Comments on: ‘Gospel of Judas’ surfaces after 1,700 years

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:46:07 +0000

Given John’s special knowledge of these events, and his status as a revelator, I assume there is more to his comment about Satan entering into Judas than just an ordinary external observation.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Wed, 12 Apr 2006 01:16:44 +0000

I believe John was writing by revelation and inspiration when the Gospel of John was composed. So I find his words extremely reliable. When he says Satan entered into Judas, I believe him. He doesn’t need to be quoting Christ’s own words.

Saying that Satan entered into Judas is not the same as interpreting the motives of Christ.

No, I’m not kidding.

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 23:29:48 +0000

You’re kidding, right? Are you suggesting interpreting the motives of someone has equal validity as quoting what someone said?

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 19:45:43 +0000

And we only know what the authors of the Gospels THOUGHT Jesus said. So why give the quotes more credence?

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 18:23:18 +0000

It makes a difference because we have no way of knowing whether Satan really did take a hold of Judas, or whether that was what John was led to believe.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:22:40 +0000

Kim, I’m more and more puzzled by something you said in #21:

What difference does it make whether the scripture is quoting the words of Jesus or describing something else? Do we give more credence to the quotes than the other information? Do we believe that Christ gave the Sermon on the Mount because it’s a quote but doubt that he fed the multitude because it’s just a description of events?

By: Ray

Ray — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:04:52 +0000

As I said, Alot of reprucussions on this subject.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 15:02:21 +0000

“That is what John…wrote, not what Jesus had said.”

True. Shall I give more credence to the Gospel of John than to the “Gospel” of Judas? I think so.

“It is if Jesus had given Judas the instruction to deliver him up.”

Which takes us right back to whether Christ was deceiving the other disciples when he told them, “woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born.”

By: Kim Siever

Kim Siever — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:47:50 +0000

"'Satan entered into' Judas before he carried out the betrayal." That is what John (or whomever the author is) wrote, not what Jesus had said.

"In that case, itâ€s not appreciably different from 'betray me.'"

It is if Jesus had given Judas the instruction to deliver him up.

By: ltbugaf

ltbugaf — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:46:33 +0000

Kim, re: #18, the reading “deliver me up” needs to be understood in its context. Here, it means, “deliver me up to the men who will carry out my murder.” In that case, it’s not appreciably different from “betray me.”