Overall rating and opinion of "Misreading Judas" by Robert Wahler

[Sahansdal]

While there have been many who have questioned whether Judas was destined to be the one to betray Jesus and whether there was anything he could have done to prevent it. This book gives us a fresh perspective on the issue.As a person who actively practices the Christian faith, i have always believed that what Judas did was meant to happen for Jesus to die and for us to receive our redemption.

Did you read the book? NO ONE needs to die to save you. Mark 10:45 (The Son comes "to give his life a ransom for many") is completely misread. Masters come all the time and save by giving Life, not their death. A death ransom would have been "for all" -- whether accepted as such or not. Jesus never said he came to save everyone for all time. In fact he says in several places just the opposite. John 6:40 says one must "SEE" the Master to be saved. John 9:4 and 5 in the original C. Sinaiticus text says, "WE must do the works of him who sent US while living. AS LONG AS I am in world, I am the Light of the world" and John 14:7 qualifies 14:6 to those present ONLY: "Now you know him, AND HAVE SEEN HIM" who is "the Way, the Truth and the Life." So, like I say, read the red-letter only and separate these quotes of a Master (likely James, not Jesus) from the narrative, which is Church propaganda.

Here is what a real Master says that John says, and it will be a real eye-opener:
http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/product_p/en-056-0.htm
Matthew:
http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/product_p/en-057-0.htm
The Science of the Soul.org library is books by and about real recent Masters, many in their own words, in English, printed at cost & shipped free. http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/

[Sahansdal]

The book sounds rather controversial, and one wonders what the author's true intentions are.When all is said and done,matters of faith is like falling g in love.Deeply personal.

My intention is to introduce the correct interpretation and contextualizing of newly discovered ancient texts from Egypt and Jordan: the Nag Hammadi/Al Minya Library, and the Dead Sea Scrolls, respectively.

[C-obi]

I believe that the book will go a long way in testing the weights of what we truly believe in.

[Sahansdal]

I believe that the book will go a long way in testing the weights of what we truly believe in.

Thanks, C obi. Consider a review on Amazon? You would be #20...

[Renee_Prior1995]

The author presents some interesting arguments throughout the book. However, this is not a genre I am interested in. And that means that I might not be the right person to rate this either. However, those who want to know more about Jesus and Judas might greatly enjoy reading this one!

I agree with your reply. I am also not generally interested in this topic but I do sometimes like to read them to expand my knowledge on the subject.

[mwanikikelvin]

I found the book quite interesting and also a bit thought-provoking. I found this book to be a book that any reader who wants to read an interesting book should really try this.

[ahegdahl]

I was born into a religion with a multitude of gods. I’ve always been curious about Christianity and its history; the role it played in shaping the world’s history. I gather that what the author deals with in this book is a very controversial topic. When I read the sample, it consisted of mostly reviews from other publications. Yet, the introduction itself reads like a research paper. I am curious about how mysticism and Christian beliefs are linked. I am interested in reading this book because I like having a healthy debate about many deep-rooted systems. I believe that any new knowledge that comes to light should be treated with the dispassionate eye of science and research and used for the betterment of humanity.

If you do read this book, you should be aware that this kind of interpretation of Judas and Jesus is NOT the perspective that 99% (or more) of Christians have. To really understand what Christians believe, you have to read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and even the book of the Acts of the Apostles, from the New Testament. The Biblegateway website gives easy access to these books (and commentary if you want) in multiple languages and translations. If a book delves into Gnostic or mystic sources for a reinterpretation, then it is entering the sphere of the historical development of Christianity, as different teachers (gurus, really) promulgated different teachings about Jesus, which resulted in many theological conflicts. The four gospels in the New Testament were the ones accepted as most authentic and authoritative by church councils because they can be traced back to actual disciples of Jesus or their close associates, because they were written within 70 years of Jesus' life, and because they were accepted by proto-orthodox Christians (people close to the time, immersed in the events and debates of the day) as authoritative within the first century of Christianity. Whew--this answer is getting longer than I intended! I just wanted to point out that to really understand what Christians today believe or why this is a controversial debate, you should start with the New Testament gospels before reading this book.

[srividyag1]

I was born into a religion with a multitude of gods. I’ve always been curious about Christianity and its history; the role it played in shaping the world’s history. I gather that what the author deals with in this book is a very controversial topic. When I read the sample, it consisted of mostly reviews from other publications. Yet, the introduction itself reads like a research paper. I am curious about how mysticism and Christian beliefs are linked. I am interested in reading this book because I like having a healthy debate about many deep-rooted systems. I believe that any new knowledge that comes to light should be treated with the dispassionate eye of science and research and used for the betterment of humanity.

