Judas did not betray Jesus

There has been a myth circulating his “Christian” circles for about 1800 years that Judas Iscariot, one of the original disciples, betrayed the Jesus of the New Testament.  The news that Judas would betray Jesus came as a surprise to everyone.  Jesus identified the traitor as one who with whom he would share bread, then handed bread to Judas.

As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him. “What you are about to do, do quickly,” Jesus told him, but no one at the meal understood why Jesus said this to him.

Since Judas had charge of the money, some thought Jesus was telling him to buy what was needed for the Feast, or to give something to the poor [John 13:27-29].

καὶ μετὰ τὸ ψωμίον τὀτε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς ἐκεῖνον ὁ σατανᾶς. λέγει οὖν αὐτῷ Ἰησοῦς· ὁ ποιεῖς ποίησον τάχιον.

τοῦτο [δὲ] οὐδεὶς ἔγνω τῶν ανακειμένων πρὸς τί εἶπεν αὐτῷ·

τινὲς γὰρ ἐδόκουν ἐπεὶ τὸ γλωσσόκομον εἶχεν Ἰούδας, ὅτι λέγει αὐτῷ Ἰησοῦς· ἀγόρασον ὧν χρείαν ἔχομεν εἰς τὴν ἑορτήν, ἢ τοῖς πτωχοῖς ἵνα τι δῷ,

How did Jesus know he would be betrayed in the first place, and that Judas would be the traitor? The problem is that the word translated as “traitor” did not have “traitor” as its only meaning. The Greek word used for betrayal (παραδίδωμι) or delivery (παράδοση): paradidomi, as but can also be translated as “to surrender, yield up, entrust or transmit,” without necessarily implying underhandedness (that would be a tertiary definition).  It is here that context is everything, and in this regard it is imperative to study Judas and his identity.  The “betrayal” was to have a special sign.  A kiss on Jesus’ mouth, one considered essential to assure support, honor, and vassalage that was carried through the Middle Ages, especially in France: hommage de bouche et de mains for the lord, and for the vassal homme de bouche et de mains, as related in the election of Notker as abbot in 971, in the presence of the emperor Otto I, and became an imperial vassal: meus tandem eris, ait, manibusque receptum osculatus est, moxque ill evangelio allato, fidem iuravit, a formulary used for centuries (Casus S. Galli, c. 16, ed. I, von Arx, Monumenta Germaniae historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum. Scriptores rerum Langobardicarum et Italicarum Hannoverae, Germany: Impensis Bibliopolii Hahniani, 1878; saec. VI-IX. [t. 1], ii. 141; there is a newer edition on 3×5 cards, but I do not care to use it).  By 1127, a formula was established that made fealty more rigid (1).

Judas Kisses Jesus (painting by Giotto)

Throughout the ancient Middle East, and throughout the Medieval epoch in Europe, a kiss on the mouth was an act of friendship, trust, and loyalty.  Both in Matthew (26:49–50: καὶ εὐθέως  προσελθὼν τῷ  Ἰησοῦ εἶπεν· χαῖρε, ῥαββί, καὶ  κατεφίλησεν αὐτόν. ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ· ἑταῖρε, ἐφ’ ὃ πάρει. τότε προσελθόντες  ἐπέβαλον τὰς χεῖρας ἐπὶ τὸν Ἰησοῦν καὶ ἐκράτησαν αὐτόν) and Mark (14:43–45) the gospel writers use the Greek verb κατεφίλησεν:  kataphilein, which means to kiss firmly, intensely, passionately, tenderly or warmly; today it would be known as a “French kiss” where tongues could meet to show the willingness to share liquids (wine and other fermented beverages) and that there was no poison within the mouth.  Only Luke 22:47–48 presents a different story, with Jesus stopping Judas before Judas kisses him. 

