Jude 1

Jude 1:1-2

Jude 1:1-2.—Salutation. Jude a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to those who have received the divine calling, beloved of the Father, kept safe in Jesus Christ. May mercy, peace and love be richly poured out upon you!

1. ἸησοῦΧριστοῦδοῦλος. The same phrase is used by St. James in the Inscription to his epistle, also by St. Paul in Rom. and Phil. In 1 Pet. the phrase used is ἀπόστολοςἸ. Χ., in 2 Pet. δοῦλοςκαὶἀπόστολος. It is, I think, a mistake to translate δοῦλος by the word “ slave,” the modern connotation of which is so different from that of the Greek word (cf. 2 Corinthians 4:5). There is no opposition between δουλεία and ἐλευθερία in the Christian’ s willing service. It only becomes a δουλεία in the opposed sense, when he ceases to love what is commanded and feels it as an external yoke. ἀδελφὸςδὲἸακώβου. Cf. Titus 1:1 δοῦλοςΘεοῦ, ἀπόστολοςδὲἸ. Χ. See Introduction on the Author. τοῖςἐνΘεῷπατρὶἠγαπημένοιςκαὶἸησοῦΧριστῷτετηρημένοιςκλητοῖς. On the readings see Introduction on the text. The easier reading of some MSS., ἡγιασμένοις for ἠγαπημένοις, is probably derived from 1 Corinthians 1:2, ἡγιασμένοιςἐνΧ. Ἰ. There is no precise parallel either for ἐνΘεῷἠγ. or for Χριστῷτετ. The preposition ἐν is constantly used to express the relation in which believers stand to Christ: they are incorporated in Him as the branches in the vine, as the living stones in the spiritual temple, as the members in the body of which He is the head. So here, “ beloved as members of Christ, reflecting back his glorious image “ would be a natural und easy conception.

Lightfoot, commenting on Colossians 3:12, ἐκλεκτοὶτοῦΘεοῦ, ἅγιοικαὶἠγαπημένοι, says that in the N.T. the last word “ seems to be used always of the objects of God’ s love,” but it is difficult to see the propriety of the phrase, ‘ Brethren beloved by God in God” . Ἠγαπημένοι is used of the objects of man’ s love in Clem. Hom. ix. 5, τῶναὐτοῖςἠγαπημένωντοὺςτάφουςναοῖςτιμῶσιν, and the cognate ἀγαπητοί is constantly used in the same sense (as below Jude 1:3), as well as in the sense of “ beloved of God” . If, therefore, we are to retain the reading, I am disposed to interpret it as equivalent to ἀδελφοί, “ beloved by us in the Father,” i.e., “ beloved with φιλαδελφία. as children of God,” but I think that Hort is right in considering that ἐν has shifted its place in the text. See his Select Readings, p. 106, where it is suggested that ἐν should be omitted before Θεῷ and inserted before Ἰησοῦ, giving the sense “ to those who have been beloved by the Father, and who have been kept safe in Jesus from the temptations to which others have succumbed,” ἠγαπημένοις being followed by a dative of the agent, as in Nehemiah 13:26, ἀγαπώμενοςτῷΘεῷἦν. κλητοῖς is here the substantive of which ἠγαπημένοις and τετηρημένοις are predicated. We find the same use in Revelation 17:14 (νικήσουσιν) οἱμετʼ αὐτοῦκλητοὶκ. ἐκλεκτοὶκ. πιστοί, in St. Paul’ s epistles, as in Romans 1:6, ἐνοἶςἐστεκαὶὑμεῖς, κλητοὶἸησοῦΧριστοῦ, 1 Corinthians 1:24, κηρύσσομενΧριστὸνἐσταυρωμένον, Ἰουδαίοιςμὲνσκάνδαλον … αὐτοῖςδὲτοῖςκλητοῖςΧριστὸνΘεοῦδύναμιν. We have many examples of the Divine calling in the Gospels, as in the case of the Apostles (Matthew 4:21, Mark 1:20) and in the parables of the Great Supper and the Labourers in the Vineyard. This idea of calling or election is derived from the O.T. See Hort’ s n. on 1 Peter 1:1 ἸησοῦΧριστοῦἐκλεκτοῖς: “ Two great forms of election are spoken of in the O.T., the choosing of Israel, and the choosing of single Israelites, or bodies of Israelites, to perform certain functions for Israel.… The calling and the choosing imply each other, the calling being the outward expression of the antecedent choosing, the act by which it begins to take effect.

Both words emphatically mark the present state of the persons addressed as being due to the free agency of God.… In Deuteronomy (Deuteronomy 4:37) the choosing, by God is ascribed to His own love of Israel: the ground of it lay in Himself, not in Israel.… As is the election of the ruler or priest within Israel for the sake of Israel, such is the election of Israel for the sake of the whole human race. Such also, still more clearly and emphatically, is the election of the new Israel.” For a similar use of the word “ call” in Isaiah, cf. ch. Isaiah 48:12, Isaiah 43:1; Isaiah 43:7. The chief distinction between the the “ calling” of the old and of the new dispensation is that the former is rather expressive of dignity , the latter of invitation; but the former appears also in the N.T. in such phrases as James 2:7, τὸκαλὸνὄνοματὸἐπικληθὲνἐφʼ ὑμᾶς and 1 Peter 2:9, ὑμεῖςδὲγένοςἐκλεκτόν, βασίλειονἱεράτευμα … λαὸςεἰςπεριποίησιν. The reason for St. Jude’ s here characterising the called as beloved and kept, is because he has in his mind others who had been called, but had gone astray and incurred the wrath of God.

Jude 1:2

Jude 1:2. For the Salutation see my note on χαίρειν, James 1:1, and Hort’ s excellent note on 1 Peter 1:2, χάρις … πληθυνθείη. We find ἔλεος and εἰρήνη joined in Galatians 6:16, and with the addition of χάρις in 1 Timothy 1:2, 2 Timothy 1:2, 2 John 1:3. The mercy of God is the ground of peace, which is perfected in the feeling of God’ s love towards them. The verb πληθυνθείη occurs in the Salutation both of 1 Peter and 2 Peter and in Daniel 6:25 (in the letter of Darius), εἰρήνηὑμῖνπληθυνθείη, cf. 1 Thessalonians 3:12, ὑμᾶςδὲὁκύριοςπλεονάσαικαὶπερισσεύσαιτῇἀγάπῃεἰςἀλλήλους. Ἀγάπη (= the love of God) occurs also in the final salutation of 2 Cor. ἡχάριςτ. κυρίουἸησοῦκαὶἡἀγάπητοῦΘεοῦ, and in Eph. εἰρήνητοῖςἀδελφοῖςκαὶἀγάπημετὰπίστεωςἀπὸΘεοῦπατρὸςκαὶΚυρίουἸ. Χ. Cf. 1 John 3:1.), ἰδετεποταπὴνἀγάπηνδέδωκενἡμῖνὁπατὴρἵνατέκναΘεοῦκληθῶμεν, where Westcott’ s n. is “ The Divine love is infused into them, so that it is their own, and becomes in them the source of a divine life (Romans 13:10).

In virtue of this gift they are inspired with a love which is like the love of God, and by this they truly claim the title of children of God as partakers in His nature, 1 John 4:7; 1 John 4:19.” The same salutation is used in the letter of the Smyrnaeans (c. 156 A.D.) giving an account of the martyrdom of Polycarp, ἔλεοςκαὶεἰρήνηκαὶἀγάπηΘεοῦπατρὸςκαὶΚυρίουἡμῶνἸ. Χ. πληθυνθείη. The thought of ἔλεος and άγάπη recurs again in Jude 1:21.

Jude 1:3

Jude 1:3. ἀγαπητοί occurs in Jude 1:17; Jude 1:20, also in 2 Peter 3:1; 2 Peter 3:8; 2 Peter 3:14; 2 Peter 3:17, 1 Peter 2:11; 1 Peter 4:12 and James. It is common in the Epistles of John and of Paul, sometimes with μου attached, as in 1 Corinthians 10:14, Philippians 2:12, and is often joined to ἀδελφοί, especially in James. The ἀγάπη of Jude 1:2 leads on to the ἀγαπητοί here. They are themselves ἀγαπητοί because the love of God is shed abroad in their hearts. πᾶσανσπουδὴνποιούμενος. For πᾶσαν, see my n. on James 1:2, and cf. 2 Peter 1:5, σπουδὴνπᾶσανπαρεισενέγκαντες, Jude 1:15, σπουδάσωἔχεινὑμᾶςμνήμηνποιεῖσθαι, also Isocr. Orat. v. p. 91 b, πᾶσαντὴνσπουδὴνπερὶτούτουποιεῖσθαι, Plato, Euthyd. 304 e, περὶοὐδενὸςἀξίωνἀναξίανσπουδὴνποιοῦνται. Jude was busy on another subject, when he received the news of a fresh danger to the Church, which he felt it his duty to meet at once. Whether he lived to carry out his earlier design, and whether it was of the nature of a treatise or of an epistle, we know not. It is noteworthy that there is a similar allusion in 2 Peter 3:1 to an earlier letter now lost. Compare Barn. iv. 9, πολλὰδὲθέλωνγράφειν … γράφεινἐσπούδασα. κοινῆςσωτηρίας. Cf. Titus 1:4, κατὰκοινὴνπίστιν, Ign. Ephesians 1., ὑπὲρτοῦκοινοῦὀνόματοςκαὶἐλπίδος with Lightfoot’ s n., Jos. Ant. 10. 1. 3 (Hezekiah besought Isaiah to offer sacrifice) ὑπὲρτῆςκοινῆςσωτηρίας. Bede explains as follows: “ omnium electorum communis est salus, fides, et dilectio Christi” . Jude puts on one side the address he was preparing on the main principles of Christianity (probably we may take Jude 1:20-21 as a sample of what this would have been) and turns to the special evil which was then threatening the Church. ἀνάγκηνἔσχονγράψαι. Cf. Luke 14:18, ἔχωἀνάγκηνἰδεῖναὐτόν, Hebrews 7:27, al., also Plut. Cato Mi. 24, ἀνάγκηνἔσχενἐκβαλεῖνἀσχημονοῦσαντὴνγυναῖκα. There is a similar combination of γράφειν and γράψαι in 3 John 1:13. The aor. γράψαι, contrasted with the preceding pres. γράφειν, implies that the new epistle had to be written at once and could not be prepared for at leisure, like the one he had previously contemplated. It was no welcome task: “ necessity was laid upon him” . ἐπαγωνίζεσθαιτῇἅπαξπαραδοθείσῃτοῖςἁγίοιςπίστει. “ To contend for the faith,” almost equivalent to the ἀγώνισαιπερὶτἠςἀληθείας in Sir 4:28, see 1 Timothy 6:12, ἀγωνίζουτὸνκαλὸνἀγῶνατῆςπίστεως, and εἰςὃκοπιῶἀγωνιζόμενος, Colossians 1:29. We may compare ἐπαμύνειν, ἐπαναπαύειννόμῳ, Romans 2:17 and Clem. Strom, iii., p. 553, ἐπαγωνιζόμενοςτῇἀθέῳδόξῃ. It is possible (as is shown by the following examples) for spiritual blessings, once given, to be lost, unless we use every effort to maintain them. The redemption from Egypt was a fact, as baptism into the name of Christ is a fact, but, unless it is borne in mind and acted upon, the fact loses its efficacy. τῇἅπαξπαραδοθείσῃτοῖςἁγίοιςπίστει. The word πίστις here is not used in its primary sense of a subjective feeling of trust or belief, but in the secondary sense of the thing believed, the Truth or the Gospel, as in Jude 1:20 below, Galatians 1:23, ὁδιώκωνἡμᾶςποτενῦνεὐαγγελίζεταιτὴνπίστινἥνποτεἐπόρθει, also Galatians 3:23, Philippians 1:27, συναθλοῦντεςτῇπίστειτοῦεὐαγγελίου, where see Lightfoot, Acts 6:7. In the same way ἐλπίς is used in a concrete sense for the object or ground of hope (as in Colossians 1:5, τὴνἐλπίδατὴνἀποκειμένηνὑμῖν, 1 Timothy 1:1, ἸησοῦΧριστοῦτῆςἐλπίδοςἡμῶν, Titus 2:13, προσδεχόμενοιτὴνμακαρίανἐλπίδα), and φόβος for the object of fear, Romans 13:3, 1 Peter 3:14. ἅπαξ. Used here in its classical sense “ once for all,” as below Jude 1:5, and in Hebrews 6:4, τοὺςἅπαξφωτισθέντας, Hebrews 9:26-27; Hebrews 10:2, 1 Peter 3:18. This excludes the novelties of the Libertines, cf. Galatians 1:9. The later sense “ on one occasion” is found in 2 Corinthians 11:25, ἅπαξἐλιθάσθην, 1 Thessalonians 2:18, καὶἅπαξκαὶδὶςἠθελήσαμενἐλθεῖν. παραδοθείσῃ. Cf. Philo M. i. 387, πιστεύειτοῖςἅπαξπαραδοθεῖσι. The Christian tradition is constantly referred to by the Fathers, as by Clem. Al. Str. vii. where we read of ἡἀληθὴςπαράδοσις (p. 845), ἡἐκκλησιαστικὴπ. (p. 890), ἡθείαπ. (p. 896), ἡπάντωντῶνἀποστόλωνπ. (p. 900), αἱτοῦΧριστοῦπ (p. 901), and even in the N.T. as in 1 Corinthians 11:2, κάθωςπαρέδωκαὑμῖντὰςπαραδόσειςκατέχετε, 2 Thessalonians 2:15, 1 Timothy 6:20. τὴνπαραθήκηνφύλαξον. For an account of the gradual formation of the Creed, see A. E. Burn’ s Introduction to the Creeds, ch. 2., 1899, and compare the comment in my larger edition, p. 61 f. τοῖςἁγίοις. Used generally of Christians who were consecrated and called to be holy, as in 1 Corinthians 1:2, Philippians 1:1, where see Lightfoot. The word contains an appeal to the brethren to stand fast against the teaching and practice of the Libertines.

Jude 1:4

Jude 1:4. παρεισεδύησανγάρτινεςἄνθρωποι. For this form which is found in [784] and adopted by WH, Veitch cites διεκδυῆναι in Hippocr. 1. 601, and compares ἐφύην, ἐρρύην. The aor. is here used with the perfect force, as in Jude 1:11 ἐπορεύθησαν, etc. cf. Blass, Gr. p. 199, my edition of St. James, p. 202. and Dr. Weymouth there cited.

The verb occurs in Deinades 178, ἄδικοςπαρεισδύνωνλόγοςεἰςτὰςτῶνδικαστῶνγνώμαςοὐκἐᾷσυνορᾶντὴνἀλήθειαν, Clem. Al. p. 659 ὅπωςεἰςτὴντῶναἰνιγμάτωνἔννοιανἡζήτησιςπαρεισδύουσαἐπὶτὴνεὕρεσιντῆςἀληθείαςἀναδράμῃ, D. Laert. ii. 142. λαθραίωςπαρεισδύςεἰςτὴνπατρίδα, Plut. M. p. 216 B, τὰἁρχαῖανόμιμαἐκλυόμεναἑώρα, ἄλλαδὲπαρεισδυόμεναμοχθηρά, other examples in Wetst. The noun παρείσδυσις occurs in Barn. ii. 10, iv. 9, ἀντιστῶμενἵναμὴσχῇπαρείσδυσινὁμέλας, Clem. Al. p. 189, ἀκροσφαλὴςἡτοῦοἴνουπαρείσδυσις.

Similar compounds are παρεισφέρω in 2 Peter 1:5, παρεισάγω in 2 Peter 2:1, παρείσακτος in Galatians 2:4, διὰτοὺςπαρεισάκτουςψευδαδέλφουςοἵτινεςπαρεισῆλθονκατασκοπῆσαιτὴνἐλευθερίανὑμῶν, Romans 5:20, 2Ma 8:1 παρεισπορευόμενοιλεληθότωςεἰςτὰςκώμας, so παρεισέρπω, παρεισπέμπω, παρεισπίπτω. The earliest prophecy of such seducers comes from the lips of Jesus Himself, Matthew 7:15, προσέχετεἀπὸτῶνψευδοπροφητῶν, οἵτινεςἔρχονταιπρὸςὑμᾶςἐνἐνδύμασιπροβάτων, ἔσωθενδέεἰσιλύκοιἅρπαγες, cf. Acts 20:29-30, and Introduction on the Early Heresies in the larger edition. [784] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi. οἱπάλαιπρογεγραμμένοιεἰςτοῦτοτὸκρίμα. “ Designated of old for this judgment.” Cf. 2 Peter 2:3, οἷςτὸκρίμαἔκπαλαιοὐκἀργεῖ. The word πάλαι precludes the supposition that the second epistle of Peter can be referred to.[785] The allusion is to the book of Enoch quoted in Jude 1:14-15. In Jude 1:18 below the same warning is said to have been given by the Apostles. The phrase οἱπρογ. is in apposition to τινεςἄνθρωποι, cf. Galatians 1:7 with Lightfoot’ s n., Luke 18:9, εἶπενδὲπρόςτιναςτοὺςπεποιθόταςἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς. For προγ., cf.