If you do read this book, you should be aware that this kind of interpretation of Judas and Jesus is NOT the perspective that 99% (or more) of Christians have. To really understand what Christians believe, you have to read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and even the book of the Acts of the Apostles, from the New Testament. The Biblegateway website gives easy access to these books (and commentary if you want) in multiple languages and translations. If a book delves into Gnostic or mystic sources for a reinterpretation, then it is entering the sphere of the historical development of Christianity, as different teachers (gurus, really) promulgated different teachings about Jesus, which resulted in many theological conflicts. The four gospels in the New Testament were the ones accepted as most authentic and authoritative by church councils because they can be traced back to actual disciples of Jesus or their close associates, because they were written within 70 years of Jesus' life, and because they were accepted by proto-orthodox Christians (people close to the time, immersed in the events and debates of the day) as authoritative within the first century of Christianity. Whew--this answer is getting longer than I intended! I just wanted to point out that to really understand what Christians today believe or why this is a controversial debate, you should start with the New Testament gospels before reading this book.

Thanks for the reply and the explanation. I have read the Bible (both Old and New Testament) since I was schooled in a convent. But I did not know the facts you mentioned. My curiosity lies in the evolution of Christianity as a religion. Every religion, Hinduism (which I belong to), Buddhism, Sikhism - all religions were not started in their current form. And not all religions have the same belief system as Christianity (For example, Hinduism does not have the dichotomy of good and evil. It says everyone has both elements and that people are quite complex.) That being said, the history of every religion fascinates me - their beliefs and how those beliefs were shaped by centuries of strife and debate. I do not mean the history mentioned in the holy books of each religion, I mean what history and anthropological texts say. What intrigues me about this book is how mysticism which seems so unrelated to Christianity, is mentioned by the author as being related. I know that it is a controversial topic, and I know people tend to stay away from it. But, if the debate is healthy enough, I would like to witness it. I am not knowledgable enough in Christian history to participate in that debate since I do not know the origins of those beliefs. Whew!! My comment to your answer is also becoming long!! Thanks again for the clarification!!

[Sahansdal]

I was born into a religion with a multitude of gods. I’ve always been curious about Christianity and its history; the role it played in shaping the world’s history. I gather that what the author deals with in this book is a very controversial topic. When I read the sample, it consisted of mostly reviews from other publications. Yet, the introduction itself reads like a research paper. I am curious about how mysticism and Christian beliefs are linked. I am interested in reading this book because I like having a healthy debate about many deep-rooted systems. I believe that any new knowledge that comes to light should be treated with the dispassionate eye of science and research and used for the betterment of humanity.

If you do read this book, you should be aware that this kind of interpretation of Judas and Jesus is NOT the perspective that 99% (or more) of Christians have. To really understand what Christians believe, you have to read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and even the book of the Acts of the Apostles, from the New Testament. The Biblegateway website gives easy access to these books (and commentary if you want) in multiple languages and translations. If a book delves into Gnostic or mystic sources for a reinterpretation, then it is entering the sphere of the historical development of Christianity, as different teachers (gurus, really) promulgated different teachings about Jesus, which resulted in many theological conflicts. The four gospels in the New Testament were the ones accepted as most authentic and authoritative by church councils because they can be traced back to actual disciples of Jesus or their close associates, because they were written within 70 years of Jesus' life, and because they were accepted by proto-orthodox Christians (people close to the time, immersed in the events and debates of the day) as authoritative within the first century of Christianity. Whew--this answer is getting longer than I intended! I just wanted to point out that to really understand what Christians today believe or why this is a controversial debate, you should start with the New Testament gospels before reading this book.

Thanks for the reply and the explanation. I have read the Bible (both Old and New Testament) since I was schooled in a convent. But I did not know the facts you mentioned. My curiosity lies in the evolution of Christianity as a religion. Every religion, Hinduism (which I belong to), Buddhism, Sikhism - all religions were not started in their current form. And not all religions have the same belief system as Christianity (For example, Hinduism does not have the dichotomy of good and evil. It says everyone has both elements and that people are quite complex.) That being said, the history of every religion fascinates me - their beliefs and how those beliefs were shaped by centuries of strife and debate. I do not mean the history mentioned in the holy books of each religion, I mean what history and anthropological texts say. What intrigues me about this book is how mysticism which seems so unrelated to Christianity, is mentioned by the author as being related. I know that it is a controversial topic, and I know people tend to stay away from it. But, if the debate is healthy enough, I would like to witness it. I am not knowledgable enough in Christian history to participate in that debate since I do not know the origins of those beliefs. Whew!! My comment to your answer is also becoming long!! Thanks again for the clarification!!

