Truth or Fable?

[Sahansdal]

Kelyn,

I'm seriously amazed that so many readers still think that there was a Judas. His being a stand-in is kinda central to the whole premise. Maybe next time, if there is a next time, I'll get it right!

Please, please remember that this is a discussion. The opinions here are just that, opinions. Notwithstanding whether or not the book affected my beliefs, I enjoyed reading the alternative view that the book presented. Don't let the content of one forum turn you away from researching and writing!! I was blown away by your showing up in the forum by the way. Thanks so much for adding your responses to the discussion.

I also enjoyed reading the alternative view that the book presented. My faith doesn't make me blind or compels me to ready only Christian literature. The main point here is that people should understand that Misreading Judas is just a different interpretation using different sources. There is no proof that X or Y source is better or more reliable. Some people here believe that there is a battle between science (truth) and faith (ignorance). It's not the case.

Lina,

Thanks for that. I'll tell you that it isn't a case of "better" except in that the gnostic texts present a believable narrative as is, and that the canon is evidently derived and inverted. That's enormously significant if true, and I think it clearly is true. The Betrayal narrative in the Bible is derived from the gnostic succession narrative. It won't work the other way, if only because the Gnostics would never be caught dead, so to speak, copying an orthodox narrative based on human sacrifice. The Pauline orthodoxy, however, is already known to invert gnostic/Essene ideas (see Dr. Robert Eisenman's Dead Sea Scrolls work), and had every reason to hide James. Sources outside of the Bible mention Paul as responsible for his death by stoning. This was the source of 'the stoning of Stephen' story in Acts 7. I merely followed Eisenman's lead and looked more deeply at James in the Gospels, where Judas covers him. The details are there. if you know enough to spot them. It took me about 10 years of study. Eisenman is the key to this. He is a brilliant scholar. I met him. He found Paul's blood salvation doctrine to be derived from an inversion of ascetic Essene blood purity observances at Qumran. The more you learn about this, the more fascinating it becomes. Especially if you know mysticism, as I do.
I can't recommend Eisenman highly enough. But his work is not easy to read. I loved it, and read three of his books twice, two of them a thousand pages each.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.v ... i.lxx.html
Eisenman:
http://roberteisenman.com/

[Letta_Jones]

I believe that it is true but it is very hard to tell. I believe that people need to follow their heart and decide for themselves whether it is truth or fable.

[Annabelle Higgins]

This author has gone slightly off topic to this book with his references to numerous people who don't really have any idea about this. For someone who might be Christian, some of these references don't make any sense. Also, the fact that he hasn't chosen the Bible as his main reference also undermines how reliable this book is.

[Choine]

I, honestly, didn't agree with the book. I still believe that Judas was the person that betrayed Jesus. I agree that the book was difficult to read. I had to re-read sections two and three times before understanding it completely.

[Kelyn]

I, honestly, didn't agree with the book. I still believe that Judas was the person that betrayed Jesus. I agree that the book was difficult to read. I had to re-read sections two and three times before understanding it completely.

So did I. It was difficult to understand at times. Thanks so much for dropping in and commenting!

[Kelyn]

This author has gone slightly off topic to this book with his references to numerous people who don't really have any idea about this. For someone who might be Christian, some of these references don't make any sense. Also, the fact that he hasn't chosen the Bible as his main reference also undermines how reliable this book is.

I don't know that the author is Christian. He refers to himself as a "Mystic." Thanks for stopping in and commenting!

[Sahansdal]

I, honestly, didn't agree with the book. I still believe that Judas was the person that betrayed Jesus. I agree that the book was difficult to read. I had to re-read sections two and three times before understanding it completely.

I drop in here daily. Maybe I can answer your questions? I kept it very short on purpose. I know it is a stretch for most people, but the premise is pretty simple, really. Just compare the parallel texts and decide which came first. There are key details to tell which is original. I think it is quite clear that with so many parallel details, and mostly in order, there is some copying going on. It is very important that we recognize this, and its huge implications. I'm not the first to notice that stories in the New Testament got copied from elsewhere. Here is a short book on sources for the Book of Acts, that you may find interesting: The Mystery of Acts, By Richard Pervo.

[Sahansdal]

I guess I am confused. If the author believes that the Gospel of Judas should be interpreted without a New Testament of the Bible bias, why would he use certain segments of the Bible to support the validity of the "true" story of what happened with Judas? If I believe that the Bible is mostly a misrepresented, heavily flawed, mistranslated document in many parts, then I would have a difficult time believing any of it.

It seems quite a few of us found something (or things) about the book confusing. You pose an interesting question there. I believe it was to indicate that the two (the Bible and the gospel of Judas) do agree on some things and/or can be integrated to come up with the 'true' story. The author himself is visiting the forum. Perhaps you can ask him directly!! His user name is Sahansdal. I agree with your last statement. If we are to believe that the Bible is so heavily flawed, how can we trust any part of it? The answer, however, is elusive. Thanks so much for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us.

