Jude 1:4

4. For there are certain men crept in unawares …] More literally, For there crept in unawares certain men … There is a touch of contempt in the way in which, as in Gal_2:4, 2Pe_2:1, the false teachers are referred to without being named. Here also, as there, stress is laid on their making their way into the Church insidiously, and, as it were, under false pretences. The words that follow have often been urged as giving a sanction to the Calvinistic theory of a Divine decree predestining men to condemnation, but it is against this view that the word “of old” is never used in the New Testament of the Divine Counsels, which are in their very nature eternal, and are commonly indicated by such words as “before the foundation of the world” (Eph_1:4), “from the beginning of the world” (Act_15:18), the “eternal purpose” (Eph_3:11) and the like. The Greek word for “of old” may, on the contrary, be used of even a recent past, as in Mar_15:44, 2Pe_1:9. Nor does the Greek word for “ordained” express the thought of a decree like that of the Calvinistic theory, but rather of a public designation, as in Gal_3:1. St Jude’s words accordingly are adequately rendered by who were long ago before marked out as on their way to this condemnation, and may refer to previous prophetic utterances of the same type as those of 1Ti_4:1-2, or 2Pe_2:1, which had already pointed to such men as the coming danger of the Church.

turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness] The description agrees with that in 2Pe_2:18-19, in pointing to the party who under the pretence of magnifying the grace of God (Rom_6:1), and asserting their Christian liberty, led base and licentious lives, the party, i.e., condemned alike by St Paul (1Co_6:9-18), by St Peter (2 Peter 2) and by St John (1Jn_3:7-10). See notes on 2 Peter 2.

denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ] The better MSS. omit the word “God,” and as the Greek word for the first “Lord” is that used in 2Pe_2:1 (see note there), we are probably justified in applying it also to Christ. On that view, or indeed in any case, it would be better to express the distinction between the two terms by translating, the only Master and Lord Jesus Christ. The “denial” spoken of is two-fold, both in doctrine, as in 1Jn_2:22-23, or in life, but the context shews that stress is laid chiefly on the latter.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For there are certain men crept in unawares - The apostle now gives “reason” for thus defending the truth, to wit, that there were artful and wicked men who had crept into the church, pretending to be religious teachers, but whose doctrines tended to sap the very foundations of truth. The apostle Peter, describing these same persons, says, “who privily shall bring in damnable heresies.” See the notes, 2Pe 2:1. Substantially the same idea is expressed here by saying that they “had crept in unawares;” that is, they had come in “by stealth;” they had not come by a bold and open avowal of their real sentiments. They professed to teach the Christian religion, when in fact they denied some of its fundamental doctrines; they professed to be holy, when in fact they were living most scandalous lives. In all ages there have been men who were willing to do this for base purposes.

Who were before of old ordained to this condemnation - That is, to the condemnation (κρίμα krima) which he proceeds to specify. The statements in the subsequent part of the Epistle show that by the word used here he refers to the wrath that shall come upon the ungodly in the future world. See Jud 1:5-7, Jud 1:15. The meaning clearly is, that the punishment which befell the unbelieving Israelites Jud 1:5; the rebel angels Jud 1:6; the inhabitants of Sodom Jud 1:7; and of which Enoch prophesied Jud 1:15, awaited those persons. The phrase “of old” - πάλαι palai - means “long ago,” implying that a considerable time had elapsed, though without determining how much. It is used in the New Testament only in the following places: Mat 11:21, “they would have repented long ago;” Mar 15:44, “whether he had been any while dead;” Luk 10:13, “they had a great while ago repented;” Heb 1:1, “spake in time past unto the fathers;” 2Pe 1:9, “purged from his old sins;” and in the passage before us.

So far as this word is concerned, the reference here may have been to any former remote period, whether in the time of the prophets, of Enoch, or in eternity. It does not “necessarily” imply that it was “eternal,” though it “might” apply to that, if the thing referred to was, from other sources, certainly known to have been from eternity. It may be doubted, however, whether, if the thing referred to had occurred from eternity, this would have been the word used to express it, (compare Eph 1:4); and it is certain that it cannot be proveD from the use of this word (πάλαι palai) that the “ordination to condemnation” was eternal. Whatever may be referred to by that “ordaining to condemnation,” this word will not prove that it was an eternal ordination. All that is fairly implied in it will be met by the supposition that it occurred in any remote period, say in the time of the prophets.

