The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (176 page)

A. Reminder from the Hebrew Scriptures (5—7)
Jude's denunciation of the false teachers takes on the form of a “reminder” of how God dealt with similar offenders and rebels in the past. Exhibit 1 is God's judgment of the rebellious generation in the wilderness during the exodus from Egypt. Exhibit 2 concerns God's judgment of the fallen angels
who were not content with their assigned place in God's creation but rebelled against it. Exhibit 3 is Sodom and Gomorrah, who rebelled against God's creation order by engaging in perverse sexual acts (homosexuality) and consequently were destroyed as an act of divine judgment. These three scriptural examples make clear that those who rebel against God will certainly not escape divine judgment, even if, as in the case of the false teachers in the book of Jude, this judgment was yet future.

B. The False Teachers (8—13)
This section, together with verses 14—16, is at the heart of the chiasm of the letter, focusing squarely on the false teachers. Their root sin is defiance of God's authority. The archangel Michael is cited as a positive example, contrasted with three negative predecessors of the false teachers: Cain, who murdered his brother out of jealousy; Balaam, whose error was the result of greed; and Korah, who rebelled in the wilderness. The false teachers are placed in this terrible trajectory of past rebels against God's authority who were severely judged by God; as Jude makes clear, the false teachers’ punishment is likewise assured.

C. The Quotation from Enoch (14—16)
As proof text Jude cites a passage from the apocryphal book of Enoch, attesting to the certainty of divine judgment on the ungodly. The teachers are charged with discontent, sensuality, arrogance, and flattery.

D. Reminder from Apostolic Prophecy (17—19)
The reminder from apostolic prophecy corresponds in the chiastic structure to the opening reminder from the Hebrew Scriptures in verses 5—7. With this Jude turns to his audience (“dear friends,” v. 17), reminding them that the false teachers were fulfilling end-time prophecy. The heretics are divisive, merely natural, and devoid of the Spirit.

IV. Exhortation (20-23)

On the basis of Jude's exposition regarding God's impending judgment of the false teachers in verses 5—19, the purpose of the letter, stated in verse 3, is now fleshed out in the form of a full-fledged exhortation. In this climactic section, Jude, in dramatic fashion, urged his readers to keep themselves pure while attempting to “snatch” some who doubt “from the fire,” that is, from eternal judgment by God.

V. Doxology (24-25)

The concluding doxology affirms God's ability to keep believers from stumbling and celebrates the glory, majesty, and power of the only God and Savior through Jesus Christ now and forever.

THEOLOGY

Theological Theme

Contending for the Faith
Jude issues an urgent appeal for believers to contend for the Christian faith over against false teaching that accentuated believers’ alleged unfettered freedom in Christ, which leads to an immoral lifestyle. In this form of antinomianism,
people appealed to God's grace as setting believers free to live any way they chose. Paul elsewhere defended from possible abuse the Christian teaching of grace apart from the “works of the law” (see, e.g., Gal 2:16).

Jude noted that the false teachers persisted in rebellion against authority and did not possess the Spirit. For this reason their activities failed to bear fruit. In essence, Jude's letter represents a wake-up call to a church that lay dormant when major doctrinal challenges called for an urgent response. This is not dissimilar to our own day in which much of the church is languishing in moral and spiritual complacency and indifference, where the prosperity gospel is alive and well, and where sound Christian doctrine is often less important than meeting felt needs.

The message of Jude's letter is therefore perennially relevant. Believers must be reminded of the holiness and righteousness of God, which will not allow sin to go unpunished and which requires a holy lifestyle in response to God's grace in Christ. Jude also provided diagnostic tools for spotting false teachers: an immoral lifestyle, a self-serving and self-seeking disposition, and a primarily monetary motivation. In contrast, believers ought to conduct themselves in holy fear, being circumspect and grateful. Similar to the false teachers in Jude's day, there is today the danger that some are “turning the grace of our God into promiscuity” (v. 4).