Alonzo Rodriguez: Commiatodei santi_Pietro e Paolo Messina Museo Regionale

In the primitive christian communities it was commonly practiced as the osculum pacis (it is in the Apostolic Constitutions: Constitutiones  Apostolorum, VIII, xxix, but men only kissed men, and women only kissed women; the collection is dated 370-380 CE (most of the organized churches rejected this work by 622 CE, however, the Apostolic Constitutions were accepted as canonical by John of Damascus and, in a modified form, included in the 81 book canon of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church), most of the Fathers of the Church encouraged this “kiss of peace” to demonstrate loyalty, love, forbearance and willingness for martyrdom)The Kiss of Peace was a popular art form in the Christian world, especially when recounting the martyrdom of Sts Paul and Peter.  The best known art work is the Farewell of Saints Peter and Paul, showing the Apostles giving each other the holy kiss before their martyrdom (Alonzo Rodriguez, 16th century, Museo Regionale di Messina).  Such a kiss is mentioned five times in the New Testament:

  • Romans 16:16 — “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (Greek: ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ).
  • I Corinthians 16:20 — “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (Greek: ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ).
  • II Corinthians 13:12 — “Greet one another with a holy kiss” (Greek: ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν ἁγίῳ φιλήματι).
  • I Thessalonians 5:26 — “Greet all the brothers with a holy kiss” (Greek: ἀσπάσασθε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς πάντας ἐν φιλήματι ἁγίῳ).
  • I Peter 5:14 — “Greet one another with a kiss of love” (Greek: ἀσπάσασθε ἀλλήλους ἐν φιλήματι ἀγάπης).

The disciple was known as Judas Iscariot (יהודה איש־קריות‎; the Greek is Ιούδας Ισκάριωθ) who turned Jesus over to the Hebrew authorities.  It is impossible, because of numerous claimants, what the name means, but most likely it is from HebrewIscariot-3.jpg or HebrewIscariot-4.jpg that means “to deliver,” based on the LXX rendering of Isaiah 19:4a and is most likely a fiction inserted in a redaction of the gospels to align the spurious writings with the Old Testament to give greater strength to the biblical character Jesus of the New Testament.

It is possible, and more practical, that the word “Iscariot” is a term that refers to Judas’ hometown of Kerioth, in southern Judah.  This means that Judas was the only one of the Twelve who was not a Galilean, and thus easily suspect by “racial purists” (Galileans).  Judas from the city of Kerioth in Judea gave the other Apostles legitimacy as the people of Jerusalem considered Galileans to be uneducated, uncouth, and of little value, as read in John 7:41, recording the incredulity of Judeans that Jesus was a Galilean: “How can the Christ come from Galilee?”  Judas would have been a more acceptable choice, and it took a man of Judah to give Jesus credibility, making Judas an accomplice in a grand scheme.

A major fault in the gospel narratives is found in the details of the “betrayal”.  If Judas was Jesus accomplice, why did Jesus tell the disciples, including Judas, that one of them would betray him? They all understood what he meant. For Jesus to call Judas a betrayer while actually being in collusion with him makes Jesus deceptive.  More realistically, the kiss was a sign to notify Jesus it was time to raise up his army and fight the infidels: the Beast of Rome.

Added to this deception is the price that Judas demanded for the “betrayal”: thirty pieces of silver–the same amount found in the Old Testament.  In Zechariah 11:12-13, thirty pieces of silver is the price Zechariah receives for his labour. He takes the coins and throws them “to the potter”–this being the background of Judas accepting the coins, then throwing them at the feet of the Sanhedrin, who use it to buy a potters field (Matthew 27:9–10) that was to buy a burial ground for foreigners (Matthew 27:7; ref. Craig L. Blomberg, “Matthew,” in G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson (eds.; 2007). Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI, USA: Baker Academic. p. 96-97.); it is but another plagiarism in the New Testament gospels (cf. Matthew 26:14, Matthew 26:47, Mark 14:10, Mark 14:42, Luke 22:1, Luke 22:47, John 13:18, John 18:1).

