Saint Judas in the Gospel of Judas?

Revisiting the Gospel of Judas (2006) in 2025: A Spy Wednesday Reflection

Originally written in 2006, slightly updated for Holy Week 2025 - Fr. Randy Flores, SVD

In April 2006, on the eve of the publication of the so-called Gospel of Judas, I wrote a commentary on it for a national daily. I still find it an interesting read—worth revisiting as a tool for personal reflection this Spy Wednesday of 2025 (Holy Wednesday, 4/16/2025). The piece has been slightly edited and updated.

A Timely and Controversial Release

The Gospel of Judas and its Holy Week unveiling

The controversial Gospel of Judas was released to the public during Holy Week in April 2006. The National Geographic Society published a 31-page ancient manuscript written in the Coptic language, along with a critical English translation. In the text, Judas is portrayed in a dramatically different light—almost as a “saint,” as some press releases suggested at the time—claiming it would “change the face of Christianity.”

Its release was, in many ways, timely. It came during Holy Week—days when Christians weep for Jesus and denounce Judas. It was also commercially strategic, riding on the popularity of The Da Vinci Code (published in 2003), which was then about to be released as a film.

A New but Ancient Text

Manuscript origins and its Coptic-Gnostic background

The publication of this Coptic manuscript provided us for the first time a text previously known only through secondary sources—reports of early Christian writers about a certain Gospel of Judas. It will also shed light on how early Christians, at least the so-called “Gnostics,” understood Judas. Coptic, which uses Greek alphabet, was the indigenous language of Egypt spoken from about A.D. 200 to 1000. The Christian Bible was translated into Coptic around A.D. 300, as Christianity spread in Egypt.

Gnosticism and the Gospel of Judas

The Cainites and their veneration of Judas Iscariot

In the 2nd century A.D., discrete religious movements began to challenge Christianity, especially in Egypt. Today, we label those movements “Gnosticism” and their adherents “Gnostics,” although these terms were never used in that period. Our knowledge of who the Gnostics were and what their teachings entailed is based on ancient manuscripts and reports by early Christian writers (technically called “Church Fathers”).

For instance, in 1945, manuscripts written in Coptic were discovered in Upper Egypt near the modern village of Nag Hammadi. Among the restored writings are the Gospel of Truth, Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Philip, Gospel of the Egyptians, and Gospel of Mary (though fragmentary). These books appear to have been copied and read by Christian monks. The manuscripts date back to the 2nd and 3rd centuries and are now available to the public in both critical editions and modern translations—readily accessible online.

Among the Church Fathers, Irenaeus of Lyons (ca. 130–200) was the earliest to inform us of the challenges posed by the Gnostics. In his writing Against Heresies, he mentioned a sect calling themselves the Cainites (followers of Cain) and possessing a book they called the Gospel of Judas. Another writer, Epiphanius of Salamis (ca. 310–403), described the Cainites as boasting of being relatives of Cain, the Sodomites, Esau, and Korah. Those familiar with the Bible will understand that these characters are biblical villains. Naturally, then, the Cainites admired the greatest villain of all—Judas Iscariot. Epiphanius writes: “They consider him [Judas] their kinsman and count him among those possessing the highest knowledge, and so they also carry about a short writing in his name which they call the Gospel of Judas.” In that culture, to call someone a kinsman was to be a follower of that person—one reason why Jesus called his disciples “brothers.”

The Logic of Betrayal According to the Gnostics

Why Judas betrayed Jesus, and how the Gnostics interpreted it

If Judas achieved such heavenly knowledge—a Gnostic Nirvana, so to speak—why did he betray Jesus? Epiphanius tells us of two reasons given by this group:

1. Judas knew—remember, he had the knowledge—that Christ was wicked because he “wanted to distort what pertains to the Law.” Here, one must recall that Jesus’ teachings often conflicted with the Jewish understanding of the Law of Moses.

2. Judas knew that the power of the “archons” (naughty and lesser deities in Gnostic cosmology) would be drained if Christ were crucified. So Judas “bent every effort to betray him, thereby accomplishing a good work for our salvation.” The Cainites argued that Christians, in fact, should “admire and praise” Judas “because through him the salvation of the cross was prepared for us and the revelation of things above occasioned by it.”

3. In short, in the eyes of this group, Judas helped Jesus save humanity by betraying him. He fared better than the rest of the disciples who did not understand that Jesus must suffer and die.