Many a convert wrongly concludes that the gospel of God's grace renders unnecessary a lifestyle that is characterized by trust in God and obedience to biblical morality and teaching. After all, God is a God of grace, love, and forgiveness. As Jude made clear, however, the decision to trust Christ must not issue in a life of unfettered freedom and licentious immorality. To the contrary, the believer becomes “a slave of Jesus Christ” (v. 1). There is therefore a great need for the church and individual believers to rediscover the important contribution made by Jude to the life and practice of the church.

CONTRIBUTION TO THE CANON

• Believers as “temporary residents” in this world (1 Pet 1:1,17; 2:11)
  
• The continuity between OT Israel and the Christian church (1 Pet 2:1—10)
  
• The importance of submission to authorities (1 Pet 2:13—3:7)
  
• The importance of Christlike suffering (1 Pet 2:21-25; 3:13-18)
  
• The need to cultivate godliness and Christian virtues (2 Pet 1:3—11)
  
• The divine inspiration of the prophetic Scriptures (2 Pet 1:21)
  
• The need for perseverance and watchfulness in view of Jesus’ return (2 Pet 3:1—13)
  
• The need to contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3)
  

STUDY QUESTIONS

1. According to the authors, which was written first: 1 Peter, 2 Peter, or Jude, and why?
   
2. What is the most likely date for 1 Peter, and why?
   
3. Why did Peter write 1 Peter, and what is the major example he cites in his exhortation?
   
4. Why do you think there is virtual unanimity in recent scholarship regarding the structure of 1 Peter?
   
5. What are four views of 1 Peter 3:18-22?
   
6. What are three reasons many modern scholars believe that Peter did not write 2 Peter?
   
7. Why are so many diverse dates offered for 2 Peter?
   
8. What is the heresy addressed in 2 Peter?
   
9. In what ways does Peter's teaching to pursue Christian virtues have important end-time implications?
   
10. Why is Jude probably not pseudonymous?
    
11. Who were most likely the “false teachers” in Jude?
    
12. Succinctly, what contributions do 1 and 2 Peter and Jude make to the canon?
    

FOR FURTHER STUDY

Achtemeier, P.J.
1 Peter.
Hermeneia. Philadelphia: Fortress, 1996.

Bauckham,
R. Jude, 2 Peter.
Word Biblical Commentary 50. Waco: Word, 1983.

___________.
Jude and the Relatives of Jesus in the Early Church.
Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1990.

Beare, F. W.
The First Epistle of Peter.
2d ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1958.

Casurella, A.
A Bibliography of Literature on First Peter.
New Testament Tools and Studies 16. Leiden: Brill, 1996.

Charles, J. D. “1, 2 Peter.” Pages 275—411 in
The Expositor's Bible Commentary.
Rev. ed. Vol. 13:
Hebrews-Revelation.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

__________. “Jude.” Pages 539—69 in
The Expositor's Bible Commentary.
Rev. ed. Vol. 13:
Hebrews—Revelation.
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005.

__________.
Literary Strategy in the Epistle of Jude.
Scranton: University Press, 1993.

__________.
Virtue Amidst Vice: The Catalog of Virtues in 2 Peter 1.
Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement 150. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1997.

Davids, P. H.
The First Epistle of Peter.
New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

_________.
The Letters of 2 Peter and Jude.
Pillar New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006.

Elliott, J. H.
1 Peter: A New Translation with Lntroduction and Commentary.
Anchor Bible 37B. New York: Doubleday, 2000.

Ellis, E. E. “Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Jude.” Pages 221—36 in
Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 18. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck/Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978.

Gilmour, M. J.
The Significance of Parallels Between 2 Peter and Other Early Christian Literature.
Academia Biblica 10. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2002.

Goppelt, L.
A Commentary on 1 Peter.
Translated by J. E. Alsup. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

Green, E. M. B.
2 Peter Reconsidered.
London: Tyndale, 1961.

Green, G. L.
Jude and 2 Peter.
Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008.

Green, M.
The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude.
2d ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987.

Grudem, W. A.
The First Epistle of Peter: An Introduction and Commentary.
Tyndale New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans, 1997.

Jobes, K. H.
1 Peter.
Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005.

Kelly, J. N. D.
A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude.
Harper's New Testament Commentaries. New York: Harper & Row, 1969.

Kruger, M. J. “The Authenticity of 2 Peter.”
Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
42 (1999): 645—71.

