Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Truth Behind Gospel of Judas Revealed in Ancient Inks

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by retirednature
 


i don't have time to read the whole thread, sorry... however, i will quickly add that gurdjieff, at the turn of last century was stating as much regarding judas... now, gurdjieff tended to favour metaphor & allegory in his writings, functioning often in multiple, cryptic layers but sometimes, i think, he is crystal clear in intent...

what he stated about judas remained with me, niggling away at me constantly, until the gospel of judas came to light... pretty mindblowing that he (gurdjieff) had afforded judas a much higher & controversial status than anyone else i'd came across, & suddenly there is the gospel of judas doing the same... i have found gurdjieff so many times to be ahead of current thinking, later to be proved right in new discoveries/findings in whatever field of relevance... he amazes me... i'd recommend him if you can grasp his style, keep an open mind, & put work in




posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:35 PM
link   


I've always wondered why people would believe that Judas betrayed Jesus for a little silver, I mean... cmon, it's Jesus right? JustSayin'

That's where the conspiracy comes in.


Why conspiracy? Greed makes people do wicked things - kill unborn babies, thievery, lying, corruption etc.


I was enraged by their sinful greed; I punished them, and hid my face in anger, yet they kept on in their willful ways.

"Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence."


Judas (Greek: Ιούδας) is the anglicized Greek rendering of the Hebrew name Yehudah (Judah).


He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.
John 1:11


Joseph, being a 'type' of Jesus, was sold to the Ishmaelites by his brother Judah...for silver.

There is so much more to 'judas' to be known, but from scripture - not from yet another gnostic text whereby the wicked ones are exalted as the 'good guys'.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 01:39 PM
link   
Judas was no doubt chosen but what was he chosen to do. All believers should have an understanding that all things are in GOD'S hands. Was he chosen to betray Jesus so that Jesus would be killed on the cross and save us? Was he chosen to have Jesus imprisoned to start Armageddon but was betrayed himself and Jesus was quickly killed to stop the uprising? Maybe he was chosen as a test of faith in Jesus teachings of love your neighbor as yourself because he was the most battle hardened among them and he failed the test because he was blood thirsty?

In my mind the question is what does GOD really want from us? There has been no shortage of bloodshed and we still have not won the battle.The technology to kill keeps evolving but where does that leave love? Does he want all his believers to be blood soaked or slain or does he want us to follow the path of his son? There is always more to the story. I think it is most important to love than to choose to kill because GOD has the power over all but he can not force you to choose love but he can take what is his at anytime. It seems naive to think that satan is here because he continues to trick GOD.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by retirednature
 


Did Jesus entrust Judas to do something that none of the other disciples would have done?
It's an interesting thought.

Does this mean that Judas was a hero? I don't know.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 03:17 PM
link   
yea i always thought it was fishy to especially when Jesus told Judas that he would betray him and he still went ahead and did it



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
MSM such as National Geographic are nothing but stealth propaganda.

Doubt everything in the mainstream apparatus and assume if they are airing something publicly, it is agenda driven.

If I have learned ONE thing about propaganda it's this:

Believe the OPPOSITE of what they are saying.


To sum it up briefly, the Gospel of Judas is a hoax to deceive the masses and better yet, sell a great many copies. Money is usually the bottom line to all fraud. Link

The National Geographic Society has unveiled the "Gospel of Judas," and the New York Times reports that the ancient document "will set off years of study and debate." The story continues:

The debate is not over whether the manuscript is genuine-- on this the scholars agree.

Whoa! Hold on just a minute! The document is apparently genuine, all right. But it's a "genuine" product of the Gnostic sect, dating back to around 300 AD-- or about 270 years after Judas died.

The "Gospel of Judas"-- of which this document is apparently a copy-- was produced by an unknown Gnostic author earlier. We know this (as the Times helpfully reminds us) because St. Irenaeus, writing late in the 2nd century, has already identified the "Gospel of Judas" as a fraud. But hey, it's a genuine fraud. a genuine fraud

The National Geographic special portrays the Gos-Bull of Judas consisting of thirteen pages. But according to American Coptologist Stephen Emmel, in 1983 he inspected sixty pages of the Gos-Bull. Like a smoky fog, somewhere along its rocky road to fame much of the Gos-Bull silently disappeared.

