The Gospel of Judas

[Frater Yechidah]

For anyone who wants to check out the Gospel of Judas, a Sethian Gnostic text, then you can get a PDF here:

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/_pdf/GospelofJudas.pdf

If anyone's interested in discussing it, I'm game :)

LLLSHJ,
Yechidah.

[Kain]

That's great Frater Yechidah, thanks! I'll be reading this later on today,

Kain

[Anibis]

This is great. Thanks for bringing it to the board. Funny how Judas is always assumed to be the traitor, but it is Peter who denies Christ thrice, and indeed who Christ actually calls 'Satan' at one point. Judas seems to enable Christ to fulfill the Hangedman role, and in the process becomes a hangedman himself. Also by throwing away the silver, he is repenting. A fascinating parallel in their characters...
-Anibis

[Frater CaO]

Have you seen the Movie about this? Really interesting stuff, too bad so much of it got lost, I think that there might actually be some significant things inbetween the lines about the angels. Damn the bastard who locked the book up in a safety deposit! damn him for eternity!! Well, there were probably some reason for that too, maybe its the demiurge pulling a prank or something, prolonging or inevitable enlightenment or something just for kicks. Damn the demiurge too!

Well it is certainly an interesteing book! And its history from when it was found is atleast as interesting too! :)

/HS!

[frater luciferi]

im always stoked to read some more gnostic material. the cosmology in this text is quite wonderful. i always love how especially dense the metaphors in gnostic texts are, like every paragraph in this text just seems to bleed gnosis in the ink so to speak. i've bookmarked this and am going to sit and give it a thorough once over when i get back home tonite.

thanks btw.

[Frater CaO]

Yeah, too bad that so much of the Gospel got lost :(
I think there might be some really interesting stuff missing in it.
It isnt that long either, must be one of the shorter gospels. Well atleast if you compare with those in the bible, havent actually had time to read any of the Dead Sea Scrolls material or the other, whats it called, material either.

The Gospel of Judas movie is also highly recomended! :)

/HS!

[Frater Yechidah]

The problem with this Gospel is that it was very damaged, and got further damaged in all the haggling, buying, selling, burying, burning, shifting, shipping, and everything else that happened from when it was found 'til when it was published. This means that there are huge gaps in it, and little gaps here and there in the smaller pieces. So, it's not complete.

However, there is enough legible material within it to reveal this "alternative history" of Judas Iscariot from the Sethian Gnostic point of view (evident from the frequent mention of the Sethian cosmology). It also fits in with how other Gnostics personified certain of the Disciples as the one whom Jesus revealed the most (that is, Gnosis) too. It goes without question that there had to be some Gnostics out there who chose Judas - perhaps in a wilful objection and rebellion to the accepted beliefs of the growing Roman Church. In a sense they would have seen Judas as a personification of how the Roman Church treated Gnostics, treating a genuine disciple as despicable, fabricating a tale of how they were, in essence, worse than "the enemy".

I'm still willing to discuss the intricacies of this document if anyone wants to raise some points. Discussion of specific lines, etc., is most welcome.

LLLSHJ,
Y.

[deviadah]

I have a fucking impossible reading list and I try to go through it as fast as possible. This gospel is course on there, but not on the top of the pile. So I can't offer a very good input just yet... but in time I will.

I have, though, skimmed through it. That resistence was to strong to avoid. :)

I always read gnostic texts from an alchemical perspective, so be aware of this when you read all my posts in this forum.

Jesus said, “The souls of every human generation will die. When these people, however, have completed the time of the kingdom and the spirit leaves them, their bodies will die but their souls will be alive, and they will be taken up.”

I read this not as taken up into heaven, but up into the crown chakra.

First you are born, then you are born again and finally you are born for the third time (thrice born). After that you die!