The suicide of Judas was a sign of frustration and loss of hope, at first sight. However, given the text of the Gospel of Judas, it was a clarion call for Jesus to come to his rescue and reward him for his participation in the plot to push Jesus to take action against Rome.  While the text argues that Judas “lost hope” most suicides are the result of bullying (by the other Apostles), presumed betrayal (Jesus did not act but told Peter to put up his sword, even though Jesus declared he came to the world not to bring peace but to carry a sword in Matthew 10:34), and the display of temper and violence in the Temple in chasing out the money changers who had been doing business within the Temple Precincts for generations narrative occurs near the end of the Synoptic Gospels (at Mark 11:15–19, 11:27–33, Matthew 21:12–17, 21:23–27 and Luke 19:45–48, 20:1–8) and near the start in the Gospel of John, a work written either at the same time as or slightly after the Gospel of Judas (at John 2:13–16). .  Jesus promised much, but delivered little according to many of his contemporaries, especially for those who sought an immediate Second Coming. 

The Second Coming or Advent was known both as ἐπιφάνεια (epiphany) and παρουσία (parousia) but originally meant “presence”: a perpetual state of being in selflessness–on par with the Buddha.  In the New Testament parousia appears twenty-four times, seventeen times concerning Jesus of the New Testament. In 2 Thessalonians 2:9, it refers to the return of the “lawless one.”  Every one hundred years there have been numerous predictions that Jesus would return. It has intoxicated Christianity for nearly 1800 years, and led to suicides, religious wars, predictions of Apocalyptic horrors–and loss of revenue and wealth as with Harold Campings numerous unfulfilled predictions, the Branch Davidians, and now the New Apostolic Reformation.  It is an ancient theory that can be found in ancient Egypt, Hinduism in India, Zoroastrianism, and even Islam (Qur’an 43:61).  In every case there would be one (Judas) who would help the fallen saviour to rise again.

Jesus had to cast suspicion on Judas to make himself seen as a man of Galilee. To this end Jesus declared that it would be better for Judas had he never been born (Mark 14:21): in Judah, as the animosity between Galilee and Judah was high.  At the same time Jesus knew what Judas was going to do, thereby making Jesus an accomplice to staging his own passion, crucifixion and death. 

Jesus’ knowledge that Judas would lead his executioners to him, to a garden that was but a short distance to sanctuary, is pregnant throughout the gospels.  That Jesus had a special plan for Judas is even more graphic.  Jesus gave Judas the first piece of the community bread dipped into a common cup of wine sauce: the very foundation that would later, in Paulinity, become Communion (John 13:26). Far from separating himself from Judas, or casting Judas out of the apostleship, Judas played a unique role: from Jesus role in breaking the bread made it symbolic, requiring, after the most important person ate it, the need to recite magical words over it as the ancient Christs Magi(cians) in ancient Egypt did before performing secret rituals including fake crucifixions, burials and resurrections in the manner of Osiris.  What most theologians have forgotten over the years, is that there were two highly honored places: one to the right (where John the Beloved sat) and the other to the left–which had to have been reserved for Jesus’ main advocate (Judas: John 13:21, 25-26).

Da Vinci's "Last Supper" (John the Beloved (L facing you), Judas (R facing you)

If Jesus was “all-knowing” (omniscient) as the gospels intimate, Jesus could have avoided his arrest, imprisonment, torture, death by execution, and so forth, but the Jesus in the Gospels  went to exactly the place where Judas led the Temple police and did not attempt to evade them.  This means that the “betrayal” was rehearsed and Jesus knew what was going to happen.  This leads to another facet:  that Judas knew what Jesus wanted and agreed to participate in a major hoax.

