In Christian history, Jesus Christ gathered twelve people to his side to be his apostles and spread his beliefs throughout the world. According to The Bible, Judas Iscariot accepts payment of thirty silver coins from the Sanhedrin priests and agrees to point out Jesus to the local authorities so that he can be captured and tried for purporting to be the Son of God. Judas’s betrayal results in the trial, crucifixion, and resurrection as depicted later in the Gospels. The traditional telling of this matter is done by the four Gospels—Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John--, but what if Judas himself got a say in the matter? In the 1970s, a papyrus codex was discovered near Beni Masah, Egypt which appears to be from Judas’s point of view. In Reading Judas, Elaine Pagels and Karen King tackle the new text to see if it can shed new light on old mythology.

There are a lot of things to learn from a shredded piece of paper from 1,700 years ago. First, Christianity was, is, and will always be an infinitely nuanced and an infinitely personal set of beliefs. Each iteration of the religion in each person begets a new system. In the Bible, each voice has a different Christianity, and in this new text, we hear the voice of the oft-reviled Judas Iscariot. The text is short, but packed with historical details, research, and annotations to the original document. It is a Coptic translation of a 2nd century Greek text, so things can definitely get lost through the years. Judas’s act, seen through Gnostic eyes, is one of love and loyalty, setting in motion the inevitable resurrection of his friend and the salvation of mankind.

Pagels’s and King’s text is nice and tight. They know that not everyone will be pleased to read about the “good” deeds of Judas Iscariot. Traditionalists will see this as a deliberate blurring of the lines between good and evil, but the codex is still a legitimate piece of history. Scholars can debate among themselves about the literal meanings of certain words and phrases, but they are more qualified than I in this matter. Overall, this was a very interesting book that illuminates a rather shady character in the Bible. ( )

Pagels and King present the Gospel of Judas like a retelling of Wicked from Judas' point of view. It's not altogether bad; I was expecting something with a little more scholarly depth. Everything is related back to many of the gnostic materials with some of the oddities that accompany many of the gnostic texts as well. Their focus seems to be more on the book as a contradiction to substitutionary atonement, which if that were the case there's been more than 1200 years of better atonement theology out there. Their other concern is trying to make it a viable gospel instead of critiquing the work as a whole to see if it bears any truth. What little they do find they confer by referencing other gnostic material, which is dated so bad that even a literary scholar would have thrown it out. ( )

I found this book a bit disappointing, as it seemed to be much more a rehash of the author's book on the Gnostic Gospels, and really didn't give enough information on the gospel of Judas, which is what I was hoping for in a book about the gospel of Judas. ( )

This is a fun one. Short and sweet, Karen and Elaine share their unique interpretation of this fascinating discovery. Scholars of the gospel of Judas would never consider it mainstream Christianity ... can any book who paints a Christian villian as a hero be mainstream? ... and yet, there remains a lot of controversy about exactly how to classify that ancient Gospel. Part of the problem, of course, is that it's far from complete; and while that's certainly not the fault of Pagels and King, it does disrupt the readability of their book when pieces of the manuscript are missing.

The subtitle of the book is "The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity." This discussion of early Christianity is, precisely, what makes the Pagels/King book interesting. They delve into the conflict between Paul and Peter, and how later writers (such as the book of Acts) purposefully glossed over this conflict in an attempt to bring unison.

The book is in two parts: First, a discussion of the gospel and it setting, and second, an interpretation of the gospel itself with commentary. Karen King translates it herself, and their understanding is unique, quite different from other coverage of the gospel of Judas, as they are unafraid to give serious attention to alternative strands of Christianity and their meaning of the cross, the suffering of martyrs, and of Jesus' divinity. These were important topics in the early years of Christianity, and Christians today are, for the most part, quite unaware of the divisive strands that existed in those days.

Pagels and King do present controversial views (I found myself often disagreeing), but regardless of your beliefs or opinions, this is a fascinating read about an equally fascinating topic. ( )

The Gospel of Judas presents, for most modern readers, an unfamiliar and uncomfortable portrait of the relationship between Jesus and Judas Iscariot. Perhaps Judas was not betraying Jesus, but instead was the only enlightened disciple, who understood that all evils all lay in the material world, and the true believers would transcend it to a higher spiritual realm once they realized that. Therefore the crucifixion would have meant very little - the true spiritual Jesus merely 'shedding' his vulgar skin - and Judas played an integral part in this plot.