The Polemics of the Church Fathers

Irenaeus and Epiphanius on Judas and the Gnostics

We can raise two questions about the logic of this Gnostic group. If they were indeed sincere in preserving the Law of Moses, why did they claim to be followers of Korah (the leader of the first unsuccessful “people power” movement against Moses and Aaron; see Numbers 16:1–50)? Second, if Judas had knowledge of Jesus’ fate, why did he not know his own—his attempt to return the money to the authorities, his remorse, and eventual suicide? Whatever we understand today about the psychology of suicide, it was then the most shameful death in the world. It is well known that Gnostics emphasized knowledge over moral actions.

Of course, we are reading the polemics of the Church Fathers, who were refuting the Gnostics at the time. Their descriptions, in a way, were “colored” by their intent. That’s why the forthcoming publication of a copy of the Gospel of Judas can offer us direct evidence of what Gnostics might have thought of Judas or the stories they might have told about him.

Rethinking Evil and the Plan of God

Theodicy and the Gnostic view of divine disorder

In a positive sense, the story of Judas allows us to rethink the problem of God and evil in the world (technically called “theodicy”). Since what Judas did was part of God’s plan, does God then intend evil in the world? Dear to the Gnostics was the idea that God created a disordered and chaotic world. We don’t even have to be Gnostics to realize that the world is, at times, flawed. How else can we explain this but to say that God is responsible? That’s why the Gnostics adored villains like Judas—they were the epitomes of a disordered world. But the issue they raised is in no way new.

Around 4,000 years ago, in the ancient Near East, there already existed literature containing laments over the seeming injustice of God. In the Bible, we find a long debate on this in the Book of Job—God allowing and tolerating “the adversary” (hassatan in Hebrew) to destroy a very good person like Job. Such experiences are universal. Our local papers once reported on a young man, who, after losing all his loved ones in the Guinsaugon tragedy (catastrophic landslide in Feb of 2006 in Leyte), broke down during Mass, lamenting: “I don’t believe in God anymore. Why did He take away our loved ones, the old and the young?”

For us Christians, evil is a reality as well as a mystery we must reckon with—finding its climax and answer in Jesus’ passion and death.

Did God Forgive Judas?

Mercy, remorse, and interpretations of Judas’ fate

Another controversy that may arise from reading the Gospel of Judas is the question of God’s mercy and forgiveness. If God were indeed merciful, did He forgive Judas? Traditionally, many have believed that Judas is probably in hell, because of Jesus’ severe indictment in Mark 14:21: “It would be better for that man if he had never been born.” But these words do not declare Judas’ fate. Jesus’ words were more of a lament than a legal sentence. That explains why Job and Jeremiah also lamented, in their suffering, that it would have been better not to be born (Job 3:11; Jer 20:18).

Judas in the Passion Narratives

Jesus’ final gestures of compassion

Let us take two scenes from the Passion Narrative to illustrate Jesus’ compassionate attitude toward Judas. First, during the Last Supper in the earliest Gospel (Mark), Jesus predicted that one who was eating with him would betray him. Jesus did not identify the traitor. In Matthew’s version, Judas asked, “Is it I, Lord?”—a rhetorical question in Greek expecting a “No” in reply. After asking a second time, Jesus responded, “You have said so”—an ambiguous answer. The other disciples did not react against Judas, suggesting they did not understand Jesus to be referring to him. Yet the Gospel writer intended readers to understand that Jesus somehow knew Judas’ plan. At that point, Judas could still have retracted.

Second, at the Mount of Olives, Judas approached Jesus to kiss him. Luke records: “He [Judas] approached Jesus to kiss him, but Jesus said to him, ‘Judas, is it with a kiss that you are betraying the Son of Man?’” Judas was about to kiss Jesus, but Jesus warned him, at the very last moment, to refrain from the act. Another chance to retract was offered.

In short, Jesus gave Judas every opportunity not to commit such treachery. Judas was responsible for his actions.

A Dominican Preacher’s Surprising Take

St. Vincent Ferrer’s vision of Judas' salvation

In a similar spirit, St. Vincent Ferrer (1350–1419), the renowned Dominican preacher, once said in a sermon delivered in 1391:

“Judas, who betrayed and sold the Master, was seized after the crucifixion by a deep and saving remorse. He earnestly desired to draw near to Christ to beg forgiveness for his betrayal. But because Jesus was surrounded by a great crowd on the road to Calvary, Judas found it impossible to approach Him. So he said within himself: ‘Since I cannot reach the feet of the Master, I will at least approach Him in spirit and humbly ask His pardon.’ And indeed, he did so. As he took the rope and hanged himself, his soul flew to Christ upon Calvary’s mount, sought His mercy, and was fully forgiven. He ascended to heaven with the Lord, and thus his soul rejoices in salvation with all the elect.”

