You know you must be watching PBS when Good Friday is a time to interview promoters of gnostic gospels and leftist preachers who equate the persecutors of Christ with "rugged individualism." On this Good Friday, April 6, Charlie Rose interviewed Princeton professor Elaine Pagels and Harvard professor Karen King, who explored with Rose how the "Gospel of Judas" shows parallels between early Christian martyrs and modern-day Islamic suicide bombers. Leftist Rev. James Forbes of New York’s Riverside Church carried the anti-individualist message.
Rose began with the professors by promising "some fascinating new information about Judas and Jesus. The New Testament presents Judas’ actions towards Jesus as the most infamous of betrayals. The long-lost Gospel of Judas tells a very different story. It shows Judas as Jesus` favorite disciple and willing collaborator."
CHARLIE ROSE: Tell me where Judas stood among the other disciples? I mean, how is he in terms of age, in terms of relationship, in terms of where he came from?
ELAINE PAGELS: We know little about Judas Iscariot. All we know is that he was one of the disciples .
CHARLIE ROSE: His betrayal.
ELAINE PAGELS: And that for some reason and, as I said, the first gospel doesn’t even speculate. It just seems so mysterious. And later people -- there were various stories and ways of talking about it, trying to figure out why he would do that.
CHARLIE ROSE: You both say that you emerged from the first reading of this feeling that he was an angry man.
ELAINE PAGELS: There is a lot of vehemence in this book, and I think what Karen said, he is angry at the leaders of the church who`re basically telling, I would imagine, young people to go die for God as martyrs.
CHARLIE ROSE: Right. Right. But the anger - the anger was primarily about the notion of going to die for God .
ELAINE PAGELS: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: -- and not wanting to see people sacrifice .
ELAINE PAGELS: Right. And it`s not .
CHARLIE ROSE: -- because the idea was Jesus was a loving person rather than someone who wanted you to die for him.
ELAINE PAGELS: Well, it`s not saying that -- if you`re up against, you know, denying your convictions, you might -- you might die for them.
CHARLIE ROSE: Right.
ELAINE PAGELS: But -- but to say you should go out and do that, you`ll get great rewards in heaven if you`re a martyr. You`ll get a, you know, a glorified body and other things, to say that is - is kind of a complicit in murder.
CHARLIE ROSE: As we now know, I mean, there are people who in today’s religious fanaticism --
ELAINE PAGELS: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: -- or deeply religious thoughts, people are engaged in all kinds of self-sacrifice.
ELAINE PAGELS: Right.
CHARLIE ROSE: For what they say, for religious purposes and on the promise that the world they`re going to --
ELAINE PAGELS: Yes.
CHARLIE ROSE: – will be much better. Is there any connection, say, between Islam and what it says or what people who are Muslim say, especially those who are committing acts of suicide? And this -- some of the kinds of things we`re talking about early Christianity?
ELAINE PAGELS: Well, both Christians and Muslims have radical groups in which martyrdom, and even killing people is sometimes condoned. And this seems like .
CHARLIE ROSE: In the name of God.
ELAINE PAGELS: In the name of God. And this is a religious leader who says, doing that, encouraging people to die that way is a kind of .
CHARLIE ROSE: Yeah.
ELAINE PAGELS: . a complicity in murder, and it certainly condemns that violence.
That was the most shocking part, but this earlier elaboration of the "Gospel of Judas" was also eyebrow-raising:
KAREN KING: This text has a very complicated position on martyrdom, because on the one hand, Judas is actually for this text the first martyr. And he doesn`t commit suicide the way we learn from the gospels. He is actually put to death by the other 12. But this text is angry
CHARLIE ROSE: To death by the other 12?
KAREN KING: By the other 12.
CHARLIE ROSE: How do they put him to death?
KAREN KING: They stone him. He has a vision in which - in which he sees the 12 stoning him to death. And - and yet the anger in this text is directed at those Christian leaders who are telling other Christians that God wants them to die, that God wants their deaths to glorify him, that they are sacrifices pleasing to God. And the Gospel of Judas says, what kind of god is that? What kind of god would desire the death of his son, would desire of the death of martyrs?
CHARLIE ROSE: And so, it was concerned that .
KAREN KING: That`s a false god.
CHARLIE ROSE: This gospel was concerned that people were going out willingly dying for God, and that was a - it didn’t -- and was - was worried that people would be doing that because it was part of Jesus’ sacrifice.