The sole support of "Judas" rests upon this single creepy, mutilated manuscript. Compare that to the over 6,000 existing manuscripts of the New Testament of the Bible. If "Judas" possessed any semblance of truth there would be thousands of "Judas" manuscripts. Yet the news media latch on to "Judas" like a blood sucking leech while ignoring the ocean of evidence exposing Judas as a ridiculous fraud.

The National Geographic Society ridiculously states, "The Gospel of Judas is an exclusive, two-hour global television event that traces the incredible story of one of the most important finds in biblical archaeology."

Why would anyone invest so much time and money advancing the Gos-Bull of Judas while scorning the real gospel? That answer is simple. Like the original Judas and the news media -- The Gospel of Judas betrays the Bible and the Lord Jesus Christ. Link

"...the National Geographic Society should be humiliated, and Christians should be reminded once again not to be shaken by media sensationalism. The discovery of the "Gospel of Judas" changes nothing except to add yet another manuscript to the pile of false gospels and Gnostic documents. When those scholars misrepresented the "Gospel of Judas," they betrayed not only the public trust, but the truth.

The Gospel Of Judas was written so long after the events it claims to relate that it would be as authentic as someone in 2008 writing an account of the first conversation between Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson."

The Gospel of Judas -- The Betrayal of Truth

The Gospel of Judas hoax

Judas' "Good News" Fraud

The Non-Canonical Gospels Were Known to be Fraudulent



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
reply to post by retirednature
 


I always found almost all of the Gnostic gospels to be more in line with the teachings of christ and his follower than what the church likes to portray.

Unless you are psychic, the only means that you have to determine what the teachings of Christ were is the texts which detail it. So saying that the Gnostic texts are closer to Jesus than the canonical texts is nonsensical -- yes, they are, but only if you've come to an independent conclusion that Christ was a Gnostic. Unfortunately, there are massive problems with that, conceptually, never mind that most of the Gnostic texts were written over a hundred years after the canonical texts were, and we know who started the Gnostic Christian sect, when and why. (See Valentinus - A Gnostic for All Seasons.)


Gospel of Thomas (which scholars believe is even older than the 4 new testament gospels and therefore probably more accurate.)

No, scholars do not believe that Thomas is older than the canonical texts, though parts of it may be, or may have been taken from the same sources that the canonical texts did. However, much of Thomas cannot be older, because it reflects a theology that didn't exist until the middle of the Second Century.


I can imagine the church did not want people hearing things like this since they depended on people having to go to church every sunday to be absolved of their sins and put money in the basket. Thats why out of the 30 gospels so far known only 4 (that were spun as alot more churchy) made it to the christian canon.

No, there were a number of valid reasons for excluding those texts (in reality, they were not rejected, they were never considered for canon,) including their late date and non-Apostolic sources, but the most important reason is that they are not, in any way, Christian texts. You might as well complain that there are no Hindu texts in the Koran.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


that's not what i heard but at the same time i heard that no one would believe so further into delusion we go.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by retirednature
news.yahoo.com...

Truth Behind Gospel of Judas Revealed in Ancient Inks



The Gospel of Judas is a fragmented Coptic (Egyptian)-language text that portrays Judas in a far more sympathetic light than did the gospels that made it into the Bible. In this version of the story, Judas turns Jesus over to the authorities for execution upon Jesus' request, as part of a plan to release his spirit from his body. In the accepted biblical version of the tale, Judas betrays Jesus for 30 pieces of silver.


Say what!?

How was this authenticated?




Barabe hit the books, looking for other studies on early Egyptian inks. The study of Egyptian marriage certificates and land documents from the Louvre proved to be the clincher.

That study found that contracts in Egypt in the mid-third century were written in lamp black ink, in the traditional Egyptian style. But they were officially registered in the traditional Greek style, using brown iron gall ink.

The Louvre study findings suggested to the teamthat the presence of both inks was consistent with an early date for the Gospel of Judas, Barabe said.

What's more, the Louvre study found that the metal-based inks from this time period contained little sulfur, just like the ink on the Gospel of Judas.

