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 579
THE EPISTLE JUDE, IRENAEUS, GOSPEL
OF AND THE OF
missed out (e.g., 2,25; 10,1; etc.) 66. Thirdly, the Christians in the
ordinary sense were utterly deprecated as the real workers of ini-
quity. Of course there has been a recent, albeit strange and uncon-
vincing effort, to read the gospel’s accusations of sacrificing
women and children as a metaphor for advocating martyrdom 67 be-
cause the orthodox commonly criticized the Gnostics for not being
prepared to undergo extremities for the faith 68. But this exegesis
cannot work because other works of “lawlessness and error†(cf.
5,12) are alleged. No. The point is, the Cainites’ deliberate flouting
of the Christian way they left behind for a subversive ‘ideological
antonym’ was legitimated when a gospel rejecting ‘normative
Christians’ somehow dropped into their hands. That is to say, when
it came their way they read it in their own interests, quite apart
from its author’s original intentions (that will go on being a matter
of scholarly debate). What they found was a set of criticisms
against the Christians which more or less matched various pagan
accusations circulating at the time, that Christians were child sacri-
ficers, cannibals and the workers of many hidden and subterranean
iniquities 69. They also found in this gospel a text which looked for-
ward to a cosmic future, the arrival of a Kingdom (9,20.25 —
Copt. : tmntero), when the invidious god of this world would be
overthrown in a final ‘dissolving’ as Irenaeus’ rendering of Cainite
beliefs has it.
This does not, however, cover all contingencies. For, would
there not be an obvious logical inconsistency in being happy to
deprecate Christians as corrupt when one’s own small sect chose to
For details, S. GATHERCOLE, The Gospel of Judas. Rewriting Early
66
Christianity (Oxford 2007).
PAGELS – KING, Reading Judas, 70-72. This work is curious for com-
67
pletely playing down the cosmological elements in Judas (80-81), and pre-
senting the author as an alternative Christian who opposed the normative
Christians’ view of a God who in turn was “unwilling or unable to forgive
human transgression without violent bloodshed†(66).
Cf. PAGELS – KING, Reading Judas, 42-57. E.g., Tertullian, Scorp.; Eu-
68
sebius, Hist. eccles. II, xiv, 2; VIII, i, 6-iii,1; X, iv, 57; cf. III, xxvi, 4; xxvii, 1,
etc. for such orthodox criticism.
Thus Pliny Iun., Epist., x, 96-7; Aristides, Apol. (Syriac), i, 26; ii, 12;
69
Justin, Apol. I, xxvi, 7; II, xii; Dial. 10; Tatian, Orat. 25; Athenagoras, Leg. iii,
31; Theophilus, Ad Autol. ii, 34; Minucius Felix, Octav. ix, 28 (apud Arnobius);
Origen, Contr. Cels. vi, 27.