Judas had no reason to believe that the Jewish high council harbored lethal intent toward Jesus.  Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God–that proclamation came from the Jewish High Priest (Matthew 26:63); the following comment was merely an affirmation noting the words of the High Priest.  The same arguments were used by “the Jews” assembled in front of the “house of Pilate” (John 19:7).  John 1:1-3, 14 only says that Jesus had a natural birth “was born flesh” (Luke 1:35).  Jesus referred to himself only as the “Son of man” (Matthew 16:13-17), the first Apostle to proclaim Jesus to be the Son of God was Peter.  The concept that Jesus is a divine son of god comes from John Patmos’ nightmare: Revelation 19:13, but here the name is “Word”–an abstract identity.  The imagery that Jesus would be “sitting at the Right Hand of the Power (god), and coming down from the clouds (Mark 14:60-62) is nothing less or more than a repeat of the Babylonian tale of Daniel 7:13.

When Jesus was condemned, Judas was overcome with grief and remorse at having had a part in delivering up Jesus to that fate. It was the loss of a loved one.  It was not the loss of a cause.  The loss of a loved one frequently leads to suicide.  For this reason, Judas killed himself according to some accounts (but not all), but not before putting down words representing his own interpretation of events.  It is known as The Gospel of Judas, the only edition found was copied in the third or fourth century CE, although there are fragments dating to the second century CE as seen in careful translation skills since it contains late 2nd century theology that was not used before or since that dating: a rubric for any competent translator or interpreter. In 180 CE, Irenaeus  (Ancient Greek: Εἰρηναῖος; 2nd century CE – c. 202) who was Bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, and wrote extensively about the Gnostics.  His writings, however, are inaccurate and polemics, but because of them he became an influential Christian priest, celebrated for writing a document in which he railed against Gospel According to Judas, indicating the book was already in circulation.  According to some biblical scholars, the findings at Nag Hammadi have shown Irenaeus’ description of Gnosticism to be largely inaccurate and polemic in nature (Robinson, James M. (1990). The Nag Hammadi Library.  San Francisco, CA, USA: HarperSanFrancisco. p. 104). 

Like most base Christians who seek to elevate their own ontology over others and control the mind-growth of separate religious groups, Irenaeus described Gnostic groups as sexual libertines, for example, when some of their own writings advocated chastity more strongly than did orthodox texts.  When one feels it essential to cast aspersions on another, which has always been the case, the quickest way to do it is to cast doubt or denounce the other person’s (or people’s) sexuality and sexual preference (Stark, Rodney (2007). Cities of God.  San Francisco, CA, USA:  HarperCollins. chap. 6).  The fact that Irenaeus wrote his objection to the current Gospel of Judas gives credence to the arguments of a few serious scholars that the original text may have been written by Judas while the second century copy was written by one of the disciples of Judas or a later follower.  While Irenaeus condemned the Gospel of Judas and argued that Judas was involved in a great hoax, his condemnation were faulty, but what he said existed in the Gospel of Judas actually exists.  Irenaeus was a man determined to rule over the church, and even enlisted the bishop of Rome (Eleuterus, (Greek: Ελευθέριος) was Bishop of Rome from about 174 to 189, although the Vatican claims that the pontificate ran from 171 or 177 to 185 or 193, the dating being uncertain) who was born in Nicopolis in Epirus in southeastern Europe between Greece and Albania) who styled himself as Father or Pope) to go after heresies.

First page of the "Gospel of Judas" (page 33 of Codex Tchacos)

The only extant copy of the Gospel  of Judas known to exist is a Coptic language text that has been carbon dated to CE 280, plus or minus 60 years.  It follows Gnosticism orthodoxy and gives no credence to early Christianity that was transmogrified into Paulinity.

The Gospel of Judas, written in Coptic or Ancient Egyptian Christian, has Jesus requiring Judas to betray him.  That was the only way that the Kingdom of God was to return: a kingdom not of the flesh as thought of by the Alexandria, Egyptian Christians, but a spiritual place in tune with Sophia: the mind.  The text begins by announcing that it is the “secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot during a week, three days before he celebrated Passover.”  Rather than being cast as the betrayer of Jesus, the Gospel According to Judas declares that Jesus said: “‘you [Judas] will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man who clothes me.'”  The “clothing” is Jesus’ flesh, and the Gospel notes that Jesus prefers a close friend to help him remove his clothes, than for a strange man to do it. 

