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

[THarveyReadALot]

reply to reneelu1998, and note to others,
I don't 'just believe' the Bible. It has been proven. I'm pretty sure there are more manuscripts for the Bible than other ancient works. The Gnostic Gospels aren't true. It's that simple.

Check out: https://carm.org/manuscript-evidence for a chart of info on old Manuscripts. I'm a Christian who believes the Holy Scriptures, but as 1 Peter 3:15 says, we should explain our faith and give an explanation and defense of it, with gentleness and respect. I'm trying to give help respectfully and kindly.
Sincerely,
Theresa Harvey
THarveyReadALot

[THarveyReadALot]

Jlrinc,
Why are we talking about life expectancy? Many people can and do live past that. And the Apostle John, who I think was Jesus' youngest disciple, was the only disciple thought to have died a natural death. The Gospels were written soon after the events they recorded. See my aforementioned website in my previous comment.

[Sahansdal]

No disrespect, but the author did touch on a sensitive aspect of Christian faith. Trying to give some credit to what Judas did sounds distorting. As a Christian I find this book to be a threat to my faith. I just read the review of the book and I don't like everything about the book. The author should redo the research on this matter again and bring something that will develop a common ground with everyone. I don't think I'll rate the book.

Please try reading it. Then comment. I want to hear what you think then.

[AntonelaMaria]

"For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” Mark 14:21

Overall all I can say.

[Sahansdal]

[bn=][/bn]

"For the Son of Man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” Mark 14:21

Overall all I can say.

Thanks for quoting Mark. There is so much to unpack here. First of all, 'betrayed' is a total mistranslation. It should read 'handed over' or 'delivered.' John 19:2, I think, is similar but with handed over. This was intentional misinformation. The author is trying to hide real dialogue with overwriting. It is widespread in the Gospels and consistent. The speaker is saying he would be better off not contacting the Spirit, as his lower, or old, self is going to die. It is a very spiritual teaching. See Scienceofthesoul.org for more

[Sahansdal]

I am not sure this book is for me but I will give it a try. I wish that the sample was more than reviews of the authors work - although I was surprised that they were critical at points - so that we could get a better flavor for the authors writing. Also, it is pointed out that the author 'wants us to read the Gospel of Judas without a New Testament bias'. That should not mean that you can't take the New Testament into account. I feel that a true study of any of the books should take into account all of the books, otherwise you will have tunnel vision and the full picture will not present itself.

But not in this case. The New Testament is a rewrite of the gnostic mastership succession narrative. The Betrayal never happened.

[jlrinc]

Jlrinc,
Why are we talking about life expectancy? Many people can and do live past that. And the Apostle John, who I think was Jesus' youngest disciple, was the only disciple thought to have died a natural death. The Gospels were written soon after the events they recorded. See my aforementioned website in my previous comment.

The author made a claim that the life expectancy in jesus's times was 40. That is just not correct and I was surprised that someone who had written a book about the earl Christians wouldn't know this

[Sahansdal]

Jlrinc,
Why are we talking about life expectancy? Many people can and do live past that. And the Apostle John, who I think was Jesus' youngest disciple, was the only disciple thought to have died a natural death. The Gospels were written soon after the events they recorded. See my aforementioned website in my previous comment.

The author made a claim that the life expectancy in jesus's times was 40. That is just not correct and I was surprised that someone who had written a book about the earl Christians wouldn't know this

I still doubt it was commonly much longer. What does it matter, though? The point is, no eyewitnesses recorded anything about a life of Jesus Christ. He is not present in any HISTORICAL account. The Gospels are NOT history. They are literature, and literature with a mission, or purpose, and that is to disinform people. If you fell for the Gospel authors' account of spiritual enlightenment as dependent on the death sacrifice of a savior, you will never find true salvation in the now. The past is GONE. Leave the dead to bury the dead.

[THarveyReadALot]

Whoever,
I don't 'just believe' the Bible. It has been proven. I'm pretty sure there are more manuscripts for the Bible than other ancient works. The Gnostic Gospels aren't true. It's that simple.
Check out: https://carm.org/manuscript-evidence for a chart of info on old Manuscripts.
Sincerely,
Theresa Harvey
THarveyReadALot

P.S. I didn't finish the book.

