Of course it's a gospel, and who's claiming that Judas wrote it, any more than MML&J wrote their namesake gospels? Less so really, since it's obviously named for its subject matter, not its author.
Biblical Archaeology Review (May/June 08, p. 52)in an article by Birger A. Pearson subtitled "What the Gospel of Judas Really Says" rips National Geographic for their secrecy that allowed such dubious translations to be published that they are already bringing out a revised translation.
But the Chronicle of Higher Education article you cite points up the result of their unscholarly procedure and hypeing of their flawed translation: Millions of people given the unsubstantiated impression that the Bible was wrong in its portrayal of Judas--and the virtual impossibility of ever correcting that error. Certainly their revised translation isn't getting the coverage the original did.
2 comments:
Of course it's a gospel, and who's claiming that Judas wrote it, any more than MML&J wrote their namesake gospels? Less so really, since it's obviously named for its subject matter, not its author.
Biblical Archaeology Review (May/June 08, p. 52)in an article by Birger A. Pearson subtitled "What the Gospel of Judas Really Says" rips National Geographic for their secrecy that allowed such dubious translations to be published that they are already bringing out a revised translation.
But the Chronicle of Higher Education article you cite points up the result of their unscholarly procedure and hypeing of their flawed translation: Millions of people given the unsubstantiated impression that the Bible was wrong in its portrayal of Judas--and the virtual impossibility of ever correcting that error. Certainly their revised translation isn't getting the coverage the original did.
Post a Comment