Fragment of the Gospel of Mary Magdalene

Since both the Gospel According to Judas and its companion Gospel of Mary [Magdalene] (found in the Berlin Gnostic Codex or Papyrus Berolinensis 8502) were in direct contradiction the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, especially with the Magdalene (a word noting Mary’s hometown of Magdala; it does not mean “prostitute” as is the popular thought, nor was Mary ever considered or referred to as such) being praised as the “favorite” of Jesus and his truest friend.  The Gospel of Mary  has Mary being superior to any of the male Apostles (Gospel of Mary 5:2-11, and 9:4)and promised unique rewards, with similarities to the Gospel of Judas.  These two texts were later denounced by Orthodox (Easter) Christian leaders and refused entry into the Bible–although they remained popular with early Christian believers for nearly one-thousand years.

Gospel of Judas: the Kiss of Peace

According to Gospel of Judas, god  was not some mythic figure sitting on a rainbow, nor one who would dart of heaven astride a horse.  Instead, the gospel notes: “Why has this agitation led you to anger? Your god who is within you and […] [35] have provoked you to anger [within] your souls. [Let] any one of you who is [strong enough] among human beings bring out the perfect human and stand before my face.”

Only Judas knew that Jesus was from “the realm of Barbelo,” and not one of those at the ceremony. The gospel continues: Knowing that Judas was reflecting upon something that was exalted, Jesus said to him, “Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom. It is possible for you to reach it, but you will grieve a great deal. [36] For someone else will replace you, in order that the twelve [disciples] may again come to completion with their god.”  Barbēlō (Greek: Βαρβηλώ) refers to the first emanation of God in several forms of Gnostic cosmogony. Barbēlō is the supreme female principle, and the passive antecedent of creation, and is frequently referred to as ‘Mother-Father’ (hinting at her/their apparent androgyny): ‘First Human Being’.  In the Apocryphon of John, a tractate in the Nag Hammadi Library, we read:

This is the first thought, his image; she became the womb of everything, for it is she who is prior to them all, the Mother-Father, the first man (Anthropos), the holy Spirit, the thrice-male, the thrice-powerful, the thrice-named androgynous one, and the eternal aeon among the invisible ones, and the first to come forth.

It is Judas (in the Gospel of Judas) who claims that the Jesus of the New Testament is of the rank of Sophia (Wisdom) being from Barbēlō (the name appears as (Βαρβηλώ, Βαρβηρώ, Βαρβηλ, and Βαρβηλώθ; the Coptic construction is “great emission” + “seed” or ejaculation which the ancient Egyptians and other older tribes from Akkadia, Sumeria and elsewhere defined as the force that created the universe: a cosmological eruption giving birth to the legend of Onan and coitus interruptus where Onan spilled his seed upon the ground). 

The Martyrdom of Wisdom (Sophia) and her daughters Faith, Hope, and Love: Η αγία Σοφία με τις θυγατέρες της. Έργο του Karp Zolotaryov, 1685.

From the god(dess) of Pistis Sophia, Jesus received His “garment of light” or heavenly body (13, 128; cf. 116, 121).  Even Irenaeus recognizes her as “a never-aging aeon in a virginal spirit”, despite his strong opposition to a pantheon of gods.  Saint Epiphanius of Salamis (ca. 310–320 – 403) was bishop of Salamis and metropolitan of Cyprus at the end of the 4th century. Even though he is considered a Church Father who gained a reputation as a strong defender of orthodoxy for composing a very large compendium of the heresies up to his own time, he still believed in Barbēlō.  He represents the doctrine as giving rise to sexual libertinism: involving Barbēlō to Tantric rituals and beliefs, noting that both systems have a common goal of attaining primordial spiritual unity through erotic bliss and the consumption of menses and semen as being the fruit of the Tree of Life.  Virtues are transmogrified into human beings: virgin women and holy women.  Men, and women, who ride a cloud into the sky are given, like Jesus, brilliant clothes, as at the Transfiguration (Matthew 17:1-9, Mark 9:2-8, Luke 9:28-36), the ascension is but another pagan myth following the stories of the transfiguration of Egyptian gods Ra (the champion of the poor and central to personal piety and

