Barratt I think should be commended for even being quiet for one minute with that guy. Jeez, talk about completely shut off from the possibility of new information.

Are they kidding? They're astonished.

He was one of the bloody Jesus Peeps. He was at the bloody Last Supper. Or so Michelangelo said.

Honestly, how else could he have identified him & gotten so close in Gethsemane?

Granted, I'm discussing this from the 'Good News' version...

But honestly, how bloody anti-Semetic can these guys get? Hell, did they NOT EVEN bother listening in all those 'Sunday-go-to-Church' naps? I guess when their only contact with religion is when they're nipping or dropping buttons in the Plate...

I love watching Rice doing her, "Nod with the Choir' move during big rallies. She just rips off the whole religious scene with her distracted, well-rehearsed drama.

Namaste BlueBerry Pick'n can be found @ www.ThisCanadian.com "Silent Freedom is Freedom Silenced"

I remember watching a documentary a while ago, before this judas gospel turned up(and I'm not sure I remember it correctly), speculating that Judas could not be viewed as a 'traitor' since (among other things) the custom was that the closest friends were responsible for 'passing on' people to the authorities at the time of apprehension. Has anyone heard something similar?

I've read that there are hints in the Gospels of Mark and John that Jesus knew and even instigated the events of his passion, seeing them as part of a divine plan as the Gospel of Judas claimed.

Anyone want to shed some light on this?

John Kasich was dead wrong. The 4 main Gospels in the Bible were not written by those closest to him nor were they first person accounts.

The consensus of scholars is that the four canonical gospels — Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — were probably not written by any of the original disciples or first-person witnesses to the life of Jesus, although they were probably written within the first century of Jesus' death.

That means the 4 main Gospels were written almost 100 years after Jesus died. They can't be first person accounts and there were most definitely not wriiten by those closest to Jesus.

How can he insist that his view of Christianity is correct when it is so obviously wrong and without real proof?

OMG!!! (xenophobia!) Which jesus freak are you going to choose to believe!! Scary world!!!

I just hope they'll have the cameras rolling when somebody tries to tell Kacich that there is no Santa Claus...

If anything, this version makes much more sense.

Im no Christian, but the idea that Judas sacrificed himself for Jesus is much more in keeping with the Chrisitian moral ideas of loving thy neighbour and doing things for others for the good of the act.

It doesnt surprise me at all that American fundamentalists are against this revelation.

Something you've heard from your pastor shouldn't be called "a fact from biblical scholars"

"It's amusing, but also quite disturbing watching a Fox News Pundit having a psychotic episode."

Have you ever watch bill O'rilly? He has psychotic episodes almost every single day on his show.

Fox news just contributes to the "beliefs above facts" attitude that is haunting our country" and this is just yet anouther example.

As a leader in a company full of intelligent individuals, we often choose what information to give everyone in the company. We choose things that motivate and unite, and do not report every small and worrisome factoid that we come across.

Does it surprise anyone that a Church would do the same for its flock?

What freaks me so much about ANYONE who believes 'autohority' is how anyone who has ever been INSIDE Authority knows about half of it is a sham. Intentional misinformation with the best of intents. Even on the best days the NEWS cannot get it right.

According to the Gospel of Judas, even Jesus (Joshua) only gave his brothers part of the story. Sounds familiar! The church continued the tradition.

Why does anyone think that ANY religious document is 100% correct? Let alone one that has been edited, rewritten and translated. (Read: The Men Who Wrote the Bible) Just do what the actual Messanger said: be nice to people, accept diversity, listen to your heart and therefore listen to God.

My beef with High Profile Religious leaders is how little they resemble the profits the worship.

I truely feel sorry for the informed and quietly religious who agree that Evolution is part of God's plan (why else is it everywhere?). Cartoon: http://www.synthstuff.com/mt/archives/doonesbury.gif

Norm, awesome site!

The Pastor knows the truth, the NGS is so correct. Kasich looks like a man whos had his faith shaken.

This conversation is hurt by the fact that both of them are right and wrong on certain points. Kasich is right in saying that this "gospel" was not widely accepted, if it was it would be part of the cannon today.

That being said, clearly Jesus and Judas must have been friends. Judas would not have been one of the twelve if this was not the case.

Wow - this is amazing. Why is information so dangerous?