Romans 15:4, ὅσαγὰρπροεγράφηεἰςτὴνἡμετέρανδιδασκαλίανἐγράφη. The word is intended to show that they are already doomed to punishment as enemies of God. As such they are to be shunned by the faithful, but not to be feared, because, dangerous as they may seem, they cannot alter the Divine purpose. Dr. Chase compares Hort’ s interesting note on 1 Peter 2:8, εἰςὃκαὶἐτέθησαν. By “ this” Spitta understands “ that judgment which I am now about to declare,” i.e., the condemnation contained in the word ἀσεβεῖς used by some ancient writer.

Zahn however remarks that οὗτος usually refers to what precedes, and he would take τοῦτο here (with Hofmann) as referring to παρεισεδύησαν. Better than this logical reference to some preceding or succeeding word is, I think, Bengel’ s explanation “ the now impending judgment,” Apostolo iam quasi cernente pœnam. [785] Zahn, it is true, following Schott and others, argues in favour of this reference, holding that πάλαι may be equivalent to “ lately” ; and the word is of course very elastic in meaning; but unless the contrast makes it clear that the reference is to a recent past, I think we are bound to assign to the word its usual force, especially here, where it stands first, giving the tone as it were to what follows, and is further confirmed and explained by ἕβδομοςἀπὸἈδάμ in Jude 1:14. ἀσεβεῖς. This word may be almost said to give the keynote to the Epistle (cf. Jude 1:15; Jude 1:18) as it does to the Book of Enoch. τὴντοῦΘεοῦἡμῶνχάριταμετατιθέντεςεἰςἀσέλγειαν. With this we may compare 1 Peter 2:16, μὴὡςἐπικάλυμμαἔχοντεςτὴςκακίαςτὴνἐλευθερίαν, 2 Peter 2:19, ἐλευθερίανἐπαγγελλόμενοι, 2 Peter 3:16. δυσνόητάτιναἃοἱἀμαθεῖςστρεβλοῦσινπρὸςτὴνἰδίαναὐτῶνἀπώλειαν, Romans 3:1-2; Romans 3:5-8 (If man is justified by free grace and not by works, then works are unnecessary), Romans 6:1; Romans 6:15; Romans 8:21, 1 Corinthians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 10:23 f., John 8:32-36, Galatians 5:13, ὑμεῖςἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳἐκλήθητε· μόνονμὴτὴνἐλευθερίανεἰςἀφορμὴντῇσαρκί. For μετατιθέντες see Galatians 1:6, for ἀσέλγειαν 2 Peter 2:2, πολλοὶἐξακολουθήσουσιναὐτῶνταῖςἀσελγείαις, 2 Peter 2:7; 2 Peter 2:18; 1 Peter 4:3, and Lightfoot on Galatians 5:19, “ A man may be ἀκάθαρτος and hide his sin: he does not become ἀσελγής until he shocks public decency. In classical Greek the word ἀσέλγεια generally signifies insolence or violence towards another.… In the later language the prominent idea is sensuality … cf. Polyb. xxxvi. 2, πολλὴδέτιςἀσέλγειακαὶπερὶτὰςσωματικὰςἐπιθυμίαςαὐτῷσυνεξηκολούθει. Thus it has much the same range of meaning as ὕβρις” .

On the meaning of χάρις see Robinson, Ephes. p. 221 f. The form χάριν used elsewhere in the N.T., except in Acts 24:27. τὸνμόνονδεσπότηνκαὶκύριονἡμῶνἸησοῦνΧριστὸνἀρνούμενοι. So 2 Peter 2:1, τὸνἀγοράσαντααὐτοὺςδεσπότηνἀρνούμενοι. On the denial of God and Christ see 1 John 2:22, οὗτόςἐστινὁἀντίχριστος, ὁἀρνούμενοςτὸνπατέρακαὶτὸνυἱόν, Titus 1:16, Θεὸνὁμολογοῦσινεἰδέναι, τοῖςδὲἔργοιςἀρνοῦνταιβδελυκτοὶὄντεςκαὶἀπειθεῖςκαὶπρὸςπᾶνἔργονἀγαθὸνἀδόκιμοι, Matthew 10:33, ὅστιςἂνἀρνήσηταίμεἔμπροσθεντῶνἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαικἀγὼαὐτὸνἔμπροσθεντοῦπατρόςμου, Matthew 26:70 (Peter’ s denial). Such denial is one of the sins noticed in the book of Enoch, xxxviii. 2: “ When the Righteous One shall appear … where will be the dwelling of the sinners and where the resting-place of those who have denied the Lord of Spirits? “Ib. xli. 2, xlv. 2, xlvi. 7, xlviii. 10: “ They will fall and not rise again … for they have denied the Lord of Spirits and His Anointed” . Two questions have been raised as to the meaning of the text, (1) is τ. μόνονδεσπότην to be understood of the Son, (2) what is the force of ἀρνεῖσθαι? The objection to understanding δεσπότης of our Lord is that in every other passage in the N.T., where δεσπότης occurs, except in 2 Peter 2:1 (on which see n.), it is spoken of God the Father; that, this being the case, it is difficult to understand how Christ can be called τὸνμόνονδεσπότην. It seems to me a forced explanation to say that the phrase μόνοςδεσπότης has reference only to other earthly masters. No Jew could use it in this connexion without thinking of the one Master in heaven. Again μόνος is elsewhere used of the Father only, as in John 5:44, τὴνδόξαντὴνπαρὰτοῦμόνουΘεοῦοὐζητεῖτε, John 17:3, ἵναγινώσκωσίνσετὸνμόνονἀληθινὸνΘεον Romans 16:27, μόνῳσόφῳΘεῷδιὰἸησοῦΧριστοῦ, 1 Timothy 1:17, τῷβασιλεῖτῶναἰώνων … μόνῳΘεῷτιμὴκ. δόξα, 1 Timothy 6:15-16, ὁμακάριοςκ. μόνοςδυνάστηςὁμόνοςἔχωνἀθανασίαν, and by Jude himself, below 25, μόνῳΘεῷσωτῆριἡμῶνδιὰἸ. Χ., τοῦκυρίουἡμῶνδόξα. Wetst. quotes several passages in which Josephus speaks of God as ὁμόνοςδεσπότης.

On the other hand, the phrase, so taken seems to contradict the general rule that, where two nouns, denoting attributes, are joined by καί, if the article is prefixed to the first noun only, the second noun will then be an attribute of the same subject. In the present case, however, the second noun (κύριον) belongs to the class of words which may stand without the article, see Winer, pp. 147– 163.

A similar doubtful case is found in Titus 2:13, προσδεχόμενοιτὴνμακαρίανἐλπίδακαὶἐπιφάνειαντῆςδόξηςτοῦμεγάλουΘεοῦκαὶσωτῆροςἡμῶνΧ. Ἰ. ὃςἔδωκενἑαυτὸνὑπὲρἡμῶνἵναλυτρώσηταιἡμᾶς, where also I should take τοῦμεγάλουΘεοῦ to refer to the Father. Other examples of the same kind are Ephesians 5:5, οὐκἔχεικληρονομίανἐντῇβασιλείᾳτοῦΧριστοῦκαὶΘεοῦ (where Alf. notes “ We cannot safely say here that the same Person is intended by Χ. κ. Θεοῦ merely on account of the omission of the art.; for (1) any introduction of such a prediction regarding Christ would here be manifestly out of place, (2) Θεός is so frequently anarthrous that it is not safe to ground any such inference on its use here),” 2 Thessalonians 1:12, ὅπωςἐνδοξασθῇτὸὄνοματοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸησοῦἐνὑμῖνκαὶὑμεῖςἐναὐτῷκατὰτὴνχάριντοῦΘεοῦὑμῶνκαὶκυρίουἸησοῦΧριστοῦ; 1 Timothy 5:21 (cf. 2 Timothy 4:1), διαμαρτύρομαιἐνώπιοντοῦΘεοῦκαἰΧριστοῦἸησοῦκαὶτῶνἐκλεκτῶνἀγγέλων, which Chrysostom explains μάρτυρακαλῶτὸνΘεὸνκαὶτὸνυἱὸναὐτοῦ; 2 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:4 ἐνδικαιοσύνῃτοῦΘεοῦἡμῶνκαὶσωτῆροςἸησοῦΧριστοῦ, where see my n. The denial of the only Master and our Lord Jesus Christ may be implicit, shown by their coquet, though not asserted in word, as in Titus 1:16; but it is more naturally taken as explicit, as in 1 John 2:22, where Westcott notes that a common gnostic theory was that “ ‘ the Aeon Christ’ descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism and left Him before His passion. Those who held such a doctrine denied … the union of the divine and human in one Person … and this denial involves the loss of the Father, not only because the ideas of sonship and fatherhood are correlative, but because … it is only in the Son that we have the [full] revelation of God as Father.” The phrase τὸνμόνονδεσπότην might also refer to the heresy attributed to Cerinthus by Hippolytus (Haer. vii. 33, x. 21) οὐχὑπὸτοῦπρώτουθεοῦτὸνκόσμονγεγονέναιἠθέλησενἀλλʼ ὑπὸδυνάμεώςτινοςἀγγελικῆς, and Irenæus Haer. i. 26. See Introduction on Early Heresies in the large edition.

Jude 1:5

Jude 1:5. ὑπομνῆσαιδὲὑμᾶςβούλομαι, εἰδόταςὑμᾶςπάντα.[786] Cf. 2 Peter 1:12, διὸμελλήσωὑμᾶςἀεὶὑπομιμνήσκεινκαίπερεἰδότας, 2 Peter 1:13, διεγείρεινὑμᾶςἐνὑπομνήσει, 2 Peter 3:1, διεγείρωὑμῶνἐνὐπομνήσειτὴνεἰλικρινῆδιάνοιαν, Romans 15:14, πέπεισμαιδὲὅτικαὶαὐτοὶμεστοίἐστεἀγαθωσύνης, πεπληρωμένοιπάσηςτῆςγνώσεως … τολμηροτέρωςδὲἔγραψαὑμῖνἀπὸμέρουςὡςἐπαναμιμνήσκωνὑμᾶς. The word εἰδότας justifies ὑπομνῆσαι: they only need to be reminded of truths already known, so that it is unnecessary to write at length. The repeated ὑμᾶς contrasts the readers with the libertines of the former verse. The words in themselves might be taken ironically of persons professing (like the Corinthians) to “ know all things,” but the broad distinction maintained throughout the epistle between ὑμεῖς and οὗτοι (the Libertines) forbids such an interpretation. If we read ἅπαξπάντα with some MSS., it suggests something of anxiety and upbraiding, which may be compared with the tone of St. Paul in writing to the Galatians.

See, however, the following note for the position of ἅπαξ. Instead of πάντα some MSS., have τοῦτο. The former finds some support in Enoch i. 2, “ I heard everything from the angels,” xxv. 2, “ I should like to know about everything,” Secrets of En. xl. 1, 2, “ I know all things from the lips of the Lord … I know all things and have written all things in the books,” lxi. 2 (quoted by Chase in Dict. of the Bible). It should probably be understood of all that follows, including the historical allusions, implying that those addressed were familiar not only with the O.T. but with rabbinical traditions: so Estius “ omnia de quibus volo vos commonere” . Bede’ s note is “ omnia videlicet arcana fidei scientes et non opus habentes recentia quasi sanctiora a novis audire magistris” . In what follows he takes ἅπαξ with αώσας, “ ita clamantes ad se de afflictione Aegyptia primo salvavit humiles, ut secundo murmurantes contra se in eremo prosterneret superbos … Meminerimus ilium sic per aquas baptismi salvare credentes, ut etiam post baptismum humilem in nobis requirat vitam.” [786] On the readings see Introduction. ὅτιΚύριος, ἅπαξλαὸνἐκγῆςΑἰγύπτουσώσας, τὸδεύτερον [τοὺς] μὴπιστεύσανταςἀπώλεσεν.] For text, see Introduction on Readings. Clement in his Adumbrationes gives the paraphrase “ Quoniam Dominus Deus semel populum de terra Aegypti liberans deinceps eos qui non crediderunt perdidit” . τὸδεύτερον has given rise to much discussion. According to the reading I have adopted, it contrasts the preceding saving with the following destruction. The deliverance from Egypt was the creation of a people once for all, but yet it was followed by the destruction of the unbelieving portion of the people, i.e. by all but Caleb and Joshua (Numbers 14:27; Numbers 14:37). So in 1 Corinthians 10. we have the privileges of Israel allowed, and yet all was in vain because of their unbelief. There seems less force in the connection of ἅπαξ with εἰδότας: ἤδη would have been more suitable. For the opposition to τὸδεύτερον, cf.

Hebrews 9:28, ὁΧριστὸςἅπαξπροσενεχθεὶςεἰςτὸπολλῶνἀνενεγκεῖνἁμαρτίαςἐκδευτέρουχωρὶςἁμαρτίαςὀφθήσεται, Theoph. Autol. ii. 26, ἵνατὸμὲνἅπαξᾖπεπληρωμένονὅτεἐτέθη, τὸδὲδεύτερονμέλλῃπληροῦσθαιμετὰτὴν … κρίσιν, Liban. ap. Wetst. ἐμοὶδὲἅπαξἀρκεῖγέλωταὀφλεῖν, δεύτερονδὲοὐκέτι. I am inclined to think that the article before μή is an intrusion, as it seems to be before ἐν in Jude 1:12. Omitting it, we can take δεύτερον with μὴπιστεύσαντας, getting the sense: “ In the 1st case of unbelief (in Egypt) [787] salvation followed; in the 2nd (in the wilderness) destruction,” lit. “ when they, a second time failed to believe, He destroyed them” . If this was the original reading, it is easy to understand the insertion of τούς as facilitating the plural construction after λαόν. We may compare the solemn utterance in Hebrews 10:26, ἑκουσίωςἁμαρτανόντωνἡμῶνμετὰτὸλαβεῖντὴνἐπίγνωσιντῆςἀληθείαςοὐκἔτιπερὶἁμαρτιῶνἀπολείπεταιθυσία, and the belief, apparently based upon it, in the early Church as to sin after baptism. [787] Cf. Exodus 2:14; Exodus 4:1; Exodus 5:21; Exodus 6:9; Exodus 14:11-12.

