Loading...I concluded my previous post by indicating that a number of Christian readers/leaders in the ancient world considered Jude not to be authentic – that is, that it was a forgery written in the name of Jesus’s brother by someone else. Here I continue the discussion, again taken from my study, Forgery and Counterforgery (Oxford University Press, 2013)
******************************
Modern times have seen a healthy split among scholars who see the book as authentically written by the brother of Jesus and of James, and those who consider it forged.[1]
Numerous factors give the palm to the latter group. For one thing, book gives every indication of being produced relatively late in the first century, after the “age of the apostles.” The apostles themselves are referred to as living in the past, and as predicting the “last time” when the author is now living – differentiated from the time of the apostles themselves (Jude 17-18).
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Learn More!
I’d like to ask you an unrelated question on the martyrdom of the apostles. The debate typically centers around the reliability of late accounts and questionable sources. But I’ve never heard anyone bring up ch 9 of Polycarp’s letter to the Philippians which alludes to the martyrdom of the apostles, and I’d like to hear your thoughts on why.
It seems to me that this passage provides an early and credible witness that the apostles were understood to have suffered martyrdom. Writing in the early second century, within living memory of the apostolic generation, Polycarp exhorts his readers to imitate the endurance of faithful examples, naming Ignatius, Zosimus, Rufus, and then explicitly including Paul “and the rest of the apostles,” all of whom, he says, “did not run in vain … with whom they also suffered.” By grouping the apostles alongside Paul and Ignatius (whose martyrdoms were well known) Polycarp signals that the apostles shared the same fate of suffering unto death for their testimony. This passage shows that, decades before legendary martyrdom accounts circulated, the collective memory of the church already regarded the apostles not just as preachers and teachers, but as martyrs whose deaths authenticated their witness.
He indicates that all teh apostles “practiced endurance” (hypomonen) and that they “suffered in the Lord” but he doesn’t say anything about them being martyred. The idea of enduring suffering in this life (apart from suffering to the point of death) is very common in early Christian discourse (as in Stoic discourse, e.g.), including, as it turns out, in Paul’s letters themselves: see, e.g. 2 Cor. 1:6; 6:4; 12:12).
Maybe I’m reading too much into the text. it doesn’t explicitly say they were martyred. But in the larger context, he urges them to imitate Christ, who of course suffered and died. He calls them to “all patience” and points to examples: not only Ignatius, who was a martyr, but to others (including Paul, likewise a martyr). He adds that they are all now “in their due place in the presence of the Lord,” which clearly indicates they’re dead. True, the text doesn’t directly say their deaths were by martyrdom, but he does connect their deaths with “having run the race,” assuring that their struggle wasn’t in vain, and he outright says they suffered with Christ. The decisive point is that he explains why they are now dead: because they “did not love this present world.” The implication is that, had they loved this world, they would have avoided suffering and death.
It’s so tempting to read it as martyrdom. I get your point- you can read it as a call to stoic endurance… but you don’t think he’s implying that these examples died for the race they were running?
Most people who “imitate Christ” do not undergo, or think they should, undergo crucifixion. Or just good ole martyrdom. And it’s been that way since the very beginning of the Christian movement. Enduring persecution rarely meant actually being executed.
Re: …how Jude’s family was remembered in the early church…
Leaving aside the silly stuff like the Da Vinci code, is there any real historical evidence that Jesus’ family was honored in any way after his death? James becomes the de facto leader of the Jerusalem church and the assumption is obviously made that Jude was a convert.
It’s been a while since my seminary days but I remember a scholar named Werner Kelber who hypothesized that the author of Mark was making a deliberate attempt to marginalize Jesus’ disciples and family in service of some gentile Christian agenda. Was there any detectable historical conflict over the status and memory of Jesus’ relatives? Or, other than James, are they lost to history?
Thanks!
Yes, Kelber and some others have argued this, but I don’t think it has garnered a lot of support. But it does appear relatively certainly that James Jesus’ brother did become the leader of the church in Jerusalem and Eusebius tells a story he claims he heard from Hegessipus of Jude’s grandchildren being pulled before teh emperor Domitian and questoined (in case they might have messianic hopes/inclinations). That seems implausible, but it does show that early sources did indeed think Jude too wsa a devout follower of Jesus, which is probably proved by the existence of the letter of Jude itself.
Hello Bart/Dr Ehrman
You say that 200 years before Jesus that Jewish thinkers believed that when we die we die and that’s it and that they then believed that that wasn’t justice.
How do you/we know that?
Thanks.
The apocalyptic message that can first be found in 1 Enoch and then Daniel, about two centuries before Jesus, is all about how God will vindicate the righteous after death and reward them, but punish the evil doers who now are in control of the world and causing such suffering; prior to that there wsa no firm indication of a belief in a future day of judgment/resurrection; in the Hebrew Bible, people die and then … they are dead. I discuss this in my book Heaven and Hell.
Nowhere is Jesus depicted as writing. Nowhere is he depicted as telling people to write down what he said. When he sends out people to preach and teach, nowhere does he tell them to hand out any written material.
I can’t help but conjecture that his message was about faith and the spiritual experience of his presence and light, and not about written textual materials.
As far as authentic, for a kid in middle school who truly believed Gospels of Matthew & John were written by the disciples…
I thought James, the 1st disciple was the best known James in the Bible.
There have been chapters written of him & his zealousness. We also know how he died.
As for James the brother
1) not a follower of Jesus [where did he get that knowledge, like Eve from God through Osmosis]
2) why wasn’t he tending the family business? we know Jesus was always sort of heavenly minded, but …
In high school literature, Richard Wright wrote Judas was [similarly why females were not named Jezebel], course word!