What if, rather than the Gospel of Judas, it was the mysterious "Q" Document that was discovered. This document is believed to have been one of two sources for the Gospels of Luke and Matthew (along with the Gospel of Mark), according to some Biblical scientists. For the sake of this WI, assume it is true. How do the world's churches react to this?
"Q" Source Discovered
- Thread starter Nicole
- Start date
Anaxagoras
Banned
According to the book "The Lost Gospel" the writer(s) of the Q Document, which was one of the main sources of the books of Matthew and Luke, only spoke of the moral ideas of Jesus. Any idea of him being divine or of being the Messiah was completely absent. In fact, he seems a lot more like a secular quasi-religious leader (i.e. Gandhi) than a religious prophet.
More importantly, the Q Document seems to have been written by people who actually knew Jesus, as opposed to the Gospels, which were written many decades after the death of Jesus.
My personal belief is that, were the original source of the Q Document to come to light, it would seriously challenge the fundamental base of the Christian religion and would, as a result, be looked upon by the major Christian churches with hostility.
More importantly, the Q Document seems to have been written by people who actually knew Jesus, as opposed to the Gospels, which were written many decades after the death of Jesus.
My personal belief is that, were the original source of the Q Document to come to light, it would seriously challenge the fundamental base of the Christian religion and would, as a result, be looked upon by the major Christian churches with hostility.
It would certainly justify the usual "Discovery of the Century, Overthrows Everything We Thought We Knew, History Must Be Rewritten" headlines.
Actually, I thought abourt writing a thriller on thatpremise, but real archeology/papyrology is not very thrilling and my fiction writing is sub-par.
Actually, I thought abourt writing a thriller on thatpremise, but real archeology/papyrology is not very thrilling and my fiction writing is sub-par.
MrP
Banned
carlton_bach said:
You've also been beaten to the punch by Daniel Easterman.
His Judas Testament is a thriller on the premise that Jesus left his own opinions written on a scroll which finally turns up. Elements in the Church want it destroyed, and neo-Nazis want it to blackmail the Church. A little Dan Brown, but more enjoyable. MrP said:You've also been beaten to the punch by Daniel Easterman.
Not quite the same thing, methinks, but it might be worthwhile nonetheless. I'll go look for a second-hand paperback.
Q wouldn't have been written by Jesus, for one thing. He doesn't strike me as the guy to write autbiography
MrP said:You've also been beaten to the punch by Daniel Easterman.
Not quite the same thing, methinks, but it might be worthwhile nonetheless. I'll go look for a second-hand paperback.
Q wouldn't have been written by Jesus, for one thing. He doesn't strike me as the guy to write autbiography
My understanding was 'Q' was only slightly earlier than Mark--the classic two source theory. It was also speculated that 'Q' was like the Gospel of Thomas mostly a Sayings of Jesus document not a continuous narrative. Its discovery would cause some serious ripples though maybe not a tsunami because unlike the Appocrypha it cannot de said to come later. If some of the unique passages in the Gospel of Thomas are found in 'Q' it would become harder to dismiss Thomas.