THE number of instances, among the men of the apostolic age, of two
persons bearing the same name, is very curious, and seems to show a
great poverty of appellatives among their parents. Among the twelve
there are two Simons, two Jameses, and two Judases; and including those
whose labors were any way connected with theirs, there are three Johns,
(the Baptist, the Apostle, and John Mark,) and two Philips, besides
other minor coincidences. The confusion which this repetition of names
causes among common readers, is truly undesirable; and it requires
attention for them to avoid error. In the case of this apostle, indeed,
the occasion of error is obviated for the most part, by a slight change
in the termination; his name being generally written Juda, (in modern
versions, Jude, ) while the wretched traitor who bears the same name,
preserves the common form terminating in S, which is also the form
in which Luke and John express this apostle’s name. A more serious
difficulty occurs, however, in a diversity noticed between the account
given by the two first evangelists, and the forms in which his name is
expressed in the writings of Luke and John, and in the introduction to
his own epistle. Matthew and Mark, in giving the names of the apostles,
mention in the tenth place, the name of Thaddeus, to whom the former
evangelist also gives the name of Lebbeus. They give him a place before
Simon Zelotes, and immediately after James, the son of Alpheus. Luke
gives the tenth place to Simon Zelotes, in both his lists, and after
him mentions “Judas, the brother of James”; and John speaks of “Judas,
(not Iscariot,”) among the chosen disciples. Juda, in his epistle
also, announces himself as “the brother of James.” From all these
circumstances it would seem to be very fairly inferred, that Judas,
or Juda, the brother of James, and Lebbeus or Thaddeus, were all only
different names of the same apostle. But this view is by no means
universally received, and some have been found bold enough to declare,
that these two sets of names referred to different persons, both of
whom were at different times numbered among the twelve apostles, and
were received or excluded from the list by Jesus, from some various
circumstances, now unknown;――or were perhaps considered such by
one evangelist or another, according to the notions and individual
preferences of each writer. But such a view is so opposed to the
established impressions of the uniform and fixed character of the
apostolic list, and of the consistency of different parts of the sacred
record, that it may very justly be rejected without the trouble of a
discussion.
Another inquiry still, concerning this apostle, is, whether he is
the same as that Judas who is mentioned along with James, Joses and
Simon, as the brother of Jesus. All the important points involved in
this question, have been already fully discussed in the life of James,
the Little; and if the conclusion of that argument is correct, the
irresistible consequence is, that the apostle Jude was also one of
these relatives of Jesus. The absurdity of the view of his being a
different person, can not be better exposed than by a simple statement
of its assertions. It requires the reader to believe that there was
a Judas, and a James, brothers and apostles; and another Judas and
another James, also brothers, and brothers of Jesus, but not apostles;
and that these are all mentioned in the New Testament without anything
like a satisfactory explanation of the reality and distinctness of
this remarkable duplicate of brotherhoods. Add to this, moreover, the
circumstance that Juda, the author of the epistle, specifies himself
as “the brother of James,” as though that were sufficient to prevent
his being confounded with any other Judas or Juda in this world;――a
specification totally useless, if there was another Judas, the brother
of another James, all eminent as Christian teachers.
There is still another question connected with his simple entity and
identity. Ancient traditions make mention of a Thaddeus, who first
preached the gospel in the interior of Syria; and the question is,
whether he is the same person as the apostle Juda, who is called
Thaddeus by Matthew and Mark. The great majority of ancient writers,
more especially the Syrians, consider the missionary Thaddeus not as
one of the twelve apostles, but as one of the seventy disciples, sent
out by Jesus in the same way as the select twelve. Another confirmation
of the view that he was a different person from the apostle Jude, is
found in the circumstance, that the epistle which bears the name of the
latter, was not for several centuries received by the Syrian churches,
though generally adopted throughout all Christendom, as an inspired
apostolic writing. But surely, if their national evangelizer had been
identical with the apostle Jude who wrote that epistle, they would have
been the first to acknowledge its authenticity and authority, and to
receive it into their scriptural canon.
So perfectly destitute are the gospel and apostolic history, of the
slightest account of this apostle’s life and actions, that his whole
biography may be considered completed in the mere settlement of his
name and identity. The only word that has been preserved as coming
from his lips, is recorded in John’s account of the parting discourses
of Jesus to his disciples, on the eve of his crucifixion. Jesus was
promising them that the love of God should be the sign and the reward
of him who faithfully kept his commandments,――“He that holds and keeps
my commandments, is the man that loves me; and he that loves me shall
be loved by my Father; and I will love him and manifest myself to
him.” These words constituted the occasion of the remark of Judas,
thus recorded by John. “Judas (not Iscariot) says to him, ‘Lord! how
is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us as thou dost not to the
world?’ Jesus answered and said to him, ‘If a man love me, he will
keep my words; and my Father will love him, and we will come to him,
and make our abode with him.’” A natural inquiry, aptly and happily
suggested, and most clearly and satisfactorily answered, in the plain
but illustrative words of the divine teacher! Would that the honest
inquirer after the true, simple meaning of the words of God, might have
his painful researches through the wisdom of ages, as well rewarded as
did the favored hearers of Jesus! And would that the trying efforts of
critical thought might end in a result so brilliant and so cheering!