Sacrifice and the Life of the Spirit

[Guest guest]

Sacrifice and the Life of the Spirit – Chapter Three

 

(P.59) The author of the 'Gospel of Judas' draws his wild caricature of " the

twelve " as priests at the altar, leading multitudes astray and offering human

sacrifice, in order to point out what he feels is a stunning contradiction: that

while Christians refuse 'to practice sacrifice, many of them bring sacrifice

right back into the center of Christian worship – by claiming that Jesus' death

is a sacrifice for human sin, and then by insisting that Christians who die as

martyrs are sacrifices pleasing to God'. Had this author seen church leaders

encouraging others – perhaps young men or women he knew, perhaps even members of

his own family – to embrace death in this way? Of course we have no way of

knowing, but his writing conveys the urgency of someone who wants to unmask what

he feels is the hideous folly of religious leaders who encourage people to get

themselves killed this way – as though their suffering would guarantee the

martyrs' personal resurrection to huge rewards in heaven, just as Justin

declared to the Roman judge who sentenced him.

 

Yet the 'Gospel of Judas', too, pictures Jesus' death as a sacrifice, for he

tells Judas that by handing him over, he will surpass them all, for " you will

sacrifice the human being who bears me " (Judas 15:4). (P.60) So even though

Jesus tells the disciples to " cease sac[rificing] " (Judas 5:17), the issue for

the 'Gospel of Judas' is not simply whether Jesus' death and the deaths of his

fellow Christians should be understood as sacrifices – he agrees that they

should. But what he thinks is wrong is when bishops like Ignatius and Irenaeus

teach that those who " perfect " themselves through a martyr's death are ensuring

that God will reward them by raising them physically from the dead – they are

wrong both in the " God " they worship and in thinking that the physical body will

be raised to eternal life.

 

These errors arise because people are unable to perceive that anything exists

beyond this mortal, visible world; they are unable to understand their place in

the divine scheme of things. Because of this ignorance, the true God and Father

sent Jesus to teach and heal so that people could come to know what " no human

will see " and " whose measure no angelic race has comprehended " (Judas 10:I,2).

He teaches Judas that there is a wider universe of the spirit beyond the limited

world people perceive, and unless they come to know it, they will never know God

or fulfil their own spiritual nature. For there is another glorious divine realm

above the material world, and an immortal holy race exists above the perishable

human race: these, he says, are " the mysteries of the kingdom " (Judas 9:20). As

long as they remain ignorant, people are easy prey to the error of false gods.

(P.61) But Jesus appeared on earth in order to show the true nature of the

universe and the end time so that those who understand these things would turn

away from the worship of false gods – with all its sacrificial violence and

immorality – and discover their true spiritual nature.

 

Almost half of Jesus' teaching is taken up with instructing Judas about the

existence and structure of the heavenly realm above, about how this world and

the gods who rule it came into being, and about what will happen at the end of

time. He teaches him that the supposed " God " whom the other disciples worship is

merely a lower angel who is leading them astray by impelling them to offer

bloody sacrifice. It is this false " God " who is responsible for having Jesus

killed – and his disciples prove they are just like him when they blaspheme

Jesus and stone Judas to death.

 

As the 'Gospel of Judas' opens, Jesus finds his disciples praying and giving

thanks as they bless bread for worship – but he laughs at them for what they are

doing. What, then, is wrong with their worship? What provokes Jesus' contempt?

What the disciples are doing is probably not simply offering thanks over a

shared meal but practicing the " thanksgiving " over the bread that Christians

call " eucharist " , to " proclaim the Lord's death, " as the apostle Paul had taught

(I Corinthians 11:23-26). [1] Jesus explains to them that he is not mocking

them; he's laughing because they don't understand that they are practicing the

eucharist " so that your 'God' will receive praise. " They wrongly think that

Jesus is the son of their " God " (Judas 2:6-9) and refuse to hear what he is

saying, comfortable in their self-righteousness: " [This] is what is right, " they

protest (Judas 2:5).

 

(P.62) As we saw, when Jesus tries to instruct the disciples, all but Judas

resist him, getting angry when he scoffs at their pieties, and blaspheming him –

proving that their " God who is within you " is easy to provoke (Judas 2:12-15).

