“a crescendo in punishment”
Download discussion questions: Jude 1-8
Jump to beginning of Jude Discussion Group Blog
Look at the passage in Jude before you read this Blog entry. What do you see in the text? What questions come to mind? How would you interpret what the writer says? A few minutes spent thinking about the text will prepare you to evaluate the comments in the Blog.
Jude opens his brief letter with a sense of urgency. What could cause his serious concern?
“Certain Persons”
After clarifying why he is writing this letter (v. 1-3), Jude gets right to the point of his alarm: “certain persons have crept in unnoticed” (v. 4a), or in the more colorful rendering of the NLT, “have wormed their way into your churches”.[1] He identifies them only as “certain men” or “’some people,’ which many commentators feel is a slightly disparaging reference…. The verbal form used (‘have come in by stealth’)…is certainly derogatory.”[2] Apparently his readers would have sensed immediately the tone of his letter.
In case there is any question, Jude expands his description of “certain men” in the rest of the sentence of verse 4.
-
- long beforehand marked out for this condemnation
- ungodly persons who turn the grace of our God into licentiousness and
- deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
We discussed his three descriptions briefly, especially the first two. In the second phrase, someone pointed out the parallel with Paul’s concern in Romans 6:1, the distortion of the gospel of grace. “Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound?” sounds a lot like “turning the grace of our God into licentiousness.” Another member suggested a parallel with so-called “carnal Christians,” professed believers who show no evidence of God’s work in their lives. (Our previous studies of Hebrews and James examined the shallowness of such a claim.)
As did many before them and many after them, these false teachers twist God’s free forgiveness in Christ into an ‘open sesame’ for sinful behavior.[3]
These “certain persons” had “crept in unnoticed.” Our group members commented that these persons didn’t draw attention; there was nothing unusual about them; they were just “average folks” who became part of the fellowship. But then someone wondered why Jude described them as “long beforehand marked out” [lit., “written about before,” προγεγραμμένοι, progegrammenoi – mw]. Where were they written about?
Jude doesn’t offer a specific reference, such as “Isaiah said” or “according to Habakkuk,” so we didn’t find a specific reference in the Jewish Scriptures. Perhaps he is referring generally to prophecy about judgment.
This charge that their condemnation was written about in Jewish prophecy will clarify itself as we continue to read the letter.[4]
The question still remained: Why does Jude mention this at all? What is the significance that the persons “were long beforehand marked out”? One member of our group commented that this fact showed that God knew “long beforehand.” That led to the further suggestion that Jude is offering a mild, subtle rebuke. Jude’s readers also should have recognized the danger. God had provided numerous forewarnings of false prophets. Numerous passages in Scripture should have made the believers alert, more attentive to the need to “contend earnestly for the faith.”
A Reminder
In case his readers still didn’t quite see the connection, Jude offers three unmistakable examples to illustrate how the condemnation of “certain persons” had “long been marked out.”
-
- Israel in the wilderness
- Angels who abandoned their domain
- Sodom and Gomorrah
An individual in our group commented that Jude “stacks up” his examples. In case one Biblical illustration isn’t enough, he provides three. This pattern pervades his letter.
-
- He addresses his audience with three descriptions (Jude 1b).
- He speaks three blessings to his readers (mercy, peace, and love in Jude 2).
- He gives three characteristics of “certain persons.”
We will continue to see that stylistic device repeatedly.
Jude uses repetitive patterns for emphasis…. Jude loves to pile up terms for rhetorical effect.[5]
Here he offers three examples of judgment: Israel, angels, and Sodom and Gomorrah. Jude’s “reminder” (v. 5a) of things they already know might even be part of the mild rebuke mentioned above. They knew (or should have known) something, but they were not applying that knowledge.
The examples he gives are all biblical examples of judgment cited several times in Jewish literature …. Since they all deal with people within the community who morally or otherwise defected from the community and received God’s judgment, they show that the pre-Jesus Jewish community also saw the need to deal with such defectors from their community.[6]
The examples would have been familiar to early Christians, those with Jewish heritage and gentile converts who had heard Old Testament stories.
We briefly discussed Jude’s three examples. The story of God’s rescue of Israel from Egypt and subsequent destruction of the unbelieving generation is familiar from Deuteronomy 1:32-35. Likewise, even unbelievers in our day have a general idea about the significance of Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19:4-25). Those passages are summarized on the back of the handout for the passage.
