April D. DeConick

Whose Saviour? Soteriology and protology in the Gospel of Judas

One of the striking characteristics of GosJud is its lack of an elaborated soteriological perspective. With the sole exception of the “race of Adam” no one really seems to be the object of salvation. On the one hand the “human race” is heading for eternal condemnation, together with the entire demiurgic reality. The “great and holy race” on the other hand seems to be beyond any need of salvation. Although Jesus’ death is the focal point to which the text is moving from its very start, its soteriological value is barely explored. The main concern of the text is to deny a certain soteriogical interpretation of Jesus’ death; thereby no alternative understanding is offered. The lack of interest for a systematic soteriology is also reflected in the representation of protological events and of the creation of the world and human beings: there is no mention of a “fall” that needs restoration, no interventions of divine entities to prepare the human beings for – later – salvation. In comparison to similar texts, the “cosmological revelations” in GosJud have some interesting particularities. In this paper, I’d like to explore those elements in the light of the – lack of – soteriology.

The “Twelve Apostles”: Authoritative for Whom?

This paper will examine the way numbers and certain identifying phrases served to strengthen or undermine the positions of early Christian figures within a text.  For example, the number “twelve” and the term “apostles” were especially useful to such an end, but only for certain early Christian circles and not for others. A comparison of Codex Judas with the Gospel of John and Luke-Acts will highlight some of the significant differences among these texts and some of the possible polemics behind them.

Apostles as Archons: The Fight for Authority and Gnosis in the Gospel of Judas, First Apocalypse of James, and Other Early Christian Texts

The Gospel of Judas and the First Apocalypse of James understand the twelve disciples to be types of the Zodiac and types of the Archons that are associated with these stars. This paper examines this typology within the broader context of early Christian literature. How is this typology understood and applied by various Gnostic writers in the second and third centuries? Do any patterns or strategies emerge? What might they tell us about particular Gnostic Christian groups and their relationship with Apostolic Christianity?

The Wandering Stars in the Gospel of Judas

Judas, Other Disciples, and Ancient Anger Management

The portrayal of Judas in the Gospel of Judas is ambiguous. On the one hand, he is described as the only disciple who recognizes the true identity of Jesus, to whom Jesus teaches “the mysteries of the kingdom,” and who does not belong to the twelve disciples, condemned in the text, but will be harrassed by them. On the other hand, Judas is still subject to the error brought about by the stars (GJud 45); his access to the divine realm is denied, and he is called “the thirthteenth demon.” In addition, like the other disciples (GJud 34), he reins in anger and is going to sacrifice “the man that bears” Jesus (GJud 56). These ambiguities in the character of Judas may become more understandable in light of ancient philosophers’ theories of moral improvement. “The perfect human being,” whom Jesus wants to tease out from his disciples at the beginning of the gospel (GJud 35), is not only yet another eternal being in the Sethian divine realm. This term is also a crucial concept in ancient moral philosophy as denoting an ideal human being or the sage who is subject neither to emotions nor to other wordly concerns. Absence of anger was one of the most conspicuous signs of such a person. While “the perfect human being” represented the ultimate goal of moral education, it was usually thought that only a very few, if any, human beings can reach this goal. However, there were a number of lower stages of development which set more realistic goals for those seeking moral improvement. Reading the Gospel of Judas in light of such theories suggests that this text is less concerned with establishing Judas’s reputation either as a hero or a villain (as a narrative figure, he seems to be both). Rather, the author uses the figure of Judas to embody a level of moral development at which a person is no longer completely ignorant of what it requires to be “the perfect human being” but has not yet reached, and ultimately will not reach, this most advanced stage.

