It won't change a thing. As is the trend with most new discoveries, the media will sensationalize it with controversial one-liner headings and cliches, just to entice people to gain ratings. This "Gospel of Judas" was mentioned in the writings of Irenaeus (110-180 A.D.), one of the most respected leaders of the early church. He was of the very next generation after the original apostles of Jesus Christ had all died. Polycarp, who was trained by the Apostle John, discipled Irenaeus; and he wrote that this gospel of Judas was a fictional heresy created by someone out of a group of embittered heretics and rebels of God. Tabloid has always existed. A copy has simply survived the centuries. And a fickle public will clamor to the media like some do to the National Inquirer. In time the truth will emerge, and this gospel of Judas will find its perspective as simply another vain attempt to slander God's church. The reason it was kept hidden is because it took this long for the owner of the document, an artifacts dealer in Egypt, to get the price he demanded (he wanted $3 million dollars, but it is rumored he only got $300K). He finally sold it to antiquity dealer Frieda Nussberger-Tchacos, who eventually published it.

The Gospel of Judas is another document amongst a tremendous collection of early Christian apocrypha. Written between 130 and 180 CE, it paints a decidedly different picture of Judas and Jesus than is described in the canonical gospels. Christians who believe in Biblical inerrancy will of course dismiss this gospel as fiction, just as they have done for centuries with regards to other gospels and writings. Christians with a more nuanced understanding of early Christian history, who are in the decided minority, will find understanding of their religion broadened. As for the impact on Christianity in general, the Gospel of Judas will serve as a significant reminder of the tremendous diversity of views of Jesus the Christ existent in the early church. The document is simply another thread in the vast tapestry of early Christian thought, which was to be vastly constrained as Roman emperors demanded and enforced a common orthodoxy. The gospel document had a murky and uncertain pedigree. It was apparently discovered in the 1950s, but its significance was not understood. Stolen in the 1970s, it was offered for $3 million, though understandably few were willing to pay such a price for a work of dubious authenticity. Finally, it was purchased and its authenticity verified only this year. Still, it is incomplete, with several people claiming to possess fragments.

Firstly: the "gospel" of Judas was not KEPT HIDDEN. It was simply, like many ancient texts, waiting to be rediscovered. It was found, about 30 years ago in an isolated part of Egypt at Al-Minya, not too far from where were found the famous Nag Hammadi scrolls(some of which were leant upon by novels such as the Da Vinci code). If you look at the map below, you will see how isolated the area is and in the pic, the sort of landscape where these finds are taking place. These manuscripts were placed in caves, often in leather cases, unlike those in Qumran and Masada in Israel, which were put in earthenware jars. This putting them in leather possibly made these manuscripts more vulnerable than their counterparts in Israel, which were protected from the climate much better. Why were they in the caves? Ancient Jewish custom, also followed by other middle eastern peoples, was never to destroy the written word. When something became too fragile to be used, or was not permitted to be read any more for any reason, it was reverently out into storage. If it were a text that would still be used, it would be copied first. This means that all of the texts found at places such as al-Minya and Nag Hammadi were either old manuscripts or no longer being used. There was no burning of heretical manuscripts, if they were deemed so. They were just put aside. Secondly: The fact that Christians no longer copied these texts means that they were no longer regarded as proper to read. There is good reason for this. The Egyptian desert was the Wild West of Christianity in its early day. It was isolated and hard to get into. Christianity got there, but just. The small communities of the desert had few visits from the major christian centres, most of which were busy trying to stay alive during the great persecutions of the second century. So, Egypt was very much on its own. It is hardly surprising that, in such a climate, divergent beliefs should begin to develop. Particularly with Egypt's long history and home-grown religious traditions going back thousands of years. THe Christian leaders of Rome, France, Greece, modern Turkey and Jerusalem were always writing to each other, encouraging each other, visiting each other, but Egypt was a difficult case. By the middle of the second century, we see the leader of the Lyon church in France, a man named Iraneus, write to other Christians that some strange ideas were coming out of Egypt, ideas that did not agree with the faith as taught by the Apostles. He wrote that there were some who: "declare that Cain derived his being from the Power above, and acknowledge that Esau, Korah, the Sodomites, and all such persons, are related to themselves. . .They declare that Judas the traitor was thoroughly acquainted with these things, and that he alone, knowing the truth as no others did, accomplished the mystery of the betrayal; by him all things, both earthly and heavenly, were thus thrown into confusion. They produce a fictional history of this kind, which they style the Gospel of Judas." Whether this text referred to is the same as the one that was discovered at Al-Minya we do not know. (The manuscript is a 4th century one, possibly copied from earlier ones, which may date back to the late 2nd century, but no one can be sure. It also has no title. It has been called "The Gospel of Judas" for convenience sake). How could Iranaeus be so sure that this text, if it is the same one, was wrong? The answer is simple: Iranaeus is one of a group of men, the last, who had close contact with the apostles themselves, or with the disciples of the apostles. Iranaeus was born sometime in the 2nd century and d. end of 2nd/beginning of 3rd century. He was a disciple of a man named Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna (modern Turkey), who was martyred in this 80s in 155AD, and himself was a disciple of the Apostle John. Polycarp, like most of the early church leaders, wrote letters to other Christians, and these have survived the centuries, giving us great insight into the teachings of the Apostles. Polycarp was close friends with a man named Papias, another disciple of John, of whose five books only tantalising fragments survive, but enough to let us know what he believed and had been taught. They were also close friends of Ignatius, head of the church of Antioch (c35 AD-107) whose works have survived better. Ignatius was a pupil of St John and successor of St Peter, who had founded the Antioch church. A final, but by no means last witness to Apostolic teaching was Clement of Rome. He was head of the Roman Christians between 88-99 AD and died shortly afterwards. Clement was also a good writer, and composed letters to encourage his own and other congregations throughout the Empire. Between these five men, the entire text of the New Testament can be reconstructed, with the exception of a few verses, so we can know exactly what books were considered authoratitive by congregations between Jerusalem and France in the first hundred years of Christianity. Egypt was the odd man out in this. The variant texts it was using were not acknowledged by leaders and congregations who had known or had close contact with the apostles themselves. By the end of the third century, persecution was on the wane, and good leaders were finally able to reach the isolated congregations in places like Egypt. With little prompting, the variant manuscripts were reverently laid to rest, and no longer copied. That is why no other more recent copies exist. SO how will the Judas text change Christianity. Not at all. Except in our improved knowledge of what variant texts existed in Coptic language at the beginning of the 4th century. And in our knowledge of the ancient Coptic language. (The New Testament was written in Koine Greek, the common language of the Roman Empire in the 1st century AD; Latin took over slightly later) Storywise, nothing here is in any way of relevance to the NT. We know what the NT said about the relationship between Judas and Jesus because we have many many manuscripts of the NT dating from within 30 years of the originals, plus we have the added witness of the early church leaders who quoted almost obsessively from it. Theologically, the teachings of the al-Minya manuscript are very different from Judeo-Christian works, with a lot of ancient Egyptian beliefs dominating, as would be expected in this backblock. Hope this helps.