Ever since the existence of an ancient manuscript known as the "Gospel of Judas" was made public last week, I've thought a lot about Judas Iscariot.

What if Judas didn't betray Jesus as translations of the 66-page manuscript suggest? What if he turned Jesus over to Roman authorities because Jesus asked him to? Does this mean Judas has been falsely defamed for thousands of years?

A biblical scholar I'm not. But as a journalist, this discovery is absolutely fascinating. It provides what good journalists seek in their reporting, another point of view. It says that Judas was Jesus' best friend. In the last week of his life, Jesus shared religious secrets with Judas not known by the other disciples. Since the manuscript conflicted with the widely accepted gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, it was ruled heretical by early church leaders. Most copies were destroyed. This particular manuscript was hidden in the Egyptian desert for nearly 1,700 years before looters found it in the 1970s.

Does it provide critical historical information about Christ's last days or will it, as the Rev. Donald Senior, president of the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago, told the New York Times, be a "short-term sensation"?

It's certainly more entertaining to imagine clerics and church leaders around the globe poring over this manuscript and debating whether they should alter what they have been teaching — and believers have been believing — for thousands of years.

But we all know what would happen next. Someone would file a defamation lawsuit on behalf of Judas. There would be a move for reparations. Judas' lawyers would be doing early morning television, Oprah and CNN, not to mention talk radio, blogs and talking heads on cable. There must be at least a hundred ways in modern culture to defile this discovery.

We live in a time when it is fashionable and profitable to question widely accepted gospels or at least to mass-market them. Witness the critical and financial success of "The Da Vinci Code" and "The Last Temptation of Christ."

It's only human to question. Most people's faith isn't shattered by the exercise of exploring another point of view.

For that matter, only the manuscript's age and origin has been authenticated through radiocarbon dating, ink and handwriting analysis and imaging techniques. But some believe it may even have been an account of a fringe group. Others question if the manuscript is historically legitimate. In other words, is it true?

I don't know. As a journalist, I think it warrants further investigation. As a person of faith, this discovery didn't alter my understanding and beliefs about Jesus' last days on Earth. I take these things on faith.

View Comments

But I do think the Lenten season provides an interesting context to this announcement. The story of the resurrection is, at its core, a lesson on second chances. This discovery gives the Christian world the opportunity to contemplate Judas in a different light.

Instead of betraying Jesus, he may have been chosen to give up Jesus to the authorities to trigger the chain of events Christians will celebrate Easter Sunday. That would make him a hero, right?

Again, I don't know. But my belief in second chances demands that I at least consider the possibilities.


Marjorie Cortez is a Deseret Morning News editorial writer. E-mail her at marjorie@desnews.com.

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.