The discovery gave the researchers the confidence to declare the document consistent with a date of approximately A.D. 280. (Barabe and his colleagues caution that this finding doesn't prove beyond doubt that the document is authentic, but rather that there are no red flags proving it's a forgery.)


I've always wondered why people would believe that Judas betrayed Jesus for a little silver, I mean... cmon, it's Jesus right? JustSayin'

That's where the conspiracy comes in.

Doesn't it make more sense that Jesus, in order to finish his plan and become immortalized forever would have to go through with the crucifixion, in which Judas helped move along?

But if you tell it that way, it takes away from the 'evilness' that was his persecution and crucifixion, it just wouldn't jive. Excuse my ignorance, but to me... it all seems very, hmmm... Socrates like, or Plato's account of Socrates' execution. Now, I've always been under the impression that if there was never Socrates, Plato, and Pythagoras(countless others, but you get the point) that there would have never been the story of Jesus. The form, the means, the style, the entire discussion that is the New Testament just seems like a rehash of Ancient Greek Philosophy. Am I the only one?

I know there's plenty of self proclaimed biblical scholars on ATS, so I thought I'd share and get some opinions. Maybe learn a thing or two, hopefully three.








has nothing to do with ' self proclaimed bible teachers ' love

its so obvious False

what they do here,
is slip in a 4th into the Trinity
'judas '



the same trick, Jung used
- after he was inside a dark room for three weeks
and every demon explained him his to be ' theory '.

Same trick
different face.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Lone12
 


Sounds like you said you are not part of the trinity. What would be the need for father son and holy spirit if you have no involvement with the three.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


It is my personal opinion that Jesus was a Gnostic. It makes more sense and it rings true to what I believe. And if you actually read what I wrote I did not say all of the omitted gospels, I said Thomas. Unlike the other 4 canon gospels Thomas is a book of sayings instead of personal accounts of Jesus life. Therefore it is harder to date, nobody can really accurately date any of the gospels. So ultimately it does not matter.

From Wiki:

Estimates for the dates when the canonical gospel accounts were written vary significantly; and the evidence for any of the dates is scanty. Because the earliest surviving complete copies of the gospels date to the 4th century and because only fragments and quotations exist before that, scholars use higher criticism to propose likely ranges of dates for the original gospel autographs. Scholars variously assess the majority (though not the consensus [34]) view as follows:
Mark: c. 68–73,[35] c. 65–70.[36]
Matthew: c. 70–100,[35] c. 80–85.[36]
Luke: c. 80–100, with most arguing for somewhere around 85,[35] c. 80–85.[36]
John: c. 90–100,[36] c. 90–110,[37] The majority view is that it was written in stages, so there was no one date of composition.



Assigning a date to the Gospel of Thomas is very complex because it is difficult to know precisely to what a date is being assigned. Scholars have proposed a date as early as AD 40 or as late as AD 140. Valantasis and other scholars argue that it is difficult to date Thomas because, as a collection of logia without a narrative framework, individual sayings could have been added to it gradually over time. (However, Valantasis does date Thomas to 100–110 AD, with some of the material certainly coming from the first stratum which is dated to 30–60 AD.[30])


And of course there were a number of valid reasons for excluding those texts from canon. Mainly because they talk about seeking and knowing God within yourself and not from other people (priests) or places (churches). All very radical ideas for those seeking to keep people ignorant and therefore more easily controlled. And of course at the time the Roman empire was rapidly going downhill financially, politically and militarily, and would rather institute a universal monotheistic religion that taught that things like chastity and poverty and living without excess were good things. As opposed to the expensive bread and circus' policy that the Roman aristocracy used to keep the people content for so long.

But of course this is just my opinion and what my version of truth is.

One of my favorite passages:

`We are its children, and we are the chosen of the living father.' If they ask you, `What is the evidence of your father in you?' say to them, `It is motion and rest.'"

Jesus said, "Look to the living one as long as you live, or you might die and then try to see the living one, and you will be unable to see."

"I am the one who comes from what is whole. I was given from the things of my father. For this reason I say, if one is whole, one will be filled with light, but if one is divided, one will be filled with darkness.