:cool:

[Frater Yechidah]

And then you are born. And then you die again. And then die a third time. And then are reborn again. And then you die. And then you... aaagh! So much for the greatness of reincarnation ;)

I like your thoughts on that passage. The thing I love about Gnostic scripture is how open to interpretation it is, and one of the tenets of Gnosticism is to keep it open, to try and find as many layers as possible, to not limit the verse to mean one thing.

I can see a few ways of interpreting that verse, but one that I like in particular is the following:

The soul is dead when a person is human (i.e. physically alive). It dies (metaphorically speaking) when they incarnate into physical being (severing the bond with the Fullness and inducing the blindness and bondage of mortality). The "time of the kingdom" is the time that we devote to the purely physical needs - food, shelter, etc. When a person completes this time (which is also the time of Malkuth - the Kingdom), and they are ready to die physically (again, metaphorically speaking, since they only end the focus on the physical, which is seen as a mystical death), their soul then comes alive, for they have embraced the spiritual. Thenceforth they ascend, and this ascension is simultaneously the raising of the Divine Spark from the depths where it was buried within the person, the rising of consciousness to the Crown Chakra (as mentioned by D), and the rising on the planes from Malkuth, the Kingdom, to Kether, the Crown.

I'm glad to see you in this thread, D :)

LLLSHJ,
Y.

[deviadah]

:cool:

I won't attempt this right now (I have food on the stove), but I think it is an interesting part:


“The multitude of those immortals is called the cosmos— that is, perdition—by the Father and the seventy-two luminaries who are with the Self-Generated and his seventy-two aeons. In him the first human appeared with his incorruptible powers. And the aeon that appeared with his generation, the aeon in whom are the cloud of knowledge and the angel, is called El. [...] aeon [...] after that [...] said, ‘Let twelve angels come into being [to] rule over chaos and the [underworld].’ And look, from the cloud there appeared an [angel]whose face flashed with fire and whose appearance was defiled with blood. His name was Nebro, which means ‘rebel’; others call him Yaldabaoth. Another angel, Saklas, also camefrom the cloud. So Nebro created six angels—as well as Saklas—to be assistants, and these produced twelve angels in the heavens, with each one receiving a portion in the heavens."


But I got this so far:

Saklas literally means fool and is another name for the Demiurge.
Yaldabaoth (Ialdabaoth Jaldabaoth) comes from the Aramaic meaning begetter of the Heavens. And yet another name for the Demiurge.

But it does not make sense, if Nebro was Demiurge, how can there be another angel that is also of that same name? Or is there a duality/polarity in all this?

[Frater Yechidah]

The quote you gave is a perfect example of the complexities of the Sethian cosmology. All those luminaries and aeons! ;)

Firstly, Yaldabaoth is a hard one to translate. As far as I'm aware it comes from a Semitic language and means something along the lines of "Child, come here", which is fairly vague (but can tie in with the Gnostic cosmology). I've never seen the translation of "begetter of the heavens" before, but that certainly ties in with the meaning of "Demiurge".

As for Nebro (the Demiurge as an angel) and Saklas, the only thing I can see here is that this text differentiates the two, seeing Saklas as one of the Archons that the Demiurge creates. Nebro creates six angels to be his assitants, and these are clearly the Archons. Combine them with himself and you have the 7 old planets, with him most likely being Saturn (commonly upheld to be the Demiurge in Sethian myth). I've never seen the name Nebro elsewhere, so this is unique to the Gospel of Judas, as far as I'm aware. The translation as "rebel" certainly suits the nature of the Demiurge, as the one who rebelled against the perfection of the Fullness exemplified in God.

The twelve angels they produce are zodiacal in nature.

I welcome more discussion on this :)

LLLSHJ,
Yechidah.

[deviadah]

Let me just point out that the "begetter of the heavens" phrase comes from this Gnostic Lexicon (http://www.geocities.com/pmcvflag/lexicon.html) (by pmcv (http://occultforums.com/member.php?u=1333) of OF).

:cool:

[Znanna]

There is a theory that Judas is Jesus' (the Christ) Twin.

