the gospel of judas, Exams of Christianity

Download the gospel of judas and more Exams Christianity in PDF only on Docsity! Chapter'8 T H E GOSPEL OF JUDAS: A PARODY OF APOSTOLIC CHRISTIANITY April D. DeConick On the evening of 9 April 2006, the National Geographic Society aired a docu­ mentary, The Gospel of Judas: The Lost Version of Christ's Betrayal. The movie showed the scholars who were members of the National Geographic team tell their stories about the recovery, reconstruction and interpretation of the 'found' Gospel of Judas. They said that this gospel presents us with a very different story of Judas Iscariot, one in which Judas is the hero, not the villain. As Jesus' 'soul-mate', Judas was asked by Jesus to kill him in order to release Jesus' spirit and bring about salvation. This opinion formed the basis for the team's book, The Gospel of Judas, released on the same day.1 In many ways, this line of interpretation reclaimed and affirmed the opinion of Epiphanius who said that Judas, in his gospel, betrayed Jesus because he was a strong Power from above whose knowledge was supreme. Judas knew if he betrayed Jesus, that Christ's crucifixion would destroy the Archons, the gods who ruled this world. So Judas carried it out. Epiphanius writes, 'Know­ ing this, Judas made every effort to betray him, thereby accomplishing a good work for salvation. We should admire and praise Judas because through him the salvation of the cross was prepared for us' (Pan. 38.3.1-5). This line of interpretation has been accepted and reaffirmed by many well- known scholars who quickly released their own interpretations, and in some cases translations, of the Gospel of Judas.2 Unfortunately, these studies are based on the faulty provisional Coptic transcription originally posted by the National Geographic Society on its website and the English translation in the original popular English publication.3 In some quarters, however, re-evaluation of the Coptic and a reassessment of the initial reading of the Gospel of Judas 1. R. Kasser, M. Meyer and G. Wurst, The Gospel of Judas (Washington, DC: National Geographic, 2006). 2. Cf. B. D. Ehrman, The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot: A New Look at Betrayer and Betrayed (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006); N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Gospel of Judas (London: SPCK, 2006); E. Pagels and K. L. King, Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity (New York: Viking, 2007). 3. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas. The Gospel of Judas: A Parody 97 have been underway since April 2006, and the results.are.shocking. Judas is not a hero or a Gnostic, but is evil as ever.4 1. The Tchacos Codexandthe QararaBooks The Gospel of Judas is one manuscript within a bigger papyrus codex. The modern name of the codex derives from the name of the Zurich antiquities dealer, Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos, who purchased the book after it had been decaying in a bank vault in Hicksville, New York, for many years. In 2001, she brought the codex to Switzerland, met Professor Rudolphe Kasser, and estab­ lished the Maecenas Foundation to aid in the codex's restoration. Eventually the National Geographic Society became involved, purchasing the right to pub­ lish the codex. The Society appointed a team of scholars to complete the restoration, translation and interpretation of the codex. Scholars who became members of the team were required to sign non-disclosure statements to keep the release of the documents secret. Unfortunately this resulted in a situation in which the codex had not been analysed and discussed broadly by a community of scholars before the release of a 'definitive' translation or critical edition. This created an odd situation in which a handful of scholars released the official transcription and interpreta­ tion of a codex that the rest of scholars had not seen. National Geographic released the Critical Edition in the summer of 2007, while refraining from publishing useable full-size facsimile photographs.5 This limited scholars in their ability to evaluate the official transcription and to make their own per­ sonal contributions. The publication of the Tchacos Codex in the Critical Edition released by the National Geographic Society was further complicated by the fact that a 4. L. Painchaud, 'A Propos de la (Re)decouverte de L'Evangile de Judas', Laval theologique et philosophique 62.3 (October 2006) 553-568; A. D. DeConick, The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says (New York: Continuum, 2007); J. Brankaer and H -G. Bethge, Codex Tchacos: Texte und Analysen (Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristli- chen Literatur 161; Berlin: de Gruyter, 2007); G. S. Robinson, 'The Relationship of the Gospel of Judas to the New Testament'and to Sethianism, Appended by a new English translation of the Gospel of Judas', Journal for Coptic Studies (forthcoming, 2008); A. D. DeConick, 'The Mystery of Judas' Betrayal: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says', in Madeleine Scopello (ed.), The Gospel of Judas in Context. Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Gospel of Judas. Paris, Sorbonne, October 27th-28th 2006, (Leiden, 2008). E. Thomassen, 'Is Judas Really the Hero of the Gospel?', in Madeleine Scopello (ed.), The Gospel of Judas in Context. Proceed­ ings of the First International Conference on the Gospel of Judas. Paris, Sorbonne, October 27th-28th 2006, (Leiden, 2008). J. Turner, 'The Place of the Gospel of Judas in Sethian Litera­ ture', in Madeleine Scopello (ed.), The Gospel of Judas in Context. Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Gospel of Judas. Paris, Sorbonne, October 27th-28th 2006, (Leiden, 2008). 5. R. Kasser, G. Wurst, M. Meyer and F. Gaudard, The Gospel of Judas together with the Letter of Peter to Philip, James, and a Book of Allogenes from Codex Tchacos: Critical Edition (Washington, DC: National Geographic Society, 2007). 100 The Non-Canonical Gospels What this means in terms of interpretation is that there is no evidence in the Gospel of Judas that would support an ascent by Judas to the holy generation or any realm beyond those contained within this cosmos. It is quite unfortunate that the faulty readings are now such a large part of the scholarly and public discourse, since the corrected readings present us with a Judas who never leaves this universe. 3. The Thirteenth Daimon The faulty readings generated from the provisional Coptic transcription were compounded by substantial translation errors in the original English transla­ tion, many of which, unfortunately, have been retained in the English translation published in the Critical Edition. The most important in terms of identifying Judas is the statement found in the Gospel of Judas 44.18-21. Jesus "mockingly laughs at Judas and says to him, 'Why do you compete (with them), O Thir­ teenth DemonT u The Coptic behind 'demon' is daimon, which the National Geographic team rendered 'spirit' in their original publication, while wisely shifting to the more ambiguous 'daimon' in the Critical Edition}5 The 'spirit' translation was justified on the grounds of Plato's Symposium 202e-203a, and it was used to posit Judas as a positive figure.16 This may reflect the world-view of Plato and later Hellenistic philosophers, but" it does not reflect the world-view closest to the author of the Gospel of Judas who was a Sethian Gnostic writing within the Christian tradition. All occurrences of the word daimon or a cognate in the New Testament are references to demons.17 Christian literature in the early period as well as the medieval period contain hundreds of references to words built from the word daimon. The meaning of these Words? They refer to demons, evil spirits, dev­ ils, demon possession, and devilish behaviour.18 Of the Gnostic books from Nag Hammadi, I have located about 50 occurrences of the word daimon or its cognate. In every case, the word refers to an Archon or one of his demonic assistants." The reason for this sinister designation in Gnostic literature is the fact that the Gnostic cosmology was fairly consistent in terms of its view that a chief 14. DeConick, The Thirteenth Apostle, 48-51, 77. 15. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas, 31; Kasser et al., Critical Edition, 207. 16. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas, 31 n. 74, 163-165. 17. Kittel, TDNT, 2, 16-19. 18. E. C. E. Owen, 'Daimon and Cognate Words', JTS 32 (1931) 133-153. 19. Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit 57.10-20; 59.25; Apocalypse of Paul 19.5; Apoca­ lypse of Adam 79.15; Authoritative Teaching 34.28; Trimorphic Protennoia 35.17; 40.5; 41.6; Testimony of Truth 29.17; 42.25; Apocalypse of Peter 75.4; 82.23; Concept of Our Great Power 42.17; Zostrianos 43.12; Paraphrase ofShem 21.26; 21.36; 22.7; 22.25; 23.9; 23.16; 24.7; 25.9; 25.19; 25.22; 25.26; 25.29; 27.24; 28.7; 28.15; 29.10; 29.17; 30.1; 30.8; 30.23; 30.32; 31.16; 31.19; 32.6; 32.16; 34.5; 35.15; 35.19; 36.27; 37.21; 40.26; 44.6; 44.15; 44.31; 45.17; 45.23. The Gospel of Judas: A Parody 101 Archon, an arrogant and rebellious Demiurge, created and rules this world. Below him exists heavens or realms populated by his own wicked creations, an entourage of Archons and assistants who, alongside him, are rebelling against the supreme transcendent God. When the word daimon is used in Gnostic sources, it is applied frequently and consistently to these wicked Archons and their assistants. Its application to Judas in the Gospel of Judas should be under­ stood no differently. Jesus is identifying Judas as a demon. What is perhaps even more fascinating is that the Gospel tells us that Judas is a particular demon, the Thirteenth (Gos. Jud. 44.18-21). In another passage in the Gospel, Judas is connected with the Thirteenth realm and its star or planet, which is a reference to the particular Archon who resides there (Gos. Jud. 55.10-11). The Gospel