Srividyag 1,
I take it you are Indian since you mentioned Hinduism. My Master, Maharaj Charan Singh, was a Punjabi by birth, as is the current one at Beas, Punjab, Baba Gurinder Singh. All religions are pretty much the same deep down, except for Christianity. For whatever reason, seems likely money and power, that one went off the rails from the start. It is disinformation, not information. Sikhism, at its inception, is what I follow -- Sant Mat. (Teaching of the Saints) Looking at all religions from a mysticism base, it all makes sense. I show in great detail in my two books (The Bible Says Saviors - Obadiah 1:21) that they are all similar. The Gnostics even use some of the same words as the Sant Mat Masters, two thousand years ago! (Anami Desh = Region never called by any name, of the Gospel of Judas). I hope you look into my books. I've been to India many times, and learned all I know from Indian Masters.

[Clemens Nickleby]

I have not read this book, and do not intend to for one basic reason. The whole underlying premise is sympathy for the devil. Anyone who had a dear and trusted friend who then betrayed them to their enemies, even though they were innocent of any wrongdoing, would be really clear that it was an act born out of evil. Just think in your own life how painful it was when you met with betrayal of some sort. The beauty of the gospel is that even Judas could have been forgiven. Peter was. Redemption came through Jesus' death and resurrection, not Judas' betrayal. True, Judas had a role, but it didn't have to be him and he could have been redeemed. Instead, he would rather die than repent. Think of a person who betrayed you, and they are there for all of us, and think of them choosing suicide over repenting and asking your forgiveness. Nothing mystical about that, or even praiseworthy. Just plain, sheer, evil. And I didn't need a new-testament bias for that analysis, just an understanding from my own experience of betrayal. Do we really want to posit that doing evil brings about good? Overcoming evil by doing good sounds more to the point. Jesus had a gospel, Judas didn't.

Well, if you aren't reading my book, and know nothing about my thesis, what makes you think you are qualified to comment here?

Touche'! But in my estimation, if what I have said carries no weight, then it will be ignored out of hand and you still have your platform to mis-read Judas.

[Sahansdal]

I have not read this book, and do not intend to for one basic reason. The whole underlying premise is sympathy for the devil. Anyone who had a dear and trusted friend who then betrayed them to their enemies, even though they were innocent of any wrongdoing, would be really clear that it was an act born out of evil. Just think in your own life how painful it was when you met with betrayal of some sort. The beauty of the gospel is that even Judas could have been forgiven. Peter was. Redemption came through Jesus' death and resurrection, not Judas' betrayal. True, Judas had a role, but it didn't have to be him and he could have been redeemed. Instead, he would rather die than repent. Think of a person who betrayed you, and they are there for all of us, and think of them choosing suicide over repenting and asking your forgiveness. Nothing mystical about that, or even praiseworthy. Just plain, sheer, evil. And I didn't need a new-testament bias for that analysis, just an understanding from my own experience of betrayal. Do we really want to posit that doing evil brings about good? Overcoming evil by doing good sounds more to the point. Jesus had a gospel, Judas didn't.

Well, if you aren't reading my book, and know nothing about my thesis, what makes you think you are qualified to comment here?

Touche'! But in my estimation, if what I have said carries no weight, then it will be ignored out of hand and you still have your platform to mis-read Judas.

Why don't you read it and then comment? That's usually how it works. I put in a lot of time and effort to arrive at my conclusion. I would love to hear what you say, after having read it.

[Rosemary Wright]

I've not read the book yet, but it seems it has some intriguing biblical information. I'm looking forward to reading and rating it.

[LeeleeByoma]

The title of this book has certainly piqued my curiosity. I'm a christian with an open mind, and I can't wait to get my hands on this book. Should make for an interesting read, at the very least.

[LeeleeByoma]

While there have been many who have questioned whether Judas was destined to be the one to betray Jesus and whether there was anything he could have done to prevent it. This book gives us a fresh perspective on the issue.As a person who actively practices the Christian faith, i have always believed that what Judas did was meant to happen for Jesus to die and for us to receive our redemption.

I agree. Jesus knew what he had to do. His primary goal was our salvation through his death on the cross. Everyone had to play their roles towards making it happen.

[Sahansdal]

While there have been many who have questioned whether Judas was destined to be the one to betray Jesus and whether there was anything he could have done to prevent it. This book gives us a fresh perspective on the issue.As a person who actively practices the Christian faith, i have always believed that what Judas did was meant to happen for Jesus to die and for us to receive our redemption.

I agree. Jesus knew what he had to do. His primary goal was our salvation through his death on the cross. Everyone had to play their roles towards making it happen.

That's what i thought, too, until I met a living Master. - the Author.