The Weight of Betrayal in Early Christianity

Greed, Satan, and the horror of Judas’ end

Nonetheless, an evil act remains evil, regardless of its outcome. The end does not justify the means. Early Christian writers were clear in portraying Judas’ betrayal as morally reprehensible and unworthy of imitation. His motives were far from noble: he was driven by greed (cf. Matt 26:15), by the influence of Satan (Luke 22:3), and, according to John, by both satanic prompting and a habit of stealing (John 13:2; 12:6).

In highlighting the gravity of his betrayal, these early sources emphasized the violent and tragic nature of his death—whether by suicide, as recorded in Matthew ("he went and hanged himself," Matt 27:5), or by the gruesome account in Acts: “Falling headlong, he burst open in the middle, and all his bowels gushed out” (Acts 1:18).

Even more horrific is the tradition preserved by Papias in the early 2nd century A.D.: “His body became so bloated that he could not pass through a space where a wagon might easily pass. His eyelids were so swollen that he saw no light at all, and not even a physician’s tools could reveal his eyes. His genitals were grotesquely deformed, and blood and worms oozed from every part of his body. After enduring these torments, he died on his own land, which remains desolate and uninhabited to this day because of the foul stench that lingered there.”

Even Our Culture Condemns Judas

How Filipino tradition rejects treachery

Even for us Filipinos, we do not tolerate Judas’ actions. That’s why his image is absent in the Good Friday procession. In jeepneys, in a play on his name, a cheater is warned: “Hudas not pay.” A traitor is called “Hudas.” No one is named or baptized “Judas” (although I have baptized children with names like Osama, Bin Laden, Saddam, and Hitler). Our Pasyon scorns Judas as: hayop, palamara, alibughang matakaw, budhi’y salawahan, tampalasan, puno ng kasakiman, lilo.

So, Is the Gospel of Judas Worth Reading?

Why it still matters and how to read it critically

In retrospect, the issues raised by the Gospel of Judas are not new. Nor will they “shake Christianity to its foundations,” as some press releases suggest. As before, people of faith continue to reflect on these questions.

Tips for Reading Ancient Texts Like the Gospel of Judas

Translation, authenticity, context, and canonical grounding

This makes the Gospel of Judas relevant and interesting to read. As with other ancient literary works, however, critical reading is always advised. Here are some tips:

1. We need to be conscious that what we read is a modern translation of a long-dead language, and that the available manuscript is just one among other possible copies that are lost or yet to be discovered. Those who copied the text had no access to the technology we have today, like photocopiers and scanners. Errors—additions or omissions—were bound to happen. A good translation depends on a reliable manuscript and a deep knowledge of both the source and target languages. That’s why translations of ancient texts must pass through the rigors of what biblical scholars call “textual criticism.” In the case of the Gospel of Judas, this work remains to be done. (For context: only recently were critical editions of the Dead Sea Scrolls—discovered between 1947 and 1956—made fully available to the public, in 38 volumes. This is not to hide anything, but rather the demand of scientific scholarship, which values truth, not profit.)

   
   

2. The circumstances of any discovery are essential to a manuscript’s authenticity. Was it discovered by archaeologists at the site, or through an antique dealer? The Gospel of Judas was first in the hands of a private collector for many years. Circumstances of its discovery and preservation should be carefully examined. As a cautionary example: years ago, an ossuary inscribed “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus” was found. Some believed it belonged to Jesus’ relative. But analysis revealed that the phrase “brother of Jesus” was a later, fraudulent addition.

   
   

3. A background in related literature is essential to understanding an ancient text. For the Gospel of Judas, the best background remains the Passion Narratives in the four Gospels and the account of Judas’ death in Acts 1:16–20. Paul, the earliest Christian writer, was conspicuously silent about Judas. Chronologically, the New Testament texts should be read first. For Christians, the Gospels and the rest of the Bible are sacred writings—the Word of God. Other writings, like the Gospel of Judas, can help us understand the world of the early Christians, but they are not the source of our ultimate joy and hope.