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.