The Gospel According to Judas

by Bejamin Iscariot

The Pope recently referred to the continuing 'mystery of Judas'. This intriguing book - the result of an intense collaboration between one of the world's most popular storytellers and one of the world's leading biblical scholars - throws a new light on the events leading up to the great betrayal. This fifth gospel, presented in gospel style with two-colour text, ribbon marker and gilded edges, and ostensibly written by the son of Judas, is a highly readable and gripping account of the stories of Jesus and Judas, which will open a whole new debate among secular and religious readers. The project is as bold as it is simple: Archer has written a story for twenty-first-century readers, while Moloney has ensured the result is credible to a first-century Christian or Jew. 'Riveting and plausible' - Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Genres: Historical Fiction, Religion, Fiction, Christianity, Historical, Audiobook, Christian

101 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2007

Reviews

[Sandra Vel · Rating 4 out of 5]

¿Y si Judas no fuera el malvado traidor que nos han hecho creer? ¿Y si los evangelios bíblicos incluyeran malas interpretaciones y confusiones para tergiversar la verdadera figura de Judas?
¿Es posible llegar a sentir compasión por Judas? Este libro, lo consigue, ofreciéndonos un original punto de vista presentado de una forma que confunde las líneas entre realidad y ficción.
Interesante reinterpretación (sin sustento real) de este personaje bíblico para ver la figura e historia de Jesús con otros ojos.
Para reflexionar y ponerlo todo del revés…

[Louis · Rating 4 out of 5]

I listened to the book on CD version of this title. At first, it took some getting used to the particular accent of Desmond Tutu, the narrator. But I would say that after a minute or two I had adjusted to his cadences and diction. In fact, by the end of this book, I would say that he was the perfect narrator. He brought life to the story and the characters.

I was raised in a Christian tradition and am familiar with the Bible's content and teaching. It was fascinating to see this take on both Christ's ministry and its portrayal of Judas.

I found the story to be highly credible as a possible alternative to the story recorded in the traditional Gospels. The story is told in the third person, so while one does not hear Judas's inner thoughts, it is still interesting to read the account given by Benjamin his son.

The book is officially co-authored and includes Prof. Francis J. Moloney as one of the authors. I read in one comment on this book that he made sure that the story written by Mr. Archer was credible not only to the modern reader but to one in the first century A.D. If this is so, then I would say that he did an excellent job.

The particular plotline involving a gullible Judas being led astray by the Jewish religious leaders was very plausible. I thought that it might have been gilding the lily though when he was the only apostle present as Jesus was sentenced by Pilate. However, the idea that the women following Christ were the ones who stayed faithful even amid this tumult was an insightful, and probably true, observation.

The conclusion of the book where Benjamin seeks out his father among the Essenes was perhaps the most interesting of the entire book. It made me wonder--many of the apostles had families that they left behind. How was that perceived by their families and the culture at large? Was this accepted? Who became the breadwinner in such a case? I suppose the extended family unit came to the rescue.

All in all, a worthwhile read, especially if you are familiar with the traditional Gospel stories.

[Terynce · Rating 1 out of 5]

Awful. A simply awful book. Full disclosure: I'm agnostic. I have studied the Bible. I realize the parts concerning Jesus were written many, many years after the fact. I'm sure history has been altered and redacted and on some level I must admit this retelling ... actually, is this purported to be fiction or non-fiction? Either way, it doesn't work.

Here's the story: what you think you know about Judas is wrong. He really was a good guy, with the best of intentions. The other apostles lied about him. He died just as Jesus did, at the hands of the Romans, while others would die at Masada.

The story offers nothing other than conjecture as to what Judas' motives may have been. Even as pure fiction it fails because a story must have a good guy and a bad guy. In this story, Judas is the good guy, wanting only what he thinks is best for Jesus and trying to save his life. Jesus is the bad guy for not doing as he's told and allowing himself to be killed and the other eleven apostles are bad for lying on noble Judas and for forsaking the Lord. For anyone to buy that story, you have to provide plausible motivation for all involved; there was none.

This book did nothing well. It didn't offer an alternate reasonable perspective. It didn't entertain. I didn't find Desmond Tutu easy on the ears. It didn't successfully introduce any complexities to the character most of us visualize when we think Judas.

I recommend Lamb: The Gospel According to Biff, Christ's Childhood Pal. It's certainly more entertaining and probably more believeable.

