Truth or Fable?

Use this forum to discuss the May 2019 Book of the month, "Misreading Judas" by Robert Wahler
Forum rules
NOTICE: The author of this book was invited to participate in the discussion in this forum about his book. You should expect that the author is reading and may reply to posts made in this forum.

While the forums typically have a rule against authors/publishers talking about their own book on the forums at all as a way to prevent spam, an author discussing their own book in the dedicated discussion forum about that book is an exception and is allowed, including posting would-be self-promotional links to his book or related material insofar as is relevant to the discussion.

However, other forum rules and standards, such as those requiring upmost civility and politeness, are of course still in effect.
Post Reply
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Re: Truth or Fable?

Post by Sahansdal »

jlrinc wrote: 07 Jul 2019, 05:53
Sahansdal wrote: 26 Jun 2019, 10:56
jlrinc wrote: 24 May 2019, 23:18


I can only speak for myself. I have no religious bias for or against. I respect everyone's religious beliefs until they are put into book form. I treated this book like I did Lee Strobel's apologetics books. Like I do with any book of Religious history. I can read the Bible or Homer and suspend my disbelief, but if you write a book about the Bible or Homer make sure you got your facts together. His inspiration is Eisenman's book on James which has some wonderful insight. There is no doubt that Stephen who is martyred in Acts is a substitute for James. When you see the clues its undeniable. The beloved disciple when you see the clues is obviously James. I have no problem with the idea in general but when Eisenman claims that Judas is James, He is just guessing. Misreading Judas starts with these guesses and doubles down on the idea . The motives of the Christians wanting to erase James are clear, James competes with them. The word antichrists was coined for those who left the roman church to go back to Jerusalem and the teachings of James. But the Gnostics loved James and couldn't have cared less what Rome thought of them so why disguise james at all? Why disguise him as Judas? When Jesus is asked in the gospel of Thomas to whom should they go after Jesus dies he answers "You are to go to James , for whom the heavens and the Earth came together" Why doesn't the Gospel of Thomas, feel the need to disguise. Theres a phrase attributed to theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli when "a friend showed Pauli the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli's views. Pauli remarked sadly, 'It is not even wrong'." Thats what I think about this book, 'It is not even wrong'. I dont say it with malice but it is a singularly bad book
jrinc,
I don't know if I said this before, but I don't say Eisenman says flat-out that Judas was James. He doesn't think that. He just pointed out that he covers him in Acts 1. I find it strange that with so much covering going on, he didn't make a stronger connection. It really explains his findings better if Judas was James. And the Gnostics had every reason to hide from the Roman Church. They were afraid of the Paulines, who killed James. gThomas is an interesting exception. Thanks again for your thoughtful comments. Even if you didn't like it, I appreciate your thought-provoking commentary.
If they were afraid of the Pauline Church the last thing they would do is write a gospel that has the other disciples look like fools and the wise one being Judas the one they blame for betraying Jesus. There is no benefit by changing James to Judas in the eyes of the orthodox church. The fact is that gThomas is not an outlier. In every gnostics text in which James is named he takes an outsized role in the leadership. There is no other gnostics text that hides James as someone else. My guess is that Judas may be Thomas. Thomas simply means twin. His actual name is Jude and the early church might have gotten mad that he Thomas pointed new disciples to James instead of the petrine church in Rome.
I really think the Gospel of Judas may be the first written Gospel. There is no Matthias where he should be if Mark came first. (36.1) And this would be the source of the sacrifice, only inverted from self-sacrifice of Judas (Thomas) to betrayal of the Master, something no Gnostic could ever imagine. James may have been alive when it was written, and he was hidden to hide his true identity. Second Apocalypse of James has language similar to "twins" with James and Jesus as brothers, but in spirit. It isn't clear to me what the order of composition was, but gnostic sentiment is. They would never write something that involved human sacrifice, or borrow from something that did, like the canon. They wrote theirs independently of the canon, at least initially.
jlrinc
Posts: 52
Joined: 08 Apr 2019, 03:50
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 11
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-jlrinc.html
Latest Review: Burn Zones by Jorge P. Newbery
Reading Device: 1400697484

Post by jlrinc »

There is a lot here to unpack so I'll start by saying that the first gospels were sayings gospels. Like q and gospel of Thomas. The narratives were added on to flesh out the sayings. The gospel of Judas contains so much narrative that it is almost certainly my later. The paleography dates it later too.

