It would be endless to go into a minute examination of the parallel passages which have been cited to prove.the priority of P. I have said all that I think need be said about them in the earlier part of this chapter and in the explanatory notes of my edition of 2 P. The im- pression which they leave on my mind is that in J. we have the first thought, in P. the second thought ; that we can generally see a reason why P. should have altered J., but very rarely a reason why what we read in P. should have been altered to what we findin J. P. is more reflective, J. more spontaneous. |
The Epistle of ude, Author, Style, Authenticity, Circumstances of Writing —The name Judas (Ἰούδας) was naturally in very common use among the Jews at the time of the Christian era. It was dear to them as having been borne not only by the Eponymos of their tribe, but also by their great champion Judas the Maccabee. Two among the Twelve bore this name, Judas Iscariot, and the Judas not Iscariot (Jn. xiv. 22), who is also called Judas son of James (6 Ιακώβου, Lk. vi. 16, Acts i. 13) and Thaddaeus (Mt. ix. 3, Mk. iti. 18, where some MSS. add AeBBaios). Besides these we meet with a Judas among the Brethren of the Lord (Mt. xiii. 55, Mk. vi. 3), Judas of Galilee (Acts v. 37), Judas surnamed Barsabbas (Acts xv. 22), Judas of Damascus (Acts ix. 11). It is therefore not surprising that the writer should have added a note of identification, δοῦλος ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ιακώβου. The most famous James in the middle of the first century was the head of the Church at Jerusalem and brother of the Lord, who also begins his epistle by styling himself simply δοῦλος (Θεοῦ καὶ Κυρίου) ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ. Hence it seems probable that the addition was made, not merely for the purpose of identification, but, like the addition of ἀπόστολος δέ in Tit. i. 1, as giving a reason why his words should be received with respect, since he was brother of James and therefore one of the Brethren of the Lord. In my Introduction to the Epistle of St. James (pp. i-xlvii), I have en- deavoured to show that the Brethren of the Lord were sons of Joseph and Mary, that they did not join the Church till after the Crucifixion, and that none of them was included among the Twelve.!
Other facts which we learn from the N.T. are (1) that Jude was probably either the youngest or the youngest but one of the Brethren of the Lord, as he is mentioned last among them in Mt. xiii. 55 ot ἀδελφοὶ αὐτοῦ ᾽Ιάκωβος καὶ ᾿Ιωσῆς καὶ Σίµων καὶ Ἰούδας, and last but one in Mk. vi. 3 ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ιακώβου καὶ ἸΙωσῆ καὶ Ιούδα καὶ Σίμωνος; (2) that the Brethren of the Lord (of course exclusive of James, who
1See ver. 17, where the writer appears to distinguish between the Apostles and himself.