The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (174 page)

In an age when Christian faith and moral integrity are in short supply, Jude's message is particularly appropriate. All too commonly, local churches fail to confront false teachings or are unwilling to challenge compromises in the way people live. Frequently, tolerance
is the order of the day, and church discipline is at an all-time low. Into this malaise Jude issued a clarion call to defend the faith and to confront false teaching, particularly in light of the reality of a holy God who will judge sin unless it is acknowledged and confessed.

HISTORY

Author

The letter begins with a reference to “Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ, and a brother of James” (1).
¹³⁰
In all probability, the author of Jude is the brother of the James mentioned in Matt 13:55. The opening self-reference by Jude as “brother” rather than the customary reference to himself as “son of” his father is unusual.
¹³¹
With regard to the expression “brother of James,” it is noteworthy that only James the brother of Jesus could be mentioned simply as “James” (Jas 1:1) without a need for further identification.
¹³²

Jude began in a way that is reminiscent of the book of James.
¹³³
James was much better known and had no need to identify himself further, but Jude is hardly mentioned elsewhere and needed to add the epithet “brother of James.”
¹³⁴
What is more, Jude called himself only “brother of James”
¹³⁵
and not “brother of Jesus Christ.”
¹³⁶
The latter designation may have seemed inappropriate in light of Jesus’ divine sonship. Rather than identifying themselves in terms of their flesh-and-blood relationship with Jesus, both James and Jude called themselves “slaves of Jesus Christ” who did his will.

The view is not uncommon that Jude's letter is pseudonymous, that it was written by someone other than Jude and attributed to him for some reason.
¹³⁷
This practice was
supposedly in keeping with the ancient convention of pseudonymity, according to which a literary work was attributed to a well-known personality in order to lend it credence and to enlarge its potential audience. But the obvious question is why anyone would have wanted to attribute a writing to a person as little known as Jude rather than to other disciples who were known much more widely.
¹³⁸

For this reason there is no serious doubt that Jude, the brother of James and half brother of Jesus, is the author of the book of Jude.

Date

The date for Jude depends in part on its relationship with 1 and 2 Peter, particularly the latter. A comparison between Jude's letter and 2 Peter suggests that Jude's letter was written first and that Peter in his second letter adapted Jude for his own purposes and circumstances.
¹³⁹
In light of the considerable number of parallels between the letters, a literary relationship between the two is more likely than the independent use of a common source by both writers.

A detailed comparison of Jude and 2 Peter will be provided further below. For the time being, the probability of Jude's having been written prior to 2 Peter can be illustrated by the way in which these writings used Jewish apocryphal literature. Jude included three such quotations or allusions: (1) to
The Assumption of Moses
in verse 9; (2) to 1
Enoch
in verses 14—15; and (3) to an otherwise unattested saying of the apostles in verse 18. All three quotations are lacking in 2 Peter. It seems more likely that Peter avoided reference to these apocryphal works rather than that Jude added these references on the assumption of Petrine priority.
¹⁴⁰

Estimates of the date of composition of Jude extend from the year 50 (Bauckham) to 65-80 (Guthrie) to 100 (Kümmel).
¹⁴¹
The critical question here is whether the letter displays the characteristics of early Catholicism.
¹⁴²
Dunn cited three such characteristics:
(1) a decrease in the expectation of the imminent return of Christ; (2) an emphasis on the institutional nature of the church (as in the Pastorals); and (3) the use of liturgical elements (similar to the Pastorals).
¹⁴³
However, a closer look shows that none of these elements is present in Jude.

1. The expectation of the
   parousia
   (the Second Coming) is given clear and repeated expression in Jude 14,21,24. The entire argument in verses 5—19 assumes that the false teachers will be judged following Christ's return.
   ¹⁴⁴
   
2. There is no reference to holders of ecclesiastical offices anywhere in Jude, and the manner in which the heretics are called to account stands in stark contrast to the early Catholic practice of appealing to ecclesiastical office.
   