ELAINE PAGELS: Yes, and when -- you know, the usual story you hear from Christians and from Christian history is that Christian martyrs went joyfully to their deaths because it was a great thing to do. We now see what happens to groups of people, real people, when some leaders are arrested, they`re tortured, various people are taken to prison, strangled, and - and publicly exhibited for his torture and execution. This divided people. They said -- as you said -- some said, "That`s great. I mean, God loves to see his -- his beloved die as martyrs." And this author says, you`re making God into a monster.
Before that came the interview with Rev. James Forbes, who said his Easter message this year would warn of the War on Terror: "We are locked into an epidemic of anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder; paranoia." He added: "The struggle is revealed in the crucifixion. That is, if you stand for love, hate will be in the corners waiting to win the day. If you stand for community, rugged individualism that has no respect for other human beings will say, I'm the way."
Rugged individualism and the Christian gospel can certainly be at odds, but when it comes to the Left, you can also suspect they need a lecture that secular or scientific socialism and the Christian gospel can also be at odds. Rev. Forbes also insisted that belief in Jesus and his Resurrection is, well, sort of optional for him:
CHARLIE ROSE: Is accepting the idea more important than having to believe the reality?
REV. JAMES FORBES: My response to you is my life`s history. You know, some years when I`m doing the Easter service, I`m thinking this thing is absolutely literally true. And other times I`m saying, "It`s - it`s a metaphor for life." At other times I`m saying, they believed it, and I receive strength from what they believe. And other times I`m not so sure. So what I think is this is one of those powerful stories. If you want to take it literally, you got it. If you want to see the metaphor, that is where the depth of the meaning applies to our hearts, no matter which of these positions we take. So I would say some folks get it. You ask me how I know he lives he lives within my heart.
CHARLIE ROSE: And you say to all of them, that however you accept it is OK.
REV. JAMES FORBES: I say I have a responsibility to answer what does the God in me reveal to be the meaning for me in this story? Each of us will have to take that for ourselves. I do not discredit those who can`t buy the whole miracle part, who can`t buy the ascension part. Take what you can. This is a story that each individual can appropriate. Now, religious organizations say if you can`t buy it literally true, you are desecrating the whole tradition itself. I am not in that camp. I`m in a camp that believes that the God in me, the spirit in me, accepts me in those years when I`m more literalistic and those years when I`m more metaphorical, and those years when I`m saying, "Oh, I don`t know." That God is in me, and assists me in appropriating what I need now.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
KAREN KING: This text has a v
April 15, 2007 - 15:11 ET by MidAmericaKAREN KING: This text has a very complicated position on martyrdom, because on the one hand, Judas is actually for this text the first martyr. And he doesn`t commit suicide the way we learn from the gospels. He is actually put to death by the other 12. But this text is angry
Well gee... I have some suspicions as to why the gospel of Judas wasn't included in the official canon of the Church. Maybe because it didn't have much to do with the ministry and teachings of Jesus?
What if 2000 years from now and the world’s current countries are long gone and research about a country called the USA was made by reading archives of The New York Times. Would that provide much of an accurate description?
8.5 for style, 9.6 for logic.
April 16, 2007 - 09:46 ET by TruthMonger8.5 for style, 9.6 for logic...
ELAINE PAGELS: Well, both Chr
April 15, 2007 - 15:40 ET by MidAmericaELAINE PAGELS: Well, both Christians and Muslims have radical groups in which martyrdom, and even killing people is sometimes condoned.
Every religion can have unintended consequences. The religion of global warming is already putting the worlds poorest and hungriest at a further disadvantage. In Mexico the poor have already had protests over rising corn prices. The price of meat for everyone is rising because of higher grain prices. The cost to fill up your vehicle will include additional costs at your grocery and restaurant.
When all the construction of ethanol plants is complete places like Iowa could be importers of corn. That's like Saudi Arabia importing oil.
So while the worlds poor go to bed hungry we will fill up our gas tanks with food and drive to the weight loss centers.
What kind of cruel God is this Gaia?
9.2 for style, 9.6 for logic.
April 16, 2007 - 09:49 ET by TruthMonger9.2 for style, 9.6 for logic...
What kind of god would desire
April 15, 2007 - 15:54 ET byWhat kind of god would desire the death of his son, would desire of the death of martyrs?