And I don't even understand what Mike is commenting on. "Widely accepted" at that time doesn't seem to equal "be part of the canon today." There are a couple of assumptions made in that statement that don't make any sense to me.

But - gotta say - I wasn't very interested in this show before - now I would like to see it....

hmm who should we trust on this one?

John Kasich B.A. in political science from OSU. Entire professional career spent in government. A man with no special education or even special interest in Biblical history. Most damning is his present employment at Fox News. A severe blow to anyone's credibility. An organzation whose only purpose seems to be promoting a conservative evangelical Christian political agenda.

or

James Barrat Noted Documentary film writer, producer, and director. Long time employee of the National Geographic society. One of the most respected, if not the most respected, science and education in the world today.

Hmmmm tough call.

God forbid that fundies would have some information brought to light that might challenge their (not necessarily the actual) world. What an embarrasment for Kasich, but there are undoubtedly folks that completely agree with him.

Oi.

This is just another piece of fan fiction written about the fictional character jesus.

Why is anyone shocked by this? We all know well that the Conservatives don't like to hear alternative viewpoints on any topic, especially anything religious. It's terrifying to them that anyone should think differently than they do.

There are a lot of fascinating issues around this document. But I'm very concerned that scholars are endorsing an artifact that was sold through the illicit trade in antiquities.

And Blueberry, I think you mean Leonardo, not Michelangelo.

A perfect example of FOX "NEWS". Its sad that this is the only news source for so many people.

It is this attitude.. you are with me or you are anti-christian, anti-american etc., that cuts off all debate in this country. A news guy had a complete meltdown because he disagreed with some "news". this is scary. he is just a little pawn/nobody. why does this scare him?

Kasich is a total nut job:

http://www.newcenturyproject.org/home/home_about.html

Somebody just slap those Fox hotheads in the face and see whether they turn the other cheek. Ignorant ignorant ignorant...and the sad thing is that these Fox nitwits just keep bluring the facts on anything and everything they can broadcast. How do they live with themselves? They are damaging to society, clear, balanced and simple.

Given the errant opinion of most American Christian fundamentalists that the Bible (specifically the KJV) is an inerrant monolithic document, a few blown brain-gaskets are to be expected over this.

What really tickles me, though, is the way Kasich shuts out his own expert. In old-school biased newscasting, the "opposing expert" is supposed to do the hatchet job, allowing the host to feign detached objectivity (not that the Faux News crowd really cares about objectivity anymore).

Kasich had one Reverand Doctor Britt Minshall at his disposal and hardly went to him at all. Even though Minshall's literary oeuvre doesn't exactly scream "biblical scholar," he does have more titles than Barratt does, which is easily impressive enough for biased news purposes.

Actually, Minshall's personal history is interesting as well. Note the blurb about Ring of Angels at the bottom of that page. Given that attitude, one wonders how the Official Cable News Sponsor of Dick Cheney's Hotel Rooms picked this guy as the go-to guy for a religious piece.

Oh the fear. The Fox guy thought it was about him. He hasn't got a clue about what's being talked about but he has his strong ready made opinion based on nothing but his version of political/religious correctness.

The fear of real world information, the fear of learning anything new, is amazing to witness.

The host was spewing so much erroneous garbage, he would have ended up in an argument with the church guy, had the Church guy gotten a chance to speak.

I've met very few believers who have the slightest clue regarding how the material in the modern bible was selected. Nor do they have any familiarity with the arguments, presented at the time, for why some were selected and others rejected.

Nor are they aware of the horse trading that went on between different factions in the body that made those sellections.

When I was growing up in Ohio, John Kasich's house was on my paper route. His was the only yard in the neighborhood in which I ever encountered snakes. That is all.

Watch the hands, the nay-saying palm pushing down motions, the finger pointing. How many times does he have to interrupt a guest on his own show when he has the last word? Kasich is out of control. BTW, O'Reilly and Gibson, to name but a couple, do it too. Does Rupert do this to his help at meetings? No wonder these guys aren't on real network tube anymore. When Murdoch dies, they'll be asking if you want fries.