The word here rendered “before ordained’ - προγεγραμμένοι progegrammenoi, from προγράφω prographō - occurs in the New Testament only here and in the following places: Rom 15:4, twice, “Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning;” Gal 3:1, “Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth;” and Eph 3:3. “As I wrote afore in few words.” Compare the notes, Gal 3:1. In these places there is evidently no idea implied of “ordaining, or pre-ordaining,” in the sense in which those words are now commonly understood. To that word there is usually attached the idea of designating or appointing as by an arbitrary decree; but no such meaning enters into the word here used. The Greek word properly means, “to write before;” then “to have written before;” and then, with reference to time future, “to post up beforehand in writing; to announce by posting up on a written tablet,” as of some ordinance, law, or requirement; as descriptive of what will be, or what should be.

Compare Robinson, Lexicon. Burder (in Rosenmuller’s Morgenland, in loc.) remarks that “the names of those who were to be tried were usually posted up in a public place, as was also their sentence after their condemnation, and that this was denoted by the same Greek word which the apostle uses here. Elsner,” says he, “remarks that the Greek authors use the word as applicable to to those who, among the Romans, were said to be “proscribed;” that is, those whose names were posted up in a public place, whereby they were appointed to death, and in reference to whom a reward was offered to any one who would kill them.” The idea here clearly is that of some such designation beforehand as would occur if the persons had been publicly posted as appointed to death. Their names, indeed, were not mentioned, but there was such a description of them, or of their character, that it was clear who were meant.

In regard to the question what the apostle “means” by such a designation or appointment beforehand, it is clear that he does not refer in this place to any arbitrary or eternal decree, but to such a designation as was made by the facts to which he immediately refers - that is, to the Divine prediction that there would be such persons Jud 1:14-15, Jud 1:18; and to the consideration that in the case of the unbelieving Israelites, the rebel angels, and the inhabitants of Sodom, there was as clear a proof that such persons would be punished as if their names had been posted up. All these instances bore on just such cases as these, and in these facts they might read their sentence as clearly as if their names had been written on the face of the sky. This interpretation seems to me to embrace all that the words fairly imply, and all that the exigence of the case demands; and if this be correct, then two things follow logically:

(1)That this passage should not be adduced to prove that God has from all eternity, by an arbitrary decree, ordained a certain portion of the race to destruction, whatever may be true on that point; and,

(2)That all abandoned sinners now may see, in the facts which have occurred in the treatment of the wicked in past times, just as certain evidence of their destruction, if they do not repent, as if their names were written in letters of light, and if it were announced to the universe that they would be damned.

Ungodly men - Men without piety or true religion, whatever may be their pretensions.

Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness - Abusing the doctrines of grace so as to give indulgence to corrupt and carnal propensities. That is, probably, they gave this form to their teaching, as Antinomians have often done, that by the gospel they were released from the obligations of the law, and might give indulgence to their sinful passions in order that grace might abound. Antinomianism began early in the world, and has always had a wide prevalence. The liability of the doctrines of grace to be thus abused was foreseen by Paul, and against such abuse he earnestly sought to guard the Christians of his time, Rom 6:1, following.

And denying the only Lord God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ - See the notes, 2Pe 2:1. That is, the doctrines which they held were in fact a denial of the only true God, and of the Redeemer of men. It cannot be supposed that they openly and formally did this, for then they could have made no pretensions to the name Christian, or even to religion of any kind; but the meaning must be, that “in fact” the doctrines which they held amounted to a denial of the true God, and of the Saviour in his proper nature and work. Some have proposed to read this, “denying the only Lord God, even (καὶ kai) our Lord Jesus Christ;” but the Greek does not demand this construction even if it would admit it, and it is most in accordance with Scripture usage to retain the common translation. It may be added, also, that the common translation expresses all that the exigence of the passage requires.

Their doctrines and practice tended as really to the denial of the true God as they did to the denial of the Lord Jesus. Peter, in 2Pe 2:1, has adverted only to one aspect of their doctrine - that it denied the Saviour; Jude adds, if the common reading be correct, that it tended also to a denial of the true God. The word God (Θεὸν Theon) is missing in many manuscripts, and in the Vulgate and Coptic versions, and Mill, Hammond, and Bengel suppose it should be omitted. It is also wanting in the editions of Tittman, Griesbach, and Hahn. The amount of authority seems to be against it. The word rendered “Lord,” in the phrase “Lord God,” is (Δεσπότης Despotēs,) and means here “Sovereign, or Ruler,” but it is a word which may be appropriately applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the same word which is used in the parallel passage in 2Pe 2:1. See it explained in the notes at that verse. If the word “God” is to be omitted in this place, the passage would be wholly applicable, beyond question, to the Lord Jesus, and would mean, “denying our only Sovereign and Lord, Jesus Christ.” It is perhaps impossible now to determine with certainty the true reading of the text; nor is it “very” material. Whichever of the readings is correct; whether the word (Θεὸν Theon,) “God,” is to be retained or not, the sentiment expressed would be true, that their doctrines amounted to a practical denial of the only true God; and equally so that they were a denial of the only Sovereign and Lord of the true Christian.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Jud_1:4

For there are certain men crept in unawares.

