'NEW' JUDAS STORY JUST REVISIONIST FLUFF.

Byline: TAD CRONN local view

Attention, conspiracy theorists: We are happy to announce the next New York Times best seller, "The Gospel of Judas." Soon to be a major motion picture starring Tom Hanks. Wait, scratch that last part; that's "The Da Vinci Code."

A newly translated codex that scholars purport to be the long-lost "Gospel of Judas" is supposedly shaking up traditional views of Christianity by depicting Judas as Jesus' best friend who was only following Jesus' orders when he sold out to the authorities.

"Judas the hero" is the headline of the day for TV, radio, Web sites and newspapers. The appropriate response from Christians should be a collective yawn.

The earliest mention of a "Gospel of Judas" comes from St. Irenaeus, circa 180 A.D. Irenaeus refers to members of a Gnostic sect calling themselves Cainites. In their gospel, according to Irenaeus, Judas was portrayed as a man who knew secret "truths" that led him to betray Jesus. Part of the newly completed translation says of Judas in relation to the other disciples: "But you will exceed all of them. For you will sacrifice the man that clothes me."

So, far from betrayer, Judas is the enabler, even a hero. Holy plot twist!

Actually, it's just typical Gnostic fluff, but this story will have legs for the same reason "The Da Vinci Code" became a best-seller. Both are suited perfectly to take advantage of the public's ignorance of history.

There are plenty of Gnostic so-called "gospels" floating around, most of them claiming to relate the "real story" about some aspect of Jesus' life. This was the inspiration for "The Da Vinci Code" and "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" years before it. According to Bible revisionists, these widely accepted gospels were excised from the Bible by closed-minded men at the Council of Nicaea who forced people to accept the radical notion that Jesus the Son and the Father were one.

Reality check: The Council of Nicaea dealt with the issue of Arianism, which denied that Jesus and the Father were equal. Of the 250-300 bishops present, only a few opposed the Nicaean Creed as it was formulated. Their opposition was to the use of wording that was not in the Bible, though not to the ideas expressed in the creed. The other burning issue at this gathering of radicals? When to celebrate Easter.

No editing. No burning of heretics. No suppression. The bishops simply expressed what was already accepted, centuries-old doctrine.

The simple fact is that Gnostic groups were never as widely popular as revisionists would have us believe. They weren't even a cohesive movement, but a variety of groups who held several views in common, among them that creation itself is evil; the body is a hindrance, a mere vessel for the spirit; women especially are corrupt.

"The Gospel of Judas" is no different. Written very late to be considered in any way authoritative, it also faces the unique difficulty that its supposed source, Judas, killed himself. I suppose that Judas conceivably could have thrown the 30 silver coins back in Caiaphas' face, stopped off for coffee, and written down or related the "real" events of the previous week before going off to hang himself, but I find myself strangely skeptical on this point.

But loose facts and logic never stopped a good story. Maybe Tom Hanks will be available for this movie, too: "Life is like a box of bad chocolates. You never know when one will turn on you."