Jude 1:6

Jude 1:6. ἀγγέλουςτετοὺςμὴτηρήσανταςτὴνἐαυτῶνἀρχὴν … εἰςκρίσιν … τετήρηκεν.] Cf. Clem. Al. Adumbr. “ Angelos qui non servaverunt proprium principatum, scilicet quem acceperunt secundum profectum.” This of course supplies an even more striking instance of the possibility of falling away from grace, cf. Bede, “ Qui angelis peccantibus non pepercit, nee hominibus parcet super-bientibus, sed et hos quoque cum suum principatum non servaverint, quo per gratiam adoptionis filii Dei effecti sunt, sed reliquerint suum domicilium, id est, Ecclesiae unitatem … damnabit” . On the Fall of the Angels see Introduction and the parallel passages in 2 Peter 2:4, and in Enoch, chapters 6– 10. ἀρχήν.] Used of office and dignity, as in Genesis 40:21 of the chief butler: here perhaps of the office of Watcher, though Spitta takes it more generally of the sovereignty belonging to their abode in heaven = τὸνἄνωκλῆρον in Clem. Al. 650 P. The term ἀρχή is used of the evil angels themselves in Ephesians 6:12. Cf. Enoch xii. 4, of the Watchers (angels) who have abandoned the high heaven and the holy eternal place and defiled themselves with women, ib. xv. 3. Philo says of the fallen angels (M. i. p. 268), καλὸνμὴλιποτακτῆσαιμὲντῆςτοῦΘεοῦτάξεως, ἐνᾗτοὺςτεταγμένουςπάνταςἀριστεύεινἀνάγκη, αὐτομολῆσαιδὲπρὸςτὴνἄνανδρονἡδονήν. So Just. M[788] Apol. ii. 5, οἱδʼ ἄγγελοιπαραβάντεςτήνδετὴντάξινγυναικῶνμίξεσινἡττήθησαν with Otto’ s n. [788]. Codex Ruber (sæc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives its name from the colour of the ink. ἀπολιπόνταςτὸἴδιονοἰκητήριον. Cf. 2 Corinthians 5:2, τὸοἰκ. τὸἐξοὐρανοῦ, and the quotation from Enoch in the last n. [For οἰκητήριον, cf. Enoch xv. 7 (the message of Enoch to the Watchers) “ the spiritual have their dwelling in heaven” … ἡκατοίκησιςαὐτῶνἔσταιἐπὶτῆςγῆς. Chase.] εἰςκρίσινμεγάληςἡμέραςδεσμοῖςἀϊδίοιςὑπὸζόφουτετήρηκεν. Cf. 2 Peter 2:4 σειροῖςζόφουταρταρώσας, 2 Peter 2:9, ἀδίκουςεἰςἡμέρανκρίσεωςκολαζομένουςτηρεῖν, 2 Peter 3:7, τηρούμενοιεἰςἡμέρανκρίσεως … τῶνἀσεβῶνἀνθρώπων, Joe 2:31, ὁἥλιοςμεταστραφήσεταιεἰςσκότος … πρὶνἐλθεῖντὴνἡμέρανΚυρίουτὴνμεγάληνκαὶἐπιφανῆ Revelation 6:17, ἦλθενἡἡμέραἡμεγάλητῆςὀργῆςαὐτοῦ, Revelation 16:14, συναγαγεῖναὐτοὺςεἰςτὸνπόλεμοντῆςμεγάληςἡμέραςτοῦΘεοῦτοῦπαντοκράτορος. Enoch 10:5, ἐπικάλυψοναὐτῷ (Azazel) σκότος, καὶοἰκησάτωἐκεῖεἰςτὸναἰῶνα, Enoch 10:12, δῆσοναὐτοὺς … μέχριἡμέραςκρίσεωςαὐτῶν, Enoch 12:11 (Gr. in Charles’ App. [789]) μέχριτῆςμεγάληςἡμέραςτῆςκρίσεως, ib. liv. 6, note on xlv. 1. So ἡμέρατοῦκυρίου 1 Corinthians 1:8, 2 Peter 3:10 al., ἐκείνηἡἡμέρα 2 Thessalonians 1:10. On δεσμοῖς see En. liv. 3– 5, “ I saw how they made iron chains of immeasurable weight, and I asked for whom they were prepared, and he said unto me ‘ These are prepared far the hosts of Azazel’ .” cf. δέσμιοισκότους (Wis 17:2) of the plague of darkness. [789] Codex Ephraemi (sæc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843. ἀϊδίοις. The chains are called “ everlasting,” but they are only used for a temporary purpose, to keep them for the final judgment. It seems to be here synonymous with αἰώνιος in Jude 1:7. So too in the only other passages in which it occurs in the Bible, Wis 7:26, ἀπαύγασμάἐστιφωτὸςἀϊδίου, and Romans 1:20, ἡἀΐδιοςαὐτοῦδύναμιςκαὶθειότης.

Jude 1:7

Jude 1:7. ὡςΣόδομακαὶΓόμορρακαὶαἱπερὶαὐτὰςπόλεις. The 3rd example of Divine judgment differs from the two others, as it tells only of the punishment, not of the fall from grace. Hence the difference of connexion ἀγγέλουςτε.… ὡςΣόδομα. Cf. 2 Peter 2:6, πόλειςΣοδόμωνκαὶΓομόρραςκαταστροφῇκατέκρινεν. The destruction was not limited to these two cities, but extended to all the neighbouring country (Genesis 19:25, called Πεντάπολις in Wis 10:6), including the towns of Admah and Zeboim (Deuteronomy 29:23, Hosea 11:8). Zoar was spared at the request of Lot. τὸνὅμοιοντρόποντούτοιςἑκπορνεύσασαι. For the adverbial acc., cf. Matthew 23:37, ὃντρόπονἐπισυνάγειὄρνιςτὰνοσσία, 2Ma 15:39, ὃντρόπονοἶνος … ἀποτελεῖ, οὕτωκαὶ, Luc. Catapl. 6 τεθνᾶσιτὸνὅμοιοντρόπον. “ Like them.” i.e. the fallen angels. The two judgments are similarly joined in Test. Nepht. 3, μὴγένησθεὡςΣόδομαἥτιςἐνήλλαξετάξινφύσεωςαὐτῆς. ὉμοίωςδὲκαὶοἱἘγρήγορεςἐνήλλαξαντάξινφύσεωςαὐτῶν, οὕςκατηράσατοΚύριος.

Others understand τούτοις of the libertines who are subsequently referred to as οὖτοι (Jude 1:8; Jude 1:10; Jude 1:12; Jude 1:16; Jude 1:19); but the beginning of Jud 1:8 (μέντοικαὶοὗτοι) seems to distinguish between them and the preceding. The verb ἐκπ. occurs in Genesis 38:24 of Tamar, Exodus 34:15-16, (μήποτε) ἐκπορνεύσωσινὀπίσωτῶνθεῶναὐτῶν, Leviticus 17:7, Hosea 4:12, Ezekiel 16:26; Ezekiel 16:28; Ezekiel 16:33. ἀπελθοῦσαιὀπίσωσαρκὸςἑτέρας. In the case of the angels the forbidden flesh refers to the intercourse with women; in the case of Sodom to the departure from the natural use (Romans 1:27), what Philo calls ἀνόμουςκαὶἑκθέσμουςμίξεις (de Gig. M i. p. 267), cf. Exodus 30:9. οὐκἀνοίσειςθυμίαμαἕτερον. For the post-classical phrase cf. 2 Peter 2:10, τοὺςὀπίσωσαρκὸςἐνἐπιθυμίᾳμιασμοῦπορευομένους, Deuteronomy 4:3, ἐπορεύθηὀπίσωΒεελφεγώρ Jeremiah 2:2-3. πρόκεινταιδεῖγμαπυρὸςαἰωνίουδίκηνὑπέχουσαι. Cf. Enoch lxvii. 12, “ this judgment wherewith the angels are judged is a testimony for the kings and the mighty,” 2 Peter 2:6, ὑπόδειγμαμελλόντωνἀσεβέσιντεθεικώς, 1 Corinthians 10:6; 1 Corinthians 10:11 τύποιἐγένοντο, Hebrews 4:11 ἵναμὴἐντῷαὐτῷτιςὑποδείγματιπέσῃτῆςἀπειθείας. The present aspect of the Lacus Asphaltites was a conspicuous image of the lake of fire and brimstone prepared for Satan and his followers, Revelation 19:20; Revelation 20:10; Revelation 21:8. It is questioned whether πυρός is governed by δεῖγμα or δίκην. If by δίκην, then the burning of Sodom is itself spoken of as still going on (eternal), and this is in accordance with Jewish belief as recorded in Wis 10:7 (πῦρΠενταπόλεως) ἦςἔτιμαρτύριοντῆςπονηρίαςκαπνιζομένηκαθέστηκεχέρσος, Philo (De Abr.

M. ii. xxi.), μέχρινῦνκαίεται. τὸγὰρκεραύνιονπῦρἥκιστασβεννύμενονἢνέμεταιἢἐντύφεται. πίστιςδὲσαφεστάτητὰδρώμενα, τοῦγὰρσυμβεβηκότοςπάθουςσημεῖόνἐστινὅτεἀναδιδόμενοςἀεὶκαπνὸςκαὶὃμεταλλεύουσιθεῖον, ib. V.

Moys. M. ii. p. 143. Some disallow this sense of αἰώνιος and think that it can only be used of hell-fire, as in 4Ma 12:12 (the words of the martyr contrasting the fires of present torture with the eternal flames awaiting the persecutor), ταμιεύεταίσεἡθείαδίκηπυκνοτέρῳκαὶαἰωνίῳπυρί, καὶβάσανοιεἰςὅλοντὸναἰῶναοὐκἀνήσουσίσε. For an examination of the word see Jukes, Restitution of all Things, p. 67 n. and cf. Jeremiah 23:39-40, Ezekiel 16:53; Ezekiel 16:55 (on the restoration of Sodom), Ezekiel 47:1-12 (a prophecy of the removal of the curse of the Dead Sea and its borders), Enoch, x. 5 and 12, where the εἰςαἰῶνα of the former verse is equivalent to seventy generations in the latter, also Ezekiel 47:10 where ζωὴαἰώνιος is reckoned at 500 years. As the meaning of δεῖγμα is made clear by the following participial clause, it seems unnecessary to take it with πυρός in the sense of “ an example or type of eternal fire,” which would escape the difficulty connected with αἰωνίου, but leaves δίκηνὑπέχουσαι (for which cf.

Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 8, 2Ma 4:48) a somewhat otiose appendage.

In the book of Enoch (lxvii. 4 foll.) the angels who sinned are said to be imprisoned in a burning valley (Hinnom, ch. 27) in which there was a great swelling of waters, accompanied by a smell of sulphur; and “ that valley of the angels burned continually under the earth” . Charles notes on this that “ the Gehenna valley here includes the adjacent country down to the Dead Sea. A subterranean fire was believed to exist under the Gehenna valley.”

Jude 1:8

Jude 1:8. ὁμοίωςμέντοικαὶοὗτοι. Notwithstanding these warnings the libertines go on in similar courses. ἐνυπνιαζόμενοισάρκαμιαίνουσιν Compare Acts 2:17 (a quotation from Joe 2:28), οἱπρεσβύτεροιὑμῶνἐνυπνίοιςἐνυπνιασθήσονται, of those that see visions: and so Spitta (holding that Jude copied from 2 Peter), would render it here, prefixing the article to make it correspond with the ψευδοπροφῆται and ψευδοδιδάσκαλοι of 2 Peter 2:1. Those who take the opposite view (viz. that 2 Peter was copied from Jude) will see nothing to justify the article. The word is used by Isaiah 56:10 in connexion with the words οὐκἔγνωσαν, οὐκεἰδότες (see Jude 1:10 below), ἐνυπνιαζόμενοικοίτηνφιλοῦντεςνυστάξαι, which Delitsch explains “ instead of watching and praying to see divine revelations for the benefit of the people, they are lovers of ease talkers in their sleep. Bengel explains “ Hominum mere naturalium indoles graphice admodum descripta est. Somnians multa videre, audire, etc. sibi videtur.” And so Chase “ they live in an unreal world of their own inflated imaginations,” comparing the conjectural reading of Col 2:18, ἀέρακενεμβατεύων. This accords with Jude 1:10 : in their delusion and their blindness they take the real for the unreal, and the unreal for the real. The verb is used both in the active and middle by Aristotle, Somm. i. 1, πότερονσυμβαίνειἀεὶτοῖςκαθεύδουσινἐνυπνιάζειν, ἀλλοὐμνημονεύουσιν; Probl. 30, 14, 2, οἱἐντῷκαθεύδεινἐνυπνιαζόμενοιἱσταμένηςτῆςδιανοίας, καὶκαθʼ ὅσονἠρεμεῖ, ὀνειρώττουσιν, cf. Artem. Oneir, i. 1.

Some interpret of polluting dreams (cf. Leviticus 15); but the word ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι is evidently intended to have a larger scope, covering not merely μιαίνουσιν but ἀθετοῦσιν and βλασφημοῦσιν. We must also interpret μιαίνω here by the ἀσέλγειαν of Jude 1:4, the ἐκπορνεύσασαι and σαρκὸςἑτέρας of Jude 1:7. This wide sense appears in Titus 1:15, τοῖςμεμιασμένοιςοὐδὲνκαθαρόν, ἀλλὰμεμίανταιαὐτῶνκαὶὁνοῦςκαὶἡσυνείδησις. κυριότηταδὲἀθετοῦσιν, δόξαςδὲβλασφημοῦσιν. On first reading one is inclined to take the words κυριότης and δόξαι simply as abstractions. The result of indulgence in degrading lusts is the loss of reverence, the inability to recognise true greatness and due degrees of honour. This would agree with the description of the libertines as sharing in the ἀντιλογία of Korah, as κύματαἄγριαθαλάσσης, as γογγυσταί uttering hard speeches against God. When we examine however the use of the word κυριότης and the patristic comments, and when we consider the reference to the archangel’ s behaviour towards Satan, and the further explanation in Jude 1:10, where the σάρκα of Jude 1:8 is represented by ὅσαφυσικῶςἐπίστανται, and the phrase κυριότηταἀθετοῦσιν, δόξαςδὲβλασφημοῦσιν by ὅσαοὐκοἴδασινβλασφημοῦσιν, we seem to require a more pointed and definite meaning, not simply “ majesty,” but “ the divine majesty,” not simply “ dignities,” but “ the angelic orders” . Cf. 2 Peter 2:10, Ephesians 1:21 (having raised him from the dead and set him on his right hand) ὑπεράνωπάσηςἀρχῆςκαὶἐξουσίαςκαὶδυνάμεωςκαὶκυριότητος, Colossians 1:16, ἐναὐτῷἐκτίσθητὰπάνταἐντοῖςοὐρανοῖςκαὶἐπὶτῆςγῆς, τὰὁρατὰκαὶτὰἀόρατα, εἴτεθρόνοιεἴτεκυριότητεςεἴτεἀρχαὶεἴτεἐξουσίαι, where Lightfoot considers that the words are intended to be taken in their widest sense, including bad and good angels, as well as earthly dignities.

In our text, however, it would seem that the word should be understood as expressing the attribute of the true κύριος, cf. Didache, iv. 1 (honour him who speaks the word of God), ὡςκύριον, ὅθενγὰρἡκυριότηςλαλεῖται, ἐκεῖκύριόςἐστιν, Herm.

Sim, Jude 1:6; Jude 1:1, εἰςδούλουτρόπονοὐκεῖταιὁυἱὸςτοῦΘεοῦ, ἀλλʼ εἰςἐξουσίανμεγάληνκεῖταικαὶκυριότητα. The verb ἀθετέω has God or Christ for its object in Luke 10:16, John 12:48, 1 Thessalonians 4:8, etc. We have then to consider how it can be said that the libertines (οὗτοι) “ despise authority” in like manner to the above-mentioned offenders. For the former we may refer to Jude 1:4, τὸνκύριονἡμῶνἀρνούμενοι, for the latter to the contempt shown by the Israelites towards the commandments of God. So the desertion of their appointed station and abode by the angels showed their disregard for the divine ordinance, and the behaviour of the men of Sodom combined with the vilest lusts an impious irreverence towards God’ s representatives, the angels (Genesis 19:5). Cf.

Joseph. Ant. i. 11. 2, εἰςἀνθρώπουςἦσανὑβρισταὶκαὶπρὸςτὸθεῖονἀσεβεῖς, and Test.

Aser. 7, where the sin of Sodom is expressly stated to have been their behaviour towards the angels, μὴγίνεσθεὡςΣόδομαἥτιςἠγνόησετοὺςἀγγέλουςΚυρίουκαὶἀπώλετοἕωςαἰῶνος. δόξαςδὲβλασφημοῦσιν. Cf. 2 Peter 2:10, τολμηταὶαὐθάδειςδόξαςοὐτρέμουσινβλασφημοῦντες. The only other passage in the N.T. in which the plural occurs Isaiah 1 Peter 1:11, where the sense is different. Dr. Bigg compares Exodus 15:11, τίςὅμοιόςσοιἐνθεοῖς, Κύριε; τίςὁμοιόςσοι; δεδοξασμένοςἐνἁγίοις, θαυμαστὸςἐνδόξαις. Clement’ s interpretation of this and the preceding clause is as follows: (Adumbr. 1008) “ dominationem spernunt, hoc est solum dominum qui vere dominus noster est, Jesus Christus … majestatem blasphemant, hoc est angelos” . The word δόξα in the singular is used for the Shekinah, see my note on James 2:1. This suggests that Clement may be right in supposing the plural to be used for the angels, who are, as it were, separate rays of that glory.

Compare Philo’ s use of the name λόγοι for the angels as contrasted with the divine Λόγος. In Philo, Monarch, ii. p. 18 the divine δόξα, is said to consist of the host of angels, δόξανδὲσὴνεἶναινομίζωτάςσεδορυφορούσαςδυνάμεις. See Test. Jude 1:25, ΚύριοςεὐλόγησετὸνΛευί, ὁἄγγελοςτοῦπροσώπουἐμέ, αἱδυνάμειςτῆςδοξηςτὸνΣυμεών, also Luke 9:26, where it is said that “ the Son of Man will come in His own glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels” .[790] Ewald, Hist. Isr. tr. vol. viii. p. 142, explains ἡκυριότης of the true Deity, whom they practically deny by their dual God; αἱδόξαι as the angels, whom they blaspheme by supposing that they had created the world in opposition to the will of the true God, whereas Michael himself submitted everything to Him. This last clause would then be an appendage to the preceding, with special reference to the case of the Sodomites (cf.