Secret enemies in the Church

1. The apostle saith there are certain men crept in, which some think to note the uncertainty of their persons, as who should say there are certain wicked and ungodly persons in the Church, but who they be we cannot tell very well. And surely the uncertainty of their persons, which are wicked, will stir up those which are wise, and have care of their salvation to greater diligence, and more circumspectly to observe and mark all men, lest at any time or by any means they be deceived. But howbeit the number be indefinite in that they are certain, yet it may seem that he giveth us to understand that the enemies of the Church were divers, and therefore the saints have greater cause to contend against them.

2. As they are certain, so are they within the bosom of the Church already, therefore both the danger is the greater and the contention must be the sharper. The enemies of the Church are not without the walls, where the better they might be dealt withal, but entered in already, and walk in the midst thereof, the greater peril is like to follow, and the greater courage must be showed in this contending.

3. And as they are already within, so are they crept in craftily, and therein their subtle dealing is noted, whereby the danger is also increased. There is no greater danger than that intended by a subtle enemy, whose person as it is most hardly discerned, so the danger by him is least perceived and rarely avoided, but that peril is the lesser when the enemy is known and the matter suspected. Wherefore the cunning of the wicked must sharpen and whet our care to contend against them. (R. Turnbull.)

The character of the heretics

I. Nameless men. He may have been induced to advert to them merely as certain men.

1. With the view of avoiding those irritating personalities by which religious controversies are so apt to be characterised.

2. With the view of marking the holy disdain with which he regarded them, as if he considered them unworthy of being more particularly mentioned.

3. For the purpose of not adding to the notoriety which they very probably courted.

II. Deceivers. They crept in unawares. This may mean either that the parties in question assumed the office of spiritual teachers without the knowledge or consent of the brethren, or that they contrived by false professions to induce the rulers of the Church to admit them to that office. The latter is probably the real meaning of the words (2Pe_2:1).

III. Reprobates. Of old ordained to this condemnation. (W.McGilvray, D. D.)

Enemies within the Church

The adversaries impugn the faith, therefore the saints must stand for it. The Church hath many adversaries, like motes in the sun. As there is a contrary in all, day and night, cold and heat, sickness and health, life and death, so in religion. The godly, the faithful are as lambs amongst wolves, as lilies amongst thorns, as doves amongst ravens. Many oppugn the faith, therefore we must be ready to defend it, yea, strive for it unto death; as Joab fought for God, so let us speak for God and write for God. But to come to the description of these adversaries, they are here described two ways.

1. They are described by their life, and they are said first to creep into the Church. They have butter in their mouths, but swords in their hearts. A dog that barketh may be prevented before he bite, and the serpent that hisseth before he sting, and the fire that smoketh before it burn; so may a known enemy, but a secret enemy, a creeper, is hard to prevent.

2. They are here described by their impiety. He saith that they were ἄθεοι, without God, without faith, without religion; they deny God the only Lord and our Lord Jesus Christ, so Paul said (Eph_2:12; Php_3:17-18). The world is full of such atheists, they swarm like bees, they abound like lice in Egypt.

3. The wicked are here described by their carnality and liberty; they turn grace into wantonness, for ungodliness hath two branches, iniquity in life and manners and impurity in religion. Of the first he saith, They turn grace into wantonness; of the second it is said that they denied God and Christ Jesus. They are like Aesops snake, that lay still in the frost, but stung him that warmed her in his bosom; so long as God keepeth us sick and lame and poor we are in some order, our ears are full of sermons, our lips full of prayers, our hands full of alms, our hearts full of holy meditations; but if we come to health and wealth and strength we rage like giants, we are like bad ground, which the more sweet dews it receiveth the more weeds it bringeth out. (S. Otes.)

False teachers foretold

I. The insidiousness with which false teachers effect an entrance into the Church. They creep in unawares. Now craft, you will observe, is the assumed Scriptural characteristic of all heresy (Mat_7:15; Eph_4:14; 2Co_11:13). The word which the apostle uses to describe this method of entrance is one which supposes that they had recourse to certain surreptitious and fraudulent means. It literally means the getting into a house under ground, or by means of some clandestine and unsuspected entrance. Let us note some of the byways by which false teachers get an entrance for their erroneous teaching.