[Frisca]

I'm sorry but the book, for me, was not interesting at all. I tried reading it three or four times and I just couldn't get into it. I am not even sure what they are trying to imply. Is there a message? A revelation? Anything that might interest those who have no clue who Judas is? The way it is written has no order as he gets into other gospels that a lot people do not know. I think if the author had introduced where he gathered his in information and then explained his reason to believe his claim maybe one who has no knowledge of what he writes about would at least try to follow. People are too quick to make a movement with no order and for no reason others follow. Not that I hadn't heard their claim before, I have yet to be convinced of where they come up with absurd claims.

[jlrinc]

You are evidently not aware that the consensus view now is that none of the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses. It would not be likely in any event, because life-expectancy in those days was something like 40 years. So they would have to have been little kids following Jesus around. Kids fluent and literate in excellent Greek, which is even less likely.

No, the life expectancy those days. Was not 40 years.. The average life expectancy was 40 years. What's the difference? The average life expectancy includes the high prevalence of children who died before turning 5. This brings the average life expectancy way down because children had a high likelihood of dying of diseases before antibiotics and vaccines were available. The truth is that if you made it to18 your life expectancy was about the same as it is now, high 70s and probably hasn't changed much in 15000 years. This 40 year old thing is a pernicious myth.How long did they expect to live on biblical times? There is a verse in psalms that says the number of the days of a mans life is 70 years and if by reason of strength what boast is there of that? So they expected to live to be about seventy or eighty. The gerousia of Athens at about the same time was a council of elders who were at least 60 to be eligible so they had about the same life expectancy. And modern archeological evidence points to the same.

Itinerant fishermen didn't speak (or write!) the kind of classic Greek that the Gospel authors used. They were master wordsmiths, not experts with nets. No one knows who wrote the Gospels, all of them, even gnostic.

The gospels were not written in classical Greek, they were written in koine Greek. This was the Greek used by everyday people everywhere Alexander the great had conquered. The fisherman almost certainly knew it as it made made communicating much easier but they almost certainly couldn't read or write. In fact the finest Greek written in the new testament occurs in the epistle of James.

[jlrinc]

The disciples were not itinerant fishermen. The word itinerant means wandering the disciples were not wandering fishermen they fished the Galilean sea. Itinerant fisherman would have been wealthy men who could afford a boat that would have been docked in the Mediterranean sea. Almost everybody in that area spoke at least a little koine Greek the language of the gospels because it was the language that merchants used . koine means common because is it is not the classical Greek of homer and Plato but a much simplified form used for buying and selling and spread everywhere Alexander conquered.

[Sahansdal]

I'm sorry but the book, for me, was not interesting at all. I tried reading it three or four times and I just couldn't get into it. I am not even sure what they are trying to imply. Is there a message? A revelation? Anything that might interest those who have no clue who Judas is? The way it is written has no order as he gets into other gospels that a lot people do not know. I think if the author had introduced where he gathered his in information and then explained his reason to believe his claim maybe one who has no knowledge of what he writes about would at least try to follow. People are too quick to make a movement with no order and for no reason others follow. Not that I hadn't heard their claim before, I have yet to be convinced of where they come up with absurd claims.

And these comments somehow do not apply to the NT Gospels? Why do they always get a pass as genuine history, when none of these sources even try to be? Including the gnostic ones! This is literature, not history.

[Sahansdal]

The disciples were not itinerant fishermen. The word itinerant means wandering the disciples were not wandering fishermen they fished the Galilean sea. Itinerant fisherman would have been wealthy men who could afford a boat that would have been docked in the Mediterranean sea. Almost everybody in that area spoke at least a little koine Greek the language of the gospels because it was the language that merchants used . koine means common because is it is not the classical Greek of homer and Plato but a much simplified form used for buying and selling and spread everywhere Alexander conquered.

So what does that change? These are invented characters, maybe based on real people, but they didn't write the Gospels.

[MatereF]

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.