John 13:20). There may also be some allusion to the teaching or practice of the libertines.

If we compare the mysterious reference in 1 Corinthians 11:10, διὰτοῦτοὀφείλειἡγυνὴἐξουσίανἔχεινἐπὶτῆςκεφαλῆςδιὰτοὺςἀγγέλους, which is explained by Tertullian (De Virg. Vel. 7) as spoken of the fallen angels mentioned by Jude, “ propter angelos, scilicet quos legimus a Deo et caelo excidisse ob concupiscentiam feminarum,” we might suppose the βλασφημία, of which the libertines were guilty, to consist in a denial or non-recognition of the presence of good angels in their worship, or of the possibility of their own becoming κοινωνοὶδαιμονίων; or they may have scoffed at the warnings against the assaults of the devil, or even at the very idea of “ spiritual wickedness in high places” . So understood, it prepares us for the strange story of the next verse. [790] There is much said of the glory of the angels in Asc. Isaiae, pp. 47, 49 f ad. Charles.

Jude 1:9

Jude 1:9. ὁδὲΜιχαὴλὁἀρχάγγελος. The term ἀρχ. occurs in the N.T. only here and in 1 Thessalonians 4:16. The names of seven archangels are given in Enoch. The story here narrated is taken from the apocryphal Assumptio Mosis, as we learn from Clem. Adumbr. in Ep. Judae, and Orig.

De Princ. iii. 2, 1. Didymus (In Epist. Judae Enarratio) says that some doubted the canonicity of the Epistle because of this quotation from an apocryphal book. In Cramer’ s Catena on this passage (p. 163) we read τελευτήσαντοςἐντῷὄρειΜωυσέως, ὁΜιχαὴλἀποστέλλεταιμεταθήσωντὸσῶμα, εἶτατοῦδιαβόλουκατὰτοῦΜωυσέωςβλασφημοῦντοςκαὶφονέαἀναγορεύοντοςδιὰτὸπατάξαιτὸνΑἰγύπτιον, οὐκἐνεγκὼντὴνκατʼ αὐτοῦβλασφημίανὁἄγγελος, ἘπιτιμήσαισοιὁΘεὸς, πρὸςτὸνδιάβολονἔφη. Charles in his edition of the Assumption thus summarises the fragments dealing with the funeral of Moses: (1) Michael is commissioned to bury Moses, (2) Satan opposes his burial on two grounds: (a) he claims to be the lord of matter (hence the body should be handed over to him). To this claim Michael rejoins, “ The Lord rebuke thee, for it was God’ s spirit which created the world and all mankind” . (b) He brings the charge of murder against Moses (the answer to this is wanting).

The story is based upon Deuteronomy 34:6 (R.V.), “ he buried him (mg. he was buried) in the valley … but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day” . Compare the vain search for Elijah (2 Kings 2:16-17). Further details in Josephus (Ant. 4:8, 48), νέφουςαἰφνίδιονὑπὲραὐτοῦστάντοςἀφανίζεταικατάτινοςφάραγγος. γέγραφεδὲαὐτὸνἐνταῖςἱεραῖςβίβλοιςτεθνεῶτα, δείσαςμὴδιʼ ὑπερβολὴντῆςπερὶαὐτὸνἀρετῆςπρὸςτὸθεῖοναὐτὸνἀναχωρῆσαιτολμήσωσινεἰπεῖν, Philo i. p. 165, and Clem. Al. (Str. vi. § 132, p. 807) where it is said that Caleb and Joshua witnessed the assumption of Moses to heaven, while his body was buried in the clefts of the mountain. See comment in the larger edition, pp. 74– 76. διακρινόμενος. Here used in the sense of “ disputing,” as in Jeremiah 15:10, ἄνδραδιακρινόμενονπάσῃτῇγῇ, Joe 3:2, Acts 11:2. See my note on James 1:6 and below Jude 1:22. διελέγετο. Cf. Mark 9:34, πρὸςἀλλήλουςδιελέχθησαν, τίςμείζων. οὐκἐτόλμησενκρίσινἐπενεγκεῖνβλασφημίας. I take βλασφημίας to be gen. qualitatis, expressed by the adjective βλάσφημον in 2 Peter: see below on Jude 1:18, James 1:25, ἀκροατὴςἐπιλησμονῆς, 2 Peter 2:4 κριταὶδιαλογισμῶνπονηρῶν, 2 Peter 3:6, ὁκόσμοςτῆςἀδικίας, also 2 Peter 2:1, αἱρέσειςἀπωλείας, 2 Peter 2:10, ἐπιθυμίᾳμιασμοῦ. For ἐπενεγκεῖν see Plat. Legg. ix. 856 προδόσεωςαἰτίανἐπιφέρων, ib. 943, τιμωρίανἐπιφ. The word occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in Romans 3:5. Field (On Translation of N.T. p. 244) compares Acts 25:18 οἱκατήγοροιοὐδεμίαναἰτίανἔφερονὧνἐγὼὑπενόουν, Diod. xvi. 29, δίκηνἐπήνεγκανκατὰτῶνΣπαρτιατῶν, ib. xx. 10, κρίσειςἀδίκουςἐπιφέροντες, xx. 62, φοβηθεὶςτὰςἐπιφερομέναςκρίσεις, tom. x. p. 171 ed.

Bip. ἐπήνεγκανκρίσινπερὶὕβρεως, and translates “ durst not bring against him an accusation of blasphemy” ; but surely that is just what he does in appealing to God. Besides such a statement would be altogether beside the point. The verse is introduced to show the guilt attached to speaking evil of dignities, i.e. of angels. If Michael abstained from speaking evil even of a fallen angel, this is appropriate; not so, if he simply abstained from charging the devil with speaking evil of Moses. κρίσις, like κρίνω, has the two meanings of judgment and of accusation, cf. Lycurg. 31 where οἱσυκοφαντοῦντες are distinguished from τῶνδικαίωςτὰςκρίσειςἐνισταμένων. ἐπιτιμήσαισοιΚύριος. These words occur in the vision of Zechariah (2 Peter 3:1-10) where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan against the high priest Joshua with the words ἐπιτιμήσαιΚύριοςἐνσοὶ, διάβολε, καὶἐπιτιμήσαιΚύριοςἐνσοί, ὁἐκλεξάμενοςτὴνἹερουσαλήμ. They were no doubt inserted as appropriate by the author of the Ass. Mos. in his account of the controversy at the grave of Moses. We may compare Matthew 17:18, ἐπετίμησεναὐτῷὁἸησοῦς.

Jude 1:10

Jude 1:10. οὗτοιδὲὅσαμὲνοὐκοἴδασινβλασφημοῦσιν. The libertines do the contrary of what we are told of the respect shown by the angel even towards Satan: they speak evil of that spiritual world, those spiritual beings, of which they know nothing, cf. 2 Peter 2:12. The common verb βλασφ. shows that the δόξαι of Jude 1:8 are identical with ὅσαοὐκοἴδασιν here. For the blindness of the carnal mind to all higher wisdom cf. 1 Corinthians 2:7-16, a passage linked with our epistle by the distinction between the ψυχικοί and πνευματικοί and by the words λαλοῦμενΘεοῦσοφίαν, ἣνοὐδεὶςτῶνἀρχόντωντοῦαἰῶνοςτούτουἔγνωκεν· εἰγὰρἔγνωσανοὐκἂντὸνκύριοντῆςδόξηςἐσταύρωσαν. See too John 8:19, 1 Timothy 6:4, τετύφωταιμηδὲνἐπιστάμενος. For the form οἴδασιν see my ed. of St. James, p. 183. ὅσαδὲφυσικῶςὡςτὰἄλογαζῷαἐπίστανται. This stands for σάρκα in Jude 1:8 and is explained by ἀσέλγειαν in Jude 1:4, ἐκπορνεύσασαι in Jude 1:7, μιαίνουσιν in Jude 1:8, κατὰτὰςἐπιθυμίαςαὐτῶνπορευόμενοι in Jude 1:16. φυσικῶς, “ by instinct,” so Dion. L. x. 137, φυσικῶςκαὶχωρὶςλόγου. Alford cites Xen. Cyrop. ii. 3, 9, μάχηνὁρῶπάνταςἀνθρώπουςφύσειἐπισταμένους, ὥσπεργεκαὶτἄλλαζῷαἐπίσταταίτιναμάχηνἕκασταοὐδὲπαρʼ ἑνὸςἄλλουμαθόνταἢπαρὰτῆςφύσεως. ἐντούτοιςφθείρονται. The natural antithesis here would have been “ these things they admire and delight in” . For this Jude substitutes by a stern irony “ these things are their ruin” . Cf. Philippians 3:19, where speaking of the enemies of the Cross the apostle says: ὧντὸτέλοςἀπώλεια, ὧνὁθεὸςἡκοιλία, καὶἡδόξαἐντῇαἰσχύνῃαὐτῶν, Ephesians 4:22, ἀποθέσθαι … τὸνπαλαιὸνἄθρωποντὸνφθειρόμενονκατὰτὰςἐπιθυμίας.

Jude 1:11

Jude 1:11. οὐαὶαὐτοῖς, ὅτιτῇὁδῷτοῦΚαὶνἐπορεύθησαν. For the use of the aorist see note on Jude 1:4. παρεισεδύησαν: for the phrase cf. Blass, Gr. p. 119, and 2 Peter 2:15, ἐξακολουθήσαντεςτῇὁδῷτοῦΒαλαάμ. The phrase οὐαί, so common in Enoch, especially in cc. 94 to 100, and in the Gospels and Apocalypse, occurs in the epistles only here and in 1 Corinthians 9:16. The woe is grounded on the fate which awaits those who walk in the steps of Cain, Balaam and Korah. In 2 Peter Balaam is the only one referred to of the three leaders of wickedness here named by Jude.

Cain, with Philo, is the type of selfishness ([791]. 1 p. 206), πᾶςφίλαυτοςἐπίκλησινΚαὶνεὕρηκεν (quoted by Schneckenb. p. 221); he is named as a type of jealous hate in 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:12. ἵναἀγαπῶμενἀλλήλους. οὐκαθὼςΚαὶνἐκτοῦπονηροῦἦνκαὶἔσφαξεντὸνἀδελφὸναὐτοῦ· καὶχάριντίνοςἔσφαξεναὐτὸν; ὅτιτὰἔργααὐτοῦπονηρὰἦν, τὰδὲτοῦἀδελφοῦαὐτοῦδίκαια, of unbelief in Hebrews 11:4, πίστειπλείοναθυσίανἌβελπαρὰΚαὶνπροσήνεγκεντῷΘεῷ, cf. Philo, De Agric. 1 M. 300 f., and Targ.

Jer. on Genesis 4:7, cited by Schneckenburger, in which Cain is represented as saying “ non est judicium, nec judex, nec est aliud saeculum, nee dabitur merces bona justis, nec ultio sumetur de improbis,” etc. There seems no reason why we should not regard Cain here as symbolising the absence both of faith and of love, cf. 1 John 3:23. Euthym. Zig. gives an allegorical explanation, καὶαὐτοὶἀδελφοκτόνοιεἰσί, διʼ ὧνδιδάσκουσιτὰςτῶνἀπατωμένωνψυχὰςἀποκτείνοντες. Cain and Korah are said to have been objects of special reverence with a section of the Ophite heresy, which appears to have been a development of the Nicolaitans (Epiphan. Pan. i. 3, 37, 1, οἱὈφῖταιτὰςπροφάσειςεἰλήφασινἀπὸτῆςΝικολάουκαὶΓνωστικῶνκαὶτῶνπρὸτούτωναἱρέσεων).

They held that the Creator was evil, that the serpent represented the divine Wisdom, that Cain and his successors were champions of right (Epiphan. ib. 38, 1, οἱΚαιανοίφασιτὸνΚαὶνἐκτῆςἰσχυροτέραςΔυνάμεωςὑπάρχεινκαὶτῆςἄνωθεναὐθεντίας, and boast themselves to be of kin to Cain, καὶτῶνΣοδομιτῶνκαὶἨσαῦκαὶΚορέ, see too Iren. i. 51, Clem. Str. vii. § 108.) [791] Codex Ruber (sæc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives its name from the colour of the ink. τῇπλάνῃτοῦΒαλαὰμμισθοῦἐξεχύθησαν. Every word in this clause is open to question. The passive of ἐκχέω, to “ pour out,” is used to express either the onward sweeping movement of a great crowd, or the surrender to an overpowering motive on the part of an individual = effusi sunt,[792] as in Sir 37:29, μὴἐκχυθῇςἐπʼ ἐδεσμάτων, Test. Reub. 1, πορνείαἐνᾖἐξεχύθην, Clem. Al. Str. ii. p. 491, εἰςἡδονήν, τράγωνδικήν, ἐκχυθέντεςκαθηδυπαθοῦσιν, Plut. V. Ant. 21, εἰςτὸνἡδυπαθῆκαὶἀκόλαστονβίονἐκκεχυμένος.

Such an interpretation seems not quite consistent with μισθοῦ, which implies cool self-interest. That covetousness, αἰσχροκέρδεια, was a common motive with false teachers is often implied or asserted by St. Paul and St. Peter in the passages quoted below: and this, we know, was the case with Balaam; but would it be correct to say either of him or of his followers, here condemned by St. Jude, that they ran greedily into error for reward? Perhaps we should understand it rather of a headstrong will breaking down all obstacles, refusing to listen to reason or expostulation, as Balaam holds to his purpose in spite of the divine opposition manifested in such diverse ways.

Then comes the difficulty, how are we to understand the dative πλάνῃ, and what is the reference in the word? Should we take πλάνῃ as equivalent to εἰςπλάνην (Winer, p. 268)?

This is the interpretation given by Lucifer p. 219, “ vae illis quoniam in seductionem B. mercede effusi sunt,” but it is a rare use of the dative, and it seems more natural to explain πλάνῃ by the preceding ὁδῷ (dative of the means or manner), which is used in the same collocation in 2 Peter 2:15. What then are we to understand by “ they were hurried along on the line of Balaam’ s error” ? What was his error? From Numbers 22:1-41; Numbers 25:1-3; Numbers 31:16, Nehemiah 13:2, Μωαβῖταιἐμισθώσαντοἐπʼ αὐτὸντὸνΒαλαὰμκαταράσασθαι, Jos. Ant. iv. 6, 6, we learn that B[793] was induced by Balak’ s bribe to act against his own convictions and eventually to tempt Israel to fornication. This then is the error or seduction by which he leads them astray.[794] In rabbinical literature Balaam is a sort of type of false teachers (Pirke Aboth, Jude 1:19, with Taylor’ s n.).

Some suppose the name Nicolaitan (Revelation 2:6) to be formed from the Greek equivalent to Balaam = “ corrupter of the people” ; see however the passages quoted from Clem. Al. in the Introduction on Early Heresies.