1. One way is they keep back the full scope and tendency of their doctrines. Things that are to be really believed are only partially discovered, the rest being wrapped up in skilful ambiguities, only to be elicited when some superior disputant will press their doctrines to their legitimate consequences.

2. Another of the byways by which false teaching creeps into a Church is by a skilful mixing up with it a good deal of sound and wholesome doctrine, which is always paraded with a great show of orthodoxy. The apostle therefore in the text exhorts us to see that we look to a mans teaching as a whole. He may teach truth in regard, of all the attributes of the Divine nature, and yet if he obscure or distort or keep back other truths, if he tamper with the great doctrine of our justification by faith in the atonement, we are to denounce him as a deceiver and an antichrist.

II. The reason why these false teachers are permitted to have a certain measure of success. They have crept in, being before of old ordained to this condemnation.

1. First, you will observe, the apostle meets the supposed objections advanced on the general score of the Divine predestination--on that fixed immutability of purpose which, however contrary things may appear to us, will cause that God shall work all things according to the counsel of His own will. There can be no counsel against the Lord; there can be no unforeseen obstacle to the spread of His gospel. He ordains the chosen vessel to preach, and He ordains the means by which this preaching may for a time be thwarted.

2. To this condemnation. What does the apostle mean by this word? Does he mean that they are ordained to the irrevocable judgments of an angered God? to the future penalties denounced against the disobedient? I think not. A deluded teacher may bring in false doctrine, may even for a time draw after him many unstable souls, and yet he may, through the enlightening and recovering grace of the Spirit, be brought to see the error of his ways, and afterwards become valiant for the truth of God. It is said with regard to these false teachers, that the longer they continue to deal out poisoned food to their people, the more likely it is that they should be given over to a judicial blindness, which must, unless the grace of God should take it away, issue in the final perdition of their souls.

III. The great doctrines which it is the aim of these false teachers to subvert. Men turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ.

1. And first, as to the expression, the grace of God. In its primary import the word means favour, goodness, benefit, something whereby one is spontaneously moved to do an act of kindness for another. Hence the word is used as a comprehensive designation for all the blessings of the gospel. These doctrines of grace these false teachers were seeking to abuse, to turn to the hateful account of their own licentiousness and sin.

2. Turning the grace of God into lasciviousness; that is, not necessarily into any particular form of deadly sin, but that they turned the grace of God, the free mercy of God vouchsafed to us in Jesus Christ, into a pretext for any and all forms of self-indulgence and self-pleasing which might minister to the gratification of the carnal mind. Examine any system of error, and you will find that more or less it resolves itself into some form of experiment on the Divine mercy, a calculation upon Gods willingness to do that which He has said He never will do--a presumptuous expectation that we may make as wide as we will that gate which God has declared to be narrow--a belief that without a changed heart, without anything that could come up to the Scriptural notion of holiness, it would be possible for a man to see the Lord. And thus it is well said by the apostle afterwards, that this turning the mercy of our God to their own worldly and selfish and unrighteous purposes practically amounted to a denial of the only Lord God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ. (D. Moore,M. A.)

Nocturnal enemies

Nocturnal birds of prey fly without making the least noise. They can, therefore, pounce unawares on their victims, seizing them before they have any idea of necessity for escape.