Only Judas is able to stand before Jesus, even though he is not able to look him

in the eyes but turns his face aside. But although he averts his eyes, Judas

recognizes who Jesus is, and dares speak: " I know who you are, and which place

you came from " (Judas 2:16-22). Thus Judas demonstrates that he is capable of

comprehending what the vision reveals – that beyond the universe we perceive

with our senses lies an invisible realm of Spirit that we must come to know in

order to know God, and our own spiritual nature.

 

Jesus then takes Judas aside and begins to teach him privately what the others

are not yet ready to hear: that beyond the visible world they know is a heavenly

realm where a great invisible Spirit dwells in an infinite cloud of light.

Although surpassing description, this creative energy is the divine source of

all things, both those in heaven and those on earth. He teaches Judas that God

first created the invisible, heavenly realm, filling it with divine beings,

lights, and eternal realms called 'aeons', each with countless myriads of

angels.

 

In contrast to this brilliant eternal realm of light, the visible world we live

in now exists only as a kind of primeval darkness and disorder. Before God

created the cosmos, in the beginning there was only chaos – like the description

in 'Genesis' 1:2 that " the earth was a formless void and darkness covered the

face of the deep. " (P.63) According to the author of the 'Gospel of Judas', God

in his goodness brought light and order to this world by setting rulers over it

in the form of the heavenly bodies – just as 'Genesis' 1:14-19 describes God

creating " lights " in the dome of the sky to rule the seasons and illumine the

earth. Jesus also reveals to Judas the names of the rulers God ordained: Nebro

(Ialdabaoth), Saklas, and other angels. They are clearly associated with

specific heavenly bodies: the sun with Nebro (with his face of fire), the

seven-day week with Saklas and his six angels, the zodiac with the twelve angels

(who are each given a portion of heaven), and the angels set to rule over " the

chaos and the oblivion " with the five planets (Judas 12:5-21).

 

Confusing as this account might appear to the modern reader, it is crucial

because it explains how evil, injustice, and suffering came to exist in a world

created by a loving and all-powerful God. This conviction – that, far from being

chaotic or random, the universe was constructed by God according to a harmonious

order – is expressed in what is probably the original meaning of the Greek term

'cosmos' ( " order " ). But the author of the 'Gospel of Judas' suggests that the

term also means " what perishes. " That double meaning expresses the view that

God's creation is good but that nonetheless the rulers of the lower world are

flawed beings, who can lead humanity astray. Jesus explains that God's goodness

consists in ordering and illuminating the primeval darkness of chaos; but

nonetheless, in order for the angels He creates to be able to rule over this

world, they have to partake of the nature of the world they rule. (P.64) That

means that they are limited in power and understanding; theirs is the dim and

consuming light of fire, not the glory of divine illumination. In this way,

Jesus' teaching here accounts for how " fallen angels " come to have dominion over

the world – much like Satan and his angels, who appear in other Christian works

such as the 'Book of Revelation' in the New Testament, exercise sway over the

world.

 

As in the 'Book of Revelation', the 'Gospel of Judas' teaches that God has set a

limit to the time that these lower angels will rule. At the end time, the lesser

heavenly beings will be destroyed, along with the stars and planets and the

people they lead astray. The author of the 'Gospel of Judas' agrees with the

`Gospel of Mark' that when the end time comes, what God created " in the

beginning " will collapse: " (T)he sun will be darkened, and the moon will not

give its light, and the stars will be falling from heaven, and the powers in the

heavens will be shaken " (Mark 13:24-25). For many Christians, then as now,

believed that the end time would be a time of judgment, when those who do evil

and the spiritual powers that incite them to do evil will be destroyed. So, too,

Jesus teaches Judas that when the time of Saklas's rule comes to an end, the

stars will bring everything to completion, just as he prophesies; and all those

people who worship the angels will fall into a moral abyss, fornicating and

killing their children (Judas 14:2-8) – these are the signs of the end.

 

What is most striking, however, is that in all the Christian literature we know,

only the author of the 'Gospel of Judas' says that those who commit these sins

do so in Jesus' name – that they are " Christians! " (P.65) When people like " the

twelve " practice eucharist and sacrifice and encourage others to follow their

lead, they have fallen under the influence of angels who themselves err, leading

astray the people who worship them into error and suffering. For as the 'Gospel

of Judas' explains, although these angels were created and appointed by God,

they are deficient beings. Unlike the heavenly angels in the divine realm above,

they are mortal, limited in their understanding, and sometimes make mistakes.