ZN

[Frater Yechidah]

That theory isn't widely used, and doesn't hold up very well.

The "twin" of Jesus was, esoterically speaking, Thomas (which is Hebrew for "Twin"), who goes by the name "Judas Didymos Thomas" in the Gospel of Thomas (Didymos being a title - Greek for "Twin"). It has long been esoteric tradition to consider Thomas as the twin of Jesus, and this is the entire underscoring principle of the teachings in the Gospel of Thomas (suggesting we become as twins of the Christ, bringing out our own Christ principle). Perhaps it is the name of "Judas" used here that makes things confusing, but remember that Judas was a very common name. Judas Thomas is not Judas Iscariot, and thus has nothing to do with this Gospel of Judas (Iscariot).

In the Gospel of Judas, Judas Iscariot is held to be the one disciple who was privy to the secret teachings of Jesus. This is in line with all other secret gospels. The Gospel of Thomas says that Thomas was the one. The Gospel of Mary says Mary was the one.

I'd be interested in seeing if you have any more information on the theory about Judas being Jesus' twin, however.

LLLSHJ,
Yechidah.

[Kuroyagi]

From a more psychological perseptive, and as a theme of literature and human relationships in general, it often happens that the "disciple" who is most like -or on the level- of the "master" will be a traitor or his greatest (future) enemy...

I must say that I'm not very versed in Gnosticism, but as far as the conventional biblical text goes I always saw Judas as a candidate for the most enlightened student of Jesus, John the most loved by him, as he says, and Peter as not very bright, down to earth and actually most human, with all his flaws but also his bucolic and straight forward nature. From the position of a ruler or King it is a wise decision to give ones empire to a guy like Peter, if one wants it to remain stable and enduring..;) (cf. Augustus-> Tiberius etc.)

[rzk]

There is an ongoing academic discussion about what the Gospel of Judas is all about. It is far from decided. It is a difficult text.
Take a look on the book on the subject by April DeConick for instance.
Or read this brief info:
http://www.aprildeconick.com/gospelofjudas.html

"I didn't find a sublime Judas. I found a Judas more demonic than any Judas I know in any other piece of early Christian literature."
-April DeConick"

The academic discussion goes on.

[deviadah]

There is an ongoing academic discussion about what the Gospel of Judas is all about. It is far from decided. It is a difficult text.
Same goes for all Biblical texts (and other religious texts as well)!

I am of the firm belief that NONE of them are really that religious... not in the sense of Messiah, God, Worship etc...

For me it is all a metaphysical allegory of alchemical significance... and once you look at these texts from this angle it becomes much more understandable!

I like Judas by the way... if we assume that he was in fact a real person (and that Jesus was too) I can't help to have this feeling that there is something missing in the whole ordeal. I don't think Judas was bad... I think he was an ancient version of Lee Harvey Oswald: patsy!

Now there is the Corporate Elite... back then it was the Sanhedrin Council (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanhedrin)!

One of the members of this council is Joseph of Arimathea (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_of_Arimathea) - a much neglected character and one that - indeed - discovered (at least partly) the secrets of the Great Work!

But that is another story...

There is a nice resource here: National Geographic (http://www.nationalgeographic.com/lostgospel/) (including the original pages + translations)

:cool:

[rzk]

I recommend the Critical Edition of The Gospel of Judas by National Geographic, instead of the site-version.
Also I recommend that one reads the DeConick-translation.

They are very different.

[frater luciferi]

I recommend the Critical Edition of The Gospel of Judas by National Geographic, instead of the site-version.
Also I recommend that one reads the DeConick-translation.

They are very different.

how can there be such a dramatic difference in the interpritation of the gospel?
it seems pretty strait forward to me.

[rzk]

Jesus speaks of Judas as the 13th Daimon, and April DeConick refuse to translate the coptic Daimon to spirit, but translates it to demon, since she says that the word daimon is never used in a positive way in gnostic literature. The archons are sometimes called Daimons.

Also she argues that 13 is the number of Yaldabaoth.