[Monty · Rating 1 out of 5]

I was extremely disappointed in this two hour book on tape. Most of the book quoted from the other gospels. The only new information I was able to gleen from this work of fiction is that Judas had conspired with a scribe to whisk Jesus to a safe place because Judas didn't want Jesus to get killed. But the scribe was working for the Romans and betrayed Judas. Also, Judas did not believe that Jesus was the messiah but honored him as being a man of God. After Jesus was crucified, Judas was shunned and after a month joined the Essenes who were still waiting for the true messiah to arrive. He did not hang himself, but was murdered by the Romans when they attacked the Essenses, but not before they buried some sacred texts.

Note: It struck my while listening to this book that anyone can write down anything and claim it as the truth. And anyone can either choose to accept the words as the truth or not accept them. There really is no "truth." There is only what one chooses to believe to be true.

[Dorian Jandreau · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book interested me like all mysteries. I had to open and read it all in few hours. I was reading easier way Bible and all book was good. Made me to seek for mysteries more!

[Carol Waters · Rating 4 out of 5]

No Judas, no Christianity. It's that simple. If Christ wasn't resurrected, the whole thing falls apart. The important thing to remember is that Judas believed that he did the right thing, absolutely believed it, in this little lesson book. If Jesus made it to 80 and died of old age, would the faith have developed as it did? "Um, that part that was prophesied about my dying for your sins? Never mind......" Jesus was not always a good Jew, Judas held him accountable for that, and the rest is what it is.

[Rodica Gavril · Rating 1 out of 5]

1

[Alexandra Alexyna · Rating 3 out of 5]

Daca ar fi sa descriu cartea într-un singur cuvânt acesta ar fi cu siguranță: ciudată . Și cu siguranță mă așteptam la altceva. Cartea ar trebui să spună povestea lui Iuda Iscarieteanul spusa de fiul acestuia Beniamin . Deși se consideră ficțiune aceasta e scrisă în stilul evangheliilor și se concentrează mult pe minunile făcute de Isus în timpul vieții. In ceea ce îl privește pe Iuda acesta ne apare în prima faza ca adept a lui Ioan Botezătorul dar convins de învățăturile lui Iisus decide sa îl urmeze . De-a lungul paginilor cărții mă așteptam să văd mult mai mult pus accent pe Iuda și sentimentele lui vis a vis de ceea ce înfăptuia Iisus dar singura constanta mi s-a părut ideea că Iuda a început să îl vadă mai mult că pe un profet decât ca Mesia. Un plus mi s-a părut scena trădării in care de fapt Iuda voia să îl salveze pe Iisus nu sa îl vândă și s-a încrezut într-un cărturar. Pentru ce i-as da in schimb 3 stele a fost ultimul capitol în care Beniamin și Iuda se reîntâlnesc pentru că spre exemplu scena cu preschimbarea apei in vin să fie desființată și să descoperim că Iuda a murit și el crucificat.
Una peste alta nu e chiar atât de rea lectura și chiar a mers repede

[Cincylitigator · Rating 5 out of 5]

Most of the way through the audio book I was despising this book because it was nothing more than a recapitulation of the gospels which I am more than familiar with. I was thinking how does someone simply slap a new title on the same material and then profit off the repackage so easily? Nonetheless I continued to cede my valuable car time to the reading as I was somewhat intrigued by the voice of Desmond Tutu wondering why he gave his time to such mundane material when he could just read the New Testament if he so chose. I think I was more than 3/4 of the way through when one of the best plot twists of all time is sprung. It is more than just it intriguing, it is emotionally explosive. For someone who has spent decades attempting to understand the New Testament with some intensity reading innumerable pages, this revelation dawns as a beautiful sunrise. I certainly teared up at the possibility suggested by this wonderful literary device. So listen up or read openly and allow your mind and socks to be blown off.

[José Díaz-Bahamonde · Rating 2 out of 5]

PROS

Archer tries to give a more kind vision of the role of Judas in the life and death of Jesus. For this, he creates a brief Gospel written by Benjamin, the son of Judas. The Gospel provides a view of the relationship between Judas and Jesus from the former perspective.
There are some exciting ideas in the text. One of them is the suggested meaning of the treason of Judas and his final destiny.
The Glossary is also helpful and informative.

CONTRAS

While the Gospel of Judas idea is original, the content of the book is not attractive. Maybe it is the text's format, but no characters are well-developed.
Besides, the perspective of this literary Judas is more a catholic or not jew than a gnostic one. Therefore, the Romans are not responsible for Jesus' fate.

