text: Sorry to cut and paste, but I've answered this question quite a lot lately...\n\n\nThe gospel of Judas is not credible. Scientists believe it to be the work of gnostics, a mystical early Christian denomination. People in those times did not have the access to the scriptures as we do today. They rarely had more than one or two books of the Bible at one time, so they often did not know what the other parts said. Gnostics often wrote stories of the way they thought things might be. The gospel of Judas is a philosophical conjecture, not scripture. It was also written at least 100 years after the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John - the 4 gospels present in the Bible that tell of Judas's betrayal.\nAlso, because "gospel" means "good news", and the good news is that Jesus died for our sins, the text would have to include the crucifixion and resurrection to be classified as a gospel. The gospel of Judas tells of neither. \n\nThe gospel of Judas has indeed been authenticated - that means that it is indeed as old as it seems. It does not mean that it is a work of scripture. If you want to back up what I have said, then watch the National Geographic special. April 13 and 22 at 9pm ET/PT. \nAs for the other gospels, the earliest known manuscripts date from 65 to 95 AD. That is 35 to 65 years after Christ died. It is quite possible then, that even if these were the earliest manuscripts (and not just the earliest known ones) that they are first-hand accounts, or recorded from first hand accounts.