Grace abused

There are two things that most men desire, and they are, power and liberty; and when they have attained them I may say they are unto men as they describe waters. They are easily apt to run over in what vessels soever you put them in. The grand exhortation in this Epistle is set down Jud_1:3, Contend earnestly for the faith once given unto the saints. It is not enough to strive once, and to assert the truths, but ye must do it again and again, after one another, as often as the truth of God is opposed. And he gives the reason of this exhortation. First, because it is a depositum that the Lord hath in mercy delivered unto the saints, which the Lord requires them to keep: you are but stewards of it; it is committed unto you that you should transmit it unto posterity. Secondly, it was but once given, and therefore you cannot expect that if you part with it the Lord will again bestow it unto you. It is like the fire upon the altar that was at first kindled from heaven, and was there, by the industry of the priests, to be kept alive, and was never to go out. Thirdly, he doth press this from the danger of it, in regard that the enemies lie in wait, there are certain men crept in unawares, etc. First, false teachers: they do not rush in, for then they would be observed, but they creep in secretly. Secondly, the things that they trade in are the truths of God and the souls of men. Therefore contend earnestly for the faith, for when false teachers come it is the faith that they do mainly aim at. And the apostle comes also to a description of the persons with whom your contention was to be. First, they are described by the act of God upon them, what they are in Gods predetermination. Secondly, by the act of sin within them, and what they are by their own corruptions. All ungodly men, pretend what they will, they have no fear of God in them, nor any respect unto God. They are men that are strangers unto God, and live without Him in the world--that is their general description. They are ungodly men that have no fear of God in their hearts, and that do whatsoever they do without any respect unto God, though they are many times great pretenders. Secondly, they are more particularly described. First, by their desperate opinions--they turn the grace of God into wantonness. Secondly, by their devilish conversations--they deny the Lord God, and the Lord Jesus Christ. It is spoken in respect of their lives and ways (2Ti_1:16). First, what is meant by the grace of God? As given unto us grace is taken two ways in Scripture, either for the gospel, the Word of His grace, as it is called (Act_20:32), and so it is taken (2Co_6:1). Secondly, it is put for the impress of this Word upon the heart, for it is the Word writ in the heart. They are the habits of grace in us; it is into this mould we are cast (Rom_6:17). It must here be meant of the Word of His grace, the doctrine of the gospel. Secondly, what is meant by wantonness? The word signifies a wanton, vain, licentious, and unruly disposition of heart. Thirdly, what is it to turn the grace of God into wantonness? The word signifies to transpose a thing, and put it out of its place; to turn away a thing or a person and put it out of its former condition. And when men make use of the doctrines of the gospel to serve their own lust, and do grow more loose under them, this is to pervert the gospel of grace unto an end for which it was never appointed.

I. There is a wantonness in corrupt teachers; there are both wicked doctrines and wicked practices, for they both go together in the same men. First, this will appear by the descriptions everywhere given of them in the Scripture; they are described and placed in the highest rank of wicked men. Secondly, it must needs be so if we consider from whence doth heresy come. We have the rise of it (Rev_9:1-2). Thirdly, they are in Scripture resembled unto the wickedest men that ever were (2Pe_2:15). Fourthly, no men are so industriously wicked as they are, and they will compass sea and land to make a proselyte, and make him tenfold the child of hell when they have done more than he was before (Rev_9:10; Rev_9:18-19). Fifthly, the people of God have abhorred them as the wickedest men that ever were in the world, and therefore there is no sort of sinners that the Spirit of God hath so set Himself and the Spirit of His saints so much against as these (Tit_3:10). Sixthly, they are such sort of sinners as are most immediately acted by the devil of any men in the world; they have the most immediate influences from hell, and therefore (Rev_16:13-14).

II. Men take special care that the Word of God should be brought in to patronise their lusts. They will be wanton, but they would also wrest the Word of God and have that countenance it. First, carnal reason is lusts counsellor, and the strongholds of sin lie therein. It is a great pleader for sin. Men sought out inventions (Ecc_7:29; 2Co_10:5). There is a great contribution that corrupt reason gives to lust. Secondly, but never so much as when it is from the Word of God, that being the rule of a mans actions. Let lust have something from it to satisfy it and then the man sins securely. Thirdly, the bitterest enemies that ever the Church of God had, have been those that have owned the same Scriptures with themselves, as the Samaritans and the Jews and the Papists unto us, for hereby wickedness comes under the title of a duty (Joh_16:2). Consider but these four things. First, is this the return you make for all the goodness of God towards you? Consider the evil of it. First, hereby you do dishonour God in that which is highest to Him, and which He has most exalted next to His Son (Psa_138:2). Secondly, hereby you do gratify the devil, for that hath been his great design. Thirdly, no men bring on themselves greater destruction than these men do, who turn the grace of God into wantonness by bringing into the Church damnable heresies (2Pe_2:3). Fourthly, this is a dangerous forerunner of destruction to any nation or Church. (W. Strong.)

Perversion of the truth

I. A great crime. Why should men want to change the truth of the living God? Look into the text and you have the answer.

(1) Because the fear of God is not in their soul--ungodly men. When the helm is broken the vessel will drift in every direction. Reverence for God is the first essential of faith in revelation.

(2) Because to human appearance sin appears less hideous when committed in the name of religion--turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness.

(3) Because the authority of our only Master and Lord is against the license they would afford the flesh. Take Christ out of the gospel and any use might be made of it; but give Him His place in the sphere of Divine truth, and the force against sin is irresistible.

II. An awful doom.

(1) It is a defiance of Divine authority: God is contradicted. When this is done moral government is at stake.

(2) It is the greatest wrong that can be done to others. If you do not know the way, say so, but to know the way, and direct the man to go in the contrary direction, is to cause him harm.

