Customer Reviews

The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot: A New Look at Betrayer and Betrayed

5 star:		(16)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Bart Ehrman's The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot is a one-stop survey of every facet of the headline-making find: It's discovery, authentication, content, and significance. I wondered a little whether Ehrman would be able to keep it interesting: once you get past the initial glitter, there's a fact which Ehrman has commented on in his other works, that ancient gnosticism was pretty weird and hard for the average person to maintain a deep interest in. However, Ehrman handles it all as skillfully as I've come to expect from his previous works, such as Misquoting Jesus and Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millenium.

One thing I didn't expect was seeing Ehrman's skill at narrative. The opening chapter gives a first-person account of Ehrman's intial encounter with the Gospel of Judas when he was called in to help authenticate it. It reads like The Da Vinci Code. Particularly memorable was a passage where one of the experts was asked who could have forged a document like the one thay had. Response: four, "And two of them are in this room." If I were Ehrman's editor, after reading this, I would be pressuring him to try his hand at writing a historical novel on the early years of Christianity.

After explaining how it eventually was authenticated, Ehrman goes into a discussion of how Judas is portrayed in various documents through the middle ages, showing that a Gospel of Judas would be necessarily unique by putting Judas in a positive light. Then come an explanation of how known literature had hinted at the book's existence, and after that is a summary of how the book came, from the sands of Egypt, through the hands of scheming antiques dealers who caused heavy damage to the manuscript, up to its final destination in a place where it could be sudied by scholars. Following this is a discussion of the gospels context that places it in the context of the countless strange varieties of Christianity that existed in the ancient world--these varities of Christianity being one of Ehrman's specialties.

Perhaps the best part of the book, however, are the final three chapters (before the conclusion). These deal with the question that is the real source of interest in the Gospel of Judas: who was Judas, and why did he betray Jesus? This involves a delve into the apocalyptic nature of Jesus' ministry, a conclusion defended in part by the observation that it is necessary to make sense of Jesus' death. It also includes a skillful reading between the lines regarding how Judas betrayed Jesus, though I won't spoil that bit here.

Once again, Bart Ehrman has shown himself to be a first-rate popularizer of Biblical scholarship. If there's anything to complain about, is that some things were not covered in as much depth as they could have been, in part a result of the wide range of topics covered in the book. It's hard to argue for cutting anything, though, and other resources are available for those who want to read about this issues in greater depth. It's a good buy for anyone interested in Biblical scholarship.

As Ehrman notes, it's hardly necessary to introduce Judas Iscariot to readers. The many allusions to betrayal or deception: the kiss, the "thirty pieces of silver", the "one among you" reference are scattered throughout our literature, politics and daily circumstances. Even the fratricide of Cain receives less attention. However, a long-lost text providing an alternate view of this man, known to scholars but never seen in its original form, is likely to change all that. Ehrman, who was among the first to study the remants of it after it was found in Eygpt over thirty years ago, here provides an analysis of its contents. In a well-written account, he traces the document's history as known, and what it might mean for Christianity.

Judas, Ehrman notes, is portrayed in various ways in the "Synoptic Gospels", the accounts of Jesus that are the standard fare of Christian teachings. They range from a man driven by greed to an instrument of Satan. "The Gospel of Judas", originally written at about the same time as those stock accounts, depicts somebody else altogether. Not written by Judas, the writer tells the story of a man specially favoured by the teacher. According to the text, Judas was the one among "the Twelve" who actually "got" the message. Instead of "betraying" the teacher, Judas is actually given the task of freeing him from the "man who clothes me". Jesus, then, is but a spirit occupying a human body. Judas thus becomes the first Christian.

The foundation of this shift of role lies in a religious philosophy known as "Gnosticism". Although much debate has raged around the term as well as its tenets, its underlying thesis is that the material world is inherently evil, created by corrupt gods. The god revered by the Jews and transferred to Christianity is a false deity. Ehrman launches into a discussion of Gnostic Christianity, beginning with its complex creation myth with a pantheon of gods. There are ranks and hierarchies of them, some good and some bad, but all residing under a superior Great Invisible Spirit. The point of his presentation is to indicate that a minority of humans enjoy the potential to join with the greatest of these gods. Those are the "knowing" [Greek "gnosis"] of which Jesus is one and who "recruits" Judas to be another. Judas' assignment to "betray" Jesus to the authorities in order to restore him to the spirit realm, sets Judas apart from the other Apostles. They naturally resent this situation, but aren't "knowing" enough to change it. Ehrman reminds us that all the Apostles but Judas abandoned Jesus at the arrival of the arresting officers.