Whoever has ears to hear should hear. There is light within a man of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine it is darkness."


edit on 9-4-2013 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-4-2013 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)
edit on 9-4-2013 by Cancerwarrior because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 

Gnostics are Cabbalists who worship Satan.

Don't seem to recall Jesus ever bowing down to the father of all lies...



Originally posted by stupid girl
Most of the Apostlic letters that make up the last half of the New Testament were written with the intent to refute the increasing heresies of Gnosticism.
The Nicene Creed was also written as a statement of faith based on the true Gospel Message as given by Jesus to the Apostles which was recorded for mankind in the 4 synoptic accounts that begin the New Testament.

Many new believers were led astray by the Gnostic perversions of Jesus' message. That is why Jesus said to seek first the Kingdom. Men have the inherent desire to seek wisdom & knowledge first, which is the modus operandi of Gnosticism in & of itself.

So in essence, Gnostic beliefs are based on the opposite of what Jesus instructed those who follow Him to do. Gnostic beliefs go against the Truths revealed to us by Christ Himself through His Apostles. Thus His Apostles referred to Gnostic teachings as 'anti Christ'.

Read the First Epistle of John (1 John, not the Gospel of John). The entire purpose of that Letter is centered on the subtle lies of Gnostic teachings. When he refers to 'anti Christs' in his letter, he is referring to Gnostic beliefs.

The New Age movement & those promulgated by the UFO contactee phenomenon are largely based on Gnosticism. All types of mysticism are respectively based on various mixtures of Kabbalah, Gnosticism & Eastern Philosophies. Which in turn, are all basically based on each other.

We are not gods. And we are only one in Christ- not in Gaia, or Christ consciousness, or universal consciousness, or karma kundalini or the galactic federation of light, or Chaka Khan Shamalama Ding Dong. We are all unique and individual and we are each accountable for the choices we make during our lifetime here on earth.

That is the Truth.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 07:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cancerwarrior
reply to post by adjensen
 


It is my personal opinion that Jesus was a Gnostic. It makes more sense and it rings true to what I believe.

How does it make any sense? Jesus was an orthodox and observant Jew. The Gnostic mythos, which eventually developed into him being the Bringer of Gnosis, depicted the God that Jesus spoke of, preached on and prayed to as a bumbling ignoramus, the Demiurge.

With those two facts in mind, why did Jesus not denounce his Judaism immediately upon reaching manhood, or at least warn the people in the synagogues that he taught at that they were worshipping a false god?

Believing that a Jewish Rabbi could be the Bringer of Gnosis demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of Jewish theology, Gnostic theology, or both.


Unlike the other 4 canon gospels Thomas is a book of sayings instead of personal accounts of Jesus life. Therefore it is harder to date

As I said, parts of it are fairly easy to date, at least on the "can't be older than" end, because they are reflective of Valentinus' theology, developed in the middle of the Second Century. Unfortunately, those parts are intentionally mixed in with authentic statements, invalidating the document. Here is a thread I wrote on the subject a couple of years ago: Early Christian Heresy: Document Forgery and the Problem of The Gospel of Thomas


And of course there were a number of valid reasons for excluding those texts from canon. Mainly because they talk about seeking and knowing God within yourself and not from other people (priests) or places (churches). All very radical ideas for those seeking to keep people ignorant and therefore more easily controlled.

No, you don't understand how canon was selected. There were three criteria to determine whether to include a text:
  1. It had to have an Apostolic connection (been written by an Apostle, or at the direction of one)
  2. It had to be in widespread use
  3. It had to be in harmony with the rest of scripture, including the Hebrew Bible

As we can see, none of the Gnostic texts meets any of those criteria. They were written long after the last Apostle was dead, they were not in widespread use, and they were contradictory to, not in harmony with, the rest of accepted scripture.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:04 PM
link   
Not that it matters but i feel strongly that the gospel of Thomas is not something satan would use to confuse. As to most of the rest of found text he uses them frequently.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:21 PM
link   
When they say 'our lord ah men"
They are actually refereing to the first pharoah of both upper and lower Egypt whose name was
you guessed it
Ah Men, or as he is also known Menes.
thats written in stone circa 4000 BC

Just like his father Zargon whose hieroglyphic name contains the reeds and basket because he was the original orphan in a basket who was found in the river and adopted by the queen ( the original "virgin birth" ), and who later became king...(also 4000 years BC...long before the fabricated christian religion )

Nomally monotheistic religions that rely on plagerised documents like the bible are not worth debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin about

really



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murgatroid
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 

Gnostics are Cabbalists who worship Satan.