3. Jude does not contain any liturgical fragments (the phrase “the faith that was delivered to the saints once for all” in verse 3 constitutes a simple reference to the gospel (see Gal 1:23).
   

For this reason the theory that Jude is a product of early Catholicism is untenable, which suggests the possibility, even probability, of an early date, and as shown below, possibly even a very early date in relation to the other NT letters.

Bauckham showed that one finds a comparable antinomianism already in Corinth after the year 50 and in Asia Minor around 90. Since in his view Jude is neither early Catholic nor anti-gnostic, Bauckham postulated a possible date of composition for Jude in the early 50s.
¹⁴⁵
It seems that Schlatter presupposed the presence of anti-gnostic polemic,
¹⁴⁶
but he also found no traces of early Catholicism in Jude's letter.
¹⁴⁷

Another factor is the question of a possible literary dependence between Jude and 2 Peter. If 2 Peter postdates and is dependent on Jude (a view held by most, though not all, commentators today), and 2 Peter is authentic (see the introduction to 2 Peter in this volume), the fact that Peter died a martyr's death in circa 65—66 requires the early 60s as the latest possible date for the book of Jude.
¹⁴⁸

Since there is no good reason to question the authenticity of 2 Peter, and since it is probable that 2 Peter is dependent on Jude rather than
vice versa
, 55—62 as a date of composition is most likely.
¹⁴⁹
But it must be noted that the lack of clear internal evidence regarding the date of composition renders this estimate tentative at best.

Provenance

The provenance of Jude cannot be determined with certainty. Bauckham showed conclusively that Jude is not a product of early Catholicism but an expression of apocalyptic Palestinian Christianity
¹⁵⁰
This is confirmed by Jude's use of the Jewish books
The Assumption of Moses
and 1
Enoch
and by the
pesher
exegesis in verses 5—19.
¹⁵¹
In light of these observations, Jude has a closer affinity to James than to 2 Peter.
¹⁵²
Beyond this, it is difficult to pinpoint the provenance of Jude, so that it is best to leave this question open.

Destination

The general reference to “those who are the called, loved by God the Father and kept by Jesus Christ” at the beginning of the letter (v. 1b) does not allow an identification of the recipients of the letter. Judging from the internal evidence, it is possible that the letter was directed to a predominantly (though not exclusively) Jewish Christian congregation, possibly in Asia Minor.
¹⁵³
Itinerant false teachers had infiltrated the church, while living a life of licentiousness and practicing a form of Christian antinomianism (lawlessness).

According to these heretics, the grace of God liberated believers from all ethical norms, so that a Christian was free to choose his own conduct without any moral restraints. These heretics were not only members of the church but also teachers (vv. 11—13). They took part in the church's worship and sought to spread their prophecies and teachings at the occasion of the church's regular “love feasts,” that is, communal meals including the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Jude warned his readers against the heretics and urged them to contend for their faith (v. 3).

Occasion and Purpose

The heretics mentioned in Jude cannot be identified with any of the other false teachers mentioned in the NT.
¹⁵⁴
In identifying their exact nature, priority should therefore
be given to the internal evidence provided by the book itself. According to Jude, the false teachers “have come in [to the church] by stealth” (v. 4; see Gal 2:4). Most likely, they were therefore itinerant teachers or preachers who went from church to church and depended on the hospitality of local Christians (see 1 Cor 9:5; 2 John 10; 3 John 5-10). In their unbelief, these godless individuals denied “Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord” (v. 4 NIV). Their motto was “freedom,” in the sense of complete ethical autonomy (vv. 4,8; see v. 7). Possibly, these false teachers held to an overrealized eschatology, focusing on their present enjoyment of the benefits of salvation while apocalyptic elements were given short shrift (see 2 Tim 2:17-18).