The Star of Judas in the Gospel of Judas

The paper will focus on the star of Judas that is mentioned in the Tchacos Codex (57). Special attention will be directed towards the origins of the concept linking every human soul to its own star. Above all, it is necessary
to have a close look at the religious background of this concept in Platonic philosophy and in astrology. These philosophical ideas were also adopted by the Hellenistic ruler-cults that equated the sovereigns with the sun and the courtiers with the stars. For example, the Athenians introduced these ideas into the prayer hailing king Demetrius Poliorcetes (336-283 BC) as sun and his courtiers as stars surrounding him, when he entered the city in 291 or 290 BC. This prayer was quoted by the Roman author Athenaeus of Naucratis (Deipnos 6, 253D-F) and has been heavily influenced by philosophical notions, that the arrival of the king was interpreted as the revelation of the sun god. The paper also tries to shed light on the Jewish doctrine that understood the messianic king as a spiritual messiah, in touch with or embodying a spirit sent by God. The angelic character of the messiah was also suggested by Balaam's prophecy that "a star has marched forth from Jacob" (Num 24,17), since the stars belonged to the angelic "host of heaven" (Deut 4,19). This impression of a man linked with a star emerges again during the Jewish uprising in the reign of Hadrian, when the nickname of its leader Bar Kokhba, "son of the star", was playing on the patronymic of Simeon ben Koseba (cf. Justin Martyr, I Apol 31). Thus, Greek philosophical thinking, astrological speculations, Greco-Roman ruler-cults, and contemporary Jewish messianic expectations can enrich our understanding of the highly syncretistic atmosphere in which the Gospel of Judas was written and lend contours to its Gnostic theology.

Personal and Cosmic Spaces of Salvation in the First Apocalypse of James and the Gospel of Judas

This paper will present a kind of geography of salvation for the texts of James and Gos. Judas in Codex Tchacos, plotting in detail the spaces between characters and between a character/s and objects or
places, under headings like "near" and "far", "in front of" and "beside", "above" and "below", "around" and "inside", "over" and "under", and so on. It will investigate the spaces that are shared, parallel, forbidden, holy/unholy, and inaccessible; spaces that expand or collapse to signify alienation/separation or unity. The "map" thus produced will be analysed for a better appreciation or understanding of characters, objects/places, and the idea of salvation in both texts.

The significance of the Tchacos Codex for understanding the First Apocalypse of James

The recent publication of a second Coptic version of the First Apocalypse of James (partly known from Nag Hammadi Codex V,3) preserved as second tractate of the Tchacos Codex has improved our reading capacity of this rather fragmentary text at several levels. Through restoration on the basis of the parallel text, a much more complete record can now be achieved on both sides. Those passages that are only readable, or more completely readable, from the Tchacos Codex can elucidate many a passage in the Nag Hammadi version that appeared rather dark so far. This paper gives some examples of such improvements and then concentrates on some principal topics and intentions of the writing. Such are, besides the redemption passwords in the centre of the text, which have for the most part been clear enough before, especially the theme of the role of femininity and the deliberate switch from seven to twelve (sc., heavens and archons). The initially raised issue of the role of femininity (or the female) finds its application in later parts of the text in at least two ways: one in the provisional or imperfect character of Old Testament prophecy as the one transmitted by (female) spirits, the other in the ambiguity of women’s behaviour, exemplified by groups of three each, good and bad, emerging after the coming of the saviour. The switch in doctrine from seven to twelve proves necessary for the demonization of the twelve apostles as servants to the archons, symbolizing an increasingly powerful church which, as it appears, at least in Eastern Syria, was able to persecute the author’s group of James Christians as early as the third century.

Paradise in the Gospel of Judas

“During eight days, three days before he celebrated Passover”: Chronological Marks in the Gospel of Judas

The aim of my presentation is to analyze the expression found at 33,3-6, along with the other chronological marks that appear in the text (36,11; 37,20-21), in order to determine in what measure their occurrences are charged with a pregnant meaning, other than the literal one. As it has been already noted, the enigmatic phrase “… during eight days, three days before he celebrated Passover”, located in the incipit, is relevant to settle the structure and the composition of the entire Gospel. This will be the first point to be discussed. Nevertheless, the same expression can possibly tell us something also on a deepest ground. It is my hypothesis that indications of time found in early Christian texts (especially Gospel narratives), are used not only as realistic details, but more often they work as theological tools, that need to be interpreted in a symbolic way, according to the ideological orientation displayed in each book. In the main frame of the question concerning the literary and textual relationships between the Gospel of Judas and the other Gospel narratives (canonical and extra-canonical) of the first two centuries, the paper will focus on the particular aspect given by the use of chronological marks, establishing a comparison between those appearing in this text and similar expressions found in other early Christian Gospels. This operation is intended to show what use the author made of the extant passion narratives and of their chronologically diverging schemes (the Markan-synoptic and the Johannine), what elements he drew from each of them, and how he interpreted and rearranged those traditional accounts. Furthermore, in the last part of the paper a survey conducted on the Gnostic texts, with respect to the same topic, will be presented. Such an inspection will help us to disclose the specificity of the Sethian tradition and, ultimately, it will allow us to reach a better understanding of this important feature of our Gospel.

Martyrdom and Its Discontents in the Tchacos Codex

According to Irenaeus, heretics (“Gnostics”) not only avoided martyrdom out of cowardice, but actually argued that it was not necessary. Yet the discoveries from Egypt do not all support this commonplace notion so readily. Other works suggest instead that some of the Christians, whom we have come rather capaciously to call “Gnostics,” wrestled with the meaning of Jesus’s death and the deaths of believers, and even more, they wrote treatises preparing people to die as martyrs. What sets these Christians apart is not that they avoided martyrdom—for some at least insisted upon the necessity of suffering and dying as Christ had. Rather it is the meaning they give to this suffering and death that is distinctive. The Tchachos Codex offers three works that exemplify attitudes toward martyrdom which challenge the meanings other Christians were assigning to the deaths of Jesus and believers. Near the beginning of the Letter of Peter to Philip, the apostles pray to Christ to give them power “for they seek to kill us” (NHC VII). Jesus Christ appears and tells them that they must fight against the archons; as Jesus died on their behalf, so too must the apostles die for humanity (TC). In the end, Jesus appears again and encourages them not to fear for “I am with you forever” (TC). They go out to preach in power and in peace. James, too, offers a similar scenario. It begins with Jesus predicting not only his own death, but the arrest and stoning of James. Throughout the work, his teaching aims to help James understand the true meaning of what will happen and to overcome his fear so that he is able to face it. The work ends with James’ death and his final words echo those of Jesus: “Forgive them for they do know what they are doing.” At first the Gospel of Judas seems to operate on an entirely different register, but it, too, is located at a time just before Jesus’ death and centers on providing teaching that will reveal the true meaning of Jesus’ death—and that of Judas. The paper will read these works as examples of “preparation for martyrdom” and briefly explore the theological resonance of their teaching about the death of Jesus and believers.

The Tchacos Codex: Another document of the Gnostics?

The Tchacos Codex (TC), an early fourth century papyrus codex discovered in the late 1970s in the Al Minya province of Middle Egypt, containing as the work of a single scribe (1) The Letter of Peter to Philip (= NHC VIII,2), (2) The (First) Apocalypse of James (= NHC V,3), (3) The Gospel of Judas, and (4) a Book of Allogenes (not = NHC XI,3) and possibly (5) a Hermetic treatise (CH XIII), is best understood as a document of the Gnostic cult movement (Logan 1996, 2006). Closely related to the Nag Hammadi and Berlin Gnostic codices, the TC is very likely the property of a Gnostic cult community rather than an individual. As regards its contents, just as the NH codices are arranged according to certain schemes (Williams 1996, Logan 2006), so the TC may reflect a Gnostic version of the latter part of the NT (Peter, James, Jude(!), Revelation), or a move from more recognised authorities to more mysterious and ancient ones. It also offers another instance of the keen Gnostic interest in producing pseudepigrapha which reflect their distinctive ideas, echoing a contemporary tendency among the Catholics. Thus it is very similar to NHC V, with its apocalypses of ancient sages and apostles, and reflects the Gnostic interest in James as source. Finally TC may help to illuminate the development of the Gnostic myth and cult. Thus it may reflect not only characteristic Gnostic fluidity of interpretation of its ‘classic’ myth, omitting key figures (e.g. Sophia) and focusing on astrology (GosJud), but also earlier stages which concentrated on Adamas rather than Seth, ancestor of the human elect race and identified with Christ as recipient of divine revelation (BkAllog), as in the Sethians of Epiphanius. It also suggests the existence of a branch of the Gnostic cult movement in Middle Egypt in the late 3rd to early 4th century CE, near Oxyrhynchus. It confirms the movement’s interest in Hermetism while weakening a link with monasticism, and also suggests, by the absence of any NeoPlatonising themes and treatises, that that development had not yet reached Middle Egypt, or was not universal among the Gnostics.

The Relationship between the Codex Tchacos and the Nag Hammadi versions of the So-called First Apocalypse of James: Seven Women as a Test Case

When Codex Tchacos (CT) was subjected to the first superficial scholarly investigation in a hotel room in Geneva in 1983, more than twenty years before its publication, it was realized that the codex contained a manuscript which very much resembled the First Apocalypse of James of the Nag Hammadi Codices (NHC). Nevertheless, it was only after the publication of Codex Tchacos that it was possible to confirm that its second tractate really was a version of the First Apocalypse of James, although the text in Codex Tchacos does not bear the same title but is simply called “James” (iakkōbos). For the time being, there is no thorough analysis of the relationship between the two extant versions of the First Apocalypse of James. The scope of the present paper does not allow for a comprehensive comparison either. Nevertheless, the purpose of the paper is to shed some light on the relationship between the two versions by examining the role of seven women disciples in the two manuscripts (1. Apoc. Jas. NHC 38.12-42.21; 1. Apoc. Jas. CT 25.15-29.17). In both versions of the First Apocalypse of James, seven women are depicted as disciples of Jesus by whom James is exhorted to be instructed. In both manuscripts they seem to be embodiments of seven prophetic spirits who have proclaimed the words of knowledge preparing the appearance of Jesus. Even though both texts contain a generally positive description of women, they also display differences in details. The paper will present a comparison of both extant versions of the First Apocalypse of James with regard to their portrayal of seven women, which helps to delineate their literary relationship and specific theological profiles.

When the Sethians were Young: The Gospel of Judas in the Second Century

This presentation addresses the second-century date and the second-century issues of the Gospel of Judas. In the paper I shall focus attention on a critical assessment of the observations of Irenaeus of Lyon on Judas Iscariot, the Gospel of Judas, and related issues pertaining to Sophia and Jesus, as well as significant parallel passages in other literature, particularly the Pistis Sophia, in order to shed light on the place of Judas in the Gospel of Judas and the essential message of the text.

Quaestiones Disputatae ad Evangelium Iudae pertinentes: From Irenaeus to Marvin Meyer and April DeConick

The aim of my paper is: (1) to provide an overview of the present state of GoJ studies, up to and including the papers of the Paris conference and the most recent books (like e.g. Pagels-King and DeConick), with discussion of their particular views; (2) to briefly discuss the main GoJ quaestiones disputatae like 44,21 (‘you thirteenth daimôn’); 46,17 (‘set apart for/from’); 46,25 (‘you will not ascend’) and 57,19-26 (e.g.: who entered the cloud?); (3) to once again consider the (rightly pre-supposed? and, if so, fully-fledged?) Sethian character of the document; (4) to look for a way-out from the present antitheses and even deadlock by critically rereading the ancient testimonies (Irenaeus, ‘Hippolytus’, Pseudo-Tertullian, Epiphanius, Theodoretus etc.) to both the GoJ and the so-called ‘Cainites’. In conclusion it may have become clear (a) that the GoJ in its present state is not only to be assessed as a very damaged but also as a composite document; (b) that, in all probability, during the first centuries CE more than one version of the GoJ circulated; (c) that, either way, Judas in his gospel was always considered a positive figure.

Stop Sacrificing! Eucharist and Baptism in the Gospel of Judas

Sacrificing is a central theme in the Gospel of Judas. In this paper I will first investigate the references to sacrifice in the Gospel of Judas in the context of the overall composition of the document. I will then assess the hypothesis, forwarded by a number of scholars, that the author uses the metaphor of sacrifices to critique the glorification of martyrdom by ‘apostolic’ Christians. Next I will put forward an alternative hypothesis, that the author denounces the forms of baptism and eucharist practiced by other Christians as sacrifices to the Jewish Creator. I will also show how another group, the Valentinians who produced the Gospel of Philip, used the same metaphor in their distinctive view of eucharist and baptism. I will conclude my paper with the image that the Gospel of Judas paints of the other Christians.

Baptism in the Gospel of Judas

“What is the advantage?” (ou pe peHouo…) (Gos. Jud. 46.16): Translation, Context and Intertext

In Gospel of Judas 46:16-17, Judas asks Jesus, “ou pe peHouo…?” which is translated in the critical edition “What is the advantage that I have received?” This question echoes the patriarch Judah’s question to his brothers in Gen 37:26: “What profit is it if we slay our brother and conceal his blood?” (RSV). My paper will examine 1) the translation problems raised by the Coptic phrase, 2) its possible meaning in its immediate context and within the Gospel of Judas, and 3) its intertextual relation with Gen 37:26 and the significance of these intertextual links for our understanding of the Gospel of Judas as a whole.

Judas Iscariot in the Gospel of Judas

In the first publication of the Coptic Gospel of Judas Jesus’ infamous “betrayer” is presented as the “hero” of the gospel and a “role model,” Jesus’ “most intimate companion” and in some sense “on a par with Jesus” (M. Meyer). Jesus’ reference to Judas in the text as the “thirteenth spirit (daimon)” is taken to mean that, for Judas, “thirteen is the lucky number” (B. Ehrman). This interpretation of the role of Judas in the gospel has been followed by a number of other scholars in hastily written books. But now a “revisionist” tendency is at work in scholarship in which Judas is seen in a completely different light. This paper consists of two main parts: (1) Judas Iscariot and his role in the Gospel of Judas, and (2) Judas’ destiny as depicted in the gospel. In each of these parts I provide answers to three questions posed by the text: In part 1 these are: (a) How does Judas know who Jesus is? (b) is the number 13 Judas’ “lucky number”? (c) Can Judas be seen as a member of the “immortal generation”? In part 2 they are (a) What is the “kingdom” whose mysteries are revealed to Judas? (b) What is Judas’ “sacrifice” and to whom is it offered? (c) What is Judas’ “star” and where does it lead him? 1a) At the beginning of the gospel Judas is the only one of the disciples who knows that Jesus has come from “the immortal aeon of Barbelo” (35,15-19). Judas knows that because he is a demon, i.e. “the thirteenth demon” (44,21). 1b) Jesus refers to Judas as “the thirteenth,” whose star will rule over the “thirteenth aeon” (46,18-20; 55,9-12). In Sethian Gnostic writings the “thirteenth aeon” is the highest level of the cosmic realm ruled by Saklas. 1c) In the Gospel of Judas different “generations” are contrasted, the immortal generation of Seth, versus the generation of mortals. Judas is associated with the latter, and denied entry to the “holy generation” (46,25-47,1). 2a) Jesus reveals to Judas the “mysteries of the kingdom” (35,24-46,14), but it turns out that the “kingdom” is associated with the cosmic realm and “the error of the stars” (45,25-46,2). 2b) When the twelve disciples tell Jesus that they have seen in a vision twelve priests offering sacrifices, Jesus tells him that it is they who are offering evil sacrifices to their god Saklas and leading people astray. (The twelve are symbolically equated with the apostolic church of the author’s time.) Jesus says to Jesus, “You will exceed all of them, for you will sacrifice the man who bears me” (56,17-20). Judas’ “sacrifice” is offered to Saklas and is even more evil than the sacrifices of the twelve. 2c) “Stars” appear frequently in the Gospel of Judas, and are always presented in a negative light. It is said that each person has his/her own star (42,7-8), and Judas’ star leads him to hand Jesus over to the Jewish leaders. Before that happens Jesus abandons his mortal body and disappears in a luminous cloud (57,16-58,26). The Gospel of Judas can be seen as an ironic parody of the gospels of the apostolic church.

The Gospel of Judas as Dialogue

In the paper I intend to discuss the structural similarities and differences between the Gospel of Judas, Corpus Hermeticum XIII and the platonic dialogue in order to investigate how the author of the Gospel uses and transposes rhetorical and didactical strategies known from contemporary texts.

Yehuda ‘ish Bartôtâ versus Judas Iscariot: The Gospel of Judas among Second Century Apocryphal Passion Stories

Since the publication of the Gospel of Judas, a lot of energies have been devoted to the question of knowing whether the text conveys a positive or a negative image of the wayward disciple. Surprisingly enough, little or no attention has been paid to its second century apocryphal environment. This is perhaps due to the fact that no other second century comparable Judas traditions apparently survived. Actually, this is not the case. Some relatively late texts – i.e. the Ethiopic Book of the Cock, the Coptic Book of the Resurrection of Jesus-Christ by Bartholomew the Apostle, and the Hebrew and Aramaic Toledoth Yeshu – have preserved a significant amount of probably earlier episodes about Judas and his relatives. The antiquity of some polemical motifs found in the Toledoth Yeshu is demonstrated by the allusions to them made by late second century authors (Celsus, Tertullian). As for the Book of the Cock, the text begins with a dialogue between Jesus and the disciples on the Mount of Olives that looks like an inverted mirror retelling of the Gospel of Judas. Those late texts provide both positive and negative pictures of Judas. Even more interestingly, they demonstrate that the Iscariot was a topical figure in second century Jewish and Christian apocryphal narratives. It is against such a background that we can gain a better understanding of what is at stake in the Gospel of Judas.

The figure of Judas willowing between being a demon in disguise and a hero par excellence

I will provide a reevaluation of the overall assessment of the Gospel of Judas. It became clear that, though a connection of Judas Iscariot with the term Gospel may be intriguing, the text has no interest in vindicating Judas by portraying him as a role model for discipleship. Neither is Judas the most trusted and beloved disciple of Jesus whom Jesus himself asked to hand him over in order to help him to get rid of his material body, nor is Judas rewarded for his assistance with an exaltation above the other disciples and an ascent on high. Though this misleading story may be have been inspired by the desire to reconcile the common portrayal of Judas as the traitor with our heightened consciousness toward legitimate Jewish concerns. Based on my own translation, I will also attempt to analyze the composition of the Gospel of Judas, put it in the perspective of Gnostic Sethianism, explore the possibility of the workings of an editorial hand, try to detect an organizational structure of the text, and evaluate the relationship between the text and the underlying social history of the community that used it – until it was buried in a cave and lost for many, many centuries.

Codex Tchacos: A Codicological Inquiry

Any ancient manuscript has two dimensions, one physical and one intellectual. A manuscript is an artifact, like a potsherd, a Roman coin, or excavated archeological ruins. But it is also an intellectual thing, a text, with ideas. This is a decisive trait not shared with other kinds of artifacts. Since I have had more experience than almost anyone outside the Codex Tchacos team in dealing with the physical dimensions of Fourth Century papyrus codices, I thought I would investigate this dimension of the Codex Tchacos. After all, I discussed other more intellectual dimensions in my book The Secrets of Judas: The Story of the Misunderstood Disciple and His Lost Gospel (San Francisco: HarperSanFrancisco, 2006, 2nd enlarged and updated ed., 2007). Of course this is as awkward as was the writing of the first edition of that book before The Gospel of Judas was published, since I am writing about a physical object which I still have not laid eyes on. Hence my presentation will be in the form of queries, hopefully to be answered by those who have access to the papyri themselves, and/or by the larger academic community when the originals are available to us all. The queries I investigate are as follows:

• Where is Codex Tchacos?
• Have the efforts to place fragments been discontinued?
• When will Codex Tchacos be returned to Egypt?
• What happened to the full-size color reproductions?
• What is to be learned from the leather cover and cartonnage?
• What was the original length of the codex and the number of tractates?
• What can be learned from analyzing codicologically the extant quires and kollemata?
• Why are there so many unidentified fragments?
• Have joins and island placements been systematically sought between unidentified fragments?
• Can answers to these questions be provided at the Codex Judas Congress, or must we look further for answers?
• What should we name Codex Tchacos?
• Will the Codex Tchacos be useful in improving the text and translation of the Nag Hammadi Codices?

The Historical Setting of the Gospel of Judas and Its Presentation to a Broad Public

When the Gospel of Judas was presented to the world in 2006, it was often suggested that this document contained historically reliable traditions on Judas’ alleged treason and Jesus’ death, and that through this Gospel our views of these historical persons would have to be radically modified. This suggestion was spread by journalists who were no specialists in early Christianity, but their articles were inspired by scholars who were more acquainted with the historical setting of this document. Some publications signed by scholars were also highly suggestive. In 2007, however, scholars seem to agree that the document informs us first of all about the tensions between Sethian Gnostics and “proto-orthodox” Christians in the middle of the second century, and far less, or hardly, about the historical Judas and Jesus. Yet the impression left to a wider audience is that the Gospel of Judas gives a valuable description of Judas’ relationship with Jesus that is more accurate than the older, though divergent, records of the canonical Gospels. In my paper I intend to analyse the hermeneutical presuppostions that appear from the various currents of information and research on the Gospel of Judas. I would emphasize the responsiblity that scholars have with respect to a balanced supply of information on early Christian texts.