Another example is the coptic porje, which the national geographic team has translated as "to set apart for", but DeConick translates as "to separate from", when they speak about the holy generation. So Judas is not to be part of the holy generation.

Also the coptic word translated as "exceed", when talking about exceeding the others, DeConick translates as "worse". So Judas is going to do worse than the others.

Please note that I have yet not taken sides in this academic discussion.

[frater luciferi]

Jesus speaks of Judas as the 13th Daimon, and April DeConick refuse to translate the coptic Daimon to spirit, but translates it to demon, since she says that the word daimon is never used in a positive way in gnostic literature. The archons are sometimes called Daimons.

Also she argues that 13 is the number of Yaldabaoth.

Another example is the coptic porje, which the national geographic team has translated as "to set apart for", but DeConick translates as "to separate from", when they speak about the holy generation. So Judas is not to be part of the holy generation.

Also the coptic word translated as "exceed", when talking about exceeding the others, DeConick translates as "worse". So Judas is going to do worse than the others.

Please note that I have yet not taken sides in this academic discussion.

shes a friggin moron then . simply stated the gnostics were very well versed on pagan theology. and daimon is not in any way entirely fitting the same mold as the x-tian archetype of the demon. thats a really big mistake.

[frater luciferi]

Also she argues that 13 is the number of Yaldabaoth.



another epic fail.

[frater luciferi]

just from what i have read in your post man, shes twisting the text to fit the mold of her own theorum..and quite badly to say the least.

[deviadah]

just from what i have read in your post man, shes twisting the text to fit the mold of her own theorum..and quite badly to say the least.
I would have to agree...

Demon is Higher Spirit in my book, and will so remain!

:cool:

[frater luciferi]

I would have to agree...

Demon is Higher Spirit in my book, and will so remain!

:cool:

i sent the charlatan a e-mail chastising her for the bad interpritation of gnostic theology. i suggest you all do the same.

adeconick@rice.edu

[deviadah]

i suggest you all do the same.
:laugh:

Will do!

Although it is all subject to interpretation and one can't be sure about anything... so she can believe what she likes! That is why it is always good, and healthy, to read books on both sides of the spectrum!

Became interested in the Esoteric World by reading books that were against it (and now I am - obviously - all for it)! Gnosis can be found in the most weird places...

:cool:

[frater luciferi]

i just re-scanned the gospel and i really dont get how she could of came to that conclusion. i really dont. it has me greatly miffed..and it makes me thinks there is some fishy reasoning to it. Its one thing to believe something and another to be a "lettered" scholar who is claiming a theory as the "one true" interpritation and translation of a text.

[frater luciferi]

http://press.nationalgeographic.com/pressroom/index.jsp?pageID=pressReleases_detail&siteID=1&cid=1196942552919

the above link is to an official explanation of the original scholars.

[deviadah]

Its one thing to believe something and another to be a "lettered" scholar who is claiming a theory as the "one true" interpritation and translation of a text.
That is why I asked you about this: http://forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?t=3026

:cool:

[rzk]

Which version did you re-scan?
The version on the national geographic site, even the NG-team is not using anymore. They have sided with DeConick and the others criticising it on at least a couple of points.

If you can point to gnostic texts where the word Daimon is used in a positive sense, it would be great. Most of the time it is used speaking of the archons.

If you have many cases where 13th is used to denote a spiritual realm above Yaldabaoth, that would also be great. It is however often so that gnostic literature talks about Yaldabaoth as the lord of the 13th realm (counting the seven heavens and the five reals of the underworld to 12, and having yalda on top as 13).

[sethur]

My two pennyworth:

I don't think the Gospel of Judas is full-blown Gnostic at all - it's too late. I suspect it is the work of Arians. It SEEMS Gnostic to us because Gnosticism has such an allure to the modern day occultist, and academics are the same. But the war against the Gnostics was over in the Christian world by the time attributed to Judas, the big battle was with Bishop Arius and his idea that Christ was not flesh, heretical to the Orthodox. That Christ might not be "of the flesh" wouldn't be objectional to Gnostics, but the emphasis within Judas suggests a later heresy. Of course, academics might use "Gnostic" to cover a multitude of sins......