IMHO, this is just FOX propaganda machine trying to rile up two sides to a non-existant debate. The reason is very simple. Currently people don't really know how to assimilate this new information about the gospel of Judas. But before anyone can think, FOX news tries to draw up two sides to the debate so that people are forced to choose one side or another without rationally examining the issue. Its the same way that a lot of people divide the country into conservatives and liberals. I am from India, and politicians do this all the time on the basis of religion. These kinds of things are used to rile up passions in people which definitely improves viewership/increases partisan voting. Its also the same tactic that is used to incite people into voting democratic always or republican always without rationally considering the merits of the candidate. From a politician's or a news channel exec's standpoint, this makes a lot of sense. People become much more predictable and easier to manipulate. FOX knows that it can drum up numbers on certain news items if they have excited people enough to follow it. Its also the same trap that a lot of you non-conservatives are falling for. You spend your time and energy hating conservatives just because one stooge paid by FOX is going about pandering a moronic viewpoint.. Thats exactly what FOX wants.. Don't play into it!! Just ignore it. FOX news and its divisive programming tactics will automatically lose relevance and disappear once people realize this.

All I have to say is...

LOL+++

Thanks for restoring that excised clip. I did realize it had been cut, I just didn't realize how much had been cut, particularly since the question to Barratt after the cut was contextually related to what Minshall was talking about before the cut (in terms of the line around the block at NGS).

Although Minshall was allowed to say more than I realized, I maintain that a real pro would have had sense enough to goad Minshall into the shouting match with Barratt instead of getting into it himself. That's what Minshall was there for.

Also, my previous comment about Minshall's scholarly credibility stands. In particular, his use of the term "heretical" to describe a document written at a time before there was a universal baseline by which to judge heresy is a bit misleading. It's a little like referring to early House and Senate drafts of a bill as "distortions" of the final synthesis that goes to the President. In both cases, we recognize that the early drafts aren't "the law" as such, but they're still important references to how we got to that final text.

I don't understand why fox news is so on voicing their own opinions rather than voicing the opinions of professional studied people that know exactly what they are talking about.

I dont understand why John Kasich pretends to be something more than a news anchor. You report the news and opinions of the majority of the population, not your own.

There should be a law made that holds people liable for voicing their own facts when knowingly the truth is far from it.

unlike the rest of you skeptics, I always knew pigs could fly

The odds may be better for a flying pig than a virgin birth.

Jeepers, In Australia we have all these hard line christians on our TV's in a respectable time slot, deserved of where they should be: 3.30 - 4.30am! Un-godly hours. And another thing, the four gospels (in fact, every gospel) were written long long before Kasich was merely a twitch in his father's nutsack. What ever he knows about christianity has been taught from one side. So what gives him the right, or the belief, or the basis, to say that the four gospels are authoritive texts, and that any thing else (dead sea scrolls, the gospel of Judas) are inferior unfactual garbage? What if the gospel of Judas was found first BEFORE the four gospels?? What then? Would you say then that the four gospels were just heresey rubbish? Answer me that you god-fearing tub of lard.

Kasich started with the belief that presenting the information was part of an anti Christian conspiracy.

To his mind, publishing information about an ancient religious document is related to publishing modern works of fiction.

The guy seems convinced that all those years of scholarly work involved in presenting the information thus far produced, was done by a bunch of conspiring Jesus haters trying to cash in on the popularity of the Divinci Code.

Verily, it boggles the mind of the observer.

Ignorance abounds...

Kaisich is nuts. I happened to see this exchange fliiping through channels. It feeds right into Colbert's standing joke about Fox anchors--that it has nothing to do with evidence and facts, just "what I know in my gut."

My understanding of this new find is that as archeology it is an amazing find, but as theology no so much. The theory that Judas was commissioned to "betray" (lit: 'turn in') Jesus is not new. The gospel of John clearly identifies him as the 'bad apostle' (e.g. 'one of you is a devil', 'you are all clean, all except one'), but other gospel accounts seem to leave open the possibility that Judas was supposed to 'turn in' Jesus, as part of an arrangement between Jesus and Judas. The gospels are pretty univocal that Judas killed himself because of guilt--for some people this is more indicative of someone whose friend commanded him to pull the trigger than of a thoroughly wicked man who betrayed his friend. For myself and most Christians I know it would not be earth-shattering theologically to find out that Judas was probably a good guy.

The religious right takes very great care over theological matters. They can't let the truth out that Jesus is not ideologically right wing. There are a lot of fronts in this effort, but one of them is an attack on most academic Biblical studies. Biblical scholars, are for many right wing people no different from the "latte-sipping" secular liberal elites who supposedly run everything through Hollywood and the courts.

