Manuscript indicates disciple betrayed Jesus -- at his request


Jesus asked Judas to betray him


Another gnostic gospel to be ignored.


this is a duplicate thread
article debunking this


Pure gnosticism. St Iranaeus disregarded this long ago.



[quote=T.A.Stobie, SFO]Another gnostic gospel to be ignored.

Exactly right. Gnosticism is one of the goofier heresies that existed early on.

the secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot.

Lots of ‘secrecy’.

For you will sacrifice the man that clothed me

The body is a ‘prison’ for the soul.
A modern Gnostic story is the Matrix trilogy where all the world is in everybody’s imagination.
Here are two links to some interesting articles:
Bridegroom press - Matrix
Bridegroom press - Matrix2


They produce no evidence indicating that this gospel has any historical authenticity. They don’t assert that it does but they use language that will lead the unlearned to think so. This is dishonest.



The gospel of Judas is a gnostic gospel that bears no authority. It was rejected by the early Church Fathers. Not one of the Church Fathers accepted it as scripture.


It also gives the impression that the flesh is bad and the spirit is good which is why Jesus needed to be freed from His earthly body.

Which heresy is that? There are so many.


[quote=DianJo]It also gives the impression that the flesh is bad and the spirit is good which is why Jesus needed to be freed from His earthly body.

Which heresy is that? There are so many.

The Manichaeans.


From 1910:
Judas Iscariot

At the opposite extreme is the strange view held by the early Gnostic sect known as the Cainites described by St. Irenaeus (Adv. Haer., I, c. ult.), and more fully by Tertullian (Praesc. Haeretic., xlvii), and St. Epiphanius (Haeres., xxxviii). Certain of these heretics, whose opinion has been revived by some modern writers in a more plausible form, maintained that Judas was really enlightened, and acted as he did in order that mankind might be redeemed by the death of Christ. For this reason they regarded him as worthy of gratitude and veneration. In the modern version of this theory it is suggested that Judas, who in common with the other disciples looked for a temporal kingdom of the Messias, did not anticipate the death of Christ, but wished to precipitate a crisis and hasten the hour of triumph, thinking that the arrest would provoke a rising of the people who would set Him free and place Him on the throne. In support of this they point to the fact that, when he found that Christ was condemned and given up to the Romans, he immediately repented of what he had done. But, as Strauss remarks, this repentance does not prove that the result had not been foreseen. For murderers, who have killed their victims with deliberate design, are often moved to remorse when the deed is actually done. A Catholic, in any case, cannot view these theories with favour since they are plainly repugnant to the text of Scripture and the interpretation of tradition. However difficult it may be to understand, we cannot question the guilt of Judas. On the other hand we cannot take the opposite view of those who would deny that he was once a real disciple. For, in the first place, this view seems hard to reconcile with the fact that he was chosen by Christ to be one of the Twelve. This choice, it may be safely said, implies some good qualities and the gift of no mean graces.

But, apart from this consideration, it may be urged that in exaggerating the original malice of Judas, or denying that there was even any good in him, we minimize or miss the lesson of this fall. The examples of the saints are lost on us if we think of them as being of another order without our human weaknesses. And in the same way it is a grave mistake to think of Judas as a demon without any elements of goodness and grace. In his fall is left a warning that even the great grace of the Apostolate and the familiar friendship of Jesus may be of no avail to one who is unfaithful. And, though nothing should be allowed to palliate the guilt of the great betrayal, it may become more intelligible if we think of it as the outcome of gradual failing in lesser things. So again the repentance may be taken to imply that the traitor deceived himself by a false hope that after all Christ might pass through the midst of His enemies as He had done before at the brow of the mountain. And though the circumstances of the death of the traitor give too much reason to fear the worst, the Sacred Text does not distinctly reject the possibility of real repentance. And Origen strangely supposed that Judas hanged himself in order to seek Christ in the other world and ask His pardon (In Matt., tract. xxxv).


[quote=DianJo]It also gives the impression that the flesh is bad and the spirit is good which is why Jesus needed to be freed from His earthly body.

Which heresy is that? There are so many.


The Manichaeans.

The Manicheans fit this description but they are a result of the Gnostics. But as the article mentions, the gnostics believed that you had to have a secret knowledge(gnosis) in order to recieve salvation. The gnostics of the early Christian period believed Christ had this knowledge.


I figured it was a bunch of bunk. I just haven’t heard of it before this.


Thread Closed

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit