What the Gospel of Judas Really Says
Does the much publicized “Gospel of Judas,” released in April, 2006 by the National Geographic, truly portray a positive view of Judas, the betrayer of Jesus? Dr. April DeConick of Rice University has questioned this interpretation of the newly released text. Speaking at the Biblical 
Archeology Society Seminar held this past weekend in San Antonio, Texas, Dr. DeConick, who holds a chair in Biblical Studies at Rice University, summarized her conclusions based on her translation and analysis of the original Coptic text. According to Dr. DeConick the idea of a positive Judas, friend and confident of Jesus, who receives a high heavenly reward for his betrayal of Jesus, is based on a series of faulty misreadings and mistranslations of the original text. Dr. DeConick argues that the “Gospel of Judas,” turns out to portray a Judas that is far more demonic than in any other piece of early Christian literature, including the traditional accounts in the New Testament Gospels.
The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says. The book surveys the story of the Judas Gospel’s discovery and release and includes Dr. DeConick’s translation of the Coptic as well as her analysis of the translation issues upon which a positive or negative interpretation of Judas turn. It further relates the text to its historical setting, namely the thought world of an early Christian group of Gnostics known as the Sethians. Chapter 2, titled “A Gnostic Catechism,” is one of the clearest expositions on Gnosticism written for the non-specialist that I have ever seen. The book also contains three invaluable appendices: A marvelously clear and complete annotated survey of “Further Reading,” a synopsis of Sethian literature, and a Q&A with Dr. DeConick in which she relates her excitement at the initial publication of the text and how she reluctantly came to question its interpretation as represented in the books and documentary produced by the National Geographic Society.
Dr. DeConick recently summarized her findings on her Blog, Forbidden Gospels, so I will quote her here in her own words:
Why did I write this book? I wrote this book because when I read the Coptic transliteration of the manuscript in April 2006, I realized that Judas was much more a hero in the National Geographic translation than he was in my own translation. As I worked through the Coptic and then sat and studied the text as a whole, I quickly came to see that Judas is not a good guy in this gospel. He is not Jesus’ friend or the greatest disciple. I began to wonder why the NG team translated in reference to Judas “daimon” as “spirit” when its most accepted translation is “demon.” I wondered why the team chose to say that Judas is “set apart for” the holy generation, when the Coptic actually reads that he is “separated from” the holy generation. And so forth.
What does the Coptic really say? The Coptic says that Judas is a demon, that he will be instrumental in bringing about Jesus’ sacrifice, that this was the worst thing he could do. Jesus tells Judas that he will not go to the Kingdom, that he is working for the demiurge Ialdabaoth-Nebruel, that he will lament and grieve his terrible fate. Furthermore, the text says that Jesus will tell him the mysteries of the Kingdom not so that he will go there, but so that Judas will lament greatly his actions within the cosmic drama. Judas is separated from the holy generation. He is the thirteenth demon, which means he is to be associated with Ialdabaoth, the “thirteenth” archon or ruler in Sethian Gnosis.
Why is my translation different from National Geographic’s? What is troubling to me is that the provisional Coptic transliteration which NG put out in April 2006 was not finished, but scholars published translations and interpretations based on it. It contained reconstructions of the Coptic that were erroneous, including the statement that Judas will ascend to the holy generation and that he would be taught the mysteries of the Kingdom because it was possible for him to go there. The Coptic text does NOT say this. It says the opposite, and this has been corrected (thank goodness!) in The Critical Edition that NG put out this last summer. The problem is that now the world thinks that Judas is a Gnostic hero when in fact the Gospel of Judas says nothing of this. In fact, it says the opposite. My translation is of the actual Gospel of Judas.
One issue that goes beyond questions of translation and interpretation is why the idea of a “positive Judas” is so extraordinarily appealing to so many in the modern world? DeConick addresses this question in her Epilogue. She traces the many examples in film, art, and books that have attempted to reverse the traditional Judas story. I found her analysis to be insightful and compelling in this regard.
I highly recommend this new book and I look forward to the continued discussion of this fascinating ancient text.