[CS-FSLUG] TD: Gospel of Judas

[Alan Trick]

On Sat, 2006-04-08 at 21:58 -0800, Christopher Rose wrote:
> My concern is just preserving the truth of scripture. I am not against 
> serious discussion. I am merely against letting a hereretical document 
> like this so-called gospel being considered canonical. Certainly it is 
> worthy of serious dicussion insofar as to origins and reasons as to why
> it was written (even the canonical scriptures were written for a purpose). 
> However, I would sooner argue that the gnostic gospel of Thomas should be 
> included in scripture than to see this one (of course I have found Thomas 
> much easier to stomach than the "Essene Gospel of Peace") into the canon. 
> Then again, what do I know? I haven't started seminary....yet!
> 
> Pax,
> Christopher L. Rose

I don't think this whole 'Gospel of Judas' thing was actually ever
serious conversation. These gnostic gospels have been around for some
two millenia now. They didn't make it into the cannon and there were
were very good reasons they didn't make it either. If there was ever any
mystery around them, it wasn't because of malicious conivance, but more
because people didn't care any more about these gospels than they care
about tabloids now-a-days.

What I'm really annoyed at is the people who spread these lies and
half-truths. They've studied these things and really ought to know
better. Instead they prey on people with little to no knowledge of
history so they can become filty rich (people seem to be ready to pay
all sorts of money for books on these faux scandals).

Nevertheless, in a few years from now all of this will be forgotten.
People like Dan Brown will have been retired, and real scholarship will
go on like it always has.

Alan Trick