Garry W. Trompf, «The Epistle of Jude, Irenaeus, and the Gospel of Judas», Vol. 91 (2010) 555-582
A detailed case that the New Testament Epistle of Jude was written against the socalled Cainite sectaries, who were in possession of a Gospel of Judas as Irenaeus attests is presented here. Because the names Judas and Jude were the same, the good name of Iouda, especially as being that of a relative to Jesus, needed clearing, and subversive teachings — making Cain, Judas and other Biblical figures worthy opponents of the (Old Testament) god — had to be combatted. Since a Gospel of Judas has come to light, within the newly published Tchacos Codex, one is challenged to decide whether this was the gospel appealed to by the Cainites, and, if it was, to begin to grasp how they read a text which did not readily match their interests.
JUDAS 571
THE EPISTLE JUDE, IRENAEUS, GOSPEL
OF AND THE OF
very least one can proceed with this being a highly attractive possi-
bility. Epiphanius lets it be known in a passing comment, moreover,
that the Cainites believed an angel had blinded Moses (Panar.
XXXVIII, ii, 4), as if they were on the right side of powers hin-
dering the most famous defender of Jehovah 46. That only adds to our
confidence ; and nothing in any of the other descriptions of Cainites
— in pseudo-Tertullian, Hippolytus (Praescr. Haer. VIII, 13 [20]);
Epiphanius, and later in Filastrius (Haer. XXXIV); Augustine (De
Haer., xviii) and Jerome (Indic. de Haer., viii), let alone allusions in
Clement and Origen — falsifies the hypothesis of this relation-
ship. Before venturing some kind of summary thus far, though, one
further question needs to be asked. Have we sufficient grounds for
concluding that the Cainites produced their own Gospel text, in
Judas’ name? Epiphanius only tells us that the Cainites attributed a
Gospel to Judas (euangelion tou Iouda; Panar. XXXVIII, i, 5), but
Irenaeus is commonly supposed to allege that the Cainites wrote it.
What are we to make of this discrepancy? From the available Latin
translation of the Irenaean account, one can be assured, we are not
required to say anything more than this: the Cainites “showed†and
hence made use of this gospel (thus: et confinctionem afferunt
hujusmodi, Judae Evangelium, Adv. Haer. I, xxxi, 9). We cannot
assume, then, that what the Cainites held and what this Gospel con-
tains qua message will necessarily “squareâ€. When turning to pos-
sible relationships between the Cainites according to Irenaeus, and
the newly available text of Judas, a scholar does not thereupon have
to distrust apparent opinions held in one camp against the other, be-
cause, as a preliminary move, it is more acceptably cautious to
affirm only that “the Cainites had the Gospel of Judas as their [or
an] authority†47.
One implication of this methodological injunction is the
working permission to assess the Cainites (including the con-
nections we have explored between heresiologists’ reports of them
and Jude) without involving the Gospel of Judas. To state the sit-
uation thus far unfolding, the Cainites were some kind of libertine
group, yet not necessarily Gnostic at their incipience, but soon be-
On angels impeding Moses, start with GINZBERG, Legends, 401.
46
B. EHRMAN, “Christianity turned on its Head: The Alternative Vision of
47
the Gospel of Judasâ€, Gospel of Judas (eds. KASSER – MEYER – WURST) 90.