Such Christian Gnosticism had been condemned as heretical in the proto-orthodox early church, but was popular among many Christians, especially persecuted ones. It's easy to see its popularity: suffering is temporary, as long as the spiritual self remains unblemished, spiritual salvation is all that matters. On the other hand, the ones doing the persecution at present will be damned to their own material and evil world. This seems to have been the society in which the Gospel of Judas was written, due to its condemnation of the 'other' apostles and support of Judas.

Reading Judas includes the full text of the Gospel, a verse-by-verse commentary, and several chapters detailing the situation and conflicts of the early Christian church. Even though the gospel is placed somewhat near the end of the book, readers should read it first to have a better sense of what's going on in the other chapters. It's a very clear and concise look at this alternate Christianity in the first few centuries of the church - a testament that the religion was hardly a harmonious movement but rather many people with many theologies adjusted to their own social climate. ( )

FUZZY THOUGHTS SLOPPILY ORGANIZED, POORLY WRITTEN:
READING JUDAS: THE GOSPEL OF JUDAS AND THE SHAPING OF CHRISTIANITY
BY ELAINE PAGELS AND KAREN KING


Even the title demonstrates the lack of a good editor for this book. It does not reflect what the book is about. The book does not delve into “the shaping of Christianity” except by way of some slight background about Irenaeus and his negative views of the Gospel of Judas that are set forth in Against Heresies. Similarly, Pagels and King promise much in their Introduction:

Much of the Gospel of Judas is filled with Jesus’s brilliant teaching about the spiritual life. Why, then, the author’s rage? What matters so deeply? And most important, what hope does the author offer to redeem his anger? The answers to these questions lead deep into the agonizing controversies and exultant visions of God that would ultimately come to shape Christianity and capture the hearts and souls of people for millennia to come. These are the matters we address in Reading Judas: The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity.

p. xiii. But the only one of those questions they address is about the author’s supposed rage. Personally, I do not see the alleged rage in the text of the Gospel of Judas, but perhaps that is caused by my lack of knowledge of the ancient Coptic (originally Greek) and/or the then extant literary traditions. The question of “what matters so deeply” seems to be merely rhetorical filler on the part of Pagels and King. As to what they say is the most important question, about anger, one cannot help but ask why an individual is required to “redeem” his anger? Is anger a transgression of some sort? Pagels and King imply they will go deep into agonizing controversies; if they do, such depth is not in this book. Perhaps the depth is in the other books by the same authors that they cross-sell by footnote. Given the explicit discussion of the nature and origin of immortal “spirits” of some humans in the Gospel of Judas, perhaps it just muddies the waters to discuss the “hearts and souls” of people in this imprecise (are hearts different than souls?, is either immortal?) manner.

One does not need to perform a close examination of the text to see that the organization of the book is problematic—even on a physical level it is apparent. King provides an English translation of the Gospel of Judas, with numbered references to endnotes that are set forth in the following section of the book, called “Comments on the Translation.” But then, there are endnotes to these endnotes! Thus, one is trying to mark three pages in the book simultaneously—the page where one is reading the text of the Gospel, the page referred to in the “Comments,” and the page referred to in the “Notes” section. A good editor should never have allowed endnotes to endnotes.

There does not seem to be any rhyme or reason to which points receive endnotes and which do not. Their random nature suggests an undergraduate sticking in footnotes willy nilly in order to show his professor that he has done the requisite reading, rather than to clarify a point or to give credit where credit is due. For example, the notion that the “Ancient astronomers believed that mathematical descriptions of the universe prove that divine intelligence, not chance or necessity, pervades the universe…” (p. 153) rates an ancient quote and an endnote. But the proposition that there was an “ancient belief that doing certain acts helps to cultivate corresponding inner attitudes” (p. 127) is simply asserted with no authority. The lack of consistency shows that this work was merely cobbled together.

Even the chronology implied in this book is wrong. There is a discussion concerning Irenaeous and Tertullian and the way they extolled martyrdom; then Pagels and King state that what they “hear in the Gospel of Judas is a sharp, dissenting voice.” (p. 56). Yet it is almost certain that the Gospel of Judas came before the works of Irenaeous and Tertullian, and that Irenaeous was responding to the Gospel of Judas. (p. xii, and pp. 169-70, n.2). It is not logical to say that Judas was dissenting to opinions that had not yet been promulgated. Perhaps Pagles and King were merely using these three authors as exemplars of the many voices of early Christianity, but that is not how they are presented.

