
Ok - just linked it on my own blog, and on myspace's LCMS group.
By the way - does it mean anything that my authorization code always contains the ratio of 10/6?
|
Posted On: April 08th, 2006 at 1:00pm by dtp [ + ] |
Don't know if it helped your stats, but my blog's entry referring here had close to 20 hits , including one comment and 2 kudos.
Have a blessed day, preparing for tomorrow's feast!
Dt
Ps my image to validate this post was Craphefr - is that anything like tauras skubala (aka BS)?
(well actually it was wraphefr - but my poor eyesight read it wrong the first time)
|
Posted On: April 08th, 2006 at 2:00pm by revcwirla |
Looks like you may be in need of our super secret Gnostic Glow in the Dark Glasses that allow you to obtain secret knowledge from heretical texts even in the dark. No illuminatum should be without one.
|
Posted On: April 08th, 2006 at 3:13pm by Rev Heath Pukallus [ + ] |
In Australia, our national Govt. broadcaster the ABC is falling over itself with the Gospel of Judas.
Thanks for your post, is it OK for me to link it to my post site. With Holy Week upon us I will not have time to reply to the questions of my parishioners.
And with what you have said, why reinvent the wheel?
Pax
Friar Puk
|
Posted On: April 08th, 2006 at 4:27pm by dtp |
Heath,
Re: "In Australia, our national Govt. broadcaster the ABC is falling over itself with the Gospel of Judas."
Ahhh - another thing we can lay at the feet of Prince Chuckie and his ma! See - I knew if we waited long enough - we could either blame the Illuminat (prince chuckie's book club)i, the Masons, the Mormons, or Steven Jobs... ( they are all in it together - it said so in the latest Hal Lindsey/Pat Robertson/Calvary Chapel secret briefing)
(nothing really interesting in this one's verification code)
|
Posted On: April 09th, 2006 at 3:23am by John Uebersax PhD [ + ] |
Having taken the trouble to make at least a limited study of Church history and Gnosticism, I believe I can say this much with some confidence: Gnostic gospels were in almost every case of a completely different literary genre than the four canonical gospels. The canonical gospels were intended and understood by their readers as accurate historical narratives. However, Gnostic gospels were more likely to be both intended and interpreted as highly metaphorical and allegorical.
To make a long story short, it likely would not have occurred to a 3rd Century reader of the Gospel of Judas to take its content literally. This is in keeping with the nature of Gnosticism, which was concerned with "esoteric knowledge", and therefore intentionally used elaborate metaphors, allegory, and symbolism.
In no way would an allegorical, and in that sense, intentionally fictionalized narrative contradict or challenge a nonfictional, historical narrative.
|
Posted On: April 09th, 2006 at 9:29am by Dtp |
John,
Having also done a study of church history, and gnosticism, in two different schools of Christianity, I have to disagree.
The gospel of Judas, like much of Marcion's tripe and trash, seeks to present an alternative view to salvation. Judas fradualent gospel doesn't use allegory - it simply states a whole different gospel - one that leaves people dead in sin, if they follow it - not freed to some other reality.
Nor was the Gospel of Thomas allegorical - when Jesus told Peter that Mary could come - because he would change her into being a "male". Yeah - they hated the material world - despite God creating it.
Give me the reality of Christ crucified, for me, for you, for the world. It may be foolishness, or a stumbling block, but that blood shed for the forgiveness of sins is the most incredible belssing in the world.
|
Posted On: April 09th, 2006 at 9:59am by revcwirla |
"To make a long story short, it likely would not have occurred to a 3rd Century reader of the Gospel of Judas to take its content literally"
Unfortunately, their 21st century counterparts are not so "enlightened."
|
Posted On: April 10th, 2006 at 9:36am by Pr. Alex Klages [ + ] |
Maybe I need to take a swing at the Gnostics again on my antibreviary. And perhaps those glorious Cainites.
At any rate, you'll be gaining a trackback soon...
|
Comment on entry entitled "The Gospel of Judas?"
You may use BBCode within your posts, a reference is available here.
|
|
|
|