This suggestion is not original to the author of the 'Gospel of Judas': Other

Jewish and Christian sources of the time also introduce such angels into the

creation story to help account for the sufferings and mistakes that characterize

much of human experience – while at the same time exempting God from creating

anything evil.

 

Those who fall under such sinister celestial influences may be driven, like " the

twelve " , to commit violence and sexual immorality – even killing their own

children in the name of some lesser heavenly power they mistake for God. As we

have seen, Jesus rebukes " the twelve " for making such a mistake – a fatal one,

because, he teaches, the way a person envisions God affects the way one lives.

What was wrong with " the twelve " was that they `believed' they worshipped the

God who was Jesus' Father but mistakenly imagined that " their God " required

sacrifice – not only the death of Jesus but also the " sacrificial " death of

their wives and children, who no doubt represent the martyrs of the author's own

day whom church leaders encouraged to die for their faith. (P.66) Even when they

worship God, they " celebrate " their eucharist by re-enacting a death – the

crucifixion seen as a sacrifice. When Jesus laughs at their worship, instead of

asking him why or considering that they might be making a mistake, they angrily

blaspheme him to his face. Thus their own angry violence mirrors that of " their

God. " But the reverse is also true: When Jesus reveals to Judas a different

vision of God, this different vision creates within him and all who worship God

a very different sense of who they are – and what God requires.

 

According to the 'Gospel of Judas', then, the fundamental problem is that " the

twelve " – here, stand-ins for church leaders – do not know who Jesus is and do

not understand who God is, either. They wrongly think that God requires

suffering and sacrifice. But the author of the 'Gospel of Judas' – and others

within the early movement as well - was asking questions like this: What does

such teaching make of God? Is God, then, unwilling or unable to forgive human

transgression without violent bloodshed – from either the cut throats of goats

and bulls, or – worse – human sacrifice? [2] Are Christians to worship a God who

demands what the Hebrew Bible says that the God of Abraham refused – child

sacrifice, even that of his own son? What kind of God would require anyone –

much less his own son – to die in agony before he accepts his followers?

 

Over the centuries, Christians have answered these questions in various ways.

[3] (P.67) One answer is that God is, of course, merciful and loving but also

just in requiring sacrifice to atone for human sin: Somehow, the debt incurred

by sin must be paid. But the measure of his love, as the 'Gospel of John' says,

is precisely this – that " God so loved the world that he gave his only son, so

that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life "

(John 3:16). What could demonstrate God's love more fully than that?

 

Yet the 'Gospel of Judas' and other newly discovered works show that some

Christians argued instead that people are gravely mistaken in worshipping such a

limited, angry – even cruel – " God " . As we saw, when Jesus mocks his disciples'

eucharist, the author of the 'Gospel of Judas' says they do not realize that

they worship in error – not the true God but, as Jesus tells them, " your 'God.' "

Astonished, the disciples protest that " 'you are' the Son of our God, " but they

are wrong. Jesus is the son of the true God. The 'Gospel of Judas' pictures such

worship as a nightmare – one that distorts Jesus' teaching, mistakes the meaning

of his death, and gives a false picture of God.

 

Ingeniously, the 'Gospel of Judas' pictures the nightmare as something that the

twelve disciples themselves have dreamed up – and it goes on to dramatize their

horror at what they dreamed. The disciples, it says, all had the same dream in

which they saw twelve priests standing at a great altar offering sacrifice.

(P.68) But instead of picturing a scene of holy worship, they see these priests

engaged in sacrilege – not only leading animals to sacrifice on their altar, but

committing violence and sexual sin: above all, killing their own wives and

children as human sacrifice, and doing all this in Jesus' name! Horrified, the

disciples go to Jesus to tell him the dream and ask him what it could mean

(Judas 4:2-17).

 

Jesus' answer shocks them even more: " You, " he says, " are the twelve men whom

you saw " (Judas 5:3). What they see in their dream is a graphic picture of what

they themselves are doing. While imagining that they are pleasing God, they are

actually serving their own distorted view of a " God " who, they believe, wants

human sacrifice (Judas 5:13-14). In their dream, they are seeing themselves as

the true God sees them – as evil priests who lead many of their " flock " to their

destruction, like animals to slaughter.