I really don't understand your self sacrifice interpretation. The text is pretty clear Jesus means the one who bears me is a standard gnostic way of looking at things. Christ comes from the pleronoma and dwells in the man Jesus.Judas is not really sacrificing Christ but Jesus the man who bears Christ. We know that because its already a problem for the Johannine community and is roundly chastised in the first epistle on john. Christ leaves the body of Jesus before he dies and so Judas is going to turnoverJesus. Not Christ to the Romans.

As a guess I would think that the gospel writers created Judas from Thomas who was encouraging christians to go to the church in Jerusalem instead of the Petrine Church. The letter of James has no christology and that was blasphemous. The early church didn't think Jesus was divine this too is condemned in the first epistle of john. James was not the brother of Jesus by birth but Judas (Thomas) was the twin of James..
User avatar
Crazyreader01
Posts: 220
Joined: 01 Feb 2019, 09:20
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 45
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-crazyreader01.html
Latest Review: Sigfried’s Smelly Socks! by Len Foley

Post by Crazyreader01 »

Kelyn wrote: 20 May 2019, 22:29 Well, now that you've had time to read the book, what do you think? Is the author on the right track? Was Judas simply seeking to accelerate the advancement of a mystical line of prophets? Or was he, indeed, the traitor the Bible portrays him as? What is it in or about the book that convinces you (or doesn't)?

Personally, I like considering alternate viewpoints. Although I did find the book somewhat difficult to understand and had to re-read several sections, the author seems to have done his homework. However, his research seems (to me) to be somewhat biased away from Christianity. Because of this, I'm reserving judgment. A more objective point of view would have done a lot better toward convincing me. How about you?
Yes, I noticed the bias too and it has me questioning parts of the book.
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Sahansdal »

Crazyreader01 wrote: 08 Jul 2019, 13:20
Kelyn wrote: 20 May 2019, 22:29 Well, now that you've had time to read the book, what do you think? Is the author on the right track? Was Judas simply seeking to accelerate the advancement of a mystical line of prophets? Or was he, indeed, the traitor the Bible portrays him as? What is it in or about the book that convinces you (or doesn't)?

Personally, I like considering alternate viewpoints. Although I did find the book somewhat difficult to understand and had to re-read several sections, the author seems to have done his homework. However, his research seems (to me) to be somewhat biased away from Christianity. Because of this, I'm reserving judgment. A more objective point of view would have done a lot better toward convincing me. How about you?
Yes, I noticed the bias too and it has me questioning parts of the book.
Everyone has bias. I used to be Christian, and still have friends who are. Why would I be anti-Christian? I am anti-dumb. I used to be dumb, but I got educated.
User avatar
Lisa A Rayburn
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 2977
Joined: 09 May 2018, 07:34
Currently Reading: Fluff Dragon
Bookshelf Size: 267
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-lisa-a-rayburn.html
Latest Review: Nightlord: Sunset by Garon Whited
Reading Device: B018QAYM7C

Post by Lisa A Rayburn »

Crazyreader01 wrote: 08 Jul 2019, 13:20
Kelyn wrote: 20 May 2019, 22:29 Well, now that you've had time to read the book, what do you think? Is the author on the right track? Was Judas simply seeking to accelerate the advancement of a mystical line of prophets? Or was he, indeed, the traitor the Bible portrays him as? What is it in or about the book that convinces you (or doesn't)?