Jude’s reference to angels (v. 6) is a little more obscure, at least to us. That story would have been more familiar to the original audience.
We can be almost certain that Jude refers here to the sin of the angels in Gen 6:1-4. The sin the angels committed, according to the Jewish tradition, was sexual intercourse with the daughters of men.[7]
Reading the Genesis passage may not immediately confirm that traditional belief. But the reference in the non-Biblical book of 1 Enoch (also included on the back of the handout) makes the interpretation more explicit. Interpreting a passage as the original audience would have understood it means that the “strangeness of the tradition to our ears does not mean that it was strange to Jude’s readers.”[8] (Interestingly, “Judaism abandoned this interpretation of Genesis 6 as referring to angelic beings only after … A.D. 130-60 …. In Christian circles this interpretation of Genesis 6 as referring to angelic beings remained unanimous until the third century and continued until the fifth century.”)[9]
Jude’s point in the three examples is clear.
God’s past record of judgment serves to remind us that it is never safe to ignore his instructions.[10]
Apparently, Jude thought his readers needed that three-fold reminder.
Jude’s Triads
One writer suggested an approach to the interpretation of Jude’s use of triple images.
Jude loves to pile up terms…. This means that individual terms need to be taken as less important than the total picture generated.[11]
While the individual words or descriptions are still important, the writer makes a good point. Jude does seem to want to build a “total picture” that exceeds any “individual term.” The whole he has in mind is greater than simply the sum of the parts. We will work on this methodology as we continue to encounter Jude’s “stacks” of images throughout his letter.
We discussed how we might describe a “total picture” presented by Jude’s three examples of judgment. Several suggestions came from our conversation.
-
- All three illustrate the wrath of God.
- All three might exemplify taking God’s grace for granted.
- All three groups ignored the consequences of unbelief or disobedience.
- All three show that sin is more serious than we might think.
As one person commented, the “largeness of the examples” highlights the urgency of what Jude’s audience had overlooked, the intruders that had “crept in unnoticed.” The examples he uses emphasize the “necessity” Jude felt to write (v. 3) about a critical situation, potentially as critical as Sodom and Gomorrah.
Another observation pointed to a possible progression in this triad of examples. Jude doesn’t present the examples in historical order (angels, Sodom and Gomorrah, Israel in the wilderness). Instead, the circumstances and their consequences increase in seriousness and severity.
By following the order he does, Jude achieves a crescendo in punishment – from physical death (v. 5) to binding in darkness (v. 6) to the ‘punishment of eternal fire.’[12]
As the reality begins to dawn on his readers, Jude’s rhetorical skill would communicate the threat with increasing intensity. The situation growing undetected in their midst must not continue.
Dreamers
Jude immediately aims that intensity toward his target. His multiple examples – Israel, angels, Sodom and Gomorrah – are more noticeable and impossible to miss. But those examples expose what had been unnoticed in “certain persons” in verse 4.
Yet in the same way these men, also by dreaming, defile the flesh, and reject authority, and revile angelic majesties. (Jude 8, emphasis added)
The normal, “average folks,” who had quietly blended into their fellowship were in the same category as the “unpersuadable” Israelites, rebellious angels, and degenerate citizens of Sodom. Jude’s multiplied, powerful examples emphasize nothing less.
All three illustrate ‘natural rebellion.’ Jude’s preference for triads emerges again.[13]
We discussed why Jude might use the word “dreamers” to describe the offenders. The word (ἐνυπνιάζομαι, enupniazomai) is used only one other time in the New Testament. Peter quotes the prophet Joel (2:28) in his sermon (Acts 2:17).
‘And it shall be in the last days,’ God says,
‘That I will pour forth of My Spirit on all mankind;
And your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
And your young men shall see visions,
And your old men shall dream dreams;
In that context, “dreaming” clearly has a positive meaning. But Jude seems to use it quite negatively. One person commented that Deuteronomy 13:3-5 uses “dreams” (the same word in LXX, the Greek version of the Old Testament) as the practice of rebellious prophets who “seduce you from the way in which the Lord your God commanded you to walk” (v. 5), and who should be executed. That may be the sense of “dreamers” Jude has in mind.
Several participants had suggestions about how “dreaming” could contribute to the crisis Jude warns against.
-
- People can “dream up” their own idea of what the gospel is. As in Galatia, a “different gospel” (Galatians 1:6) might sound more attractive or more compatible with culture and tradition.