 

The 'Gospel of Judas' does not tell us how the twelve disciples reacted, but if

their previous behavior is any guide, they must have been horrified. Certainly

the charge Jesus makes would have surprised and offended most readers, for

Christians prided themselves on having rejected the practice of sacrifice,

associating it either with Jewish worship in the Jerusalem Temple or with the

worship of the false gods of their pagan neighbors. Praying and sacrificing to

idols, they believed, would inevitably lead to immorality. Paul claims that

people who do such things deserve to die (Romans 1:18-32) – and that the " gods "

who require animal sacrifice, are really demons (I Corinthians 10:20). [4]

 

Yet Christians were not the first to denounce such practices. (P.69) On the

contrary, they were following traditions already well established in their day.

Israel's prophets, as well as Greek and Roman philosophers, had criticized

conventional religion for promoting superstition, immorality, and violence by

giving people wrong ideas about God. For centuries, Jewish teachers had

denounced pagan worship, accusing their neighbors of carving images from wood or

casting them from metal and then kneeling down to worship what they had made.

Jewish teachers, including Jesus' disciple Paul, charged that devotion to false

gods – gods who, they said, are actually demons [5] – leads people into

violence, sexual immorality, perhaps even murder and the killing of children.

[6]

 

The great Jewish prophets such as Amos, Hosea, and Isaiah denounced not only

pagan worship but also the sacrifices offered by their own people to the one

true God in the Jerusalem Temple. Speaking in the Lord's name, Hosea declared

that " I desire steadfast love and not sacrifice, the knowledge of God, rather

than burnt-offerings " (Hosea 6:6). Amos, too, speaking for God, declared:

 

I hate, I despise your festivals....Even though you offer me your

burnt-offerings and grain-offerings, I will not accept them; and the offerings

of well-being of your fatted animals I will not look upon....But let justice

roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream (Amos

5:21-24)

 

(P.70) Many Jews, including Jesus, agreed with Amos that what God requires above

all is " to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God "

(Micah 6:8); without these virtues sacrifice was unacceptable. According to the

'Gospel of Mark', Jesus teaches that the greatest commandment is to " love the

Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your

mind. The second is this, 'You love your neighbor as yourself' " (Mark 12:30-31).

After he speaks a Jewish scribe applauds, agreeing that these commandments are

" more important than all whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices " (Mark 12:33). [7]

 

Greek and Roman philosophers, too, criticized certain religious practices,

arguing that their own myths about jealous and petty gods who fomented war and

committed rape proved that these gods did not deserve devotion. [8] Some people

even questioned whether slaughtering animals in sacrifice actually pleased the

gods. [9] Philosophers often argued that the gods do not require the smell and

taste of sacrifice for their food but rather, as the moral philosopher Porphyry

said, " The best sacrifice to the gods is a pure mind and a soul free from

passions. " [10]

 

Yet everyone who criticized sacrifice – whether Jew, Christian, or pagan –

regarded human sacrifice as the worst of all. The Jewish author of the 'Wisdom

of Solomon', for example, claimed that God gave the land of Canaan to the

Israelites because the Canaanites had mercilessly slaughtered children, and

feasted on the human flesh and blood they had sacrificed (Wisdom 12:5-6). The

Roman governor Pliny says that the Senate first passed a law against human

sacrifice only as recently as 97 B.C.E., and until then " these monstrous rites

were still performed. " [11] (P.71) Pliny adds that suspect people – Druids and

magicians – still practice human sacrifice; for him this proves how savage they

are. [12] Whether accurate or not, these denunciations show that human sacrifice

horrified people.

 

Since Christians were famous – or notorious – for rejecting sacrifice, and some

even chose to die rather than perform it, the author of the 'Gospel of Judas'

surely intends to shock his readers when he pictures " the twelve " not only

offering animals in sacrifice to God but offering him even human sacrifice! Only

their worst enemies accused Christians of slaughtering children and promoting

all kinds of immoral behavior. Some apparently understood the symbolic Christian

practice of eating the body and drinking the blood of Jesus as, literally,

cannibalism. [13]

 

