of Jamee," but which hae on the whole a better title to be taken as" Jude the son of Jamee." But the Gospels also speak of a. Jude, or J udae, who wM one of the brethren of Jesus. Both Matthew (xiii. 55) and Mark (vi. 3) represent the men of our Lord's " own country" as meutioning him by name. Of this Jude we know extremely little. The historical books of the New Testament indicate that these brethren of Jesus were at first unbelievers (John vii. 5), and that afterwards (probably not till the Resurrection was accomplished) they were of the company of disciples (Acts i. 14). This will apply, we have every reason to think, to Jade as well as others. But beyond what these passages suggest, we have nothing irom the New Testament itself. Neither does early ecclesiastical history fornish llB with much. There is, however, one statement of great interest, which bas come down to us from Hegesippus, the father of Church history, who flourished perhaps about the middle of the second century. It has been preserved for us by Eueebius, and is of such importance that it may be given in full. •• There were yet living of the family of our Lord," the narrative says, "the grandchildren of Judas, called the brother of our Lord, according to the flesh. These were reported as being of the family of David, and were brought to Domitian by the Evocatus. For this emperor was as much alarmed at the appearance of Christ as Herod. He put the question whether they were of David's race, and they confessed that they were. He then asked them what property they had, or how much money they owned. And both of them answered that they had between them only nine thousand denarii, and this they had not in silver, but in the value of a piece of land containing only thirty-nine acres, from which they raised their taxes, and supported themselves by their own labour. Then they also began to show their hands, exhibiting the hardness of their bodies, and the callosity formed by incessant labour on their hands, as evidence of their own labour. When asked, also, respecting Christ and his kingdom, what was its nature, and when and where it was to appear, they replied 'that it was not a temporal nor an earthly kingdom, but celestial and angelic; that it would appear at the end of the world, when, coming in glory, he would judge the quick and dead, and give to every one according to his works.' Upon which Domitian, despising them, made no reply; bat treating them with contempt, as simpletons, commanded them to be dismissed, and by a decree ordered the persecution to cease. Thus delivered, they ruled the Churches, both as witnesses and relatives of the Lord. When peace was established, they continued living even to the times of Trajan" (Eusebius, • Eccl. Hist.,' iii. 20: Bohn). As Domitian reigned from A.D. 81 to 96, this passage helps us so far to determine the limit of J ude's life. The question of the authorship of our Epistle has been for the most part a question as to which of these two J udes is the writer. The necessity of making a choice has been superseded, it is true, by some who have con- tended that the apostle and the Lord's brother were one and the same a3 iv INTRODUCTIO:N' TO --------------------------------- person. This identification, howevor, rests upon the two suppositions tluit "Jude of James" means "Jnde the bi·other of JameR," and that the sons of Alphens were brothers of Jesus. But the former supposition is, as we have said, less probable than another, and the latter has against it the dist.inct statement in John vii. 5. The theory has also beon propounded that the author is the J ndas surnamed Barsabas of Acts xv. 22, eto .. But this has met with little favour. With most, therefore, the question is i;till this-Which of two Judas is the writer of this Epistle? Is it the apostle with the threo names, or is it the non-apostolio brother of Jesus? With many, both in ancient and in modern times, the opinion ho.s p1·evailed that the apostle is the author. But the difficulties in the way of this are considerable. Besides the argument drawn from the circum- stance that the Jnde who belongs to the twelve is represented rather as the son than as the brother of James, there is the fact that the writer of our Epistle nowhere calls himself a.n apostle, or even hints at his being so, and there is no apparent reason why he should have avoided mention .of :his real position. Further, if he wa.s an apostle, it is difficult to see why he should have appealed to his relationship to James rather than "to th~ weightier fact of his official dignity. And again, the manner in which he refers to "the words which have.been spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ" (ver. 17) leads us most naturally to the .same con.. closion. For he appears there to distinguish himself from them, and to appeal, in support of his exhortations, to an authority higher than his own. This being thtl case, the decision: must be in favour of the Lord's brother. It hBB been strongly urged by some that, if the writer had held this relationship to Christ, he would have found in it his most direct and obvious claim upon the attention of his readers, and would no.t have failed. to make use of the title. But this is sufficiently met by the explanatia{I which was given in very ancient times. The death and resurrection _and a5cension of Jesus had produced such a. change on the, position and the ideas of those who had been most intimately connected with him on earth, that religions feeling would restrain them from preferring any claim on the ground of human relationship or asserting the ties of nature. O~ the other hand, the designation, "brother of Ja mes," and other peculiarities of the Epistle, are easily understood if the writer is not the apostle, and if the Ja mes referred to is the well-known head of the motlier Church of Jerusalem.
IV. PLA.CB AND DATE OP COMPOSITION.' Both these questions remain unsettled. As regards the question of place, materials for a decision entirely fail ns. So far as a decision has been attempted, it bas been in favour of Palestine. Thie is held to be supported by the Jewish-Christian tone of the Epistle, and the tradition regarding the residence of the descendants of Jude. But there is nothing of a more positive kind to appeal to. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE. V