- Like today, people in Jude’s time could imagine a subjective version of the gospel (“my truth”) to twist the Christian life to their desires.
- The “certain persons” could claim new revelation from their dreams to give authority to their distorted ideas.
We also talked briefly about the symptoms of their “dreaming” and how the symptoms related to Jude’s triad of examples. Dreaming, imagining how things could be better or easier, can lead to a variety of distortions of the truth of God’s gospel of grace.
-
- Sodom and Gomorrah, and possibly the angels (according to the traditional understanding from 1 Enoch), certainly focused on “defiling the flesh.” Even for the Israelites in the wilderness, remembering the fleshly-satisfying good food back in Egypt was more appealing than God’s promised land and rest.
- Dreams of individual autonomy (“if only I wasn’t under these rules, these limitations…”) makes “rejecting authority” an attractive option in all three examples.
- “Reviling angelic majesties” was a little more puzzling. Someone pointed out the possible irony that the second of Jude’s examples was about the rebellion of “angelic majesties.” The common factor among all three examples seems to be a disregard or rejection of any “supernatural beings” (NLT; lit. “glories,” δόξας, doxas; “glorious ones” in ESV, “majestic beings” in LEB, “celestial beings” in NIV).[14] Clearly all three examples display such a disregard, “reviling” or “scoffing” (NLT) at even God Himself, the ultimate “Glorious One.”
Applying the Reminder
Jude’s original audience required the reminder he began in verse 5. How do we benefit from his reminder to them? Why did they fail to recognize when “certain persons crept in unnoticed”? We thought of several possibilities, including ones we might face today, things that might be said in many churches.
-
- “Their behavior is only a little different from what we have practiced.”
- “Let’s not get all legalistic.”
- “Who are we to judge their lifestyle. We’re not perfect either.”
- “No one else is questioning what they are doing, neither will I.”
- “We must have unity at any cost.”
- “If we criticize them, they might leave our small, struggling fellowship.”
- “We don’t want a reputation of being too narrow. That would keep people away.”
- “‘Going along and getting along’ will attract people from our surrounding culture.”
The list could go on. Several of the possible rationalizations could even be supplemented with “…and then more people will hear the gospel.” But as someone pointed out, ignoring or accepting immorality is not the gospel. There is no forgiveness, there is no need for grace, there is no sin to be freed from.
Without knowing what specific reasons affected the first-century recipients, our discussion raised plenty of present pitfalls to avoid. May God protect us from “certain persons who creep in unnoticed.”
We also considered the opposite reaction, the other extreme of what one person described as “hyper-vigilance.” Several members of our group have experienced congregations where any deviation (real or perceived) from accepted standards resulted in criticism or judgment or condemnation.
A helpful insight offered by one person noted that such “hyper-vigilance” is driven by fear. Any non-conformity is an implicit challenge to the security of the accepted norm. The “safe zone” of clearly defined, measurable behavior is threatened. Pressure to conform is an easier defense than rational discussion and relational interaction.
Yet Jude’s letter is unquestionably a call to vigilance. Watchfulness is essential in order to “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints.” His starting point is the fact that “certain persons” were “unnoticed,” possibly due to a lack of attentive vigilance. In contrast to fear-driving hyper-vigilance, someone described legitimate vigilance as driven by a love of truth and a love of people. That vigilance begins with curiosity rather than confrontation. It is true that direct, forceful confrontation is sometimes necessary, as evidenced in the ministries of Jesus, Paul, and other New Testament figures. They were motivated by a passion for truth and a love for people. We need to be aware of our own motives, our own inner-world, and we must learn to recognize any tendency to respond out of fear to those who may “creep in unnoticed.” Instead, genuine curiosity and questions about differences in doctrine or lifestyle may lead to clarification and reconciliation. We will see later in Jude’s letter that it his passion for protecting the weak and the doubting that drives his desire for “contending earnestly for the faith.”
[1] https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Jude%204
[2] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & Jude and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 525.
[3] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 230.
[4] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 44.
[5] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 25.
[6] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 47.
[7] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & Jude and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 539.
[8] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 49.
[9] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 49.
[10] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 54.
[11] Peter H. Davids, The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude, The Pillar New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2006), 25.
[12] Douglas J. Moo, 2 Peter, Jude: The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 243.
[13] Thomas R. Schreiner, 1 & Jude and Jude, Christian Standard Commentary (Nashville: Holman, 2020), 532.