(3) It is an offence against the love of God, who sent His only Son to make us good, and lead us to virtue. (T. Davies, D. D.)

Before of old ordained to this condemnation.

Man responsible for sin

Having described the wicked which were before of old ordained to condemnation by their life, he cometh now to describe them by their end. Here they fare well; but they walk upon ice, in the end they fall. Wheat and chaff go together till they come to the flail; gold and dross go together till they come to the furnace, but then the gold is the purer and the dross is molten. Gods glory is above the heavens; we may bark at it, as dogs do against the moon, but we cannot pull it down. To speak more fully--Gods will is a reason of all reasons; it is the rule of all equity. The judgments of God are oftentimes secret, hid, but never unjust. God ordains no man to be evil, though He hath ordained the evil unto punishment, for should God ordain men unto sin then should God be the author of sin. He ordains indeed the incitements and occasions of sin to try men withal; He also orders sins committed, and does limit them; and in these regards is said as before to work in them and to will them; in which regards also they are in Scripture attributed unto Him sometimes (2Sa_12:11-12; 2Sa_15:16). A. man rideth upon a lame horse, and stirs him; the rider is the cause of the motion, but the horse himself of the halting motion. So God is the author of every action, but not of the evil of the action. The like is in the striking of a jarring and untuned harp--the fingering is thine, the jarring or discord is in the harp or instrument. The earth giveth fatness and juice to all kind of plants; some of these plant, yield pestilent and noisome fruits. Where is the fault, in the nourishment of the ground or in the nature of the herb, which by the native corruption decocteth the goodness of the ground into venom and poison? The goodness and moisture is from the earth, the venom from the herb; the sounding from the hand, the jarring from the instrument. So the action is from God, the evil in the action from the impure fountain of thy own heart. (S. Otes.)

Divine preordination

1. The object of the Divine decrees are not only mens ways, but mens persons. He doth not only say that their condemnation was preordained, but they also were ordained of old to this condemnation.

2. God hath His books and registers, wherein the persons, behaviours, and eternal estates of all men are recorded (Rev_20:12).

3. In all those things which appertain to the judgment of sinners God doth nothing rashly, but proceedeth by foresight and preordination.

4. No man ever perverted the truths of God but to his own loss. We play with opinions, but do not consider that damnation is the end of them; the way of truth is the way of life, but error tendeth to death.

5. Heresies and errors do not fall out by chance, but according to the certain preordination and foreknowledge of God. There are two reasons for it:--Nothing can come to pass without His will, and nothing can come to pass against His will. Briefly, the concurrence of God in and about the errors of men may be conceived in these things:--

(1) He denieth grace and light which might direct and sanctify.

(2) He leaveth difficulty enough in the Word, that men who will not be satisfied may be hardened (Mar_4:11-12).

(3) God leaveth them to follow the course of their own hearts; He doth not incline and compel their wills, or infuse evil to them (Hos_4:17; 1Ki_22:22; Psa_81:12); He hindereth not their wickedness--yea, permitteth it, that so His wise counsels may take place.

(4) God ordereth it for good, thereby bringing great advantage to His own name (Exo_9:16).

(5) Once more, Gods permission of error conduceth to the just ruin of His enemies (Mat_18:6-7; 1Sa_2:25).

The point may be applied many ways.

(1) Here is comfort to those that regard the affairs of Sion; all the confusion and troubles that are in the Church are ordered by a wise God; He will bring some good issue out of them.

(2) It checketh fear; it is all in the hands of a good God; as God trieth you to see what you will do, so you must wait upon God to see what He will do: He will bring forth His work in due time.

(3) It showeth their wickedness that take occasion to turn atheists from the multitude of errors.

(4) It is a ground of prayer in times of delusion: Lord, this was ordained by Thee in wisdom, let us discern Thy glory in it and by it more and more.

(5) It informeth us what a foolish madness it is to think that God seeth not the sin which we secretly commit: surely He seeth it, for He foresaw it before it was committed; yea, from all eternity. (T. Manton.)

Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness.--

The perversion of grace

I. The gospel and grace of God in itself is not pliable to carnal purposes, yieldeth no carnal conclusions. They turn it, saith the apostle; there is no such thing gotten out of the gospel till the art of a deceiver hath passed upon it.

1. It yieldeth no leave to sin, but liberty to serve God; this is the great design of it. Freedom from wrath and hell is a privilege, but freedom from duty and obedience is no privilege. In the gospel there is pardon for failings, but not to encourage us in our failings, but our duties. We were never so much obliged to duty as since the gospel, because now we have more help and more advantages, stronger motives and greater encouragements.