CHARLIE ROSE: And so, it was concerned that .
KAREN KING: That`s a false god.
Whoever these people are they are not Christians. The spurrious 'gospels' were not accepted as canon (or truthful) by the church in this or any century. I could write a democratic national platform which advocates repeal of Roe v Wade would it be accepted as a true indication of the democratic parties position?
I thought Jesus *was* rugged.
April 15, 2007 - 15:58 ET by zfAnd here I thought that Jesus was the rugged individualist crusading against the status quo of Roman brutality and Jesuit monopoly of theology, both groups which incidentally condemned Jesus as a rabble rouser harmful to the "public good." But I guess I read a different New Testament than the leftys.
It's also funny how the leftys crow about "individuality" as long as it's the freakish and inhumane individuality embodied by leftist ideals such as sexual deviance and immorality, the anti-social pandering of current rap music, and the destruction of families by individual "reinterpertations" of the "concept." But the type of individuality (rugged and otherwise) that leads to improvements in society and government structure, better technologies, and true progress (not "progressivism") in solving mankinds age old problems is condemned as "selfish."
Amazing.
And here I thought that Jesu
April 15, 2007 - 16:12 ET byAnd here I thought that Jesus was the rugged individualist crusading against the status quo of Roman brutality and Jesuit monopoly of theology
Why would you believe that? I don't think he came to confront the Romans but to fulfil ALL persons need for a Savior. Also the Jesuits are a branch of Roman Catholic christians - - - followers of Christ.
And here I thought that Jes
April 15, 2007 - 16:24 ET by motherbeltAnd here I thought that Jesus was the rugged individualist crusading against the status quo of Roman brutality-- Dreb
Uh, no. Jesus was very plain in saying that His kingdom was "not of this world." Nowhere did He espouse rebellion against the civil authority; in fact when they tried to trap Him into that He said "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's".
What utterly mystifies me--
April 15, 2007 - 16:48 ET by tracheostomyWhat utterly mystifies me--is that these so-called scholars are validating non-canonical books that not only contradict the gospel accounts, but those contradictions cancel out the assumed accounts that these "scholars" take for granted. They build their theories on doubtful; contradictory texts. . .and at the same time expect their study to be taken seriously. The theories they build and receive accolades for are suspended on nothing but a cloud of doubtful conjecture.
What value do the gnostic gospels have, in and of themselves, other than as liberal ammo to attack the inspired accounts?
If these people brought up differing accounts of say, the Arthurian myths, you wouldn't hear it discussed in the same manner. The panelists bounce back & forth from belief to doubt; then to metaphor. . .mixing it all up into one elaborate confusion.
And they're respected for it. For doing absolutely nothing useful in the end.
-PJ
From what i've read the gospe
April 15, 2007 - 17:48 ET byFrom what i've read the gospel of thomas is very un PC at times equatting women to property. The leftists only reason for validating such a work is to defame the True Gospels. Of course there are certain aspects of an ancient writting which would be of value as it will show some of the mores and values of the society in which it is written
Was it over when the Germans
April 15, 2007 - 16:50 ET by KC MulvilleWas it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
---Germans? ---Forget it, he's rolling.
The Jesuits were founded 1500 years after the crucifixion. But Dreb's complaints against the modern Left have some weight.
Karen, did you pass 1st grade
April 15, 2007 - 16:37 ET by tracheostomyKaren, did you pass 1st grade math?
Don't you mean "put to death by the other 11," instead of 12? Or did Judas actually die after Acts 1. . .and Matthias was also a co-conspirator? No one seems to realize that if you pull one thread in the Biblical tapestry, the entirety falls apart. If Judas was lynched (lets call it what it really is) by the disciples, then they would be guilty of mob justice. Karen shows her cards when she assumes how Jewish law was customarily carried out. And how could they catch the traitor if the sheep were scattered after the shepherd struck? Didn't they have more to worry about at that time, other than personal vendettas?
And Mr. Forbes? If there is no resurrection, your faith is truly in vain. It's amazing how these guys get into the pulpit, and at the same time waffle back and forth on the very lynchpin of the faith itself.
-PJ
Typical "educated" experts with no understanding
April 15, 2007 - 18:09 ET by c5thenThese people are like dogs, when you point to something and say "look" they stare at the finger.