physically places Judas in the Thirteenth realm in the near future (Gos. Jud. 46.19-24). These references are to Sethian cosmol­ ogy which is mapped out in terms of thirteen realms. There are five hells or abysses and seven heavens ruled by the demon Archons. These twelve realms are the creations of Ialdabaoth, Saklas and Nebruel, the chief demon Archons who reside above them in the thirteenth realm. In Sethian literature, Ialdabaoth is known by the nickname, 'god of the thirteen realms' (Gos. Egy. 63.19). In this same text, Nebruel, one of Ialdabaoth's chief archons living in the thirteenth realm is twice called 'the great demon (pnoc ndaimon)' (Gos. Egy. 57.10-20). This is the same Nebro(el) who is also known as Ialdabaoth in the Gospel of Judas. This is the particular demon that Judas has been identi­ fied with in the Gospel of Judas. How and why this transparent reference to Ialdabaoth was missed in the initial interpretations of the Gospel of Judas, I do not know. But until someone can offer a better explanation about the identity of a 'thirteenth spirit' beyond an allusion to lucky numbers,20 the most reasonable starting point for understanding who Judas is in the Gospel of Judas is what the Coptic actually tells us: he is the Thir­ teenth Demon, Nebro(el)-Ialdabaoth, who is also called the Apostate, the renegade and traitor (Gos. Jud. 51.12-15). Saklas, who is mentioned as a separate archon, appears toward the end of the goapel to be amalgamated with this figure too. 4. Separation from the Gnostic Generation Another window into the character of Judas is a very important statement made by Jesus that Judas has been 'separated from' the holy generation (Gos. Jud. 46.14-18). The Coptic is very clear here, using the expression porj e. This expression is a Coptic unit with a fixed lexical meaning - that is, the preposi­ tion is bound to the verb in terms of meaning.21 Although e as a lone preposition 20. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas, 164—165. 21. Bentley Layton, A Coptic Grammar (2nd edn Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2004) sec. 181. 102 The Non-Canonical Gospels might have a variety of meanings, including 'for', when it is bound with this particular verb it can only mean 'from'.22 This expression is found frequently in Coptic literature, including transla1 tions of Old and New Testament passages, and always indicates separation 'from', exclusion or opposition.23 In Coptic translations of the Bible, it is used to render Paul's question in Rom. 8.35 (S) - 'Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?' - and the words of Jesus in Mt. 10.35 (SB) - 'For I have come to set aman against his father.' It is chosen by the Coptic translator of the Gospel of Philip to indicate the separation of Eve from Adam (70.21) and woman from man (70.10).24 The same is true of the translator of the Tripartite Tractate who wishes to discuss the powers that separate the Pleroma from the Logos (97.21). In On the Origin of the World, the expression is used to speak about the separation of Sabaoth from the darkness (106.12), while in two other passages the translator uses it to indicate the separation out of a part from the whole during the process of creation (103.3, 5). In the Apocryphon of James 14.33, it indicates the parting of two people - T shall depart from you.' How has this been translated by the National Geographic team in the original publication and is retained in the Critical Edition! 'When Judas heard this, he said to him, 'What is the advantage that I have received? For you have set me apart for that generation.'15 Itmakes a big difference whether Judas is set apart for the Gnostic generation or separated from it! But separated he is, just as we discover earlier when Jesus interprets Judas' dream to mean his exclusion from the holy generation (Gos. Jud. 44.15^46.4). In the Gospel of Judas, Judas is no hero, and certainly no Gnostic. 5. Criticism of the Apostolic Church Because Judas is identified with the chief Archon, Ialdabaoth, there are a cou­ ple of passages in which he is told that he will rule in the thirteenth realm over the twelve Archons and their realms below him (Gos. Jud. 45.25^16.24; 55.10- 1.1; cf. 46.2-A) and that he will be in control of the Archons (Gos. Jud. 46.5-7). 22. W. E. Cram, A Coptic Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1939) 271b-272a. It translates Greek expressions such as xcop'î co aiTO, 5ixa£co, SICKJT'SAAGO, a<f>op'i£co, and pf)yvuui. 23. Cf. 2 Kgs 1.23S; Prov. 18.1SA; Wis. Sol. 1.3S; Mt. 10.35; 1 Cor. 7.10; 2 Cor. 6.17; Rom. 8.35: 24. For additional usages, see Gos. Phil. 53.16, 64.18. 25. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas, 32; Kasser et al., Critical Edition, 211-. The n. for lines 17-18 in.Critical Edition offers '. . . from that generation' as an alternative. Unfortu­ nately Marvin Meyer continues to perpetuate this faulty translation in the new international edition of the Nag Hammadi texts, and in his anthology of 'Judas' sources. See M. Meyer, The Interna­ tional Edition of the Nag Hammadi Scriptures (San Francisco: Harper, 2007) 765, with 'from' listed as an alternative reading in n. 63); M. Meyer, Judas: The Definitive Collection of Gospels and Legends about the Infamous Apostle of Jesus (San Francisco: Harper, 2007) 60, with 'from' listed as an alternative reading in n. 67. The Gospel of Judas: A Parody 105 to the archonic kingdoms. Particularly loathsome to these Gnostics was the Church's doctrine of atonement and its re-enactment in the Eucharist. The rea­ son that this doctrine and practice was so hideous to them was because it assumed infanticide - that a father would and should kill his own son. So hei­ nous a crime was this, so immoral, that the Sethian Christians could not stomach it, and so in the Gospel of Judas the Twelve are accused of engaging in child sacrifice and understand Judas the demon as the one who initiated it. But doesn't Jesus in the Gospel of Judas ask Judas to kill him in order to release his spirit? No. This conversation does not occur anywhere in the Gospel of Judas. What occurs is a short diatribe by Jesus in which he con­ demns all the sacrifices that are made to the Archons (Gos. Jud. 56.11^21). This appears to be a flashback to the twelve apostles' earlier nightmare when they are severely chastised by Jesus for making sacrifices to the lower god (Gos. Jud. 37.20-40.26) and when he commands them to stop sacrificing (Gos. Jud. 41.1-2). In the middle of the fragmented diatribe, Jesus declares that their sacrifices are evil. Then he tells Judas, 'You will do more than all of them. For the man which clothes me, you will sacrifice him.' The question is, do more than what? The answer must be determined from the immediate context of the Coptic phrase, er-houo eroou terou, 'more than'. The context does not indicate that Judas will do a good thing as the National Geographic interpretation suggests in its original publication and maintains its Critical Edition: 'But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man who bears me.'26 Rather given the negative context, Jesus is telling Judas that his sacrifice will be the worse kind possible, because he will be sacrificing Jesus himself to the Archons. The atonement was (and still is) a cherished interpretation of Jesus' death among Christians. Nonetheless, it is an interpretation that came after the fact of his death. Because of this, the interpretation did not align exactly with the way in which the Christian story remembered Jesus' death - that a demonic Judas was the one who actually made it happen. The Sethian Gnostics in the Gospel of Judas pointed out the obvious problem with this. If Jesus' death really was a sacrifice made by God for the purpose of salvation, why would a demon be the instrument? And why would Judas be cursed for his involvement? The Apostolic doctrine struck them as dangerous and humorous at the same time, because they felt that it showed up the ignorance and ineffectiveness of the Apostolic faith. Judas was a demon, and the god who put out Jesus' death warrant was Ialdabaoth. Judas collaborated with him, and together they brought about Jesus' sacrifice, which was nothing less than apostasy and murder. The sacrifice was a sacrifice to Ialdabaoth, so all Eucharistic offerings serve only to worship and extol him. I find this to be a very clever and powerful argument given the premises of the Gnostic universe. 26. Kasser, Meyer and Wurst, Gospel of Judas, 43; Kasser et al., Critical Edition, 231. 106 The Non-Canonical Gospels 6. The Apostolic Response Given what the Gospel of Judas has to say by way of critique of Apostolic doc­ trine and practices, I find it fascinating that the Apostolic Christians begin to become concerned about Judas in the literature produced by the Church Fathers in the late second and early third centuries. His actions appear to have become a liability for the Apostolic Christians. It seems that the sophisticated Gnostic critique we find in the Gospel of Judas concerned a number of Apostolic Christian thinkers, who prior to the publica­ tion of the Gospel of Judas in the mid-second century rarely mentioned Judas beyond the mere repetition of his stories from the gospels or fanciful embel­ lishments of these stories. Not only does the number of references to Judas in their writings increase in the late second century, but the Apostolic writers begin working hard to provide defences of and interpretations for Judas' actions, especially his connection with demonic forces. These apologies for Judas look like they are meant to resolve the exact problem articulated in the Gospel of Judas - that a demon is responsible for Jesus' death, and any atone­ ment he may have brought about was by and for the Archons who rule this world. Of particular interest is Origen's early-third-century discussion where, as he is thinking about God's bigger plan of redemption, he forges a link between Judas and the Devil. The terms of this plan is a ransom paid to