In Revelation 2:14 we read of some in Pergamum that held the teaching of Balaam, ὃςἐδίδασκεντῷΒαλὰκβαλεῖνσκάνδαλονἐνώπιοντῶνυἱῶνἸσραήλ, φαγεῖνεἰδωλόθυτακαὶπορνεῦσαι. There is no hint to suggest that the innovators, of whom Jude speaks, favoured idolatry, but they may have prided themselves on their enlightenment in disregarding the rule of the Apostolic Council as to the use of meats offered to idols (cf. 1 Corinthians 8), and perhaps in burning incense in honour of the Emperor, see Ramsay, Expositor for 1904, p. 409, and July, pp. 43– 60. On the other hand, Jude continually charges them with moral laxity, and we may suppose that this was combined with claims to prophetic power, and with the covetousness which is often ascribed to the false teachers of the early Church, as in 1 Thessalonians 2:3 f., where Paul asserts of his own ministry that it was οὐκἐκπλάνηςοὐδὲἐξἀκαθαρσίαςοὐδὲἐνδόλῳ … οὔτεγὰρἐνλόγῳκολακείαςἐγενήθημεν, οὔτεἐνπροφάσειπλεονεξίας, οὔτεζητοῦντεςἐξἀνθρώπωνδόξαν, 1 Timothy 3:8-9. διακόνουςμὴδιλόγους, μὴοἴνῳπολλῷπροσέχοντας, μὴαἰσχροκερδεῖς, ἔχονταςτὸμυστήριοντῆςπίστεωςἐνκαθαρᾷσυνειδήσει, Titus 1:7; Titus 1:11 διδάσκοντεςἃμὴδεῖκέρδουςχάριν, 1 Peter 5:2. For the gen. μισθοῦ cf. Winer, p. 258, Plat. Rep. ix. 575 B, μισθοῦἐπικουροῦσιν, 1 Corinthians 7:23, τιμὴςἠγοράσθητε. [792] I do not think the marginal reading in the R.V., “ cast themselves away,” is tenable. [793]. Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi. [794] Zahn understand πλάνη in an active, not a passive sense, as the ruling principle of the πλάνος Balaam, not as the error into which others fell through his seductions. I do not think Jude discriminated between these meanings: πλάνη covers both. On the whole I understand the passage thus: Balaam went wrong because he allowed himself to hanker after gain and so lost his communion with God. He not only went wrong himself, but he abused his great influence and his reputation as a prophet, to lead astray the Israelites by drawing them away from the holy worship of Jehovah to the impure worship of Baal Peor. So these false teachers use their prophetical gifts for purposes of self-aggrandisement, and endeavour to make their services attractive by excluding from religion all that is strenuous and difficult, and opening the door to every kind of indulgence. See the notes and comments on the parallel passages of 2 Peter in my edition of that Epistle. τῇἀντιλογίᾳτοῦΚορὲἀπώλοντο. For Rorah’ s sin see Numbers 16:1 f. and compare, for the same rebellious spirit in the Christian Church, 3 John 1:9-10 (of Diotrephes), Titus 1:10-11. εἰσὶπολλοὶἀνυπότακτοι … οὓςδεῖἐπιστομίζειν, Titus 1:16; Titus 3:10-11, 1 Timothy 1:20 (among those who have made shipwreck of the faith mention is made of Hymenaeus and Alexander) οὓςπαρέδωκατῷΣατανᾷἵναπαιδευθῶσινμὴβλασφημεῖν, 1 Timothy 6:3-6; 2 Timothy 2:16-18, ὁλόγοςαὐτῶνὡςγάγγραινανομὴνἕξει, ὧνἐστινὙμέναιοςκαὶφίλητος, οἵτινεςπερὶτὴνἀλήθειανἠστόχησαν, 2 Timothy 2:25; 2 Timothy 4:14, where the opposition of Alexander the coppersmith is noted; but especially 2 Timothy 3:1-9, which presents a close parallel to our passage, referring to a similar resistance to Moses in the case of the apocryphal Jannes and Jambres. For ἀντιλογία see Hebrews 12:3, ἀναλογίσασθετὸντοιαύτηνὑπομεμενηκόταὑπὸτῶνἁμαρτωλῶνεἰςἑαυτὸνἀντιλογίαν It is used as a translation of Meribah in Numbers 20:13 al. and (in relation to Korah) in Protev. Jac. 9. μνήσθητιὅσαἐποίησενὁΘεὸςτοῖςΔαθάν, Κωρέ, καὶἈβειράμ, πῶςἐδιχάσθηἡγῆκαὶκατέπιεναὐτοὺςδιὰτὴνἀντιλογίαναὐτῶν. Rampf draws attention to the climax contained in these examples. The sin of Cain is marked by the words ἐπορεύθησανὁδῷ, that of Balaam the gentile prophet by ἐξεχύθησανπλάνῃ, that of the Levite Korah by ἀπώλοντοἀντιλογίᾳ.

Jude 1:12

Jude 1:12. οὖτοίεἰσιν [οἱ] ἐνταῖςἀγάπαιςὑμῶνσπιλάδεςσυνευωχούμενοι. Dr. Chase quotes Zechariah 1:10 f., Revelation 7:14, Enoch xlvi. 3, Secrets of Enoch, vii. 3 xviii. 3, xix. 3, etc., for the phrase οὗτοίεἰσιν, adding that it was probably adopted by St. Jude from apocalyptic writings, for which he clearly had a special liking. On the early history of the Agape, see my Appendix C to Clem. Al. Strom. vii. The parallel passage in 2 Peter (on which see n.) has two remarkable divergencies from the text here, reading ἀπάταις for ἀγάπαις and σπῖλοι for σπιλάδες.

There has been much discussion as to the meaning of the latter word. It is agreed that it is generally used of a rock in or by the sea, and many of the lexicographers understand it of a hidden rock, ὕφαλοςπέτρα, see Thomas Mag., σπιλάς, Ἀττικῶς· ὕφαλοςπέτρα, Ἕλληνες, Etymol. [795]., σπιλάδες … αἱὑπὸθάλασσανκεκρυμμέναιπέτραι, ὅθενκαὶὕφαλοςἄνθρωποςλέγεταιὁκεκρυμμένοςκαὶπανοῦργος, ib. κατασπιλάζοντες, κατακρύπτοντες, ἀπὸμεταφορᾶςτῶνὑφάλωνπετρῶν, αἵτινεςὑπὸὕδατοςκαλυπτόμεναιτοῖςἀπρούπτωςπροσπελάζουσικίνδυνονἐπιφέρουσι (both cited by Wetst.). The same explanation is given by the scholiast on Hom. Od. ver 401– 405, καὶδὴδοῦπονἄκουσεποτὶσπιλάδεσσιθαλάσσης … ἀλλʼ ἀκταὶπροβλῆτεςἔσανσπιλάδεςτεπάγοιτε. See Plut. Mor. 101 B, εὐδίασπιλάδος, which Wytt. translates “ tranquillitas maris caecam rupem tegentis,” ib. 476 A, Oecumenius on this passage, αἱσπιλάδεςτοῖςπλέουσινὀλέθριοι, ἀπροσδοκήτωςἐπιγενόμεναι (? -νοις), and ἐξαίφνης, ὥσπερσπιλάδες, ἐπάγοντεςαὐτοῖςτὸνὄλεθροντῶνψυχῶν.

Wetst. also quotes Heliod. ver 31, θαλάσσῃπροσείκασαςἂντοὺςἄνδραςαἰφνιδίῳσπιλάδικατασεισθέντας. The compound κατασπιλάζω joined with the parallel case of ὕφαλος justifies, I think, this sense of σπιλάς, which is rejected by most of the later commentators.[796] Cf. also the use of ναυαγέω in 1 Timothy 1:19.

Scopulus is used in a similar metaphoric sense, see Cic. in Pis. 41 where Piso and Gabinius are called “ geminae voragines scopulique reipublicae” . Others take σπιλάδες in the very rare sense of “ spots,” or “ stains,” like σπίλοι in 2 Peter. The only example of this sense seems to be in Orph. Lith. 614, but Hesych. gives the interpretation σπιλάς, μεμιασμένοι. I agree with Bp. Wordsworth and Dr. Chase in thinking that the metaphor of the sunken rocks is more in harmony with the context. [795] Codex Ruber (sæc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives its name from the colour of the ink. [796] Dr. Bigg denies this meaning on the strength mainly of two quotations, Hom. Od. iii. 298, ἀτὰρνῆάςγεποτὶσπιλάδεσσινἔαξανκύματα, where, he says, the σπιλάδες are identical with λισσὴαἰπεῖάτεεἰςἅλαπέτρη of 293; and Anthol. xi. 390, φασὶδὲκαὶνήεσσινἁλιπλανέεσσιχερείουςτὰςὑφάλουςπέτραςτῶνφανερῶνσπιλάδων. In both of these I think the word refers to the breakers at the bottom of the cliffs: in the latter it is said that hidden rocks are more dangerous than visible reefs. Compare Diod. iii. 43, ὄροςδὲταύτῃπαράκειταικατὰμὲντὴνκορυφὴνπέτραςἀποτομάδαςἔχονκαὶτοῖςὕψεσικαταπληκτικάς, ὑπὸδὲτὰςῥίζαςσπιλάδαςὀξείαςκαὶπυκνὰςἐνθαλάττους. How are we to account for the gender in οἱ … σπιλάδεςσυνευωχούμενοι? Are we to suppose the gender of σπιλάς was changed or forgotten in late Greek (cf. Winer, pp. 25, 38, 73, 76)? If so, the forgetfulness seems to have been confined to this author. Or is this a coustructio ad sensum, the feminine being changed to masculine because it is metaphorically used of men (Winer, pp. 171, 648, 660, 672), cf. Revelation 11:4, οὗτοίεἰσιναἱδύολυχνίαιαἱἐνώπιοντοῦκυρίουἑστῶτες and B’ s reading παραφερόμενοι below?

Or may we take σπιλάδες as expressing a complementary notion in apposition to συνευωχούμενοι? The last seems the best explanation though I cannot recall any exact parallel. An easier remedy would be to omit the article (with [797] and many versions), as suggested by Dr. Chase in Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible, ii. p. 799b, translating: “ these are sunken rocks in your love-feasts while they feast with you” . [797] Codex Mosquensis (sæc. ix.), edited by Matthæi in 1782. συνευωχούμενοι. Is used in the parallel passage of 2 Peter with a dat. as in Luc. Philops 4, Jos. Ant. iv. 8, 7. ἀφόβωςἑαυτοὺςποιμαίνοντες. If we take σπιλάδες as complementary to συνευωχούμενοι, it is better to take ἀφόβως with ποιμ.: if we omit the article and take σπιλάδες to be the predicate, συνευωχούμενοι will be an epexegetic participle, which will require strengthening by ἀφόβως. Generally ἀφ. is used in a good sense, but we find it used, as here, of the want of a right fear in Proverbs 19:23, φόβοςΚυρίουεἰςζωὴνἀνδρί, ὁδὲἄφοβοςκ.τ.λ., Proverbs 15:16, κρεῖσσονμικρὰμερὶςμετὰφόβουΚυρίουἢθησαυροὶμεγάλοιμετὰἀφοβίας, Sir 5:5, περὶἐξιλασμοῦμὴἄφοβοςγίνου, προσθεῖναιἁμαρτίανἐφʼ ἁμαρτίαις. The phrase ἑαυτοὺςποιμ. recalls Ezekiel 34:8, ἑβόσκησανοἱποιμένεςἑαυτοὺς, τὰδὲπρόβατάμουοὐκἐβόσκησαν, but there does not seem to be any reference to spiritual pastors in Jude; and ποιμαίνω has probably here the sense “ to fatten, indulge,” as in Proverbs 28:7, ὃςδὲποιμαίνειἀσωτίαν, ἀτιμάζειπατέρα, Proverbs 29:3, ὃςδὲποιμαίνειπόρνας, ἀπολεῖπλοῦτον, Plut. Mor. 792 B, Ἄτταλονὑπʼ ἀργίαςμακρᾶςἐκλυθέντακομιδῇφιλοποίμηνἐποίμαινενἀτεχνῶςπιαινόμενον. We may compare 1 Corinthians 11:27 f., James 5:5, 1 Timothy 5:6. νεφέλαιἄνυδροιὑπὸἀνέμωνπαραφερόμεναι. The character of the innovators is illustrated by figures drawn from the four elements, air, earth, sea, heaven (αἰθήρ). Spitta points out the resemblance to a passage in Enoch (chapters ii.– v.), which follows immediately on the words quoted below, Jude 1:14-15. The regular order of nature is there contrasted with the disorder and lawlessness of sinners. “ I observed everything that took place in the heaven, how the luminaries … do not deviate from their orbits, how they all rise and set in order, each in its season, and transgress not against their appointed order.… I observed and saw how in winter all the trees seem as though they were withered and shed all their leaves.… And again I observed the days of summer … how the trees cover themselves with green leaves and bear fruit.… And behold how the seas and the rivers accomplish their task. But as for you, ye have not continued steadfast; and the law of the Lord ye have not fulfilled … and have slanderously spoken proud and hard words (below Jude 1:15, περὶπάντωντῶνσκληρῶνὦνἐλάλησανκατʼ αὐτοῦ) with your impure mouths against his greatness.“ For the metaphor cf. Ephesians 4:14.

In the parallel passage of 2 Peter the first figure is broken into two, πηγαὶἄνυδροι, ὁμίχλαιὑπὸλαίλαποςἐλαυνόμεναι. Perhaps the writer may have thought that there was an undue multiplication of causes; if the clouds were waterless, it was needless to add that they were driven past by the wind. We find the same comparison in Proverbs 25:14 : “ As clouds and wind without rain, so is he that boasteth himself of his gifts falsely” . [The LXX is less like our text, suggesting that Jude was acquainted with the original Hebrew. C[798]] For the use of ὑπό with ἀνέμων see my note on James 3:4. [798]. Codex Ephraemi (sæc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843. δένδραφθινοπωρινὰἄκαρπα. φθινοπωρινός is an adjective derived from τὸφθινόπωρον, which is itself, I think, best explained as a compound of φθίνουσαὀπώρα (cf. φθίνοντοςμηνός), meaning the concluding portion of the ὀπώρα. This latter word is, according to Curtius, compounded of ὀπ-, connected with ὀπίσω, ὄπισθεν, and ὥρα = “ the later prime” . We find ὥρα used by itself both for the spring with its flowers and, more rarely, for the summer with its fruits, as in Thuc. ii. 52, ὥραἔτους. Perhaps from this double use of the word may have come the ambiguity in the application of ὀπώρα, of which Ideler says that “ it originally indicated, not a season separate from and following after the summer, but the hottest part of the summer itself, so that Sirius, whose heliacal rising took place (in the age of Homer) about the middle of July, is described as ἀστὴρὀπωρινός Il. Jude 1:5). In early times it would seem that the Greeks, like the Germans (Tac.

Germ. 26), recognised only three seasons— winter, spring, summer, and that the last was indifferently named θέρος or ὀπώρα: compare Arist. Aves 709, πρῶταμὲνὥραςφαίνομενἡμεῖςἦρος, χειμῶνος, ὀπώρας, with Aesch. Prom. 453, ἦνδʼ οὐδὲναὐτοῖςοὔτεχείματοςτέκμαροὔτʼ ἀνθεμώδουςἦροςοὔτεχείματοςτέκμαροὔτʼ ἀνθεμώδουςἦροςοὔτεκαρπίμουθέρουςβέβαιον. But though ὀπώρα was thus used strictly for the dog-days, when the fruit ripened, it was also vaguely used for the unnamed period which ensued up to the commencement of winter. Thus Hesiod (Op. 674) μηδὲμένεινοἷνόντενέονκαὶὀπωρινὸνὄμεβρονκαὶχειμῶνʼ ἐπιόντα: and ὀπώρα appears as a definite season by the side of the others in a line ot Euripides, qnoted by Plutarch (Mor. 1028 F), from which it appears that he assigned four months each to summer and winter, and two to spring and ὀπώρα:— φίληςτʼ ὀπώραςδιπτύχουςἦροςτʼ ἴσους(where the epithet φίλης deserves notice). It is said that the author of the treatise De Diaeta (c. 420 B.C.), which goes under the name of Hippocrates, was the first to introduce a definite term (φθινόπωρον or μετόπωρον) for the new season, the word ὀπώρα being reserved for the late summer, according to the definition of Eustath. on Il. Jude 1:5, ὀπώραὥραμεταξὺκειμένηθέρουςκαὶτοῦμετʼ αὑτὴνμετοπώρου. And so we find it used by Aristotle (Meteor. ii. 5), αἱχάλαζαιγίνονταιἔαροςμὲνκαὶμετοπώρουμάλιστα, εἶτατῆςὀπώραςχειμῶνοςδὲὀλιγάκις, and by Theophrastus (περὶΣημείων, 44), ἐὰντὸἔαρκαὶτὸθέροςψυχρὰγίνηται, ἡὀπώραγίνεταικαὶτὸμετόπωρονπνιγηρόν. There is a good deal of inconsistency about the exact limits of the seasons, as is natural enough when we remember that they were first distinguished for purposes of agriculture and navigation, as we see in Hesiod’ s Works and Days. Each season brings its own proper work, and the farmer or merchant is reminded of the return of the season by various signs, the rising and setting of stars, especially of the Pleiades and Arcturus, the sun’ s passage through the signs of the zodiac, the reappearance of the birds, etc. A more strictly accurate division was made by the astronomers, who distinguished between the various kinds of rising and setting of the stars, and divided the year into four equal parts by the solstices and equinoxes. In the year 46 B.C. Julius Caesar introduced his revised calendar, which assigned definite dates to the different seasons. Thus spring begins a.d. vii. id.