Kelyn,

I know I go into this with others. The Old Testament is just fine. I love it. It is one of the greatest collections of literature. I thnk Zechariah is my very favorite of any writing. The mysticism is so deep and beautifully written, I hope everyone reads what I do with it in The Bible Says Saviors - Obadiah 1:21. The New Testament is an entirely different story. From inception, it is disinformation. No one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice. The sacrifice is of self. I really think the Gospel of Judas, if not the very source of this idea, had something intimately to do with it. It may have been an early commentary by Gnostics to counter Mark. Like I say, I still have questions myself. But I am absolutely sure that Judas covers James, the real Master they were desperate to hide. Masters are always here. This is obscurely evident even in the Gospels (John 6:40, 9:4-5, 14:6 and 7). Read my first book. I cover all these thoroughly.

[Kelyn]

I guess I am confused. If the author believes that the Gospel of Judas should be interpreted without a New Testament of the Bible bias, why would he use certain segments of the Bible to support the validity of the "true" story of what happened with Judas? If I believe that the Bible is mostly a misrepresented, heavily flawed, mistranslated document in many parts, then I would have a difficult time believing any of it.

It seems quite a few of us found something (or things) about the book confusing. You pose an interesting question there. I believe it was to indicate that the two (the Bible and the gospel of Judas) do agree on some things and/or can be integrated to come up with the 'true' story. The author himself is visiting the forum. Perhaps you can ask him directly!! His user name is Sahansdal. I agree with your last statement. If we are to believe that the Bible is so heavily flawed, how can we trust any part of it? The answer, however, is elusive. Thanks so much for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us.

Kelyn,

I know I go into this with others. The Old Testament is just fine. I love it. It is one of the greatest collections of literature. I thnk Zechariah is my very favorite of any writing. The mysticism is so deep and beautifully written, I hope everyone reads what I do with it in The Bible Says Saviors - Obadiah 1:21. The New Testament is an entirely different story. From inception, it is disinformation. No one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice. The sacrifice is of self. I really think the Gospel of Judas, if not the very source of this idea, had something intimately to do with it. It may have been an early commentary by Gnostics to counter Mark. Like I say, I still have questions myself. But I am absolutely sure that Judas covers James, the real Master they were desperate to hide. Masters are always here. This is obscurely evident even in the Gospels (John 6:40, 9:4-5, 14:6 and 7). Read my first book. I cover all these thoroughly.

Thank you for the explanation. That 'no one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice' is an idea you're going to have an extremely difficult idea selling people on seeing that it's pretty much what the entire Christian religion is based on. Too simplistic, I know. Sorry, no scholar here. I will admit I found the possibility that they were trying to 'hide' James intriguing. It's not an idea I'd run across before, even in religion and philosophy of religion classes that were required in university. I would have thought they'd at least mention the possibility in the philosophy class, but no. I am sorry, I doubt I will take on your first book due to the length, but I might be able to 'cherry pick' sections to read based on what has been said and asked here. Thank you so much for taking in interest in the forum!

[Sahansdal]

It seems quite a few of us found something (or things) about the book confusing. You pose an interesting question there. I believe it was to indicate that the two (the Bible and the gospel of Judas) do agree on some things and/or can be integrated to come up with the 'true' story. The author himself is visiting the forum. Perhaps you can ask him directly!! His user name is Sahansdal. I agree with your last statement. If we are to believe that the Bible is so heavily flawed, how can we trust any part of it? The answer, however, is elusive. Thanks so much for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us.

Kelyn,

I know I go into this with others. The Old Testament is just fine. I love it. It is one of the greatest collections of literature. I thnk Zechariah is my very favorite of any writing. The mysticism is so deep and beautifully written, I hope everyone reads what I do with it in The Bible Says Saviors - Obadiah 1:21. The New Testament is an entirely different story. From inception, it is disinformation. No one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice. The sacrifice is of self. I really think the Gospel of Judas, if not the very source of this idea, had something intimately to do with it. It may have been an early commentary by Gnostics to counter Mark. Like I say, I still have questions myself. But I am absolutely sure that Judas covers James, the real Master they were desperate to hide. Masters are always here. This is obscurely evident even in the Gospels (John 6:40, 9:4-5, 14:6 and 7). Read my first book. I cover all these thoroughly.

Thank you for the explanation. That 'no one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice' is an idea you're going to have an extremely difficult idea selling people on seeing that it's pretty much what the entire Christian religion is based on. Too simplistic, I know. Sorry, no scholar here. I will admit I found the possibility that they were trying to 'hide' James intriguing. It's not an idea I'd run across before, even in religion and philosophy of religion classes that were required in university. I would have thought they'd at least mention the possibility in the philosophy class, but no. I am sorry, I doubt I will take on your first book due to the length, but I might be able to 'cherry pick' sections to read based on what has been said and asked here. Thank you so much for taking in interest in the forum!