Marshall, I. H.
1 Peter.
NewTestament Commentary. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1991.

Martin, R. P. “The Theology of Jude, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter.” Pages 63—163 in
The Theology of the Letters of James, Peter, and Jude
by A. Chester and R. P. Martin. Cambridge: University Press, 1994.

Michaels, J. R.
1 Peter.
Word Biblical Commentary 49. Waco: Word, 1988.

Moo, D.J.
2 Peter, Jude.
NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

Neyrey, J. H.
2 Peter, Jude: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary.
Anchor Bible 37C. New York: Doubleday, 1993.

Osburn, C. D. “Discourse Analysis and Jewish Apocalyptic in the Epistle of Jude.” Pages 287—319 in
Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation.
Edited by D. A. Black. Nashville: B&H, 1992.

Picirilli, R. E. “Allusions to 2 Peter in the Apostolic Fathers."
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
33(1988): 57-83.

Reese, R. A.
2 Peter and Jude.
Two Horizons New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007.

_____________.
Writing Jude: The Reader, the Text, and the Author in Constructs of Power and Desire.
Biblical Interpretation Series 51. Leiden: Brill, 2000.

Schreiner, T. R.
1, 2 Peter, Jude.
New American Commentary 37. Nashville: B&H, 2003.

Schutter, W L.
Hermeneutics and Composition in First Peter.
Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 30. Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1989.

Selwyn, E. G.
The First Epistle of St. Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction, Notes and Essays.
London: Macmillan, 1955.

Senior, D. P.
1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter.
Sacra Pagina 15. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2003.

Talbert, C. H., ed.
Perspectives on First Peter.
Macon: Mercer Univ. Press, 1986.

Thurén, L. “Hey Jude! Asking for the Original Situation and Message of a Catholic Epistle."
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
43 (1997): 451-65.

Watson, D. F.
Invention, Arrangement and Style: Rhetorical Criticism of Jude and 2 Peter.
SBL Dissertation Series 104. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 1988.

¹
M. Luther,
Prefaces to the New Testament
, 1522, cited by J. H. Elliott, “Peter, First Epistle
of,” ABD
5:270.

²
J. D. G. Dunn,
Unity and Diversity in the New Testament: An Inquiry into the Character of Earliest Christianity
, 2d ed. (Valley Forge: Trinity Press International, 1990), 350.

³
E. Käsemann, “An Apologia for Primitive Christian Eschatology,” in
Essays on New Testament Themes
, SBT 41 (London: SCM, 1964), 191, 194.

⁴
On the phenomenon of pseudonymity see T. L. Wilder,
Pseudonymity, the New Testament, and Deception: An Inquiry into Intention and Reception
(Lanham: University Press of America, 2004); and A. J. Köstenberger, “1 Timothy,” in
The Expositor's Bible Commentary
, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2006), 492—94 and the sources cited there. The presence of pseudonymous letters in the NT was advocated by R. Bauckham, “Pseudo-Apostolic Letters,”JBL 107 (1988): 469—94; K. Aland, “The Problem of Anonymity and Pseudonymity in the Christian Literature of the First Two Centuries,”
JTS
12 (1961): 39—49; D. G. Meade,
Pseudonymity and Canon: An Investigation into the Relationship of Authorship and Authority in Jewish and Earliest Christian Tradition
(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987). In favor of authenticity are D. A. Carson and D. J. Moo,
An Introduction to the New Testament
, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2005), 337—50; D. Guthrie,
New Testament Introduction
, 2d ed. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990), 607—49; and E. E. Ellis, “Pseudonymity and Canonicity of New Testament Documents,” in
Worship, Theology and Ministry in the Early Church
, ed. M. J. Wilkins and T. Paige, JSNTSup 87 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1992), 212-24.

⁵
J. R. Michaels,
1 Peter
, WBC 49 (Waco: Word, 1988), xxxii.

⁶
T. R. Schreiner,
1, 2 Peter, Jude
, NAC 37 (Nashville: B&H, 2003), 22.

⁷
E.g.,
Phil.
1:3; 2:1-2; 6:3; 7:2; 8:1-2; 10:2-3.