Feb. (Feb. 7), summer a.d. vii. id. Mai. (May 9), autumn a.d. iii. id. Sext. (Aug. 11), winter a.d. iv. id. Nov. (Nov. 10). To turn now to the commentators, I may take Trench as representing their view in his Authorised Version, p. 186, ed. 2, where he says, “ The φθινόπωρον is the late autumn … which succeeds the ὀπώρα (or the autumn contemplated as the time of the ripened fruits of the earth) and which has its name παρὰτὸφθίνεσθαιτὴνὀπώραν, from the waning away of the autumn and the autumn fruits.… The deceivers of whom St. Jude speaks are likened to trees as they show in late autumn, when foliage and fruit alike are gone.” I have stated above what I hold to be the origin of the word φθινόπωρον. Trench’ s explanation is ambiguous and unsuited to the facts of the case, as will be seen from the criticisms in Lightfoot’ s Fresh Revision, p. 135: “ In the phrase ‘ autumn-trees without fruit’ there appears to be a reference to the parable of the fig-tree.… At all events the mention of the season when fruit might be expected is significant.” He adds in a note, “ Strange to say, the earliest versions all rendered φθινοπωρινά correctly.[799] Tyndale’ s instinct led him to give what I cannot but think the right turn to the expression, ‘ Trees with out frute at gadringe (gathering) time,’ i.e. at the season when fruit was looked for. I cannot agree with Archbishop Trench, who maintains that ‘ Tyndale was feeling after, though he has not grasped, the right translation,’ and himself explains φθινοπωρινὰἄκαρπα as ‘ mutually completing one another, without leaves, without fruit’ . Tyndale was followed by Coverdale and the Great Bible. Similarly Wycliffe has ‘ hervest trees without fruyt,’ and the Rheims version ‘ trees of autumne unfruiteful’ . The earliest offender is the Geneva Testament, which gives ‘ corrupt trees and without frute’ .… The Bishops’ Bible strangely combines both renderings, ‘ trees withered (φθίνειν) at fruite gathering (ὀπώρα) and without fruite,’ which is explained in the margin, ‘ Trees withered in autumne when the fruite harvest is, and so the Greke woord importeth’ .” [799] This agreement is probably owing to their dependence on the Vulgate “arbores auctumnales infructuosae” . The correctness of the interpretation, given by Lightfoot alone among modern commentators, is confirmed by a consideration of the context. The writer has just been comparing the innovators, who have crept into other Churches, to waterless clouds driven past by the wind. Just as these disappoint the hope of the husbandman, so do fruitless trees in the proper season of fruit. If φθινοπωρινά were equivalent to χειμερινά, denoting the season when the trees are necessarily bare both of leaves and fruit, how could a tree be blamed for being ἄκαρπον? It is because it might have been, and ought to have been a fruit-bearing tree, that it is rooted up. δὶςἀποθανόνταἐκριζωθεντα. Schneckenburger explains, “ He who is not born again is dead in his sins (Colossians 2:13), he who has apostatised is twice dead,” cf. Revelation 21:8, Hebrews 6:4-8, 2 Peter 2:20-22. So the trees may be called doubly dead, when they are not only sapless, but are torn up by the root, which would have caused the death even of a living tree.

Jude 1:13

Jude 1:13. κύματαἄγριαθαλάσσηςἐπαφρίζοντατὰςἑαυτῶναἰσχύνας. Cf. Cic. Ad Hercnn. iv. 55, spumans ex ore scelus. The two former illustrations, the reefs and the clouds, refer to the specious professions of the libertines and the mischief they caused; the third, the dead trees, brings out also their own miserable condition; the fourth and fifth give a very fine description of their lawlessness and shamelessness, and their eventual fate. The phrase ἄγριακύματα is found in Wis 14:1.

The rare word ἐπαφρίζω is used of the sea in Moschus Jude 1:5. It refers to the seaweed and other refuse borne on the crest of the waves and thrown up on the beach, to which are compared the overflowings of ungodliness (Psalms 17:4), the ῥυπαρίακαὶπερισσείακακίας condemned by James 1:21, where see my note. The libertines foam out their own shames by their swelling words (Jude 1:16), while they turn the grace of God into a cloak for their licentiousness (Jude 1:4). We may compare Philippians 3:19, ἡδόξαἐντῇαἰσχύνῃαὐτῶν. ἀστέρεςπλανῆται. This is borrowed from Enoch (chapters xliii., xliv.) where it is said that some of the stars become lightnings and cannot part with their new form, ib. lxxx, “ In the days of the sinners, many chiefs of the stars will err, and will alter their orbits and tasks, ib. lxxxvi, where the fall of the angels is described as the falling of stars, ib. lxxxviii, “ he seized the first star which had fallen from heaven and bound it in an abyss; now that abyss was narrow and deep and horrible and dark … and they took all the great stars and bound them hand and foot, and laid them in an abyss,” ib. xc. 24, “ and judgment was held first upon the stars, and they were judged and found guilty and were cast into an abyss of fire” ; also xviii. 14 f. It would seem from these passages, which Jude certainly had before him, that πλανῆται cannot here have its usual application, the propriety of which was repudiated by all the ancient astronomers from Plato downwards. Cf. Cic. N. D. ii. 51, “ maxime sunt admirabiles motus earum quinque stellarum quae falso vo— cantur errantes. Nihil enim errat quod in omni aeternitate conservat motus constantes et ratos,” with the passages quoted in my notes on that book. Some commentators take it as applying to comets; perhaps the quotations from Enoch xliv and lxxx fit better with shooting-stars, ἀστέρεςδιᾴττοντες (Arist. Meteor. i. 4, 7) which seem to rush from their sphere into darkness; compare Hermes Trismegistus ap. Stob. Ecl. 1. 478, κάτωθεντῆςσελήνηςεἰσὶνἕτεροιἀστέρεςφθαρτοὶἀργοὶ … οὓςκαὶἡμεῖςὁρῶμενδιαλυομένους, τὴνφύσινὁμοίανἔχοντεςτοῖςἀχρήστοιςτῶνἐπὶγῆςζῴων, ἐπὶἕτερονδὲοὐδὲνγίγνεταιἢἵναμόνονφθαρῇ. For the close relationship supposed by the Jews to exist between the stars and the angels, see my note on James 1:17, φώτων. In this passage, however, the subject of the comparison is men, who profess to give light and guidance, as the pole-star does to mariners (ὡςφωστῆρεςἐνκόσμῳ, Philippians 2:15), but who are only blind leaders of the blind, centres and propagators of πλάνη (Jude 1:11), destined to be swallowed up in everlasting darkness.

Cf. Revelation 6:13; Revelation 8:10; Revelation 8:12; Revelation 9:1; Revelation 12:4. οἷςὁζόφοςτοῦσκότουςεἰςαἰῶνατετήρηται. See the parallel in 2 Peter 2:17, and above Jude 1:6.

Jude 1:14

Jude 1:14. ἐπροφήτευσενδὲκαὶτούτοιςἕβδομοςἀπὸἈδὰμἙνώχ. “ It was for these also (as well as for his own contemporaries) that the prophecy of Enoch was intended, far as he is removed from our time, being actually the sixth (by Hebrew calculation, seventh) descendant from Adam.” For Enoch compare the allusions in Sir 44:16; Sir 49:14, Hebrews 11:5, Charles, Introduction to Book of Enoch. The prophecy is contained in En. i. 9 (Greek in Charles, App. C. p. 327), ὅτιἔρχεταισὺντοῖς (? ταῖς) μυριάσιναὐτοῦκαὶτοῖςἁγίοιςαὐτοῦποιῆσαικρίσινκαταπάντων, καὶἀπολέσειτοὺςἀσεβεῖςκαὶἐλέγξειπᾶσανσάρκαπερὶπάντωνἔργωναὐτῶνὧνἠσέβησανκατʼ αὐτοῦἁμαρτωλοὶἀσεβεῖς. The phrase ἕβδομοςἀπὸἈδάμ is also found in En. lx. 8, “ My grandfather was taken up, the seventh from Adam,” ib. xciii. 3, “ And Enoch began to recount from the books and spake: I was born the seventh in the first week, while judgment and righteousness still tarried; and after me there will arise in the second week great wickedness,” where Charles refers to Jubilees, 7. The genealogical order, as given in Genesis 5:4-20, is (1) Adam, (2) Seth, (3) Enos, (4) Cainan, (5) Mahalaleel, (6) Jared, (7) Enoch. It is probably the sacredness of the number 7 which led the Jewish writers to lay stress upon it in Enoch’ s case. ἰδοὺἦλθενΚύριοςἐνἁγίαιςμυριάσιναὐτοῦ. Charles’ translation from the Aethiopic is “ And lo! He comes with ten thousands of his holy ones to execute judgment upon them, and He will destroy the ungodly and will convict all flesh of all that the sinners and ungodly have wrought and ungodly committed against Him” . For μυριάσινἀγγέλων cf. Hebrews 12:22, Psalms 68:17, Deuteronomy 33:2. For the use of ἐν denoting accompanying circumstances see Blass, Gr. N. T. tr. p. 118, and Luke 14:31, εἰδυνατόςἐστινἐνδέκαχιλιάσινἀπαντῆσαιτῷμετὰεἴκοσιχιλιάδωνἐρχομένῳἐπʼ αὐτόν. The aorist here is the preterite of prophetic vision, as when Micaiah says, “ I saw all Israel scattered,” cf. Revelation 10:7; Revelation 14:8.

Jude 1:15

Jude 1:15. ποιῆσαικρίσινκατὰπάντων. Follows exactly the Greek translation of Enoch given above, cf. Ael. V. H. ii. 6, Κρίτωνἔπειθεναὐτὸνἀποδρᾶναικαὶτὴνκατʼ αὐτοῦκρίσινδιαφθεῖραι. On the distinction between the active ποιεῖνκρίσιν “ to execute judgment” (as in John 5:27) and the periphrastic middle = κρίνειν (as in Isocr.48 D) see my notes on αἰτεῖν and αἰτεῖσθαι, ἴδε and ἰδού (James 4:3; James 3:3). ἐλέγξαιπάνταςτοὺςἀσεβεῖςπερὶπάντωντῶνἔργωνἀσεβείαςαὐτῶνὧνἠσέβησαν. Shortened from the Greek Enoch quoted above. ἀσεβεῖς. Cf. Jude 1:4; Jude 1:18. The word thrice repeated in this verse runs through the epistle as a sort of refrain. περὶπάντωντῶνσκληρῶνὧνἐλάλησαν. This is taken from Enoch xxvii. 2. Charles, p. 366 (To Gehenna shall come), πάντεςοἵτινεςἐροῦσιντῷστόματιαὐτῶνκατὰΚυρίουφωνὴνἀπρεπῆκαὶπερὶτῆςδόξηςαὐτοῦσκληρὰλαλήσουσιν, cf. ib. Jude 1:4, “ The law of the Lord ye have not fulfilled, but … have slanderously spoken proud and hard words with your impure mouths against His greatness,” ib. ci. 3, al., Genesis 42:7, ἐλάλησεναὐτοῖςσκληρά, 1 Kings 12:13, ἀπεκρίθηπρὸςτὸνλαὸνσκληρά, Malachi 3:13-15.

Jude 1:16

Jude 1:16. οὖτοίεἰσινγογγυσταί, μεμψίμοιροι. Charles thinks that we have here another case of borrowing from the Assumption of Moses, see his Introd. on Apocryphal Quotations. The word γογγυστής is used in the LXX, Exodus 16:8, Numbers 11:1; Numbers 11:14-27; Numbers 11:29. The verb γογγύζω is found in John 7:32 of the whispering of the multitude in favour of Jesus, but is generally used of smouldering discontent which people are afraid to speak out, as in 1 Corinthians 10:10, of the murmurings of the Israelites in the wilderness; Matthew 20:11 (where see Wetst.) of the grumbling of the labourers who saw others receiving a day’ s pay for an hour’ s labour; John 6:41-43 of the Jews who took offence at the preaching of the Bread of Life. It is found in Epict. and M. Aur. but not in classical authors. γογγυσμός is used in 1 Peter 4:9.

See further in Phrynichus, p. 358 Lob. For the word μεμψίμοιρος see Lucian, Cynic. 17, ὑμεῖςδὲδιὰτὴνεὐδαιμονίανοὐδενὶτῶνγιγνομένωνἀρέσκεσθε, καὶπαντὶμέμφεσθε, καὶτὰμὲνπαρόνταφέρεινοὐκἐθέλετε, τῶνδὲἀπόντωνἐφίεσθε, χειμῶνοςμὲνθέροςεὐχόμενοι, θέρουςδὲχειμῶνα … καθάπεροἱνοσοῦντες, δυσάρεστοικαὶμεμψίμοιροιὄντες, and Theophr. Char. 17. It is used of the murmuring of the Israelites by Philo, Vit. Mos. 1. 109 M. See other examples in Wetst.

The same spirit is condemned in James 1:13. κατὰτὰςἐπιθυμίαςαὐτῶνπορευόμενοι. cf. 2 Peter 3:3; 2 Peter 2:10, below Jude 1:18, and see my notes on James 4:1-2. Plumptre notes “ The temper of self-indulgence recognising not God’ s will, but man’ s desires, as the law of action, is precisely that which issues in weariness and despair … cf. Ecclesiastes 2:1-20” . τὸστόμααὐτῶνλαλεῖὑπέρογκα. See Enoch Jude 1:4, quoted on Jude 1:15, also Enoch ci. 3, “ ye have spoken insolent words against His righteousness,” Psalms 12:4, Psalms 73:8, Daniel 7:8, στόμαλαλοῦνμεγάλα and Jude 1:20 of the little horn; compare above Jude 1:4; Jude 1:8; Jude 1:11, and James 3:5 foll. In classical writers ὑπέρογκα is generally used of great or even excessive size, in later writers it is also used of “ big” words, arrogant speech and demeanour, see Alford’ s note on 2 Peter 2:18 and Plut. Mor. 1119 B (Socrates), τὴνἐμβροντησίανἐκτοῦβίουκαὶτὸντῦφονἐξήλαυνεκαὶτὰςἐπαχθεῖςκαὶὑπερόγκουςκατοιήσειςκαὶμεγαλαυχίας, 2 Peter 2:7 A, where ἡθεατρικὴκαὶπαρατράγῳδοςλέξις is styled ὑέρογκος in contrast with ἰσχνὴλέξις, Plut. Vitae 505 B, τοῦβασιλέωςτὸφρόνηματραγικὸνκαὶὑπέρογκονἐνταῖςμεγάλαιςεὐτυχίαιςἐγεγόνει. It is found in 2 Peter 2:18 and in Daniel 11:36, ὁβασιλεὺςὑψωθήσεταικαὶμεγαλυνθήσεταιἐπὶπάνταθεόν, καὶλαλήσειὑπέρογκα. θαυμάζοντεςπρόσωπαὠφελίαςχάριν.The phrase occurs with the same force in Leviticus 19:15, οὐμὴθαυμάσῃςπρόσωπον, Job 13:10, see my note on James 2:1, μὴἐνπροσωπολημψίαιςἔχετετὴνπίστιντοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸ. Χ., and cf. 1 Timothy 3:8, quoted above on Jude 1:11. As the fear of God drives out the fear of man, so defiance of God tends to put man in His place, as the chief source of good or evil to his fellows. For the anacoluthon (τὸστόμααὐτῶνλαλεῖ—θαυμάζοντες) compare Colossians 2:2, ἵναπαρακληθῶσιναἱκαρδίαιὑμῶνσυμβιβασθέντεςἐνεἰρήνῃ, where a similar periphrasis (αἱκαρδίαιὑμῶν = ὑμεῖς) is followed by a constructio ad sensum, also Winer, p. 716. Perhaps the intrusion of the finite clause into a participial series may be accounted for by a reminiscence of Psa 17:10, τὸστόμααὐτῶνἐλάλησενὑπερηφανίαν, or Psalms 144:8; Psalms 144:11, where a similar phrase occurs.

Jude 1:17

Jude 1:17. ὑμεῖςδὲ, ἀγαπητοί, μνήσθητετῶνῥημάτωντῶνπροειρημένωνὑπὸτῶνἀποστόλων. The writer turns again, as in Jude 1:20 below, to the faithful members of the Church (Jude 1:3) and reminds them, not now of primeval prophecy, but of warning words uttered by the Apostles. Some have taken this as a quotation by Jude from 2 Peter 3:3, where the quotation is given more fully. But, there also, the words are referred back to a prior authority, “ holy prophets” and “ your Apostles” . The words ὅτιἔλεγονὑμῖν, which follow, imply that the warning was spoken, not written, and that it was often repeated.

Jude 1:18

Jude 1:18. ἐπʼ ἐσχάτουχρόνουἔσονταιἐμπαῖκται. The parallel in 2 Peter 3:3 is ἐλεύσονταιἐπʼ ἐσχάτωντῶνἡμερῶνἐνἐμπαιγμονῇἐμπαῖκται, where see note on the use of the article with ἔσχατος, etc. For ἐπί, cf. Arist. Pol. iv. 3, ἐπὶτῶνἀρχαίωνχρόνων. The prophecy of this mocking, as a mark of the future trials of the Church, has not come down to us. An example of it in the very beginning of the Church is given in Acts 2:13, ἕτεροιχλευάζοντεςἔλεγονὅτιγλεύκουςμεμεστωμένοιεἰσί. In the O.T. we have such examples as 2 Chronicles 36:16 (the summing up of the attitude of the Jews towards the prophets) ἦσανμυκτηρίζοντεςτοὺςἀγγέλουςαὐτοῦκαὶἐξουθενοῦντεςτοὺςλόγουςαὐτοῦκαὶἐμπαίζοντεςἐντοῖςπροφήταιςαὐτοῦ, Jeremiah 20:8, ἐγενήθηλόγοςΚυρίουεἰςὀνειδισμὸνἐμοὶκαὶεἰςχλευασμὸνπᾶσανἡμέραν. Cf. also the mockery at the crucifixion, and the declaration in Matthew 10:25 f., εἰτὸνοἰκοδεσπότηνΒεεζέβοὺλἐπεκάλεσαν, πόσῳμᾶλλονκ.τ.λ. In 2 Peter the purport of this mockery is explained to be the unfulfilled promise of the Parusia. Here we must gather its meaning from the account already given of the libertines.