Personally, I like considering alternate viewpoints. Although I did find the book somewhat difficult to understand and had to re-read several sections, the author seems to have done his homework. However, his research seems (to me) to be somewhat biased away from Christianity. Because of this, I'm reserving judgment. A more objective point of view would have done a lot better toward convincing me. How about you?
Yes, I noticed the bias too and it has me questioning parts of the book.
Thanks for passing by and commenting!
Books are my self-medication. 8)
User avatar
Florence Nalianya
Posts: 638
Joined: 24 Jun 2019, 10:33
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 82
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-florence-nalianya.html
Latest Review: The Prodigy Slave, Book One: Journey to Winter Garden by Londyn Skye

Post by Florence Nalianya »

It's really difficult to give judgement on such a weighty discussion. Am a true Christian and choose to leave this to be a personal decision for any reader.I feel like it isn't mine to draw the line of judgement
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Sahansdal »

Florence Nalianya wrote: 09 Jul 2019, 08:12 It's really difficult to give judgement on such a weighty discussion. Am a true Christian and choose to leave this to be a personal decision for any reader.I feel like it isn't mine to draw the line of judgement
You might want to check out what modern mystic Masters say about the Bible. As one Christian to another, I never stopped believing in the savior, just in who that savior might be. Jesus never said one single word to believers of today. Read John 14:7 carefully when you read 14:6 for just who He said he was "The Way" for.
http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/
http://www.scienceofthesoul.org/product_p/en-002-0.htm
ayomie
Posts: 178
Joined: 01 Mar 2019, 17:56
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 19
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-ayomie.html
Latest Review: Cancer on a Harley or is it? Lyme Disease by Lisa Heather Torbert

Post by ayomie »

I still believe that truth cannot be bent or manipulated. This story does not seem to have that ring of truth.
“I have experienced many times
since then that I don’t always have
to prove I’m right to win at the
game of life."
Rob White
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Sahansdal »

ayomie wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 17:17 I still believe that truth cannot be bent or manipulated. This story does not seem to have that ring of truth.
Ayomie,
Can you tell me what the truth is? Even Pilate couldn't seem to get it out of Jesus. He does say what it is, but Christians misunderstand what he said. -the Author
User avatar
Lisa A Rayburn
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 2977
Joined: 09 May 2018, 07:34
Currently Reading: Fluff Dragon
Bookshelf Size: 267
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-lisa-a-rayburn.html
Latest Review: Nightlord: Sunset by Garon Whited
Reading Device: B018QAYM7C

Post by Lisa A Rayburn »

Florence Nalianya wrote: 09 Jul 2019, 08:12 It's really difficult to give judgement on such a weighty discussion. Am a true Christian and choose to leave this to be a personal decision for any reader.I feel like it isn't mine to draw the line of judgement
I agree. The old maxim that everyone is entitled to their own opinion certainly applies here. Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us!
Books are my self-medication. 8)
User avatar
Lisa A Rayburn
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 2977
Joined: 09 May 2018, 07:34
Currently Reading: Fluff Dragon
Bookshelf Size: 267
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-lisa-a-rayburn.html
Latest Review: Nightlord: Sunset by Garon Whited
Reading Device: B018QAYM7C

Post by Lisa A Rayburn »

ayomie wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 17:17 I still believe that truth cannot be bent or manipulated. This story does not seem to have that ring of truth.
Yes, but who is to say which 'truth' is the correct one? God? Jesus? Brigid? Mohammed? Etc. There are many, many 'truths' out there, all dependent on the individual's perspective. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!
Books are my self-medication. 8)
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Sahansdal »

Kelyn wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 22:20
ayomie wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 17:17 I still believe that truth cannot be bent or manipulated. This story does not seem to have that ring of truth.
Yes, but who is to say which 'truth' is the correct one? God? Jesus? Brigid? Mohammed? Etc. There are many, many 'truths' out there, all dependent on the individual's perspective. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!
This is not true at all, Kelyn. Truth is one. I think even the Bible says as much. There is only one truth, and it is up to each of us to learn what it is. I think if you investigate, you will discover that the Path of the Masters is the Way. There is a Master in the New Testament. It is not absolutely clear just who it was who said those red-letter quotes, but I think it was James, and not Jesus. That is what prompted me to write two books. I think it is learn-able from the texts themselves.
User avatar
Lisa A Rayburn
Previous Member of the Month
Posts: 2977
Joined: 09 May 2018, 07:34
Currently Reading: Fluff Dragon
Bookshelf Size: 267
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-lisa-a-rayburn.html
Latest Review: Nightlord: Sunset by Garon Whited
Reading Device: B018QAYM7C