Laughing at Judas: An Argument for a New Interpretive Paradigm of the Third Tractate of Codex Tchacos

Laughter is conspicuously present in the Gospel of Judas, a writing where Jesus laughs at his disciples -including Judas- in four occasions. What does laughter mean in this new Gnostic writing? Is its meaning the same in all four passages? In current scholarship, the view held by the editors of the text (Judas as the perfect disciple, spiritual hero and the paradigm of Gnostics) has been seriously challenged by several scholars, for whom Judas is demonized and assimilated to the archons. Those advancing this last interpretation have of course mentioned laughter as a sign of the disparaging attitude of Jesus towards Judas, but have not deepened this line of argument. The aim of my paper is to discuss the passages referring to laughter, to show at what extent these texts can be used to support the new interpretation of the Gospel of Judas from Tchacos Codex.

The Thirteenth Daimon: The Spiritual Realm in the Gospel of Judas

Much of the recent debate about the portrayal of Judas in The Gospel of Judas as either hero or villain has centered upon the translation of a key term in 44:21. In this instance, the National Geographic team of translators chose to render the Greek word daimon as “spirit.” But this word may be more appropriately translated “demon.” Clearly, the meaning that we apply to the terms “spirit” or “demon” today has a significant impact on how we then understand Judas’ role in the gospel. This paper will seek to comprehend the background of the text with regard to its understanding of the spiritual realm (i.e., the realm of God, the gods, angels, demons, spirits, etc.). It will look at both the use of the term in Greek sources, which the translators took into account when they rendered it “spirit,” and also the way it was used within Gnostic sources, usage in which it regularly refers to “demons.” Additionally, it will consider the early Christian literature, evidence that would have had an impact on the way that the term daimon was understood within Gnostic circles and in this gospel. With that context in mind, the paper will then probe more deeply. It will consider what it means for Judas to be a called a daimon in 44:21. In what sense is it metaphorical and in what sense is it ontological? Is this a case of demon-possession or identification of Judas with Yaldaboath? In either case what is the meaning and significance of Jesus’ referring to Judas as daimon? Ultimately, this paper will argue that “demon” is a more appropriate translation of 44:21 and that as such, the words of Jesus paint Judas (and perhaps all of the apostles) in a negative light. Moreover, with some comparisons to references from the canonical gospels, we will see that we should not be surprised by Jesus’ words: not because Judas is a betrayer, but because it is not the first time that Jesus has spoken in harsh and negative terms to his disciples.

De la souillure: the notion of pollution in the Gospel of Judas and Gnostic thought

Is James Valentinian?

The presence in James of a section that parallels the eschatological dialogue quoted by Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses 1.21.5, in his survey of Valentinian apolytrosis rituals, and the clearly Valentinian terminology present in this section, have led scholars (myself included) to assume that James as well is a Valentinian text. This view must be revised. There are, in fact. hardly any affinities with typical Valentinian vocabulary and themes in the rest of the text. The ones that exist, in particular the concept of “redemption,” have most likely been derived from the text of the eschatological dialogue. In my presentation I wish to explore the hypothesis that the Valentinian eschatological dialogue is the core of James, and that the rest of the tractate has been built around that core. This means that I will be looking both at the structure of the tractate and the intratextual references from this point of view. It is already clear, however, that some of the materials in James cannot be explained in this way; this is the case in particular with the traditions about the seven women in the last part of the tractate, which seem to derive from a different source. Finally: what inferences can be made from such a use of Valentinian materials in an apparently non-Valentinian text, and about the boundaries of the category “Valentinian” in general?

The Sethian Myth in the Gospel of Judas

By all accounts, the Gospel of Judas is a Sethian work. The content and outline of its mythical narrative is remarkably similar not only that of the Apocryphon of John and the Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit, but also to portions of the Apocalypse of Adam, Zostrianos, and the closely related but not strictly Sethian works Eugnostos the Blessed (possibly of "Ophite" provenance) and Sophia of Jesus Christ. On closer inspection, however, it turns out that the Sethian myth employed by the Gospel of Judas is of a very odd sort, containing many ambiguities in crucial terminology, a number of departures in content and sequence from the instances of this mythology in other Sethian works, and unlike all other instances and testimonia of Sethian mythology, offers no soteriological narrative at all. In order to account for this phenomenon, I begin with a brief summary of the more broadly-attested features of Sethian mythology, and then continue with an examination of the content, setting, and function of the theogony, cosmogony, and anthropogony of the Sethian myth that Jesus reveals to Judas in this strange gospel, if indeed it can even be considered to be a "gospel" at all.

A Consideration of 'Race' as a Preoccupation in The Gospel of Judas and Related Ancient Sources

The challenge to find a sound interpretation of the Gospel of Judas