Amun-Min as Amun-Ra ka-Mut-ef from the temple at Deir el Medina

was originally known as Amun who was self-created, without mother and father, and during the New Kingdom he became the greatest expression of transcendental deity in Egyptian theology, whose votive stele reads: “[Amun] who comes at the voice of the poor in distress, who gives breath to him who is wretched..You are Amun, the Lord of the silent, who comes at the voice of the poor; when I call to you in my distress You come and rescue me…Though the servant was disposed to do evil, the Lord is disposed to forgive. The Lord of Thebes spends not a whole day in anger; His wrath passes in a moment; none remains. His breath comes back to us in mercy..May your ka be kind; may you forgive; It shall not happen again and was known as “[the god] who hears the prayer, who comes at the cry of the poor and distressed…Beware of him! Repeat him to son and daughter, to great and small; relate him to generations of generations who have not yet come into being; relate him to fishes in the deep, to birds in heaven; repeat him to him who does not know him and to him who knows him…Though it may be that the servant is normal in doing wrong, yet the Lord is normal in being merciful. The Lord of Thebes does not spend an entire day angry. As for his anger – in the completion of a moment there is no remnant..As thy Ka endures! thou wilt be merciful!”  Wilson, John A. (ed. 1951, 1963).  Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press. p. 300, 4th imp 1963. Republished as The Culture of Ancient Egypt; cp.  Lichtheim, Miriam (1976). Ancient Egyptian Literature: Volume II:

A stele commemorating the burial of a sacrificial bull bearing the iconography of Hathor

The New Kingdom.  Los Angeles: University of California Press.  pp. 105-106) and Apis (a bull-deity worshipped in the Memphis region, and origin of Yeh the golden calf who upon death became Osorapis or Osiris-Apis having been executed, entombed, and on the third-day rose from the dead to ascend into glory and became a man: Arrian, Anabasis, VII. 26).  The cult survived until 385 CE, when Christians terrorists destroyed the Serapeum of Alexandria, and forced through a royal proclamation known as the Theodosian decree that forbade reverence for the faith and theology of the bull-god-man, with all ancient writers from Herodotus to The Pyramid Texts giving reference to Apis theology; and even the Egyptian queen Hetshepsut (a woman, she was the fifth pharaoh of the XVIII dynasty); and Pharoah Amenophis III all of

Hatshepsut reigned 1479-1458 BCE

whom appeared in White Robes rising into the Heavens and sitting on Rainbows.  While many churches consider Epiphanius a scholar, he admits on one occasion that he writes against the Origenists based only on hearsay (Panarion, Epiphanius 71), and there are other traces of plagiarism and hearsay scattered throughout.  He is well-known for his persecution of non-Christians and ordering the destruction of their temples.  He has little time for Judas.

Judas, according to his gospel, yields/betrays/hands over Jesus so that he can become a great star in the heavens.  The concept of a disciple who becomes a star has ancient Egyptian origins as the deities flank the