The religious right views this in the same way they would a redemption of Bill Clinton's dalliance with Monica Lewinski. One where Hillary knew and that is was some sort of necessary therapy for Bill.

Thanks, Norm, for putting Minshall's comments back in. Kasich still seems far less than disinterested, but nice to hear the other side.

I've got huge problems with Minshall's characterization of the Gnostic movement as representing the "fringe" of Christian belief. A movement that had believers as far spread as Gaul on the one end and Tibet and China on the other, one that managed to become the state religion of the Uyghur empire for 500 years, can hardly be belittled as a mere "fringe".

Oh snap! BIBLE FIGHT!

I believe in God, in an afterlife at the absolute least, but some people are just stupid.

If you are looking for a "Fair and Balanced" examination of any topic, you'll have to look at some channel that does not have the word "FOX" in the corner of your screen. Kasich is simply a prime example of his political bent; an intellectual examination is not possible, he already "knows" the answer.

The up side is that people like John Kasich kick off from heart attacks relatively young...

Fox news just contributes to the "beliefs above facts" attitude that is haunting our country" and this is just yet anouther example.

It isn't just Fox News that is doing this. Just listen to Brian Williams last Friday on the NBC Evening News as he shamelessly panders to the Christy crowd. This on the same day that ABC named one of the discoverers of the Tiktaalik roseae fossil as its Person of the Week. Williams's coverage of that effectivenes-of-prayer study from a few weeks ago was similarly apologetic.

"It isn't just Fox News that is doing this. Just listen to Brian Williams last Friday on the NBC Evening News as he shamelessly panders to the Christy crowd. This on the same day that ABC named one of the discoverers of the Tiktaalik roseae fossil as its Person of the Week. Williams's coverage of that effectivenes-of-prayer study from a few weeks ago was similarly apologetic."

I never said all the blame was on fox news. I said they are one of the contributers to this.

Actually the closes things we get to real news are from 2 comedians. Bill Maher show and Jon Stewart. I am partially joking but it does seem there more truth given in a fake news show like the dairy show then many of the real ones lots of times.

geez. fox news is insane.

Of the 4 approved Gospels, John's was clearly the most judemental in terms of his characterisation of Thomas, Judas and even non-believers. With such clear bias, any reader with reason will know not to take his words 100%, especially when the Gospel of John was written by an unknown writer nearly 100 years after Jesus' death, and by implication John's as well.

I studied these kinds of things in seminary for several years. If you accept the Gospel of Judas as being true then you really don't understand anything about critical New Testament scholarship and you don't understand anything about Church history. Anyone who knows about the history of New Testament documents will look at the Gospel of Judas as something that is interesting but does not contain anything approaching the truth. The Gospel of Judas was written by someone who was involved in an offshoot of Christianity that was deemed to be involved in heresy. These things happened back then. Heretical offshoots are still happening.

wow! Kasich really looks like a nutjob... maybe his personality won him the job for dramatic interviews?

Anyway - this gospel of Judas is not really a new find. Irenaeus, one of the Early Church Fathers (ECFs) wrote about this gospel of Judas... Here's what he had to say:

Others again declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. On this account, they add, they have been assailed by the Creator, yet no one of them has suffered injury. For Sophia was in the habit of carrying off that which belonged to her from them to herself. They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictitious history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas.

I don't understand why people see this as a "threat to Christianity". Gnostic gospels have been known about for centuries... it/they haven't shaken my faith in the least.

Appendix, I don't accept your view.

The 4 main Gospels was chosen by the Church council to reduce the divisions in thought among Christianity, which was very much a religion under seige in the warly days. Division then meant weakness.

All the Gospels should be evaluated on their own worth as they were all written by unknown authors between 50-100 years after Jesus died and could not be identified as primary documents as they were not eye witness account.

That was wonderful entertainment. Reading this well after the fact but still, Kasich seems to have missed, even as, apparently, a fundamentalist, that, well, Judas was one of the disciples most educated and he was entrusted with the money which the disciples had. The fact that he took his life eventually over turning Christ in to the Pharisees might also suggest that Jdas was not a singularly evil chap or so Kasich would have us believe.

Incidentally, I think the real reason Kasich ended the clip abruptly was because he felt the insides of his head tightening before it exploded and popped off.