2. There are frequent and constant dissuasives from this perverting our liberty in Christ to the service of any fleshly design (Rom_6:1; Gal_5:13; 1Pe_2:6).

3. Because in the gospel itself there are quite contrary inferences from those which flesh and blood would draw from the gospel. The gospel hath been abused to three ends--to looseness, laziness, licentiousness. Now, you shall see the Word carrieth things in a quite contrary way to what carnal men do. To looseness: men have been the more careless, because grace hath abounded in the discoveries of the gospel; but the apostle disdaineth it, as a most abhorrent conclusion from gospel principles (Rom_6:1). The gospel teacheth quite contrary (Tit_2:11-12); not wantonness, but weanedness, to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts (Rom_6:16; 2Co_7:1). A bee gathereth honey thence from whence a spider sucketh poison. Again, to laziness: men are apt to lie down upon the bed of ease, and say Christ must do all, and so exclude all use of means and the endeavour of the creature. This is a foul abuse; for the Scripture inferreth thence the care and work of the creature, because God doth all (Php_2:12-13). Use

1. It serveth to inform us, in the first place, that carnal men are ill-skilled in consequences; from the very gospel would they draw a liberty to sin, than which from such premises no conclusion can be more strange. Use

2. Again, it serveth for caution; when you meet with such base inferences from evangelical principles, do not blame the gospel or the ministry.

(1) Not the gospel, as if it were not clear enough, or faithful enough, or wary enough. They that have a mind to fall shall not want a stone of stumbling; they that will only be feasted with comforts, no wonder if they contract a spiritual sickness, and undo their souls by a misunderstood and misapplied gospel.

(2) Do not blame the ministry and dispensation of the gospel, because some abuse free grace, others cannot endure to hear it preached; but children must not be kept from their bread because dogs catch at it.

II. Though grace itself be not pliable to such conclusions, yet wicked men are very apt to abuse it to the countenancing of their sins and lusts.

1. Because carnal hearts do assimilate all that they meet with, and turn it into the nourishment of their carnal lusts: as the salt sea turneth the fresh rivers and the sweet showers of heaven into salt waters, so do carnal men pervert the holy principles of the gospel; or as sweet liquors are soon soured in an unclean vessel, so do truths lose their use and efficacy when laid up in a carnal heart, and are quite turned to another purpose.

2. Because they would fain sin securely, with a free dispensation from God, and therefore seek by all means to entitle God to the sin, and the sin to God. They would find a great deal of ease from gripes of conscience if they could make God the author, or at least the countenancer, of their evil practices; and therefore when they can rub their guilt upon the gospel, and pretend a liberty by Christ, the design is accomplished.

3. Because man is obedient naturally no longer than when under impressions of awe and fear; the cords of a man (Hos_11:4) work little with us--like beasts we only put forward when we feel the goad.

4. Because we all naturally desire liberty, carnal liberty, to be left to our own sway and bent, and therefore we catch at anything that tendeth that way. We would be as gods, lords of our own actions, and so are very apt to dream of an exemption from all kind of law but our own lusts. (T. Manton.)

Grace turned into lasciviousness

But how can they turn the grace of our God into lasciviousness? Is grace capable of a conversion into lust or sin? Will what was once grace ever become wantonness? It is the doctrine, not the real substance of grace, that is intended. The doctrine of forgiveness is this grace of God, which may be thus abused. From hence do men, who have only a general notion of it, habitually draw secret encouragements to sin and folly. (J. Owen, D. D.)

The folly of presuming on redeeming grace

Would any man be so simple as to set his house on fire because he has a great river running by his door, from whence he may have water to quench it; or wound himself, because there is an excellent plaster which has cured several? (S. Charnock.)

Divine grace abused

1. To turn the grace of God into wantonness is to take a pretence and occasion to wax wanton, by the grace of God, whose favour the greater it is towards them the more wicked and wanton they be. Such are the presumptuous sinners, which will therefore sin of purpose because God is merciful. These are they which in the apostle say, Let us do evil that good may come thereof: let us sin that God may be merciful: let us commit iniquity that Gods glory may be revealed; yet is their condemnation just. And this grace of God is turned into wantonness of divers and diversely.

(1) When we think ourselves exempted from all duties, homage, and service to men, because we are freed by Jesus Christ.

(2) They also turn the grace of God into wantonness which outwardly profess the gospel, frequent the Word of God, hear the wholesome doctrine of Jesus Christ: but wrest it to maintain their wanton and filthy desires.