FINAL

A wasted good idea.

[David Rough · Rating 3 out of 5]

2.5 stars

The Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Bartholomew, and the Gospel of Nicodemus are all part of extra-biblical materials and included in a group of apocryphal writings. However, the Gospel of Judas is not among them. This novel written in 2007 should not be confused with a serious document of antiquity. This volume has been written in the style of the biblical gospels and has included many events recorded in the Scriptures.

The perspective of this novel which in turn attempts to share the perspective of Judas is interesting, but I think there is danger in perverting the orthodox texts of the New Testament just to share a work of fiction. I would have liked to have seen this book written from a purely biographical context as opposed to a parallel version of a gospel text.

[Jane Fournier · Rating 5 out of 5]

I have always been told that Judas was a traitor and sold out Jesus. As a Catholic I saw this book as a challenge to maybe understand. I’m so glad I read it. In fact as the crucifixion nears, what a beautiful story about humans. Written originally by the son of Judas and recounted by two men. They wrote a story for modern readers it is considered credible by Christians and Jews.

Please read the Glossary also for amazing comparison.

[Emily · Rating 1 out of 5]

well, I finished it. But only because it was so short. I wanted something different. But it felt like I was just listening to another Bible book.
I was bored.
I guess I wanted another Lamb: the Gospel According to Biff. But truly, there is only one masterpiece like that.

[Stacy · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not a unique story, exactly what you learn in Sunday School. A lot of gospel quotes.

[Tony Lawrence]

This is an imagined gospel, apparently written by the son of Judas Iscariot*. I don’t know where Jeffrey Archer’s creative story ends and Francis Moloney’s expert commentary/annotation starts, but the combination is a fairly ‘safe’ alternative history IMO. This review and thoughts my own; I am not a Christian or theologian … this will be obvious! The authors use the [chosen] 4 gospels, other Biblical references, prophets, and contemporary history to re-create Judas as a more rounded and believable character, who seems earnest but politically naive; to borrow a phrase he ends up on the ‘wrong side of history’. He becomes a scapegoat for the new rather shaky Christian sect as it develops an ‘origin’ story with the required bad guys, including Judas, the Jewish Leadership, the Scribes and Herod/Romans. The authors give lots of contextual notes that provide a fascinating glimpse of the politics and manoeurvring within the Jewish faith leaders in response to the emergence of the latest (and most convincing) Messiah-elect.

Disciple Judas struggles with the theological arguments about whether Jesus is a great prophet and miracle-worker, but essentially a man (‘son of man’), or the ‘son of God’ made flesh (with no prophetic or Torah precedent), and if he descended from King David, and hence fulfils the messianic prophecy, to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, return Jews to Israel, defeat all their enemies etc. The biggest, existential, problem was that the ‘real’ King Messiah would either defeat the Romans or result in the final and complete destruction of the Jews … it was obvious that a meek Jesus arriving at the gates of Jerusalem on the back of a requisitioned donkey did not have a desire for the former.

So, the 11 remaining apostles ran away to regroup and create a coherent rebranding of the Torah (a New Testament), Judas is left holding the metaphorical baby, and we get the stories of his betrayal for ’30 pieces of silver’, Judas’s suicide, Jesus’s sacrifice and resurrection, the Last Supper and the sacrament of the ‘bread and wine’, additional miracles etc. etc.

*Benjamin Iscariot visits his father 40 years later(?), living among the Esene community at Qumran, waiting for the real Messiah, but keen to put the record straight on what really happened.

[Socrate · Rating 3 out of 5]