Gnosticism isn't for those seeking simple answers. It required the "knowing" to take a stance in direct contradiction to those accepting the Jewish god as paramount. Jesus does not make demands of his followers. Indeed, it's fundamental to Gnosticism that each individual find the route into the realm of the divine on their own. Over time, that would lead to clashes with those who sought a more hierarchical church system - the "proto-orthodox" who were later vindicated by Constantine. The early "Church Fathers" railed against Gnostic ideas - in fact, it is their writings that preserved the thoughts of the Gnostics in ranting against their ideas. Once in ascendency, the "orthodox" saw to it that Gnostic texts were destroyed. The Gospel of Judas, Ehrman reminds us, was known chiefly by a reference to it in the works of Irenaeus in his polemics against "heresies".

To Ehrman, The Gospel of Judas' importance lies in what it can contribute to our understanding of the early forms of Christianity - "Christianities". He leaves unaddressed the inevitable comparison with the doctrine of the Trinity, an issue that has split the faith numerous times. In fact, beyond describing how the Gnostics viewed their spirit realm, he avoids theological discussion. His aim here is to describe the history and words given in the newly found Gospel and put them in perspective. He does a fine job of that in language that must keep his students enthralled. It is a engrossing account at many levels, and deserves your close attention. [stephen a. haines - Ottawa, Canada]

Bart D. Ehrman has, as so often happens, outdone himself. He has in his previous works consistently challenged long (often devoutly) held assumptions with indisputable facts, and this book is no different. Here he points to the differences between the various canonical gospel accounts in search of the facts beneath the theological agendas of their authors. In this short but brilliant work he more than fulfills the promise of his brief essay in "The Gospel of Judas," published earlier this year by the National Geographic Society in support of their televised special. Within this slender volume he discusses the popular image of Judas Iscariot, discussing popular misconceptions while directing the reader to the very slender evidence available to us. Like Mary Magdalene, Judas Iscariot barely appears in the canonical gospels but the stories about him have grown all out of proportion over the centuries. Professor Ehrman, who is well aware of the distorting influence of books like "The DaVinci Code" examines each of these New Testament accounts, pointing to their differences as well as to the ways in which the accounts built upon each other from Mark to Matthew and Luke, and to Acts and John, before arriving at the story told in the Gospel of Judas itself. Included is a discussion of Gnosticism and the place of Judas' gospel within the framework of Gnostic religion and early Christian thought. Just as interesting is the account of the gospel's recovery, preservation and translation. This book belongs on the bookshelf of everyone interested in the origins and history of Christianity.

I have read a number of Ehrman's books (e.g., "Misquoting Jesus," "The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture," "Lost Christianities"), and have generally enjoyed them, but found this one to be a bit disappointing.

One might expect, as I did, that based on the title, one would find a complete translation of the Gospel of Judas (it's not that long) plus some commentary where necessary explaining Gnostic terms and contrasting with other such heretical gospels. But unfortunately only excerpts are given - most of the Gospel is described rather than shown. Moreover, only a relatively small portion of the book is devoted to the contents of the Gospel (one 14-page chapter plus parts of a couple of others). The bulk of Ehrman's work consists of (1) an account of how the manuscript was discovered and his part in analyzing it, and (2) his ruminations on who the real Judas and Jesus were and what they actually did. Now, as several other reviewers have pointed out, the tale of how this Gospel was discovered does read somewhat like the DaVinci Code, but that was not why I was interested in this book. On the other hand, Ehrman's ideas about the historical Jesus, namely, that he was an apocalyptic preacher, have been spelled out in much more detail in some of his other works.

Ehrman notes that the Gospel of Judas is unlikely to contain any historical data on Judas or Jesus, considering how late it was written, how radically it differs from other descriptions of them, and the facts that it includes many private conversations between them but does not claim to be written by someone with that sort of access. Thus, when Ehrman spends several chapters searching for the "real" Judas, he discards this Gospel entirely and uses the NT Gospels entirely for his sources. Hence this book is really a book about Judas rather than the Gospel of Judas. Ehrman constructs motives for Judas by assuming that the narrative of the Gospels is more or less factually correct, despite the fact that he acknowledges that they aren't, so his conclusions come across as 18th-century Rationalistic - he speculates freely while simultaneously assuming the accuracy of the Gospel account, leaving himself open to criticism on both fronts. As an example, he posits that Judas may have betrayed Jesus out of a desire to protect him from himself (Jesus was stirring up the authorities). Ehrman arrives at this conclusion by noting that Jesus was tried for claiming to be the King of the Jews, even though he never makes that claim in the Gospels, and so Ehrman supposes that Jesus told his disciples that in private, which Judas than told to the authorities. But this is all guesswork - nothing to this effect is even implied in the Gospels - and moreover rests on the assumption, among others, that the descriptions of the trial, including private deliberations of the Sandherin, are accurate.