the Devil, an j idea rooted in the Gospels and Paul (cf. Mk 10.45; Mt. 20,28; Rom. 3.24; 8.23; | 1 Tim. 2.5-6). What Origen begins insisting is that God - not Judas and not the Devil - is responsible for Jesus' sacrifice. He supports this by quoting the apos­ tle Paul that God 'spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all' (Origen, Comm. Matt. 13.8). How does Judas get involved? Judas, Origen says, was an evil person whose soul was already being eaten by a spiritual gangrene, a wickedness hidden deep within (Origen, Comm. Matt. 11.9). * Because of this, Judas allowed the Devil to possess him fully, as it is written » that after the supper, 'Satan entered into him' (Origen, On First Principles 3.2; I Comm. John 10.30) and God delivered Judas to the demons. Then the Devil | used Judas to deliver Jesus to those men who would crucify him. Jesus' blood I was the ransom that bought the sinful dead from the Devil. But the Devil, when he accepted this purchase price, got a big surprise. Because Jesus' spirit was more powerful than his, Jesus was able to rise from the dead and conquer death. The Devil could not hold on to him so he was cheated out of his ransom. This, Origen thinks, is how God tricked the Devil and Jesus atoned for the sins of humanity (Origen, Comm. Matt. 12.40; 13.8-9). What is striking to me is that the end of Origen's story is not so far removed from the Gnostic story, which centred around the moment when Jesus' power­ ful spirit conquered the Archons who tried to subdue him. The Gnostic interpretation of his death is victory over death and the Archons who enslave the human spirit. On this point, I think that Origen and the Gnostics were on common ground. The Gospel of Judas: A Parody 107 The Church Fathers also respond to the Gospel of Judas by directly taking on the text itself. The first to do this was Irenaeus around 180 CE in Against Heresies 1.31.1. In this passage, he does not give us much in terms of detail, only suggesting that the Gospel of Judas had Judas as its central figure, that Judas knew the 'truth.' while the other disciples did not, and that his betrayal of Jesus was a 'mystery' that set the earth and heavens into chaos. He never says that Judas was characterized as 'good' or a 'hero' in the Gospel of Judas. It is difficult to know from his description whether he actually read the version of the Gospel of Judas that we how possess, or was testifying to hear­ say about its contents, or worst of all, was guessing at them. His description appears to me to be fairly accurate of the manuscript we possess, except that he identifies it as a Gospel belonging to people who declared that their ancestors were Esau, Korah and the Sodomites, and that Cain was an entity derived from a Power above. Since the people who wrote the Gospel of Judas understood themselves to be descendants of the great Seth, son of Adam, not Cain nor any df the others whom Irenaeus mentions, this suggests to me two immediate possibilities. Either the Gospel of Judas was not originally Sethian, and this non-Sethian version is what Irenaeus knew, or his genealogy is fictitious, whose purpose is to undermine the Gospel's credibility. My analysis of the Gospel of Judas suggests that the subversive Sethian hermeneutic is not merely a surface patina, but integral to the entire narrative. So the former possibility is not very attrac­ tive to me. The latter is reasonable given Irenaeus' agenda against Gnostic groups and writings, where he embellishes and distorts 'facts', and creates polemics to undercut his opponents, including false genealogies tracing the many sprouting mushrooms back to Simon Magus. Having said all of this, howeVer, there is something about his description that causes me to pause. The Sethians did teach that Cain was a Power. In their system, however, he was not a benevolent Power, but an evil Archon, a Power ruling one of the cosmic realms. So if the Sethians taught that the human Cain owed his existence to a Power above, he owed it to an evil one, not a good one. Could it be that Irenaeus knew this and merely tweaked the 'facts' slightly to fit his polemical agenda? The other Church Father to write about the Gospel of Judas is Epiphanius who leaves us a very elaborate discussion in Panarion 38.1.2-5 and 38.3.1.5, a discussion which at least has been influenced by Irenaeus. Epiphanius rids the Irenaean description of any ambiguity it might have had, so that Cain is said to be from 'the stronger power and dominion above' as are also Esau, Korah and the Sodomites. He adds that Abel is from 'the weaker power'. He gives the name Cainites to the authors of the Gospel of Judas, and says that they believed that Judas was their kinsman, knew about the upper Aeons, and possessed the highest of knowledge. He goes into several elaborate schemes about how the crucifixion came about according to the Cainites (cf. Clem. Alex. Strom. 7.17.17; Tert. Prescription 33; Tert. On Baptism 1; Ps.-Tert. Ag. Haer. 2.5-6; Hipp. Ref 8; Origen, Contra