This supposedly scholarly book is larded with mushy (in two senses of the word) language:

…the pattern of ruling and serving is established as one that is not only good and natural but divine. The entire universe was ordered this way by God’s command—both the divine realm above and the world below. Ruling and order display God’s goodness.

(p.149). There is no mention of “God’s goodness” or any other goodness in the passage of the Gospel of Judas that this quote seeks to explicate. It is a mere logical leap from ruling and order to goodness. Is the goodness just presumed because it arises in the context of God? If so, then what has goodness to do with ruling and order? Is there goodness implied in the original Coptic text? If so, it was not set forth in King’s translation of the text. Most likely, King and/or Pagels just had a throw-away sentence that sounded “nice,” and just put it in—meaning be damned.

The authors make much of the mystical significance of the number twelve as represented by the number of Jesus's disciples and how their number reflects the twelve angels that were set by God to rule over the lower world. (p. 134). This may well be true-- but even as a casual reader of the Bible, I cannot help but think that the twelve disciples reflect the twelve sons of Jacob and the resulting twelve tribes of Israel. Given the prominence of those themes, it seems odd there is not even a mention of the Old Testament connection to the number twelve.

If you want an orderly account of the Gospel of Judas, then read The Lost Gospel of Judas Iscariot by Bart Ehrman, and skip the chaos of the Pagels/King book.

The book is laid out in three sections. The introduction by Elaine Pagels is sound enough, although not a major advance on themes this author has treated in more depth in other writings. The text of the gospel itself is fascinating, its fragmentary nature only enhancing the mystery and strangeness of what does survive. It chronicles the spiritual education of Judas, who, alone of the disciples, seems able to begin to fathom the mind-boggling nature of Jesus' teachings. The outcome of Judas' insight is the betrayal, which abruptly concludes the gospel. Karen King's notes are the final section: essential and models of clarity. I would recommend tackling this book in the following order: (1) first the gospel text itself -- just jump in, no matter how strange it might seem; (2) then the notes; (3) then the gospel again; (4) finally, the introduction. Or, the way it's actually presented in this volume is OK, too. ( )

A very well organized and thoughtful book. The authors discussed the Gospel, the Tchacos Codex it was part of, other "Gnostic" texts and early Christian writings, and books of the New Testament. They then present the Gospel in its entirety and after discuss each line or groups of lines as appropriate. There are also extensive footnotes.

It confirms the "conspiracy" of the early church fathers in eliminating anything that didn't promote their consolidation of power and dogma. As Pagels and King point out, it was necessary from their point of view for survival of their 'sect', but as a non-Christian who sees the harm done to the message of Jesus I can only be sorry that so many of the other gospels and Christian writings of the early years didn't make it into the "New Testament". They quote many of these documents - some I've heard of, some not, so I have some areas to research too.

I am sad that the Codex fared so badly after its initial discovery - there are so many missing lines and even parts of pages because of poor handling. Pagels and King have done a careful, insightful, emotive job in writing about The Gospel of Judas. ( )

Not so much a book as an extended essay, this short work has some interesting things to say about this newly restored Gospel.

Chiefly, Pagels and King see this gospel as a response to the support of martyrdom that the early church fathers gave. Repeatedly, they refer to the thinly veiled "anger" of the author at the suggestion that somehow being tortured and killed was the best way to get closer to God.

The gospel itself, translated and annotated here, is strange and different. There are some angels and celestial beings that play an active role, and all of this reality seems to be handled by their caprice, as some sort of flawed proxy of the ultimate creator. Very strange indeed. I hadn't met that cast of characters before, or that particular vision of Christian cosmology.

Interesting, scholarly...without a whiff of any of the sensationalism that has accompanied this text since its reintroduction into the light after 1500 or so years. ( )

Excellent story! Another piece in the puzzle of the mosaic that makes up early Christianity. I am sure fundies will be upset by this, but rationalists will see how history and Old Testament prohicies were manipulated to creat the Catholic Church in the image of Paul. INteresting read. I could not put it down during a brief wait and a three hour flight home for a wedding. Pagels and King are great collaborators, and the text discussion was well-documented.
Jim 3/15/07 ( )