Autorul de mare succes Jeffrey Archer a publicat o nouă carte Evanghelia după Iuda.
Scrisă într-o strânsă colaborare cu unul dintre cei mai de frunte specialişti în Biblie, profesorul Francis J. Moloney, Evanghelia după Iuda, de Benjamin Iscarioteanul, aşază într-o lumină nouă misterul lui Iuda, incluzând motivele trădării lui şi ceea ce i s-a întâmplat după crucificarea lui Isus. Având puţin peste 22.000 de cuvinte, este comparabilă, ca dimensiuni, cu cele patru Evanghelii canonice.
Cercetătorii şi teologii sunt intrigaţi de mult de misterele care-l înconjoară pe Iuda – de exemplu, nu se ştie dacă el s-a sinucis într-adevăr, aşa cum scrie în Evanghelia după Matei.
Cei doi autori spun povestea lui Isus, utilizând ca referinţă principală textele canonice, dar prezentând totul prin ochii lui Iuda. Ne oferă o recitire foarte plauzibilă a tradiţiei creştine, care reliefează tragedia lui Iuda şi, deopotrivă, mila lui Isus pentru oameni.
Aparent scrisă de fiul lui Iuda, Benjamin, cu respectarea stilului Evangheliilor, cartea cuprinde o poveste pentru secolul douăzeci şi unu, care să fie credibilă, cu ajutorul profesorului Moloney, şi pentru un creştin sau evreu din secolul întâi. Cei doi autori au lucrat intensiv la proiectul lor timp de nouă luni. Lordul Archer a fost călăuzit permanent de profesorul Moloney şi nu a inclus în carte nimic cu care profesorul să nu fi fost de acord; amândoi recunosc că 80% din stilul povestirii îi aparţine lui Jeffrey Archer, iar 80% din contribuţia ştiinţifică este a profesorului Moloney.
În plus…
Parteneriatul între Jeffrey Archer şi Francis Moloney s-a stabilit în urma unei întâlniri care a avut loc la Roma, la începutul anului 2006, între lordul Archer şi cardinalul Carlo Maria Martini, arhiepiscop emerit al oraşului Milano şi fostul rector al Institutului Biblic Pontifical. Când lordul Archer a întrebat cine îl putea ajuta să scrie o astfel de Evanghelie, cardinalul Martini l-a numit imediat pe unul dintre foştii lui studenţi, Francis Moloney.

[Skip Thurnauer · Rating 3 out of 5]

This Easter I wondered why no one ever wrote a book about the Crucifixion from the perspective of Judas Iscariot. Then I stumbled across The Gospel according to Judas by Jeffrey Archer (I subsequently learned there are several other similarly titled books and a 2004 movie). The Gospel According to Judas is told by Judas's son Benjamin. The Judas Gospel takes the form of biblical books with numbered chapters and verses, some of which are red-lettered denoting that they are either direct citations from biblical text or paraphrases of it. Many of the stories and miracles attributed to Jesus are recounted in the Judas Gospel. In Benjamin Iscariot's telling, Judas did not betray Jesus. He was a loyal disciple who was trying to protect Jesus. Judas believed Jesus was the King of the Jews and was concerned that some of Jesus's actions might diminish that potential. He at one time also believed that Jesus was the true Messiah, but began to doubt whether that was true. Judas's actions leading to the crucifixion were designed to remove Jesus from Jerusalem and the threat of the Romans. When Judas went to Gethsemane, to secret Jesus out of Jerusalem, he was double crossed by the temple scribe in whom he had confided Jesus's location. In Benjamin's telling, Judas does not commit suicide. Rather, when he learns that he is scorned by Jesus's followers, he takes refuge with the Essenes, a Jewish sect who disapproved of the Pharisees and are still awaiting the coming of the Messiah. The Gospel of Judas offers an interesting perspective on the teachings and crucifixion of Jesus from the perspective of one who was very close to him. With the aid of Biblical scholar Professor Francis J. Moloney, Archer weaves an interesting alternative to the familiar story of Jesus's life and death on the cross.

[Desirae · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting that the book includes most of the same claims about Jesus, but deviates to soften the historical view of Judas.

This is not the Gnostic text from 180 AD. That is what I wanted to make clear in this review. This is a retelling by a scholar who seems to have missed the mark. Around 1970, a Coptic language document written on ancient Papyrus was discovered through a set of events which seem implausible and miraculous. It was the gospel of Judas.

The story of Judas was told, and it deviated from the story in "The Bible" (an anthology of books we are all familiar with). At some point in history, some books were thrown out and others kept in the official anthology. The Judas Gospel was outlawed by the church (probably because it did not fit in well with the other books), and it was thought destroyed until a copy was discovered in 1970. In reading through reviews, there is clearly some confusion between that ancient historical text and this book.

Regarding this book by Jeffrey Archer, as a piece of historical fiction, this book is not bad, but it does not offer much in the way of originality so I could only give it three stars. Just know what you are buying.

[Zenobia Loh · Rating 1 out of 5]

I approached "The Gospel According to Judas Iscariot" by Benjamin Iscariot with an open mind, hoping to gain a fresh perspective on biblical narratives. However, I was disappointed to find the book filled with provocative storytelling that often blurs the line between historical interpretation and sensationalism.