Until recently it appeared that criticizing Christians for immorality came

solely from the outside – notably, from Greek and Roman philosophers, who were

appalled at this new " sect. " The 'Gospel of Judas' now adds a new voice to the

bitter debate that was raging within Christian circles, like that of another

outspoken Christian, who wrote a vehement attack he called the 'Testimony of

Truth' to challenge what he felt was the false testimony of those who glorified

martyrdom. Like the 'Gospel of Judas', this protest was buried centuries ago; it

was discovered only in 1945 near Nag Hammadi. [14] (P.72) This author declares

that " foolish people, thinking in their heart that if they only confess in

words, 'We are Christians,' ... while giving themselves over to a human death, "

they will gain eternal life. These 'empty martyrs...testify only to themselves. "

What their actions really testify to, the author says, is their ignorance: " they

do not know ... who Christ is, " and they foolishly believe that " if we deliver

ourselves over to death for the sake of the name " – the name of Christ – " we

will be saved. " The author of the 'Testimony of Truth', like the author of

'Judas' suggests that such people do not know the true God. Those who imagine

that human sacrifice pleases God have no understanding of the Father; instead,

they have fallen under the influence of wandering stars that lead them astray

('Testimony of Truth' 34:1-11). Rather than turning believers toward salvation,

such leaders actually are delivering them into the clutches of the authorities,

who kill them. All that such violence accomplishes is their own destruction.

 

What, then, is " the true testimony " to Christ? To proclaim his mighty works of

deliverance and compassion – how the Son of Man raised the dead, healed the

paralyzed, restored sight to the blind, healed those suffering from sickness or

tormented by demons. While these would-be martyrs are themselves " sick, unable

to raise even themselves " ('Testimony of Truth' 31:22-34:11), this author

declares that those who truly witness to Christ proclaim that God's power brings

wholeness and life. The true testimony, this author declares, is " to know

oneself, and the God who is over the truth. " Only one who testifies to this

message of deliverance wins the " crown " that others mistakenly say that martyrs

earn by dying ('Testimony of Truth' 44:23-45:6).

 

(P.73) While the 'Testimony of Truth' thus denounces – even ridicules - the

martyrs themselves, the 'Gospel of Judas', as we noted, stops short of this

choosing only to criticize the leaders who encourage would-be martyrs to court

destruction. Another of the Nag Hammadi texts, the 'Apocalypse of Peter', allows

us to hear the voice of a third vocal critic of Christian leaders who urge

martyrdom upon devout believers. This author singles out especially " those who

call themselves bishops and deacons, as if they had received their authority

from God " ; such people, he wrote, " are dry canals! " ('Apocalypse of Peter'

79:22-31). Charging that these leaders themselves are the heretics ('Apocalypse

of Peter' 74:20-22), the 'Apocalypse' says that " These are the ones who oppress

their brothers, saying to them, 'Through this (suffering) our God has mercy,

since salvation comes to us through this,' " oblivious that they themselves will

incur divine punishment for the part they played in sending so many of the

" little ones " to their death ('Apocalypse of Peter' 79:11-21).

 

When denouncing such leaders as not only mistaken but implicated in bloodshed,

however, this author apparently is writing to fellow Christians who are living

in fear of persecution. The 'Apocalypse of Peter' – that is, God's " revelation "

to Peter – opens to a scene of Peter and other disciples standing in the

Jerusalem Temple in a moment of mortal terror. Peter says, " I saw the priests

and the people running up to us with stones, as if they would kill us; and I was

afraid that we were going to die " ('Apocalypse of Peter' 72:6-9). (P.74) But

instead of advising them to avoid suffering a martyr's death, the 'Apocalypse of

Peter' encourages them to face such a death with courage and hope, as Jesus

tells Peter: " You, therefore, be courageous and do not fear at all. For I shall

be with you in order that none of your enemies may prevail over you. Peace be to

you. Be strong! " ('Apocalypse of Peter' 84:6-11). Thus the reader would

understand that a writing like this, which claims to convey a " revelation " Jesus

gave to Peter when the terrified disciple faced his own death, was also written

to console any believer who feared the same fate – and, for that matter, anyone

who faces, and fears, impending death.

 

When it comes to our second question – How does such teaching impel people to

act? - some Christians, like Irenaeus, when faced with the reality of

persecution and death, advocated that people should be martyred, arguing that

God wills all this suffering for people's own good. For Irenaeus, suffering and

even death are meant to teach people about the greatness and goodness of God in

granting eternal life to a sinful humanity. [15] But the author of the 'Gospel

of Judas' not only denies that God desires such sacrifice, he also suggests that

the practical effect of such views is hideous: It makes people complicit in

murder. By teaching that Jesus died in agony " for the sins of the world " and

encouraging his followers to die as he did, certain leaders send them on a path

toward destruction – while encouraging them with the false promise that they

will be resurrected from death to eternal life in the flesh.

 

(P.75) But the 'Gospel of Judas' rejects the resurrection of the body. What

meaning, then, can be found in Jesus' death? The author offers a radical answer.

When Jesus tells Judas to " sacrifice the human being who bears me, " he is asking

Judas to help him demonstrate to his followers how, when they step beyond the

limits of earthly existence, they, like Jesus, may step into the infinite – into

God.

 

Reading Judas - The Gospel of Judas and the Shaping of Christianity,

Pg. 59-75

Elaine Pagels and Karen L. King

Penguin Group – London, England

ISBN 978-0-713-99984-6

 

 

Notes: (P.178-182)

 

[1] During the second century, " fathers of the church " show that Christians

disagreed about what the eucharist meant. Bishop Ignatius, for example, declared

that those he calls heretics " do not confess that the eucharist is the flesh of

our savior, Jesus Christ " (Smyrneans 7:1); Ignatius himself insists that the cup

of wine offers union with Christ's blood, and the bread with his flesh

(Philippians 4:1); thus it becomes the " medicine of immortality, the antidote so

that we should not die, but live forever " (Ephestans 20:2). Ignatius connects

this view of the eucharist, then, with bodily resurrection and, for that matter,

with bishops whose participation alone can ensure proper worship (Smyrneans

7-8). The author of the 'Gospel of Philip' speaks as a Christian who takes the

eucharistic elements symbolically " His flesh is the 'logos', and his blood the

holy spirit " ), and sees the resurrection as a spiritual process, not a physical

one ('Philip'. 57.3-9). Irenaeus, writing toward the end of the second century,

also derides " heretics " who celebrate the eucharist, and yet do not believe in

bodily [fleshly] resurrection, for which Irenaeus regards it as the appropriate

preparatory nourishment (see 'Against Heresies' 4.17.5-18.5: " Just as the bread,

which is produced from the earth, when it receives God's invocation is no longer

common bread, but the eucharist...so also our bodies, when they receive the

eucharist, are no longer corruptible, having the hope of the resurrection to

eternity. "

 

[2] See Tertullian's discussion in 'Scorpiace', where he enumerates questions

like these as examples of " heretical poison " spread by dissidents who question

whether God desires – or commands – martyrdom.

 

[3] The history of this position, generally known as " the doctrine of

atonement " , is notoriously varied, having been interpreted and reinterpreted

from the early church into the twenty-first century. Christians have thought

about Jesus' death as a ransom to liberate human sinners from bondage to sin and

the devil (Gregory of Nyssa and Augustine); they have talked about the way human

sin offends God's honor, so Christ paid off the infinite debt owed to God with

his perfect obedience unto death (Anselm); they have said that Christ's

atonement is sufficient for the sins of the whole world (Aquinas), or that

Christ's life and death are meant as an inspiring exemplar of love and obedience

to God, intended to move people to repent of their sins and reform their lives

(Abelard); and so on. Here we try to focus on the kind of views present in the

first and second centuries that the author of the `Gospel of Judas' seems to

take aim against. It should be noted, too, that theologians working on the

articulation of atonement theory often address exactly such concerns: How should

we think about God in light of Jesus' death? For further discussion, see Paul S.

Fiddes, 'Past Event and Present Salvation: The Christian Idea of Atonement'

(Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1989).

 

[4] This was a common charge by Christians and Jews (see the discussion in

R.P.C. Hanson, " The Christian Attitude to Pagan Religions up to the Time of

Constantine the Great " 'Aufsteig und Niedergang der romischen Welt', Wolfgang

Haase, editor. II. Principat 23/2 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1980), pp. 910-973

esp. pp. 925-927.

 

[5] Deuteronomy 32:17.

 

[6] For example, Paul's denunciations we saw above closely resemble those of the

Jewish author of the 'Wisdom of Solomon', who charges that devotion to false

gods has corrupted pagans: " ...living in great strife ... whether they kill

children in their initiations, or celebrate secret mysteries, or hold frenzied

revels with strange customs ... they either treacherously kill one another, or

grieve one another by adultery, and all is a raging riot of blood and murder...

and debauchery. For the worship of idols... is the beginning and cause and end

of every evil " (Wisdom 14:22-27).