If they turned the grace of God into licentiousness, they would naturally mock at the narrowness and want of enlightenment of those who took a strict and literal view of the divine commandments: if they made light of authority and treated spiritual things with irreverence, if they foamed out their own shame and uttered proud and impious words, if they denied God and Christ, they would naturally laugh at the idea of a judgment to come. On the form ἐμπαίκτης and its cognates, see note on 2 Peter. τῶνἀσεβειῶν. I am rather disposed to take τῶνἀσεβειῶν here as a subjective genitive, “ lusts belonging to, or arising from their impieties,” cf. Romans 1:28, καθὼςοὐκἐδοκίμασαντὸνΘεὸνἔχεινἐνἐπιγνώσει, παρέδωκεναὐτοὺςὁΘεὸςεἰςἀδόκιμοννοῦν. The position of the genitive is peculiar, and probably intended to give additional stress. We may compare it with James 2:1, μὴἐνπροσωπολημψίαιςἔχετετὴνπίστιντοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸησοῦΧριστοῦ, τῆςδόξης, where some connect τῆςδόξης with κυρίου in a qualitative sense.

Jude 1:19

Jude 1:19. οὗτοίεἰσινοἱἀποδιορίζοντες. “ These are they that make invidious distinctions.” See Introduction on the Text. The rare word ἀποδιορίζοντες is used of logical distinctions in Aristotle, Pol. iv. 43, ὥσπεροὖνεἰζῴουπροῃρούμεθαλαβεῖνεἴδη, πρῶτονἂνἀποδιωρίζομενὅπερἀναγκαῖονπᾶνἔχεινζῷον (“ as, if we wished to make a classification of animals, we should have begun by setting aside that which all animals have in common” ) and, I believe, in every other passage in which it is known to occur: see Maximus Confessor, ii. p. 103 D, τὸμὲνφυσικὸνὥρισενἐπʼ αὐτοῦ, τὸδὲγνωμικὸνἀποδιώρισε, translated “ naturali in eo (Christo) constituta voluntate, arbitrariam dispunxit,” ib. p. 131 C, ὡςὁλόγοςἦναὐτοῦ, μόνοντὸἐμπαθές, ἀλλʼ οὐτὸφυσικὸνἀποδιορίσασθαιθέλημα, “ quod dixerat hoc solum spectare ut libidinosam, non ut naturalem voluntatem a Salvatore eliminaret,” Severus de Clyst. xxxii., xxv., ὅτανταῦτατὰσυμπτώματαὄψῃπαρόντα, ἀποδιόριζετὴνὀργανικὴννόσονἐκτῆςὁμοιομεροῦς. The simple διορίζω is found in Leviticus 20:24, διώρισαὑμᾶςἀπὸτῶνἐθνῶν “ I separated you from the nations,” Job 35:11; so ἀφορίζω Matthew 25:32, ἀφορίζειτὰπρόβαταἀπὸτῶνἐρίφων, Acts 19:9 (Paul left the synagogue) καἰἀφώρισεντοὺςμαθητάς, 2 Corinthians 6:17, ἐξέλθατεἐκμέσουαὐτῶνκαὶἀφορίσθητε, Luke 6:22 (of excommunication) ὅτανἀφορίσωσινὑμᾶς, Galatians 2:12 (of Peter’ s withdrawal from the Gentiles) ὑπέστελλενκαὶἀφώριζενἐαυτόν. ψυχικοί. Used of worldly wisdom in James 3:15, where see note, distinguished from πνευματικός in 1 Corinthians 2:13-15; 1 Corinthians 15:44, cf. the teaching of the Naassenes (ap. Hippol. p. 164) εἰςτὸνοἶκονθεοῦοὐκεἰσελεύσεταιἀκάθαρτοςοὐδείς, οὐψυχικός, οὐσαρκικός, ἀλλὰτηρεῖταιπνευματικοῖς. πνεῦμαμὴἔχοντες. The subjective negative may be explained as describing a class (such as have not) rather than as stating a fact in regard to particular persons; but the use of μή is much more widely extended in late than in classical Greek, cf. such phrases as ἐπεὶμή, ὅτιμή. It is simplest to understand πνεῦμα here of the Holy Spirit, cf. Romans 8:9, ὑμεῖςοὐκἐστὲἐνσαρκὶἀλλʼ ἐνπνεύματι, εἴπερπνεῦμαΘεοῦοἰκεῖἐνὑμῖν, 1 Corinthians 2:13; 1 Corinthians 7:40, 1 John 3:24; 1 John 4:13, and the contrast in Jude 1:20, ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳπροσευχόμενοι. Others, e.g. Plumptre, prefer the explanation that “ the false teachers were so absorbed in their lower sensuous nature that they no longer possessed, in any real sense of the word. that element in man’ s compound being, which is itself spiritual, and capable therefore of communion with the Divine Spirit” .

Jude 1:20

Jude 1:20. ὑμεῖςδὲ, ἀγαπητοί. Contrasted with the libertines, as in Jude 1:17. ἐποικοδομοῦντεςἐαυτοὺςτῇἁγιωτάτῃὑμῶνπίστει. For the spiritual temple, cf. 1 Peter 2:3-5; Colossians 1:23; Ephesians 2:20-22, ἐποικοδομηθέντεςἐπὶτῷθεμελίῳτῶνἀποστόλωνκαἰπροφητῶν, ὄντοςἀκρογωνιαίουαὐτοῦΧριστοῦἸησοῦκ.τ.λ., 1 Corinthians 3:9-17, a passage which the writer may have had in his mind here and in Jude 1:23. Dr. Bigg compares Polyc. Philippians 3. “ If ye study the epistles of the blessed apostle Paul, δυνηθήσεσθεοἰκοδομεῖσθαιεἰςτὴνδοθεῖσανὑμῖνπίστιν. Add Clem.

Strom, v. p. 644, ἡκοινὴπίστιςκαθάπερθεμέλιονὑπόκειται. Usually Christ is spoken as the foundation or corner-stone of the Church, and we should probably assign an objective sense to τῇπίστει here, as in Jude 1:3 above (ἐπαγωνίζεσθαιτῇπίστει). Otherwise it might be explained of that faculty by which we are brought into relation with the spiritual realities (Hebrews 11:1, πίστιςἐλπιζομένωνὑπόστασις, πραγμάτωνἔλεγχοςοὐβλεπομένων), that which is the introduction to all the other Christian graces, see note on 2 Peter 1:5, and which leads to eternal life (1 Peter 1:5; 1 Peter 1:9, κομιζόμενοιτὸτέλοςτῆςπίστεωςὑμῶν, σωτηρίανψυχῶν). The faith is here called “ most holy,” because it comes to us from God, and reveals God to us, and because it is by its means that man is made righteous, and enabled to overcome the world (1 John 5:4-5). Cf. 1 Peter 5:9, ᾧἀντίστητεστερεοὶτῇπίστει. ἐνπνεύματιἁγίῳπροσευχόμενοι. These words, contrasted with πνεῦμαμὴἔχοντες in Jude 1:19, show how they are to build themselves up upon their faith. I understand them as equivalent to James 5:16, δέησιςδικαίουἐνεργουμένη, where see note. Compare also Ephesians 6:18, διὰπάσηςπροσευχῆςπροσευχόμενοιἐνπαντὶκαιρῷἐνπνεύματι, Romans 8:26-27.

Jude 1:21

Jude 1:21. ἑαυτοὺςἐνἀγάπῃΘεοῦτηρήσατε. In Jude 1:1 the passive is used: those who are addressed are described as kept and beloved (cf. Jude 1:24, τῷδυναμένῳφυλάξαι): here the active is used and emphasised by the unusual order of words; each is to keep himself in the love of God, cf. James 1:27, ἄσπιλονἑαυτὸντηρεῖν, Philippians 2:12, τὴνἑαυτῶνσωτηρίανκατεργάζεσθαι· Θεὸςγάρἐστινὁἐνεργῶνἐνὑμῖν. Again in Jude 1:2 the writer invokes the divine love and mercy on those to whom he writes: here they are bidden to take steps to secure these. Compare Romans 5:5, ἡἀγάπητοῦΘεοῦἐκκέχυταιἐνταῖςκαρδίαιςἡμῶνδιὰπνεύματοςἁγίουτοῦδοθέντοςἡμῖν, ib.

Romans 8:39, πέπεισμαιὄτιοὔτεθάνατοςοὔτεζωὴ … οὔτετιςκτίσιςἑτέραδυνήσεταιἡμᾶςχωρίσαιἀπὸτῆςἀγάπηςτοῦΘεοῦ, John 15:9. καθὼςἠγάπησένμεὁπατὴρκἀγὼὑμᾶςἠγάπησα, μείνατεἐντῇἀγάπῃτῆἐμῇ. ἐὰντὰςἐντολάςμουτηρήσητε, μενεῖτεἐντῇἀγάπῃμου. The aor. imper. is expressive ot urgency, see note on ἡγήσασθε, in James 1:2. προσδεχόμενοιτὸἔλεος. Cf. Titus 2:13, προσδεχόμενοιτὴνμακαρίανἐλπίδακαὶἐπιφάνειαντῆςδόξηςτοῦμεγάλουΘεοῦκαὶσωτῆροςἡμῶνἸ. Χ., and 2 Peter 3:12-14. The same word is used of the Jews who were looking for the promised Messiah at the time of His first coming, Mark 15:43, Luke 2:25; Luke 2:38. εἰςζωὴναἰώνιον. Some connect this closely with the imperative τηρήσατε, but it seems to me to follow more naturally on the nearer phrase, πρ. τὸἔλεος: cf. 1 Pet. 1:37, εὐλογητὸςὁΘεὸς … ὁκατὰτὸπολὺαὐτοῦἔλεοςἀναγεννήσαςἡμᾶςεἰςκληρονομίανἄφθαρτον … τετηρημένηνἐνοὐρανοῖςεἰςὑμᾶςτοὺς … φρουρουμένους … εἰςσωτηρίανἑτοίμηνἀποκαλυφθῆναιἐνκαιρῷἐσχάτῳ.

Jude 1:22

Jude 1:22. οὓςμὲνἐλέγχετεδιακρινομένους. On the reading see the Introduction. For the form ὃςμέν instead of ὁμέν, cf. Matthew 13:8; Matthew 22:5, Luke 23:33, Acts 27:44, Romans 14:5, 1 Corinthians 7:7; 1 Corinthians 11:21, 2 Corinthians 2:16, 2 Timothy 2:20, not used in Hebrews , 1 and 2 Pet., James or John. The doubled ὃςδέ is found in Matthew 21:35, ὃνμὲνἔδειραν, ὃνδὲἀπέκτειναν, ὃδὲἐλιθοβόλησαν. Matthew 25:15, ᾧμὲνἔδωκενπέντετάλαντα, ᾧδὲδύο, ᾧδὲἕν.

The use is condemned as a solecism by Thomas Magister and by Lucian, Soloec. 1, but is common in late Greek from the time of Aristotle, cf. Sturz. Dial. Maced. pp. 105 f. On the word ἐλέγχω (here wrongly translated “ strafen,” in the sense of excommunication, by Rampf), see Const. Apost. vii. 5, 3, ἐλεγμῷἐλέγξειςτὸνἀδελφόνσου, and Hare’ s excellent note [800] in his Mission of the Comforter, where he argues that the conviction wrought by the Spirit is a conviction unto salvation, rather than unto condemnation; and quotes Luecke as saying that “ἐλέγχειν always implies the refutation, the overcoming of an error, a wrong, by the truth and right.

When this is brought before our conscience through the ἔλεγχος there arises a feeling of sin, which is always painful: thus every ἔλεγχος is a chastening, a punishment.” Compare Grote’ s life-like account of the Socratic Elenchus in his Hist. of Greece. [800] Codex Angelicus (sæc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others. This verse seems to be referred to in Can. Apost. vi. 4, οὐμισήσειςπάνταἄνθρωπον, ἀλλʼ οὓςμὲνἐλέγξεις, οὓςδὲἐλεήσεις, περὶὧνδὲπροσεύξῃ, οὓςδὲἀγαπήσειςὑπὲρτὴνψυχήνσου, which is also found in the Didache ii. 7, with the omission of οὓςδὲἐλεήσεις. Cf. John 16:8, ἐκεῖνοςἐλέγξειτὸνκόσμονπερὶἁμαρτίαςκαὶπερὶδικαιοσύνηςκαὶπερὶκρίσεως, 1 Corinthians 14:24, ἐλεγχεταιὑπὸπάντων (the effect of the prophets’ teaching on an unbeliever), Titus 1:13, ἔλεγχεαὐτοὺςἀποτόμωςἵναὑγιαίνωσινἐντῇπίστει. Titus 1:9, τοὺςἀντιλέγονταςἐλέγχειν 2 Timothy 4:2 (the charge to Timothy) ἔλεγξον, παρακάλεσονἐιπάσῃμακροθυμίᾳ, Revelation 3:19, ὅσουςἐὰνφιλῶἐλέγχωκαὶπαιδεύω, Ephesians 5:13, τὰδὲπάνταἐλεγχόμεναὑπὸτοῦφωτὸςφανεροῦται. There is a tone of greater severity in the ποιῆσαικρίσινκαὶἐλέγξαι of the 15th verse, but even there we need not suppose that the preacher is hopeless of good being effected. The point is of importance in deciding the mutual relations of the three cases here considered. διακρινομένους. We should have expected a nominative here to correspond with ἁρπάζοντες and μισοῦντες in the following clauses, and so the text. rec. has διακρινόμενοι, wrongly translated in A.V., as if it were the active διακρίνοντες, “ making a difference” . This gives such a good sense that some commentators (e.g. Stier) have been willing to condone the bad Greek. It would have been better to alter the reading at once. Keeping the reading of the best MSS. we may either take the accusative as complementary to ἐλέγχετε (as we find in Plato, Theaet. 171 D, ἐμὲἐλέγξαςληροῦντα, Xen.

Mem. 1, 7, 2, ἐλεγχθήσεταιγελοῖοςὤν, Jelf. § 681), or simply as descriptive of the condition of the persons referred to. There is also a question as to the meaning we should assign to διακρ. Is it to be understood in the same sense as in James 1:6; James 2:4? In that case we might translate “ convict them of their want of faith,” taking the participle as complementary to the verb; or “ reprove them because of their doubts” . It seems more probable, however, that the meaning here is “ convince them when they dispute with you,” which we may compare with 1 Peter 3:15, ἕτοιμοιἀεὶπρὸςἀπολογίανπαντὶτῷαἰτοῦντιὑμᾶςλόγον … ἀλλὰμετὰπραΰτητοςκαὶφόβου (cf. ἐνφόβῳ below). So taken, this first clause would refer to intellectual difficulties to be met by quiet reasoning; the force of διακρινόμενος being the same as that in Jude 1:9, τῷδιαβόλῳδιακρ., and in Socr.

E.H. Jude 1:5, ὅλαὸςεἶχενὁμόνοιανκαὶοὐκέτιπρὸςἀλλήλουςδιεκρίνοντο.

