(g) The Gospel of Perfection. — ' Some of them,' says Epiphanius (xxvi. 2), speaking of the Nico- laitans or Ophite Gnostics, ' bring in a manufactured sort of adventitious work (iyiiiycfidv ri iroliifxa) called The Gospel of Perfection,' which, he adds ironically, is the very perfection of diabolic mischief ! This notice is probably derived from Hippolytus (Phil- aster, Hcer. 33). If it was a Gnostic treatise in Gospel form, it may have resembled, or been related in some way to, the Gospel of Eve ; but no details or quotations have been preserved, unless we may suppose that allusions to it occur in the Pistis Sophia, where uncanonical Gospel material is more than once employed.
(h) The Gospel of Eve. — 'Others,* Epiphanius adds (xxvi. 2f.), • are not ashamed to speak of the Gospel of Eve,' who owed her gnosis to the serpent. One quotation from this Gospel is given : ' I stood on a high hill, and I saw a tall man and a short man (SXKov KoXojSdv) ; and I heard as it were a voice of thunder and drew near to listen, and it spoke to me and said, "I am thou and thou art I, and wherever thou art there am I also, and I am sown in all (iv dvafflv elfii ifftrapfiivos). And wherever thou gatherest me from, in gathering me thou gatherest thyself." ' Probably the quotation which follows, from the secret books of the Gnostics, was also derived from this ' Gospel ' : (^i* d7ro/fpi50ots dvayivdjcTKovTes 6ti) • I saw a tree bearing twelve fruits a year, and he said to me. This is the tree of life.' Epiphanius (xxvi. 6) explains that this meant allegorically menstruation. But this so - called ' Gospel ' may have been either of an apocalyptic character or simply, as Lipsius suggests, a doctrinal treatise in more or less historical form. In any case, its mysticism assumed a sexual form whicn readily lent itself to obscene interpretation.
(i) The Gospel of Judas. — The Gnostic Cainites, in the 2nd cent., composed 'a Gospel of Judas' (Iren. i. 31. 1 ; avvrayp-aTibu rt, Epiphan. xxxviii. 1) in the name of their hero, Judas, who was .supposed to have alone penetrated the Divine secret, and consequently to have deliberately betrayed Jesus in order to accomplish it. Nothing has been pre- served of this Gospel.
The fifth of Revillout's Coptic fragments (Lcs Apocryphes copies, 156-157) contains a novel tra- dition about Judas. The disciples speak : * We have found this man stealing from what is put into the purse every day, taking it to his wife, and defrauding the poor in his service. Whenever he
GOSPELS (UN CANONICAL)
GOSPELS (UNCANONICAL) 505
returned home with sums of money in his hands, she would rejoice at what he had done. We have even seen him failing to take home to her enough for the malice of her eyes and insatiable greed. Whereupon she would turn him into ridicule.' His wife then, like a Lady Macbeth, instigates him to the crime of selling Jesus. ' " Look how the Jews pursue your master. Up then and betray him to them. They will give you plenty of riches, and we will bestow them in our house, so as to live thereby." He got up, the unfortunate man, after listening to his wife, till he had consigned his soul to the hell of Amenti,* in the same manner as Adam listened to his wife, until he became a stranger to the glory of Paradise, so that death reigned over him and his race. Even so, Judas listened to his wife and thus set himself outside the things of heaven and the things of earth, to end in Amenti, the place of tears and moaning. He went to the Jews and agreed with them for thirty pieces of silver to betray his Lord. They gave them to him. Thus was ful- filled the word which was written : " They received the thirty pieces of silver for the price of hira who is appraised." He rose up. He carried them to his wicked wife.'
Here the motive of Judas is not personal greed ; he is a thief, as in the Fourth Gospel, but it is owing to his wife's pressure. She is a temptress, and the misogynism of the author leads him to blame her more than her poor husband. But this is a catholic exculpatory estimate of Judas, in Egyptian circles, which is very different from the Gnostic glorification of him ; he is not the author of a Gospel, but he is made out to be not so de- liberately the author of Christ's betrayal as in the canonical traditions. We cannot tell whether the Gnostic Gospel made use of any such motive to ex- plain his conduct. It is unlikely that this would be so, for his conduct, on the Gnostic theory, re- quired no exculpation.
Another Coptic Gospel fragment, assigned doubt- fully by Revillout (op. cit. 195-196) to the Gospel of Bartholomew, belongs to the same line of tradition. *The apostle Judas, when the devil entered into him, went out and ran to the high priests. He said, "What will you give me for handing him over to you ? " They gave him thirty pieces of silver. Now the wife of Judas had taken the child of Joseph of Arimathsea to bring him up. The day when the unfortunate Judas received the thirty pieces of silver and took them home, the little one (would not drink). Joseph went into the woman's chamber . . . Joseph was utterly distressed over his son. When the little child saw his father (he was seven months old), he cried, saying, " My father, come, take me from the hand of this woman, who is a savage beast. Since the ninth hour of this day, they have received the price (of the blood of the just)." When he heard this, his father took him. Judas also went out. He took . . .' Tlien follows a broken pas- sage belonging to the Acts of Pilate literature.