Post by Lisa A Rayburn »

Sahansdal wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 22:46
Kelyn wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 22:20
ayomie wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 17:17 I still believe that truth cannot be bent or manipulated. This story does not seem to have that ring of truth.
Yes, but who is to say which 'truth' is the correct one? God? Jesus? Brigid? Mohammed? Etc. There are many, many 'truths' out there, all dependent on the individual's perspective. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!
This is not true at all, Kelyn. Truth is one. I think even the Bible says as much. There is only one truth, and it is up to each of us to learn what it is. I think if you investigate, you will discover that the Path of the Masters is the Way. There is a Master in the New Testament. It is not absolutely clear just who it was who said those red-letter quotes, but I think it was James, and not Jesus. That is what prompted me to write two books. I think it is learn-able from the texts themselves.
Playing devil's advocate here - From what I've read (admittedly not a lot and probably not from the greatest of sources), over the course of history there have been far more polytheistic religions than monotheistic ones. When Christianity did take over (and yes, I do mean take over - this I have read quite a bit about) it was not by the choice of the people living there (wherever 'there' was at that moment). It was by force. In other words, the 'invading' Christians shoved their monotheistic religion down the throats of the culture they were invading, which in ancient terms was often polytheistic. What gave them that right? You absolutely cannot say that a 'loving' God would have wanted blood to be shed in his name, then or now. I cannot and will not believe that. So...who determines truth...those that have worshipped in a certain way for centuries or invaders (Christians) forcing their comparatively new religion on others? Or are there different, valid truths for each? Sorry, I'll put my soapbox away now.
Books are my self-medication. 8)
Sahansdal
Posts: 602
Joined: 15 Jul 2018, 22:12
Bookshelf Size: 0

Post by Sahansdal »

Kelyn wrote: 12 Jul 2019, 00:24
Sahansdal wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 22:46
Kelyn wrote: 10 Jul 2019, 22:20

Yes, but who is to say which 'truth' is the correct one? God? Jesus? Brigid? Mohammed? Etc. There are many, many 'truths' out there, all dependent on the individual's perspective. Thanks for stopping in and sharing your thoughts with us!
This is not true at all, Kelyn. Truth is one. I think even the Bible says as much. There is only one truth, and it is up to each of us to learn what it is. I think if you investigate, you will discover that the Path of the Masters is the Way. There is a Master in the New Testament. It is not absolutely clear just who it was who said those red-letter quotes, but I think it was James, and not Jesus. That is what prompted me to write two books. I think it is learn-able from the texts themselves.
Playing devil's advocate here - From what I've read (admittedly not a lot and probably not from the greatest of sources), over the course of history there have been far more polytheistic religions than monotheistic ones. When Christianity did take over (and yes, I do mean take over - this I have read quite a bit about) it was not by the choice of the people living there (wherever 'there' was at that moment). It was by force. In other words, the 'invading' Christians shoved their monotheistic religion down the throats of the culture they were invading, which in ancient terms was often polytheistic. What gave them that right? You absolutely cannot say that a 'loving' God would have wanted blood to be shed in his name, then or now. I cannot and will not believe that. So...who determines truth...those that have worshipped in a certain way for centuries or invaders (Christians) forcing their comparatively new religion on others? Or are there different, valid truths for each? Sorry, I'll put my soapbox away now.
Well, unfortunately, none of the above. This is why proper guidance is so important. The Word is the key. Word isn't the Bible. It is the Holy Spirit, and It/He/She incarnates repeatedly. Only the Master is truth: "Thy Word is truth." - John 17:17

Come see for yourself. www.Petalumaprogram.org or www.Fayettevilleprogram.org
AntoineOMEGA
Posts: 293
Joined: 09 May 2019, 01:23
Currently Reading:
Bookshelf Size: 24
Reviewer Page: onlinebookclub.org/reviews/by-antoineomega.html
Latest Review: Poetic Inspirations by Melody D. Velez

Post by AntoineOMEGA »

Judas was the traitor most know him as.
Post Reply

Return to “Discuss "Misreading Judas" by Robert Wahler”