Jude 1:23

Jude 1:23. σώζετε. Here again a word which is strictly applicable to God is transferred to him whom God uses as His instrument, cf. 1 Peter 4:11 and notes on τηρήσατε, ἐλέγχετε above, especially James 5:20, ὁἐπιστρέψαςἁμαρτωλὸνἐκπλάνηςὁδοῦαὐτοῦσώσειψυχὴνἐκθανάτου. ἐκπυρὸςἁρπάζοντες. The expression is borrowed from Amos 4:11, κατέστρεψαὑμᾶςκαθὼςκατέστρεψενὁΘεὸςΣόδομακαὶΓόμορρα, καὶἐγένεσθεὡςδαλὸςἐξεσπασμένοςἐκπυρός, καὶοὐδʼ ὣςἐπεσπρέψατεπρόςμε, λέγειΚύριος, and Zechariah 3:3, οὐκἰδοὺοὗτοςδαλὸςἐξεσπασμένοςἐκπυρός; Both passages have further connexions with our epistle, the former from the reference to Sodom (see above Jude 1:7), the latter as following immediately on the words, ἐπιτιμήσαισοιΚύριος quoted in Jude 1:9, and preceding a reference to filthy garments (see note below). In it the High Priest Joshua is a representative of Israel, saved like a brand from the captivity, which was the punishment of national sin. The image of fire is naturally suggested by the allusion to the punishment of Sodom in the passage of Amos, and of Korah (see above Jude 1:7) described in Numbers 16:35, Psalms 106:18, ἐξεκαύθηπῦρἐντῇσυναγωγῇαὐτῶνκαὶφλὸξκατέφλξενἁμαρτωλούς. The writer may also have had in mind St. Paul’ s description of the building erected on the One Foundation (see above Jude 1:20), which, he says, will be tried by fire, 1 Corinthians 3:13-15, ἑκάστουτὸἔργονὁποῖόνἐστιν, τὸπῦραὐτὸδοκιμάσει … εἴτινοςτὸἔργονκατακαήσεται, ζημιωθήσεται, αὐτὸςδὲσωθήσεται, οὕτωςδὲὡςδιὰπυρός. Such an one may be spoken of as “ a brand snatched from the fire,” not however as here, saved from the fire of temptation, but as saved through the agency of God’ s purgatorial fire, whether in this or in a future life. ἐλεᾶτεἐνφόβῳ. The faithful are urged to show all possible tenderness for the fallen, but at the same time to have a fear lest they themselves or others whom they influence should be led to think too lightly of the sin whose ravages they are endeavouring to repair. Cf. 2 Corinthians 7:1, καθαρίσωμενἑαυτοὺςἀπὸπαντὸςμολυσμοῦσαρκὸςκαὶπνεύματοςἐπιτελοῦντεςἁγιωσύνηνἐνφόβῳΘεοῦ, Philippians 2:12, 1 Peter 1:17; 1 Peter 3:15. For the confusion of the contracted verbs in -έω and -άω in late Greek see Jannaris, § 850. § 854 f., Winer p. 104. The best MSS. read ἐλεᾷ in Proverbs 21:26, and ἐλεῶντος Romans 9:16, but ἐλεεῖ in Romans 9:18. μισοῦντεςκαὶτὸνἀπὸτῆςσαρκὸςἐσπιλωμένονχιτῶνα. While it is the duty of the Christian to pity and pray for the sinner, he must view with loathing all that bears traces of the sin. The form of expression seems borrowed from such passages as Isaiah 30:22, Leviticus 15:17, perhaps too from Zechariah 3:4, Ἰησοῦςἦνἐνδεδυμένοςἱμάτιαῥυπαρά. Cf. Revelation 3:4, οὐκἐμόλυναντὰἱμάτιααὐτῶν, and Apocal. Pauli quoted by Spitta, ὁχιτώνμουοὐκἐρυπώθη.

The derivatives of σπίλος are peculiar to late Greek: the only other examples of σπιλόω in Biblical Greek are James 3:6, ἡγλῶσσα … ἡσπιλοῦσαὅλοντὸσῶμα and Wis 15:4, εἶδοςσπιλωθὶνχρώμασιδιηλλαγμένοις. Compare for the treatment of the erring 2 Timothy 2:25-26, ἐνπραΰτητιπαιδεύοντατοὺςἀντιδιατιθεμένους, μήποτεδῷηαὐτοῖςὁΘεὸςμετάνοιανεἰςἐπίγνωσινἀληθείας, καὶἀνανήψωσινἐκτῆςτοῦδιαβόλουπαγίδος.

Jude 1:24

Jude 1:24. τῷδὲδυναμένῳφυλάξαιὑμᾶςἀπταίστους. Apparently a reminiscence[801] of Romans 16:25 f., τῷδὲδυναμένῳὑμᾶςστηρίξαι … μόνῳσοφῷΘεῷδιὰἸησοῦΧριστοῦ, ᾧἡδόξαεἰςτοὺςαἰῶναςτῶναἰώ, ων. Similarly the noble doxology in Ephesians 3:20, commences τῷδὲδυναμένῳ. The reading ὑμᾶς is confirmed by the evidence of [802] and [803], which was unknown to Alford when he endeavoured to defend the reading αὐτούς, found in KP and some inferior MSS. [801] For the position and genuineness of this doxology see the Introduction and notes in Sanday and Headlam’ s commentary, and the dissertations by Lightfoot and Hort in the former’ s Biblical Essays, pp. 287– 374. [802] Codex Sinaiticus (sæc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862. [803] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi. ἄπταιστος. Occurs in 3Ma 6:39, μεγαλοδόξωςἐπιφάναςτὸἔλεοςαὐτοῦὁτῶνὅλωνδυνάστηςἀπταίστουςαὐτοὺςἐρρύσατο: used here only in the N.T. The verb πταίω has the same figurative sense in James 2:10; James 3:2, εἴτιςἐνλόγῳοὐπταίει, οὗτοςτέλειοςἀνήρ, 2 Peter 1:10, ταῦταποιοῦντεςοὐμὴπταίσητέποτε. στῆσαικατενώπιοντῆςδόξηςαὐτοῦἀμώμουςἐνἀγαλλιάσει. Cf. Matthew 25:31-33, ὅτανδὲἔλθῃὁυἱὸςτοῦἀνθρώπουἐντῇδόξῃαὐτοῦ … στήσειτὰμὲνπρόβαταἐκδεξιῶναὐτοῦ, Acts 6:6, οὓςἔστησανἐνώπιοντῶνἀποστόλων, Colossians 1:22, παραστῆσαιὑμᾶςἁγίουςκαὶἀμώμουςκαὶἀνεγκλήτουςκατενώπιοναὐτοῦ (which Lightfoot refers to present approbation rather than to the future judgment of God, comparing Romans 14:22, 1 Corinthians 1:29, 2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2; 2 Corinthians 7:12; 2 Corinthians 12:19). In the present passage the addition of the words τῆςδόξης shows that the final judgment, the goal of φυλάξαι, is spoken of. Hort, in his interesting note on 1 Peter 1:19, τιμίῳαἵματιὡςἀμνοῦἀμώμουκαὶἀσπίλουΧριστοῦ, traces the way in which the words μῶμος “ blame,” and ἄμωμος “ blameless,” come to be used in the entirely unclassical sense of “ blemish” and “ unblemished” cf. Ephesians 1:4; Ephesians 5:27, Hebrews 9:14.

In 2 Peter 3:14, ἀμώμητος seems to be used in the same sense. The word κατενώπιον is apparently confined to the Bible, where it occurs in Joshua 1:5; Joshua 21:42, Leviticus 4:17, Ephesians 1:4, ἀμώμητοςκατενώπιοναὐτοῦἐνἀγάπῃ, κατένωπα is found in Hom. Il. 15:320. For ἀγαλλίασις see Hort’ s note on 1 Peter 1:6, ἐνᾧἀγαλλιασθε, “ in whom ye exult” . The verb with its cognate substantives “ is unknown except in the LXX and the N.T. and the literature derived from them, and in the N.T. it is confined to books much influenced by O.T. diction (Matt., Luke, Acts, 1 Pet., Jude, John, including Apoc.), being absent from the more Greek writers, St. Paul, and (except in quot.) Heb.… It apparently denotes a proud exulting joy, being probably connected closely with ἀγάλλομαι, properly ‘ to be proud of,’ but often combined with ἥδομαι and such words.”

Jude 1:25

Jude 1:25. μόνῳΘεῷσωτῆριἡμῶν. See above on Jude 1:4, τὸνμόνονδεσπότην. God is called σωτήρ in Isaiah 45:15, σὺγὰρεἶΘεὸς … ὁΘεὸςτοῦἸσραῆλσωτήρ, Isaiah 45:21, Sir 51:1, αἰνέσωσεΘεὸντὸνσωτῆράμου, Philo, Confus. Ling. §20, 1. p. 418 fin., τίςδʼ οὐκἂν … πρὸςτὸνμόνονσωτῆραΘεὸνἐκβοήσῃ (? -σαι); cf. Luke 1:47, ἠγαλλίασεντὸπνεῦμάμουἐπὶτῷΘεῷτῷσωτῆρίμου, elsewhere in N.T. only in Titus 1:3; Titus 2:10; Titus 3:4, ὅτεἡχρηστότης … ἐπεφάνητοῦσωτῆροςἡμῶνΘεοῦ … κατὰτὸαὐτοῦἔλωοςἔσωσενἡμᾶςδιὰ … πνεύματοςἁγίουοὗἐξέχεενἐφʼ ἡμᾶςπλουσίωςδιὰἸ. Χ. τοῦσωτῆροςἡμῶν, 1 Timothy 1:1, ΠαῦλοςἀπόστολοςἸ. Χ. κατʼ ἐπιταγὴνΘωοῦσωτῆροςἡμῶνκαὶΧ. Ἰ. 1 Timothy 2:3; 1 Timothy 4:10. The later writers of the N.T. seem to have felt it needful to insist upon the unity of God, and the saving will of the Father, in opposition to antinomian attacks on the Law. διὰἸησοῦΧριστοῦ. It seems best to take διά with δόξα and the following words. The glory of God is manifested through the Word, cf. 1 Peter 4:11, ἵναἐνπᾶσινδοξάζηταιὁΘεὸςδιὰἸ. Χ. ᾦἐστινἡδόξακαὶτὸκράτοςεἰςτοὺςαἰῶνας. δόξα. The verb is often omitted in these ascriptions, cf. 2 Pet. αὐτῷἡδόξα, Romans 11:36; Romans 16:27, Galatians 1:5, Luke 2:16, δόξαἐνὑψίστοιςΘεῷ. In 1 Peter 4:11 it is inserted, ᾧἐστινἡδόξακαὶτὸκράτος, and, as we find no case in which ἔστω is inserted, and the indicative is more subject to ellipse than the imperative, it might seem that we should supply “ is” here; but the R. V. gives “ be,’ and there are similar phrases expressive of a wish or prayer, as the very common χάριςὑμῖνκαὶεἰρήνηἀπὸΘεοῦπατρός, where we must supply ἐστω or γένοιτο. De Wette maintained that the following words πρὸπαντὸςτοῦαἰῶνος, referring to already existing fact, were incompatible with a prayer; but it is sufficient that the prayer has regard mainly to the present and future; the past only comes in to give it a fuller, more joyful tone, reminding us of the eternity of God, as in the psalmist’ s words, “ I said it is my own infirmity, but I will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High,” and the close of our own doxology “ as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be” . I do not see, however, that we need exclude either interpretation.

The writer may exult in that which he believes to be already fact in the eternal world, and yet pray for its more perfect realisation in time, as in the Lord’ s Prayer, γενηθήτωτὸθέλημάσουὡςἐνοὐρανῷκαὶἐπὶγῆς. The omission of the verb allows of either or both views in varying proportion. δόξα by itself is the commonest of all ascriptions.

It is joined with τιμή in 1 Timothy 1:17 and elsewhere, as here with μεγαλωσύνη. It is joined with κράτος in 1 Peter 4:11; 1 Peter 5:11, Revelation 1:6. Fuller ascriptions are found in Revelation 4:11, ἄξιοςεἶ, ὁκύριος … λαβεῖντὴνδόξανκαὶτὴντιμὴνκαὶτὴνδύναμιν, Revelation 5:13, τῷκαθημένῳἐπὶτῷθρόνῳ … ἡεὐλογίακαὶἡτιμὴκαὶἡδόξακαὶτὸκράτοςεἰςτοὺςαἰῶναςτῶναἰώνων, Revelation 7:12, ἡεὐλογίακαὶἡδόξακαὶἡσοφίακαὶἡεὐχαριστίακαἰἡτιμὴκαὶἡδύναμιςκαὶἡἰσχὺςτῷΘεῷἡμῶν. Just before (Jude 1:10) we have the remarkable ascription ἡσωτηρίατῷΘεῷἡμῶν. Compare with this the ascription of David (1 Chronicles 29:11), σοἰΚύριεἡμεγαλωσύνηκαὶἡδύναμιςκαὶτὸκαύχημακαὶἡνίκηκαὶἡἰσχύς, ὅτισὺπαντωντῶνἐνοὐρανῷκαὶἐπὶγῆςδεσπόζεις. For a similar expression in regard to the future blessedness of man, see Romans 2:10, δόξαδὲκαὶτιμὴκαὶεἰρήνηπαντὶτῷἐργαζομένῳτὸἀγαθόν.[804] An unusual form of ascription occurs in Clem. Rom. 59:2, ἡχάριςτοῦκυρίουἡμῶνἸησοῦΧριστοῦμεθʼ ὑμῶνκαὶμετὰπάντωνπανταχῆτῶνκεκλημένωνὑπότοῦΘεοῦκαὶδιʼ αὐτοῦ· διʼ οὗαὐτῷδόξα, τιμή, κράτοςκαὶμεγαλωσύνη, θρόνοςαἰώνιοςἀπὸτῶναἰώνωνεἰςτοὺςαἰῶναςτῶναἰώνων. [804] For a full account of the early doxologies, see Chase on the Lord’ s Prayer (Texts and Studies, i. 3, p. 68 foll.). He states that the common doxology at the end of the Lord’ s Prayer (σοῦἐστινἡβασιλείακαὶἡδύναμιςκαὶἡδόξαεἰςτοὺςαἰῶνας “ appears to be a conflation of two distinct forms,” and “ was added to the Prayer in the ‘ Syrian’ text of St. Matthew’ s Gospel” . μεγαλωσύνη. Only found elsewhere in N.T. in Hebrews 1:3, ἐκάθισενἐνδεξιᾷτῆςμεγαλωσύνηςἐνὑψηλοῖς, repeated in Hebrews 8:1. Dr. Chase notes that it occurs in Enoch Jude 1:4, κατελαλήσατεμεγάλουςκαὶσκληροὺςλόγουςἐνστόματιἀκαθαρσίαςὑμῶνκατὰτῆςμεγαλοσύνηςαὐτοῦ, xii. 3, τῷκυρίῳτῆςμεγαλοσύνης xiv. 16 (a house excelling) ἐνδόξῃκαὶἐντιμῇκαὶἑνμεγαλοσύνῃ. It is coupled with δόξα, of which it may be regarded as an extension, in the doxology used by Clem. Rom. 20, 61. I am not aware of any other example of ἐξουσία in a doxology: compare, however, Matthew 28:18, ἐδόθημοιπᾶσαἐξουσίαἐνοὐρανῷκαὶἐπὶγῆς. πρὸπαντὀςτοῦαἰῶνος. cf. 1 Corinthians 2:7 (τὴνσοφίαν) ἣνπροώρισενὁΘεὸςπρὸτῶναἰώνωνεἰςδόξανἡμῶν, Proverbs 8:23, πρὸτοῦαἰῶνοςἐθεμελίωσέμε (i.e. σοφίαν), ἐνἀρχῇπρὸτοῦτὴνγῆνποιῆσαι. An equivalent expression is πρὸκαταβολῆςκόσμου found in John 17:24, ἠγάπησάςμεπ. κ. κ. also Ephesians 1:4, ἐξελέξατοἡμᾶςἐναὐτῷπ. κ. κ. and 1 Peter 1:20 (Χριστοῦ) προεγνωσμένουμὲνπ. κ. κ., φανερωθέντοςδὲἐπʼ ἐσχάτουτῶνχρόνων. St. Jude speaks of one past age and of several ages to come. On the other hand St. Paul speaks of many ages in the past (1 Corinthians 2:7), and St. John of only one age in the future. εἰςπάνταςτοὺςαἰῶνας. This precise phrase is unique in the Bible, but εἰςτοὺςαἰῶνας is common enough, as in Luke 1:33, Romans 1:25; Romans 5:5; Romans 11:36; Romans 16:27, 2 Corinthians 11:31, etc., so in LXX, Daniel 2:4; Daniel 2:44; Daniel 6:6; Daniel 6:26. The stronger phrase εἰςτοὺςαἰῶναςτῶναἰώνων occurs in Galatians 1:5, Philippians 4:20, 1 Timothy 1:17, 2 Timothy 4:18, Hebrews 13:21, 1 Peter 4:11; 1 Peter 5:11, Revelation 1:6, etc. John uses only εἰςτὸναἰῶνα apparently with the same meaning. Other variations are found in Ephesians 3:21, αὐτῷἡδόξαἐντῇἐκκλησίᾳκαὶἐνΧ. Ἰ. εἰςπάσαςτὰςγενεὰςτοῦαἰῶνοςτῶναἰώνων, 2 Peter 3:18, αὐτῷἡδόξακαὶνῦνκαὶεἰςἡμέραναἰῶνος.