Don't seem to recall Jesus ever bowing down to the father of all lies...



Originally posted by stupid girl
Most of the Apostlic letters that make up the last half of the New Testament were written with the intent to refute the increasing heresies of Gnosticism.
The Nicene Creed was also written as a statement of faith based on the true Gospel Message as given by Jesus to the Apostles which was recorded for mankind in the 4 synoptic accounts that begin the New Testament.

Many new believers were led astray by the Gnostic perversions of Jesus' message. That is why Jesus said to seek first the Kingdom. Men have the inherent desire to seek wisdom & knowledge first, which is the modus operandi of Gnosticism in & of itself.

So in essence, Gnostic beliefs are based on the opposite of what Jesus instructed those who follow Him to do. Gnostic beliefs go against the Truths revealed to us by Christ Himself through His Apostles. Thus His Apostles referred to Gnostic teachings as 'anti Christ'.

Read the First Epistle of John (1 John, not the Gospel of John). The entire purpose of that Letter is centered on the subtle lies of Gnostic teachings. When he refers to 'anti Christs' in his letter, he is referring to Gnostic beliefs.

The New Age movement & those promulgated by the UFO contactee phenomenon are largely based on Gnosticism. All types of mysticism are respectively based on various mixtures of Kabbalah, Gnosticism & Eastern Philosophies. Which in turn, are all basically based on each other.

We are not gods. And we are only one in Christ- not in Gaia, or Christ consciousness, or universal consciousness, or karma kundalini or the galactic federation of light, or Chaka Khan Shamalama Ding Dong. We are all unique and individual and we are each accountable for the choices we make during our lifetime here on earth.

That is the Truth.


Lmao!!

What a joke...

Clearly you have not read any gnostic texts... Or you wouldn't make such a ignorant statement...

And your quote comes from another member who knows little to nothing about gnostic texts as well... which ia evident by her statements... I remember the thread that quote came from..




posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murgatroid
reply to post by Cancerwarrior
 

Gnostics are Cabbalists who worship Satan.

Don't seem to recall Jesus ever bowing down to the father of all lies...




Riiiiiiiiiiight.........



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


And yet despite all of this there is truth in them. Unfortunately not the church-approved truth, but truth nonetheless. The fact is that Christianity started off with many different versions and sects. Just because some powerful men got together and decided what they wanted to be the "official" gospels does not negate the truth and validity of the others. And it does not mean that God does not exist within the other versions of Christianity (and other religions) as well.

Personally, I will take the Jesus as known in the lost gospels than the one depicted in the "approved" ones.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Akragon
Lmao!!

What a joke...

Clearly you have not read any gnostic texts... Or you wouldn't make such a ignorant statement...

And your quote comes from another member who knows little to nothing about gnostic texts as well... which ia evident by her statements... I remember the thread that quote came from..

Clearly you HAVE read the gnostic texts...

I have NO interest in studying lies.

Makes JUST as much sense as someone saying you don't understand 9/11 because you haven't read the NIST report.



posted on Apr, 9 2013 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by Osiris1953
reply to post by retirednature
 


I've always found the idea of the Gospel of Judas. To me it's always seemed to be a more plausible story. Thank for the thread, I'm glad you posted this.


Wouldn't believe anything Judas supposedly wrote, besides he hanged himself right after his betrayal. Jesus also said it would be better for him if he had never been born. Not going to be real nice whats coming for him at the end.


Such a loving Good/Jesus to have had the power to change Judas destiny from hell to heaven to let him do this and end up in hell.Guess the all knowing creator creats some of us just to fill hell. Gota respect that. I really love this Holy Bible God. Can't wait to meet him since I am a believer and all.
edit on 9-4-2013 by Xeven because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join