Ehrman also devotes a couple of chapters to discussing the Gnostic character of the Gospel of Judas, but gives only a cursory sketch of what Gnostics actually believed. I would rather that he had delved further into that subject, but he brushes it off as being too technical.

Most bizarre is Ehrman's conclusion. He states, on the penultimate page, that the Gospel of Judas is significant for 2 reasons: First, it is another example of a heretic Gospel. But he admits that there were many such Gospels from that time period, and moreover this one was already known, having been mentioned by Irenaeus in AD 180, so how would the actual discovery of this text make any difference in this regard? Ehrman's second reason is, according to him, that this Gospel states that Judas was actually the only disciple that understood Jesus, and by helping to have him killed he was freeing Jesus from his earthly body. That is how Ehrman ends his book - without actually explaining why this is important. I was expecting him to elaborate on this point, but instead he just repeated his summary of the main point of the Gospel, without saying why it is significant. Did he run out of time or space? Did he think it was self-evident? Is Ehrman endorsing this view of Jesus and Judas? The ending felt rushed and unsatisfactory.

I bought this book not knowing it was written by the same author as Misquoting Jesus. While both books stand on their own, reading Misquoting Jesus helped me understand the author's thinking. Both are worth reading, but unless you are a biblical scholar, don't expect to read either book quickly. There are nuances to appreciate. I found I could not read this before bed, because I had to think so hard. This is not the fault of the author, just a reflection of this lay reviewer's working knowledge of the Bible.

My only criticism is about the book's organization. The author spent several chapters "setting the stage" and then gave the physical and other particulars of the bGospel of Judas itselt (how much of it is readable, how it deteriorated in modern times etc.) I would have put all this information in the first chapter.

Also, just a warning, -- and this is not the author's intent -- if you believe the Bible is literally true, this will challenge your beliefs. However, if you have intellectual curiousity about "biblical times" -- even if you are devout -- this is a must have book. Four stars.

"Lost Gospel" is less about the recently discovered Gospel of Judas and more about Ehrman's continuing textual criticism of the New Testament. But it is interesting and well-written and much preferable to an in-depth study of what turns out to be Gnostic writings. The Judas manuscript is not a gospel according to Judas, but about him, and provides little if any enlightment about the historical Judas and his relationship with Jesus.

Apart from the Judas manuscript, Ehrman provides an insightful presentation of Judas based on the four Canonical Gospels and books of the apocrypha. While he admits there is not enough available information to really understand Judas, he offers some speculation of Judas' motives and agenda

I really enjoyed "Lost Gospel" and finished it in a weekend, but it would have been better titled just as "Judas Iscariot: A New Look at Betrayer and Betrayed". If the reader is really looking for a dissection of the manuscript or a deeper discussion of Gnosticism, this will only provide a brief intro.

Bart Ehrman can write very good books (Misquoting Jesus) and very bad books (Truth and Fiction in the Da Vinci Code), so it's always a treat reading an Ehrman book and discovering who wrote it. In the case of The Lost Gospel of Judas, it seems to be co-authored. The "good" Ehrman showed up with his excellent writing skills and his attention to detail. But he obviously took long breaks, during which the "bad" Ehrman slipped in and did his damage.

On the positive side, Ehrman demonstrates the breadth and depth of his knowledge of early Christianity. He provides a detailed examination of the life of Judas, from all the available information, and places that information in perspective and in juxtaposition to itself. Chapters 2 to 4 (Judas in our Earliest Gospels, Judas in Later Gospel Traditions, Our Previous Knowledge of Judas) are extraordinary.

Ehrman also looks beyond the specifics of the Gospel and uses it as an opportunity to discuss Gnosticism in general, and Gnostic texts in particular. His discussion is interesting and illuminating, although I wouldn't throw away my Pagels and Meyers books just yet.

That being said, let's look at some of Ehrman's questionable comments:

- he claims that the gospels are from the 1st century (p. 13). That's a theory. There is quite a bit of research to indicate that at least 3 and possible all 4 gospels are 2nd century products, and there are several prominent authorities (e.g., Schonfield, Mack, Ellegard to name a few) who advance this alternate theory.

- he claims that Mary Magdalene "was one of three women who accompanied Jesus..." (p. 13) but that's clearly wrong. Luke 8:1-3 names only three of the women, but clearly states that were "many others."

- he claims that in the Gospel of Mark, Jesus is "silent on the way to the crucifixion, while being nailed to the cross... (p. 35)." Search as you will, the Gospel of Mark, and you'll find no mention of Jesus being nailed to the cross. You will find mention of the nails in the Gospel of John (20:25), but not Mark. No big deal, you think, but in a section of the book where Ehrman criticizes others for conflating the gospels, Ehrman's own coflation is noteworthy.