 

[7] See also 'Matthew' 9:13; 12:7.

 

[8] See the discussion of Harold W. Attridge, " The Philosophical Critique of

Religion Under the Early Empire " in 'Aufsteig und Niedergang der romischen

Welt', Wolfgang Haas, editor. II. Principat. 16.1 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,

1978), pp. 45-78); R.P.C. Hanson, op. cit., esp. pp. 910-918.

 

[9] The social critic and satirist Lucian describes what would have been a

common scene of sacrifice in any city in the Roman empire: " Although ... no one

is to be allowed within the holy-water who has not clean hands, the priest

himself stands there all bloody just like the Cyclops of old, cutting up the

victim, removing the entrails, plucking out the heart, pouring the blood about

the altar, and doing everything possible in the way of piety. To crown it all,

he lights a fire and puts upon it the goat, skin and all and sheep, wool and

all; and the smoke, divine and holy, mounts upward and gradually dissipates into

Heaven itself " ('On Sacrifices' 13, translated from A.M. Harmon 'Lucian', Loeb

Classical Library edition, Vol. III. [Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,

1921], p.169). Is this what the gods really want? Lucian scoffs. Other

philosophers also mocked aspects of pagan worship: The philosopher Heraclitus of

Ephesus ridiculed those who worshipped images, suggesting that anyone who

approaches and prays before statues as if they were gods acts like a person who

tries to engage in conversation with houses (cited in Origen, 'Contra Celsum'

1.5, translated by Henry Chadwick, [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

1953], p.9). The Platonist teacher Celsus complains that even when images are

made by craftsmen with loose morals, people still regard them as worth

worshipping (ibid).

 

[10] Cited by Eusebius, 'The Preparation for the Gospel' 4.14d (translated by

Edwin Hamilton Gifford [Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981], Part I, p.

167. Although Porphyry is writing after the 'Gospel of Judas' was composed, the

sentiment he expresses was widespread in the first and second centuries (see

Attridge, op. cit.).

 

[11] See 'Natural History' 30.12, cited from Mary Beard, John North, and Simon

Price 'Religions of Rome, Vol. 2: A Sourcebook' (Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press, 1998), pp. 156-160.

 

[12] 'Natural History' 30.12-13, For other examples of Romans offering human

sacrifice, see 'Plutarch, Roman Questions' 83, ibid; and the discussion of J.

Rives, " Human Sacrifice among Pagans and Christians " in 'The Journal of Roman

Studies' 85 (1995), pp. 65-85.

 

[13] Those hostile to Christians accused them of murdering and eating infants as

a central " mystery " of their worship. One such critic is quoted as saying that

initiates are required to kill a child, and then: " I can hardly mention this,

but they thirstily lap up the infant's blood, eagerly tear his body apart, make

a covenant over this sacrificial victim, and by complicity in the crime they

bind themselves to mutual silence. These rites are more foul than any form of

sacrilege " (Minucius Felix, 'Octavius' 9.5, cited from Mary Beard, John North

and Simon Price, 'Religions of Rome. Vol. 2: A Sourcebook' [Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 1998], p.281). How did such a slanderous charge of ritual

murder and cannibalism get started? Some outsiders may have inferred this from

what they heard about Christians eating " the flesh and blood " (bread and wine)

of God's son (see Stephen Benko, 'Pagan Rome and the Early Christians'

[bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 1984], especially p.62). But in any

case, it fits the pattern we have seen of condemning other people's religious

practices as impious and immoral (see J. Rives, " Human Sacrifice among Pagans

and Christians " in `The Journal of Roman Studies' 85 [1995], pp. 65-85).

 

[14] All references to this work are from Birger Pearson and Soren Giversen,

'The Testimony of Truth', pp. 101-203 in 'Nag Hammadi Codices IX and X.'

(Leiden: E.J. Brill) 1981).

 

[15] See 'Against Heresies' V.2.3; English translation from A. Clevelan Coxe,

'The Ante-Nicene Fathers', Vol. I, (Grand Rapids, MI: Erdmans, 1885 [reprint

1979]), p.528.