"Gospel of Judas": The St. Blogs treatment

Update 3:

If you want a concise explanation as to why all these gnostic "gospels" aren't going to get you one tad closer to the "historical Jesus", then read this.

UPDATE 2:

• Diogenes of Off the Record: "A genuine fraud"
• More from Jimmy Akin
• CNA: Experts skeptical of new ‘Gospel of Judas’

UPDATE:

• A non-Christian Judas enthusiast and a Christian strike up a conversation
• Amy Welborn's take

So, the news story de jour concerns the so-called "Gospel of Judas."

It's the latest attempt of pseudo-scholarship to "disprove" Christian tenants.

I have to say, I love being a member of St. Blogs, because my confreres make quick work of this kind of silliness:

(some snips from their coverage, click on links for their full text)

• Mark Shea:

"The most hilarious irony of all of this is that many of the hedonists and "sacred feminists" who are so eager for the gnostic Jesus would not want to have touched a real gnostic with a barge pole. After all, when your religious theory tells you that matter is a prison and women are the means by which spirit is imprisoned in matter, this tends to give rise to a rather low view of women."

• Jimmy Akin (good history and links to sources):

"It'll all be much ado about not much, though, because this thing ain't written by the historical Judas. It's a second century forgery (assuming that it's not a 20th century forgery of a forgery) that will tell us more about hte beliefs of certain Gnostics than it will about the events of Christ's life."

• Carl Olson (does some "Get Religion"-like analysis of the news report, many good links):

"Or, it's like a document being written in the mid-20th century titled "The Autobiography of Benedict Arnold" that contradicts everything known about Arnold, George Washington, and the American Revolution — and people saying that it's authentic and reflects a viable tradition ("Yes, Arnold probably was the original source!"), that it "overturns previous beliefs about the years 1765-1790", and that it will "cast doubts on what Americans believe about the founding of their country."

• Zenit interview with Fr. Thomas Williams - a great read

"Basically, for those who reject outright the possibility of miracles, any theory, outlandish as it may be, trumps Christian claims. "

Now, here's where it gets good.

Professor Bainbridge and The Anchoress outline the possibility that this story, and other ones like it (such as the "Jesus walked on water " thing), are part of a "full-court" media press:

• The Anchoress

"Can’t help but wonder if some of th[ese "news items" are] meant to be a prelude to the release of the Da Vinci Code movie - advance work, if you will. Here we have a plethora of stories trying to debunk common Christian understanding, and I am wondering if it is all part of the movement to mush-up soggy Christians - to foment doubt - and to soften up the non-believers to the idea that if everything Christians believe is worthless, well then, their influence is to be discounted or even disdained, lessened and disresepected."

• Professor Bainbridge

"So why is the National Geographic peddling heresy at this precise moment in time? I'll give you a hint: May 19, 2006 [release date of the "Da Vinci Code" movie]. It looks like a cheap attempt to cash in on the Da Vinci Code phenomenon just as the movie is about to be released."

Stay informed.