|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 631
addict
|
OP
addict
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 631 |
This is from an essay by Gregor Wurst supplementing the English translation of the recently-discovered "The Gospel of Judas" in the Codex Tchacos. Wurst is trying to reason that the Gospel of Judas in the Codex Tchacos is the same "Gospel of Judas" alluded to in the anti-Gnostic work "Against Heresies" (c. 180) by St. Irenaeus:
"Given the fact that the Gospel of Judas Irenaeus is discussing is certainly not a work written within the group of Irenaeus's opponents, given furthermore that he does not seem to have personal knowledge of it, but is only reporting what he knows from hearsay, a link between the new Coptic text from Codex Tchacos with the Gospel of Judas known from Irenaeus's account seems to be justified."
He goes on to show that several points of Irenaeus's description correspond with the Codex Tchacos Gospel of Judas. The first point (that the Gospel of Judas did not originate among Irenaeus's opponents) does not necessary follow from what Wurst has so far had to say on the connection between the Codex and Irenaeus. And isn't this second point fuzzy logic? Irenaeus only knew of the Gospel of Judas second-hand "and yet" (?) his description corresponds to the Codex Tchacos Gospel, therefore there must be a link? Couldn't this just as easily prove that Irenaeus had got wind of a similar but separate Gospel of Judas, the text of which may differ greatly on several other points that were not known to Irenaeus or that he chose not to mention?
Last edited by Hydra; 11/07/06 02:07 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Hydra, aside from not being able to say exactly what fuzzy logic is, I am confused. You write: his description corresponds to the Codex Tchacos Gospel . Where did this information come from? Elsewhere in the material you quoted from?
As far as "Given the fact that the Gospel of Judas Irenaeus is discussing is certainly not a work written within the group of Irenaeus's opponents, given furthermore that he does not seem to have personal knowledge of it, but is only reporting what he knows from hearsay, a link between the new Coptic text from Codex Tchacos with the Gospel of Judas known from Irenaeus's account seems to be justified." goes, let me see if I can clarify for myself the facts:
1.) Gregor Wurst is writing about "The Gospel of Judas"'
2.) he's saying it's the same one St. Irenaeus wrote about; and,
3.) he's saying it's the same one because it definitely wasn't written by Irenaeus' enemies nor apparently by Irenaeus himself, and therefore it must be the same Gospel.
Given the sentence you quoted, my #3 certainly does not constitute even a reasonable assumption, let alone proof. However, given your added statement about several points coinciding, that could change the picture entirely.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,317
Members9,182
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
759
guests, and
1
robot. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
|
|