Hathor Menkaure Bat (Fourth century Egyptian triad or Trinity) Cairo Museum

pharaoh and provide the authority to rule  (as  with Hathor-Menkaure-Bat triad (Trinity) of the fourth dynasty – Cairo Museum) that renders historical precedence to John the Beloved (represented originally as Bat) being to the right of Jesus (the pharaoh) and Judas (Hathor) to the left of the Christ (an ancient Egyptian/African word meaning “anointed”; it was never, in any society, a name nor a title). Judas would be one of the celebrated, although he would be cursed on earth (Gospel of Judas 56-58).  The concept of being protected and served by two chosen “special” representatives (gods or sojourners in life) is older than even Egypt, with representations going back to ancient Ethiopia and other more primitive societies all of whom had their own version of a celestial Trinity that worked as a united force but were still three separate individuals who leagued together to protect mortals and the creation of Nut (also spelled Nuit, Newet, and Neuth) was the goddess of the sky who is among the oldest stories in ancient Egyptian theology with her origins being found on the creation story of Heliopolis.  Her headdress was the hieroglyphic of part of her name, a pot, which may also symbolize the uterus, and from this uterus came the creation of the universe and everything within it, her body shaped as a great sycamore tree (Budge, Wallis (2007 ed.) Papyrus of Ani: Egyptian Book of the Dead, Sioux.Falls, SD, USA: NuVisionPublications, page 57).  Amos 7:14 “Amos answered Amaziah, “I was neither a prophet nor a prophet’s son, but I was a shepherd, and I also took care of sycamore-fig trees” NIV; וַיַּעַן עָמֹוס וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־אֲמַצְיָה לֹא־נָבִיא אָנֹכִי וְלֹא בֶן־נָבִיא אָנֹכִי כִּי־בֹוקֵר אָנֹכִי וּבֹולֵס שִׁקְמִים׃) incorporates the legend of the sycamore tree as a tree that can used to strike as a weapon (ref. 1 Kings 20:35) as well as a tree to hide in; the gospel writers use it in their fable of Zacchaeus (Greek Ζακχαῖος, Hebrew זכי, which means pure and righteous one, and was considered a god who would seek out that which was above the heads

Ancient Egypt pyramid painting of climbing the sycamore tree as wise men

of men and in the clouds above) in Luke 19:1-9, tells of a tax collector who was not able to see over the crowd of people as Jesus passed by, forcing him to climbed into a sycamore tree that was the tree of life (an allusion to returning to Nut’s uterus.  The sycamore tree (Ficus sycomorus) is native to Egypt and has its fruits carried on special branches that come from green branches  The Pharaohs called the Sycamores Nehet.   The oldest sycamore tree in Egypt is in Matarria and is known as Virgin Mary Tree (an ancient Egyptian goddess, but the name

Tree Goddess from the tomb of Pashedu in the Valley of the Kings

continued when Muhammad incorporated Mary into the Qur’an). Sycamore tree lives long and bears sun exposure and humidity. Ancient Egyptians used them in making the wood monuments, such as the statue of the chief of the village from the Fourth Dynasty.

In the time of Mohamed Ali El Kabeer, sycamore tree was used in making the bases for artillery units.  The sycamore tree is an ever green large tree. Its height reaches 20 meters, when it is fully grown. Its branches spread horizontally over a diameter ranging 15-20 meters, therefore it is planted in 15-20 meters spacing. Flowers appear in sycamore when the age of the tree is ranging from 5 to 6 years old. Sycamore fruit is like fig in form and structure).  The Zacchaeus story is a legend illustrating the need to know and the difficulties there are in obtaining wisdom; it is this wisdom (Logos:  λόγος, a word that originally meant “a plea from the ground” or “ground” “petition”; later the Sophists used it to mean “reasoned discourse”, and later adopted numerous other definitions) that is the foundation for the Gospel of Judas.

One comment to Judas did not betray Jesus

  • Cesar Oblitas  says:

    Excellent article; your knowledge of the Bible and the languages of the ancient world offers new insights on old interpretations. As a student, I find this review refreshing and thought-provoking. There is no valid reason that either the “Gospel of Judas” or the “Gospel of Mary” are not included in the contemporary Bible as they were in the early versions. I have been acquainted with both now for several years and find new revelations daily. Well done.

    Excelente artículo, su conocimiento de la Biblia y de las lenguas del mundo antiguo, ofrece nuevas perspectivas sobre viejas interpretaciones. Como estudiante, esta opinión es refrescante y estimulante. No hay ninguna razón válida que sea el “Evangelio de Judas” o el “Evangelio de María” no están incluidos en la Biblia contemporánea como lo fueron en las primeras versiones. He estado familiarizado con ambos desde hace varios años y encontre nuevas revelaciones . Bien hecho.

Leave a reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.