[frater luciferi]

Which version did you re-scan?
The version on the national geographic site, even the NG-team is not using anymore. They have sided with DeConick and the others criticising it on at least a couple of points.

If you can point to gnostic texts where the word Daimon is used in a positive sense, it would be great. Most of the time it is used speaking of the archons.

If you have many cases where 13th is used to denote a spiritual realm above Yaldabaoth, that would also be great. It is however often so that gnostic literature talks about Yaldabaoth as the lord of the 13th realm (counting the seven heavens and the five reals of the underworld to 12, and having yalda on top as 13).

i'm not really diagreeing with the fact that judas may in some sense be representing the demiurge--im just having a very very hard time accepting that daimon in gnostic term is equivilent to the x-tian term demon. that does not make sense to me.

you would think that since gnosticism in its theology borrows heavily from pagan sources, that the gnostics in there varying sects would understand/comprehend the original meaning of the term daimon..ie daemon.
im not saying that i am well versed enough in gnostic theology..i just know that
there is heavy pagan metaphysics in a lot of the texts i have read... if you want i'd love a like to the new translation but i think that the only two terms that really come into controversy are the usage of the 13th spirit and the term daimon..all the rest of the text go into a cosmology that i'm pretty certain that does not seem to me to even gel with sethian gnosticism.

but whos to say? every new "gnostic" text is a little different..and perhaps they jumped the gun a little claiming that this is a "gnostic" text.

does anyone know of a compendeum of the instances and way that daimon is used in gnostic literature?

all i have come up with doing research into the term--is that the term daemon-of which daimon is derived is --that it is a spirit between man and the gods..no designation purely of evil or good.

[rzk]

DeConick has a short list of things that is the difference between the original NG-translation and her own. Now paraphrasing "The Thirteenth Apostle" by April DeConick, page 60:

NG:
Judas is the perfect enlightened Gnostic
Judas ascends to the holy generation.
Jesus ascends to the holy generation.
Jesus wants Judas to betray him.
Jesus wants to escape the material world.
Judas performs a righteous act, serving Jesus by "betraying" him.
Judas will be able to enter the divine realm as symbolized by his vision of the great house.
As the "thirteenth," Judas surpasses the twelve disciples, and is lucky and blessed by this number.

...

DeConick:
Judas is a demon.
Judas will lament and mourn his fate.
Judas´seed controls the Archons, instead of being controlled by them.
Judas is separated from the holy generation.
Judas will not ascend to the holy generation.
Judas cannot enter the heavenly house he has seen in his vision.
Judas does the worst thing he can do by sacrificing Jesus.

[frater luciferi]

DeConick has a short list of things that is the difference between the original NG-translation and her own. Now paraphrasing "The Thirteenth Apostle" by April DeConick, page 60:

NG:
Judas is the perfect enlightened Gnostic
Judas ascends to the holy generation.
Jesus ascends to the holy generation.
Jesus wants Judas to betray him.
Jesus wants to escape the material world.
Judas performs a righteous act, serving Jesus by "betraying" him.
Judas will be able to enter the divine realm as symbolized by his vision of the great house.
As the "thirteenth," Judas surpasses the twelve disciples, and is lucky and blessed by this number.

...

DeConick:
Judas is a demon.
Judas will lament and mourn his fate.
Judas´seed controls the Archons, instead of being controlled by them.
Judas is separated from the holy generation.
Judas will not ascend to the holy generation.
Judas cannot enter the heavenly house he has seen in his vision.
Judas does the worst thing he can do by sacrificing Jesus.

i really seriously wish i could compare the two translations..deconicks interpritation of the text pretty much contradicts everything that the original translators deduced. this is going to take a lot more study odviously :)