While these are relatively small matters, one of the continuing serious problems in this book was also reflected in Ehrman's Peter, Paul, and Mary. In both books he claims that the ancient material gives us a window not into history but into the minds of the people who wrote this material. I agree fully. Unfortunately Ehrman does take himself seriously enough to follow through with this hypothesis. He spends very little time telling us what he thinks was going on in the lives of the people who wrote the Gospel of Judas. Instead he focuses on the historical data and discusses its probable historicity, when in fact it is his underlying thesis that the Gospel should be read more for the dynamics of the writers than the historical validity of the principals. We get very little about the dynamics of the writers and their society.

Another problem with the book is Ehrman's conclusion that the Gospel of Judas offered some new perspective on the life of Judas. While it's true that the traditional view of Judas as the betraying, "money-grubbing thief and Christ killer (p. 180)" has been the main view, the idea that Judas was serving the greater need was not first advanced in the newly discovered Gospel.

Finally, I confess to being interested in the contents of a book and having no interest whatsoever in the behavior of the writer. I know some people enjoy these personal touches, but quite frankly if I wanted auto-biographical information about Ehrman or any other author, I would read their auto biography. To my understanding of the Gospel of Judas, does it matter that Ehrman received unexpected phone calls, or that he sat in the back seat of a van, or that the weather was cold and dreary on the day he first saw the Gospel? I think not.

On balance, this is a good book. The writing is well done and there is a wealth of material here for beginning and advanced students.

Remember all the fuss among fundamentalists when the Gospel of Judas hit the news? They were all off the mark. As Bart Ehrman explains in another skillfully written explanation of matters theological, the Gospel of Judas was not written by Judas, nor was Judas the bad boy portrayed by current fundamentalist Christanity. What we have here instead is a document suppressed by early Christians who had an interest in furthering their own particular interpretation of the Gospels. Ehrman shows that Jesus was an apocalyptic Jewish preacher. He was not God, nor the son of God, nor the Son of Man, nor divine+human, nor 2 separate persons. (But to see why Jesus is special, see the writings of Bishop John Shelby Spong.) According to Gnostic theology, Judas' task was to help free Jesus from the flesh that entrapped him. From Jesus' perspective, Judas was the only apostle who understood him. As a Gnostic document, the Gospel of Judas was deemed heretical by the winners of the struggle in the early centuries of the Church between a large number of different views of Jesus. What eventually emerged as the winner is, of course, not necessarily the correct view of Jesus. It was merely the winner. How interesting to note that if things had turned out differently and the Gnostics or another sect had gained the upper hand, what passes for mainstream Christanity today (to say nothing of its literalist aberations) would have been heresy and its documents suppressed, perhaps to be dug up centuries later in the Egyptian desert in Coptic translation. This is the sort of book that needs to be read by literalists, to disabuse them of their latterday heresy.

This is a great book, if you know what you're getting. This is not a translation of the Gospel of Judas. It includes a summary of the Gospel and a translation of a few of the passages, but you should look for another book if all you're after is the translation of the text itself.

Instead, Ehrman has provided a comprehensive history of everything surrounding the text. Not only do we get a history of how the Gospel was found, restored, and presented to the public, but we also get a history of the early Christian church (the widespread, conflicting beliefs), an overview of how Judas Iscariot is portrayed throughout history, and what this "new" gospel tells us about what the Christian movement was like in the years following the death of Jesus.

Ehrman writes in a highly readable style, meant for the layman's understanding rather for scholar's to study. A lot of his material overlaps with his other books though, so if you've read some of his previous books, you'll find yourself covering a lot of the same ground.

The Kindle edition is well formatted, with only a handful of spelling errors. There are a couple of lines that looked like the bottom half of the letters are missing, which I assume was from a scanning error, but everything is readable. The footnotes are not linked, but you can solve that problem by going to the start of the footnotes (location 2916) and placing a bookmark there, so you can jump to it when you need to.

I feel like I've been reading this book forever! I started it several months ago, and I was really enjoying it at first. But it seemed to drag a bit in the middle (despite being a pretty short book), and I more or less put it down for a couple of months. Fortunately, it was easy to pick up again; Ehrman writes clearly and explains everything thoroughly, so I didn't feel lost at all. The flip side of this is that the book is pretty repetitive; he emphasizes things and makes sure his point is clear by saying the same thing over and over. This was effective in its way; I feel like I learned a lot from this book and am likely to retain that knowledge. It did make for a slower than necessary reading experience, though.

On the whole, I'm glad I read this book; especially as someone with a limited knowledge of Christianity, I found it very informative. People who are more familiar with Christianity in general and early Christianity in particular might find it too simplistic and repetitive, but it worked for me. It's definitely very accessible.