The Gospel of Judas

TOPICS: Gospel of Judas part of diversified early Christianity – contradictory attitude of fundamentalists – not factual but counterpoint to unbalanced public opinion – official gospels also counterpoints to popular opinion – channeled gospel – easy to take this too far into opposite extreme – do not take any spiritual teaching as gospel –

Question from Kim: Jesus, several people have asked about the newly published Gospel of Judas. I know you have already commented on Judas twice, Link 1, Link 2, but I wonder if you have a comment on the new gospel?

Answer from ascended master Jesus through Kim Michaels:

I consider the Gospel of Judas a part of the ongoing process of making modern Christians aware that Christianity was much more diversified in the first couple of centuries and that much was lost after the emergence of the orthodox church. However, I do not consider this gospel a major milestone.

This gospel was one among many gospels that are often called Gnostic gospels by orthodox Christians. It was indeed brought forth through a process of inspiration, revelation or what today would be called channeling. The main purpose was to counteract the rising negativity toward Judas and provide a counterpoint to the orthodox portrayal of Judas as the only reason I was crucified. If you read the four official gospels carefully, you will see that I knew Judas was playing a role, that I somewhat encouraged him but that I nevertheless would have been crucified even if Judas had not “betrayed” me.

Thus, it is not necessary or reasonable to become so hateful toward Judas, and it is somewhat ironic that some of the people who hate Judas the most are fundamentalist Christians. These people seem to believe that if Judas had not given me up, I would not have been crucified, yet they also believe that it was the spilling of my blood on the cross that has washed away their sins. So if the crucifixion was necessary for their salvation, why blame Judas? Would they prefer he had not betrayed me and thus they had not had their sins washed away?

In reality, the Gospel of Judas was meant to counteract this hatred of Judas because it prevented many Christians from understanding the inner mysteries behind my crucifixion. Obviously, that purpose was undermined when the Gospel of Judas was banned as heresy.

It is important to understand that this gospel is an example of what we might call an attempt to balance the scales by providing a counterpoint to a popular opinion, interpretation or doctrine. This is a principle you see in many spiritual teachings; indeed I made use of it in many of my statements, where I challenged the scribes and Pharisees or Jewish customs. As I explain throughout my website,  people tend to become rigid in their adherence to outer doctrines, and thus one of the roles of the Living Christ is to challenge people’s fixed viewpoints – their graven images – in an attempt to shock them out of their mental boxes. The purpose is to get them to think by providing a viewpoint that is startlingly different from what they were brought up to see as an infallible truth.

My point is that the Gospel of Judas should not be taken literally or seen as a factual account of what actually happened. It is designed specifically as a counterpoint to the popular interpretation of the official gospels and thus it is not meant to give factual knowledge. It is still very much in the realm of duality in that it is a response to a dualistic viewpoint. For that matter, the official gospels are not meant to be taken completely literally. Even they can be considered as counter-gospels in the sense that they aim – as one of their functions – at countering Jewish beliefs about me. They are very much adapted to people’s beliefs and Old Testament scriptures in order to show that I was a prophet in the line of Old Testament prophets and that I had come to bring the Jewish religion to a new level.

When you avoid the trap of interpreting the Gospel of Judas literally, you can see that it is not correct that Judas was my foremost disciple. He did think so at times, as did Peter and a couple of the others. Yet I had no preferred or foremost disciple, affirming my oneness with all life. However, I did have a special relationship with Mary Magdalene as my twin flame, and this is reflected in some of the official and unofficial gospels. Likewise, the official gospels are correct in that Judas did commit suicide.

My point is that the Gospel of Judas should not be seen as an attempt to provide a factual account, and thus it is not what is normally called a historical document and certainly not an eye-witness account. I am aware that some will say the official gospels are not historical accounts and do not seek to provide a factual account. However, these gospels were written as an attempt to provide a blend of factual accounts and stories aimed at producing an effect on a particular audience. The Gospel of Judas is primarily given to provide an effect on the audience, namely to counteract official interpretations. In other words, there is some historicity in the official Gospels.

Take note that I am not thereby denouncing the Gospel of Judas as false or heretical. For those who have grown up with the official hatred of Judas, this gospel can help them open their minds and overcome the hatred, which is highly beneficial for their own growth. I am merely saying that if you start taking this gospel literally, you will go far beyond its intended purpose—as is the case with any religious scripture.

As I said, this gospel was “channeled” to counter a popular misconception, and it is very difficult for the “channeler” to receive such a teaching. It is quite easy for the recipient – what scholars call the author – to take the teaching too far into the opposite extreme of the viewpoint it is meant to counter. This did to some degree happen with the Gospel of Judas, so it is not entirely pure. Nevertheless, this is relatively insignificant when you understand the gospel’s true purpose.

Incidentally, many modern spiritual teachings are also given as counter teachings. You will see many of today’s channeled teachings that do serve the purpose of countering either traditional religious beliefs or a scientific world view. As such they can serve a function for people to transition into a more spiritual frame of mind.

The problem is when people start taking them literally or think they come from the highest source. As I have said elsewhere, many modern channelings come from the mental level, which means they can counter the scientific and rational mindset. However, if you want to take such teachings as factual, you will run into problems. My point being that at some point a sincere spiritual seeker needs to start looking for teachings that originate from the ascended masters and thus do not originate from the level of duality found in the three lower levels of the material universe. We will also sometimes give counter teachings, but they will always point beyond duality for those who have ears to hear.


Copyright © 2006 by Kim Michaels