The author’s portrayal of Judas as a misunderstood hero raises interesting questions, but it also relies heavily on speculative reinterpretations of biblical events. What troubled me most was the handling of sensitive topics, such as Jesus’ identity and parentage, which are presented in ways that could be seen as disrespectful or misleading to some readers.

While I appreciate the author's bold approach, I believe readers should exercise discernment when engaging with this book. It’s essential to critically evaluate the arguments and consider multiple perspectives, especially given the book’s unconventional take on well-established religious beliefs.

Ultimately, this book might spark intriguing discussions, but readers should be prepared for a narrative that challenges traditional views in ways that may not resonate with everyone.

[Madras Mama · Rating 4 out of 5]

As a non-practicing Hindu (although I want to call myself agnostic, people always want to hear me saying I am a Hindu, I am from India, I am a vegetarian, My country is dirty, I worship cows, There are cows roaming in the streets of my country, We are a country of snake charmers, My name is XXXXX Nahasapeemapetilon and so on... ;-) I enjoyed reading the book. It was simple without any complications, honest, non-controversial, easy to read Once you finish the book, you'll agree that you have added some infinitesimal knowledge of Jesus to your portfolio.

Your logical reasoning and scientific understanding should not be tried and tested on religion (not only Christianity, this is applicable to all religions). Once you accept, understand, appreciate and practice this ground rule, then you'll agree that this is a good book.

[Brian Maunder · Rating 4 out of 5]

Although I didn’t really like this book, I gave it four stars because I have always thought that there is more to the story of Judas than what we read in the short narratives of the Bible. Judas is an interesting character, and a mystery that, due to the limited Information we have recorded in the Gospels, it’s extremely difficult to ascertain exactly his motives or reasoning or what really went on. This book is not really an entertaining book, but more for the reader to see an alternative side to a mysterious character (In some ways this book is like the musical “Wicked” which portrays the “Wicked Witch of the West” from the Wizard of Oz, in a new way that completely changed our perspective)… just remember though, this is a purely fictional book.

[Colin Cloutus · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting idea that is defeated by its bland and one dimensional 'flip' of Judas' traditional character.
Seems more like a shameful jump onto a trend of apocryphal gospels and modern day sympathy for 'misunderstood' figures.
I've always been infatuated with Judas role from the biblical accounts and tradition, and this book did not really strike me at all. The narrative's integration of modern day scholarship is downright bad.

I blame Dan Brown

[Marian Pandera · Rating 5 out of 5]

Această lucrare este interesantă pentru cei pasionați de ficțiune biblică, istorie religioasă sau reinterpretări ale textelor sacre. Archer scrie într-un stil accesibil, iar aportul lui Moloney adaugă o notă de autenticitate teologică. Totuși, cartea poate fi controversată pentru cititorii cu viziuni tradiționaliste asupra Evangheliilor.

[Antonio Coelho · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interessante este livro em que Archer dá a Benjamin, o filho de Judas Iscariotes, o papel de narrador daquilo que aconteceu na Judeia à volta de Jesus da Nazaré e o papel desempenhado por Judas, particularmente na altura da entrada em Jerusalém.
O interesse vai mais para os muitos apontamentos, menos para o conteúdo, daí o 3 que dou.

[Jasper Woodard · Rating 1 out of 5]

Highly uninteresting. It reads just like the bible, but without the satisfaction of then knowing what's in the bible. And for someone who's seen a few fictional takes on the life of Jesus this wasn't particularly entertaining or novel.

[Steve Eagle · Rating 5 out of 5]

A work of fiction that challenges the reader to ask “what if”. God as the Trinity in omnipotent, and all knowing. How would the story of Christ and His sacrifice change without Judas? Christ knew his betrayer, but did not reject him.

[Kit Miller]

Mixed feelings about this one, so I'm not sure I can rate it. Not really the historical, psychological, or philosophical deep dive I was hoping for but well worth the read as casual speculative fiction.

[Don · Rating 2 out of 5]

Básicamente es una compilación de los evangelios que ya conocemos con notas al pie que aportan la perspectiva de Judas. Sin ritmo ni desarrollo de personaje. Una novela corta que bien pudo haber sido un cuento de dos párrafos. Bastante perdible este libro.

[Morgan · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was really interesting. I didn’t find it particularly unbelievable, but I did find that some parts of the story (at least in some accounts) were ignored. All in all, interesting. Though I’m loathe to ever see Peter as a bad guy as he was portrayed…

[Subbarao · Rating 3 out of 5]

was not up to my expectation. But the way it is written in the style of other gospels is amazing.