Jude called the false teachers “dreamers” (v. 8), mystics who boasted of privileged access to esoteric knowledge. This may indicate the charismatic character of these itinerant preachers.
¹⁵⁵
These claims of visionary experiences appear to have resulted also in lack of respect toward angels (vv. 9—10). It is possible that people were said to have an angelic nature and thus the distinction between humans and angels was blurred. Jude accounted for this by reference to the lack of spiritual insight on the part of the heretics: “These people blaspheme anything they don't understand” (v. 10). In truth, they do not possess the Spirit (v. 19).

These teachers are “blemishes” (v. 12 NIV) at the church's “love feasts,” in which they participate without the slightest qualm (v. 12; see vv. 8,23). Their status as teachers is hinted at in verse 12, where they are called shepherds “nurturing only themselves.” Like Balaam or the false shepherds in Ezekiel 34, these heretics sought nothing but their own advantage (v. 11). These individuals are as unreliable as waterless clouds or fruitless autumn trees and as unstable as the restless ocean (vv. 12—13; see Isa 57:20; Eph 4:14), leading people astray similar to stars that do not keep their course (see v. 6).

The heretics were highly critical and deeply discontent with their own fate (v. 16).
¹⁵⁶
They utter “defiant words” (v. 15) similar to the godless mentioned in the previous quotation from 1
Enoch
(see also vv. 8,10); they were “scoffers” who displayed a mocking spirit (v. 18). They caused divisions (v. 19; see 1 Cor 1:10—4:7; Jas 3:14) and were earthly minded (v. 19; the word is
psychikoi;
see 1 Cor 2:14; Jas 3:15; 4:5). Although these charismatic itinerant preachers boasted of their visionary experiences, they were devoid of the Spirit (v. 19), thus proving their unregenerate nature (see Rom 8:9). This was impressively demonstrated by their licentious lifestyle.

These were the false teachers that Jude opposed in his letter. While he had intended to write a general and encouraging letter “about our common salvation,” he instead “found it necessary to write and exhort” his readers to contend for the faith once for all entrusted to believers (v. 3). This remarkable change of plans was occasioned by the covert and
subversive presence of the false teachers in the congregation to which Jude addressed his letter. Rather than acquiesce to their teachings, the believers in that congregation needed to oppose these heretics, knowing that God's judgment of such individuals is sure.

Just as God severely punished people who did such things in the past—the demonstration of which is the burden underlying Jude's reference to several OT examples in verses 5—19—he will most certainly judge these false teachers. Jude's message for his recipients is given clear expression in verses 20—23, where he called on his readers to build themselves up in their most holy faith, to pray in the Holy Spirit, and to keep themselves in God's love as they await Christ's return (one of the proto-trinitarian references in the NT, vv. 20—21). They were to show mercy toward those who doubted; save others by snatching them from the fire; and to conduct themselves with holy fear, knowing that even the clothing of the false teachers was “defiled by the flesh” (vv. 22—23).

Something to Think About: Caring Enough to Confront

I
n the third verse of his short letter, Jude strikingly told his readers that the letter they received was not the letter he actually set out to write. Jude intended to write an encouraging letter “about our common salvation” (v. 3), but when false teachers threatened the church, he instead wrote a scathing denunciation of the false teachers in order to protect the congregation from harm. Rather than glossing over the difficulty or hoping it would go away on its own, Jude took drastic action. In this he serves as an example for today's churches in which materialism, convenience, and consumerism are too often the rule and radical discipleship and God-centeredness the exception.

For Jude, the false teachers were a spiritual menace that had to be confronted with utmost seriousness and urgency. Their immorality needed to be exposed, their appeal had to be curtailed, and a rescue operation for those swayed needed to be launched. “Have mercy on some who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; on others have mercy in fear, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh” (v. 23). It may be inconvenient to change our plans and (as Jude did) to shift gears from encouragement to exhortation, but if we care enough to confront, we will not let false teachings in our churches go unchecked but contend for the faith once for all delivered to believers.

It is hard to exaggerate the utmost seriousness with which the church, according to Jude, must deal with heretics while acting redemptively toward those who may still be wrenched from the demonic grasp of these wicked, self-seeking individuals.