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.
578 G.W. TROMPF
explanations of visions (by the disciples and Judas), of being re-
sponsible for the most outrageous acts — including sacrificing chil-
dren and wives (even on altars), engaging in homosexual acts,
slaughtering, fornication, impurity and a “multitude of sins and
injustices â€, including the claim to be “equal with angels†(4,9-16;
5 :8-13 ; 14, 6). Indeed they engage in the very sorts of outrages the
heresiologists believed the Cainites sought to validate. Paradox-
ically, of the three major texts we are considering, the only one to
use the term anomia is the Gospel of Judas (at 4,14; 5,12) — not
Jude (though cf. 1 John 3,4), nor Irenaeus — and the author appar-
ently imputes it to mainstream Christians, not the followers of the
betrayer. Furthermore, the Judas of this gospel turns out to be the
only disciple who understands Jesus, and without his act of “sacri-
fice †in handing him over to the chief priests, and thereafter freeing
his body (15,3; 16,1-8), the salvation brought by Christ cannot occur
nor can the final cosmic rearrangement be achieved (14,1-15, etc.).
How much sense can it make, therefore, that the Gospel recently
discovered could ever be of value for the Cainites, whose Cain-
Judas ‘lineage’ meant that it was hostile to “the holy race of Sethâ€
(3,4-5.11; 9,28; 11,5; cf. 12,16; 15,12)?
There can be only two basic answers. One is that the text in the
Tchacos codex is not the same as Judae Evangelium discussed in
Irenaeus or Epiphanius, which is possible, but does not necessarily
follow. The other is that, not being the creators of this Gospel, the
Cainites made use of it (as Irenaeus says), and so one of the last
questions we may pose for ourselves is, how is this so? (and con-
sequently why?). Without overdoing a response, it would seem that
at least three advantages lay in the Cainites “showing [off!]†the
Gospel of Judas as we now know it. In the first place, it heroized
Judas (and even while still hailing Jesus as saviour it still some-
what cuts the latter “down to sizeâ€). Jude was made part of a “holy
race †(genea etouaab — 8,10; 9,30), and his sperma is the one to
which the archons will be made subject (9,22). The link of this race
with Seth is admittedly made, yet only once, and Seth is identified
with Jesus (at 12,16) and not placed in Judas’ line. That the other
disciples recognize Jesus as the Son of God, moreover, does not
mean that they knew who he really was (2,10-11) in the way Judas
is presented as comprehending things (cf. 2,19.9,27.10,1). Secondly,
Judas had revealed to him the true character of the angelic powers
and the entire nature of the universe while the other disciples had