Kelyn,

The first book is only 238 pages. It gives much of the support you desire for why the New Testament is disinformation. Martyrdom sacrifice is a compelling idea, though false. Look at how it caught on! Has any idea every galvanized humanity's imagination in such a way as that? It is totally untrue. God is not limited that he has to kill his only faithful son to save others (Son is not Jesus, but Holy Spirit). It's a crazy idea, and silly on its face when you realize that there would then be no reason at all for all those who were born and then died before the savior was even born! Or what about those remote people who even now have never known about the "Good News"? Sant Mat takes this into account with the reality of rebirth, or reincarnation. Salvation is not saving from death, but saving FROM REBIRTH.

[Tommi]

I believe its entirely false. Many people are not really concerned about giving out facts.

[Sahansdal]

I believe its entirely false. Many people are not really concerned about giving out facts.

I doubt you even read it, Tommi. You can't cite a single thing about my book that is "false."

[Kelyn]

Thank you for the explanation. That 'no one is saved by martyrdom sacrifice' is an idea you're going to have an extremely difficult idea selling people on seeing that it's pretty much what the entire Christian religion is based on. Too simplistic, I know. Sorry, no scholar here. I will admit I found the possibility that they were trying to 'hide' James intriguing. It's not an idea I'd run across before, even in religion and philosophy of religion classes that were required in university. I would have thought they'd at least mention the possibility in the philosophy class, but no. I am sorry, I doubt I will take on your first book due to the length, but I might be able to 'cherry pick' sections to read based on what has been said and asked here. Thank you so much for taking in interest in the forum!

Kelyn,

The first book is only 238 pages. It gives much of the support you desire for why the New Testament is disinformation. Martyrdom sacrifice is a compelling idea, though false. Look at how it caught on! Has any idea every galvanized humanity's imagination in such a way as that? It is totally untrue. God is not limited that he has to kill his only faithful son to save others (Son is not Jesus, but Holy Spirit). It's a crazy idea, and silly on its face when you realize that there would then be no reason at all for all those who were born and then died before the savior was even born! Or what about those remote people who even now have never known about the "Good News"? Sant Mat takes this into account with the reality of rebirth, or reincarnation. Salvation is not saving from death, but saving FROM REBIRTH.

You tempt me, fairly badly, to start actually talking religion but, as moderator, I will refrain with great effort. Let's just say that some of your points I can agree with and others I cannot. As the first book is much shorter than I thought, I may give it a read. No promises, but it's worth thinking about.

[Sahansdal]

I believe its entirely false. Many people are not really concerned about giving out facts.

Thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us!

I want to hear what makes these people say that! I worked hard to get this right. I have spent a lifetime to get where I am at understanding the Bible, and it cost me all my high school friends, most of the others I made along the way, too, since then, so all I have is my wife's family (thank God) and some great Satsangi friends. All I need. But this is for Christians, as I left behind some dear friends as I left the Church in 1973. This hasn't been without cost. People are being lied to, and have been for centuries. What am I supposed to do, now that I know? Judas is the mystic sacrifice in this gnostic masterpiece! And 'Judas' IS James, a real MASTER. Are we to let this story get away without so much as a whimper???

I didn't start this. And I sure as hell am not letting it end with me. Two billion Christians is a lot of Christians. I soldier on!

[Kelyn]

I believe its entirely false. Many people are not really concerned about giving out facts.

Thank you for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us!

I want to hear what makes these people say that! I worked hard to get this right. I have spent a lifetime to get where I am at understanding the Bible, and it cost me all my high school friends, most of the others I made along the way, too, since then, so all I have is my wife's family (thank God) and some great Satsangi friends. All I need. But this is for Christians, as I left behind some dear friends as I left the Church in 1973. This hasn't been without cost. People are being lied to, and have been for centuries. What am I supposed to do, now that I know? Judas is the mystic sacrifice in this gnostic masterpiece! And 'Judas' IS James, a real MASTER. Are we to let this story get away without so much as a whimper???

I didn't start this. And I sure as hell am not letting it end with me. Two billion Christians is a lot of Christians. I soldier on!

No, you aren't expected to hide it or quit. And I admire you for both writing a book you had to know was going to be so controversial and for 'soldiering on' to reach the people you wrote the book for. I am truly sorry for all the people your faith and determination has lost you. I don't know if you've read all the posts in the forum, but a few of them outline quite succinctly why they think as they do. If you haven't read them all, I encourage you to do so. It might give you a few of the answers you're looking for.