On the topic of the Gospel of Judas, I noticed this update from Al Mohler’s blog. It turns out that the translation from the Coptic into English is itself more than a bit tendentious at points - especially the claim that it said Judas was good and not evil!

I guess sometimes you need to have the original language if you want to check the primary source. (Hence the importance of learning Greek and Hebrew - where ever possible - for those who want to be congregational teachers of God’s Word.) In this case, we can be glad that other experts in Coptic were (eventually) allowed to access the facsimiles of this gnostic gospel and were able to challenge the problems with the initial translation.

Stephen, I should point out that most Protestants, (including Sandy, I presume) recognise the role that tradition plays in the history of Protestant theology.

But yes, I would agree with Sandy’s exhortation. Read the Bible. Read the Early Church Fathers. Read the Church Councils. Only then can we develop a balanced understanding of our faith tradition. As Cardinal John Henry Newman once stated “To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant.”

David,

Good to hear your support for the role of church history & tradition as informing sources.  I just think we Protestants need to be a little more honest about the legacy left to us from the sources of antiquity. 

I think there is a tendancy to assume it is one clean step to the Reformers, and one more clean step back into 1st century Palestine.  When in reality, our present held convictions rest on a mulitiude of sources and informing traditions over several thousand years.

I have no problem with the assertion that the Christian Scriptures are a primary source of the sacred for all humanity. It is just that I think the Christian Sciptures form part of a continuum of such influential sources throughout history.

Cheers.