More on the so-called ‘Gospel of Judas’

More information on the so-called ‘Gospel of Judas” was in the news:

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.

As part of a 2006 National Geographic Society (the Society) investigation of the document, microscopist Joseph Barabe of McCrone Associates in Illinois and a team of researchers analyzed the ink on the tattered gospel to find out if it was real or forged. Some of the chemicals in the ink raised red flags — until Barabe and his colleagues found, at the Louvre Museum, a study of Egyptian documents from the third century A.D., the same time period of the Gospal of Judas.

“What the French study told us is that ink technology was undergoing a transition,” Barabe told LiveScience. The Gospel of Judas’ odd ink suddenly fit into place…

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…

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. http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/04/08/truth-behind-gospel-judas-revealed-in-ancient-inks/#ixzz2Q16CsXjz

You’d expect a sign that the Gospel of Judas (a fragmented ancient text that casts Judas in a more sympathetic light than the gospels published in the Bible) is authentic would come as a flash of divine inspiration. But scientists are basing their belief on the extremely mundane analysis of … ink. After examining other third-century documents like marriage certificates and land documents, experts realized that folks then were moving from using lamp black ink to brown iron gall ink. Turns out the raggedy document scrawled out in Coptic (Egyptian) was written in a mixture of both. This explained its odd chemical makeup, dating the doc to around A.D. 280. http://now.msn.com/gospel-of-judas-ink-analysis-shows-it-could-be-authentic-and-explain-why-judas-turned-jesus-christ-over

While the ‘Judas’ document in question may be a lot older than a recent invention, the reality is that it was not quoted by Polycarp of Smyrna in anything I have seen nor was it considered as part of the New Testament canon by the apostles or their early faithful followers in Asia Minor.

Years ago, Peter Nathan of COGaIC reported about this ‘Judas’ book (and that was reported here, see COGaIC and the Gospel of Judas). And neither he nor I thought it was real, in the inspired by God since, then-or now (as I really doubt he changed his mind either).

In the past I have commented on some of the gnostic and other false gospels. I do not believe that the so-called gospels of Thomas, Mary Magdalene, Judas, James, Peter, or Barnabas were written by the famous people in their titles. Nor were they accepted by faithful Christians as inspired by God (though some Greco-Roman types accepted some of them for a while). Mainly they represent Gnostic and other heresies.

And as far as age goes, most scholars do not believe that any of them were written until at least the second century. All the books accepted by the Continuing Church of God and most other churches were written before the close of the first century. Even if the so-called ‘Gospel of Judas’ is very old, it is generally not believed to be that old.

Some articles of possibly related interest may include:

The New Testament Canon – From the Bible and History This article, shows from the Bible and supporting historical sources, why the early Church knew which books were part of the Bible and which ones were not.
The Old Testament Canon This article shows from Catholic accepted writings, that the Old Testament used by non-Roman Catholics and non-Orthodox churches is the correct version.
Sola Scriptura or Prima Luther? What Did Martin Luther Really Believe About the Bible? Though he is known for his public sola Scriptura teaching, did Martin Luther’s writings about the Bible suggest he felt that prima Luther was his ultimate authority? Statements from him changing and/or discounting 18 books of the Bible are included. Do you really want to know the truth?
The History of Early Christianity Are you aware that what most people believe is not what truly happened to the true Christian church? Do you know where the early church was based? Do you know what were the doctrines of the early church? Is your faith really based upon the truth or compromise?