They have no real understanding of the faith that they are supposed to be commenting on. Pagels thinks it's the act of being killed that made people martryrs and happy. she has no concept that it was the holding of their faith even in the face of death. King seems to think that if something is written, it must be true even if it contradicts historical fact.
As for the "reverend" Forbes...He is a typical unsaved "christian" who thinks that it's the act of going to church and saying you are saved that actually saves. Here is a hint for him: going to church makes you a christian as much as standing in a garage makes you a car.
I'm not surprised the the MSM has found these so-called experts to discuss these heratical ideas. Here is an experiment: If the conservatives adamantly expouse the idea that the earth is round and orbits as the 3rd planet in the system, I bet that the MSM will eventually find some flat-earth society people and an "expert" who argues that Copernicus was wrong.
Charley Rose
April 15, 2007 - 19:56 ET by pocomocoWhat Rose has done is just a continuation of the MSM not attempting to prove the bible, but to disprove it. The most recent attempt, of course, was James Cameron’s ‘finding’ of Jesus’ grave. And as we all know, his documentary was so profound, it immediately went to DVD, which is the death knell for a movie.
For several years, now, TV producers have ‘hired’ scholars and scientists to go into the counties of the Bible with the sole purpose of finding fault with its historical descriptions of Biblical events. One such event they looked at was Moses’ parting of the Red Sea. One theory they came up with was that the Israelites just crossed it at its shallowest point.
This, then, is the kind of tripe to be expected when the faithless are more interested in ‘audience share’ than in the truth.
..."Charlie Rose panels&
April 16, 2007 - 10:09 ET by TruthMonger..."Charlie Rose panels" have been around even before Noah building the ark - but what else is faith other than staying the course even when the going gets tough?
Charlie's little assembly from our church apparently doesn't have the strength to see the harder tenets of our faith through but that's never been anything unusual within the church - even the leadership - a very big point Jesus was making to the rabbi's of His time...
And all of the great Biblical figures were ridiculed for their beliefs BY GOD'S DESIGN as a testimony to the concept of faith...Noah was building a boat in the middle of nowhere? What an idiot! A few pages later he doesn't look so dumb after all...
...Charlie's tiny little persecution-fest here just helps prove to me I'm still doing things somewhat correctly...
In assessing Charlie Rose, hi
April 15, 2007 - 20:14 ET by GalvanicIn assessing Charlie Rose, his guests, and his interviews, never forget that he is the protege of Bill Moyers. It's no accident that Rose is on PBS, and it is not surprising that he tends to soft soap the Left and wingding celebrities.
About the only thing I can say about Rose is that he's a better interviewer than CNN's celebrity cadaver --- Larry King. But then, who isn't?
who was it that said Larry Ki
April 15, 2007 - 20:33 ET bywho was it that said Larry King Live was an oxymoron?
bot, I don't know, but ain't
April 15, 2007 - 20:49 ET by bigtimerbot,
I don't know, but ain't that the truth, more and more everyday!
ROFL!
he had a whole bunch of shows
April 15, 2007 - 21:09 ET byhe had a whole bunch of shows that were the opposite of the titles
politically incorrect
hardball
BT, Drill Often, Drill Deep.I
April 15, 2007 - 21:52 ET by BlondeBT,
Drill Often, Drill Everywhere.
I received an e-mail today, thought you'd enjoy it.
Seems many in this country are wondering why we've run out of oil.
Well, we haven't really run out, we've just forgot how to check the oil.
You know, the oil that's located in Alaska, California, coastal Florida, coastal Louisiana, Kansas, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, and Texas.
Seems the problem about checking the oil, though, is that all of the dipsticks are in Washington, D.C.
B,Thought you told me once yo
April 15, 2007 - 22:19 ET by bigtimerB,
Thought you told me once you were kind of tired of that line.
LOL!
BT, Not me. It's still one
April 15, 2007 - 22:23 ET by BlondeBT,
Not me. It's still one of the very best lines here....along with "the dogs bark", and kath's tagline.
I thought you'd get a kick out of that dipstick joke.
it (Gnosticism) was addressed
April 15, 2007 - 22:10 ET byit (Gnosticism) was addressed as a major threat by such church fathers as Augustine, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen. Best known (of gnostic writings) is The Gospel Of Thomas.
Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics pg. 274
"It's the same old wine in brand new bottle" Loggins and Messina