(3) They furthermore turn the grace of God into wantonness who profess the gospel, that under colour thereof they may play the wanton more freely and may live thereunder more idly. (R. Turnbull.)

Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.--

Denying God

Now there be many ways to deny God. Some deny His power, as the proud do; some His providence, as the infidels; some His justice, as the impenitent; some His mercy, as the desperate; some His truth, as liars; some His strength, as the fearful do. But especially we deny God in our lives, in our deeds, thus the Cretians denied Him. They professed they knew God, but by works they did deny Him, and were abominable, disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. The profession of God is known by the fruits of it, as life is discerned by the motion of man. On the contrary, if a man would persuade us that there is fire whereas there is no heat, or that there were life in a carcase that never moved, we would not believe him; so believe not him that speaketh of God and liveth not in God. Seeing all things are made for man, it cannot be but man is made for another, and that is God only: but the wicked shall find God and feel God when it is too late, though here they do deny Him. God here is called the only God to note the Trinity in Unity; there is one God, one essence of the three persons. The heathen thought it impossible for one God to govern this great world, therefore they made one god for heaven, as Jupiter; another for hell, as Pluto; one for bread, as Ceres; another for wine, as Bacchus; one for the sea, as Neptune; another for the wind, as Aeolus; one for learning, as Minerva; another for merchandise, as Mercury. Again, they deny Christ, of which sort there be many. The Jews deny that He is come; the pagans deny that ever He will come; the Turks confess that He is come, but yet as a man, not as a God, inferior to their Mahomet. But to speak orderly, men deny Christ many ways. Some deny His Divinity, as the Arians; some His humanity, as the Ubiquitaries; some His natures, by rending them asunder, as the Nestorians, who make two Christs--one the Son of God, another the son of Mary; some deny them by confounding them, as Eutyches, which said that His humanity was swallowed up of His Divinity; some deny Him by concealing Him in time of persecution, as the Nicodemites do. But chiefly we deny the Lord Jesus two ways: first, by denying the sufficiency of His death, as the Galatians did and as the Jews did. Secondly, we deny the Lord Jesus by denying the efficacy or virtue of His death, not dying unto sin. For as the sun doth not warm all whom it lighteneth, as the people under the North Pole, who have the sun six months together, and yet freeze, so the Spirit of God doth not cause all to feel the virtue of His death, whom He illuminateth with the knowledge of His death. The profession of Christ standeth not in words, but in deeds; not in tongue, but in heart; not in opinion, but in life. The apostle nameth a true knowledge, for many know not God truly. (S. Otes.)

Denying Christ the Lord

I. Jesus Christ is Master and Lord (Rev_15:3). Head over all things to the Church (Eph_1:22). In the world the attribute manifested is power; in the Church, grace. Lord, let me feel the efficacy of Thy grace rather than the power of Thine anger!

II. Christ is Lord and Jesus; He came to rule and He came to save.

III. Again, from the words observe, the Son of God was Christ, that He might be Lord and Jesus; anointed of the Father that He might accomplish our salvation. This anointing signifieth two things. First, it noteth the nature of His offices. Under the Old Testament three sort of persons were anointed--kings, priests, and prophets, and all these relations doth Christ sustain to the Church. Secondly, it noteth the authority upon which His office is founded; He was anointed thereto by God the Father, who in the work of redemption is represented as the offended party and supreme judge; and so it is a great comfort to us that Christ is a mediator of Gods choosing.

IV. Once more, observe, that Jesus Christ, the Master of the world and Lord of the Church, is true God. For it is said here, denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. That Christ is God appeareth by express Scripture, where He is called the true God (1Jn_5:20); the great God (Tit_2:13), to show that He is not a God inferior to the Father, but equal in power and glory, and that not by courtesy and grant, but by nature. So He is called the mighty God, the everlasting Father (Isa_9:6), and God over all (Rom_9:5). Again, God He must needs be, if you consider the work He ought to do. The work of the Mediator could be despatched by no inferior agent. Uses. Well, then, we learn hence--

1. That Christ is a proper object for faith.

2. Since He was God by nature, let us observe the love of Christ in becoming man.

3. It is an invitation to press us to come to Christ, and by Christ to God.

V. i come now to the word implying their guilt, denying. Observe, that it is a horrible impiety to deny the Lord Jesus; when He would make these seducers odious, He giveth them this character. Now Christ is many ways denied. I shall refer them to two heads--in opinion and practice.

1. In opinion: so Christ is denied when men deny His natures or offices.

2. Christ is denied in practice; and so--

(1) By apostasy and total revolt from Him (Mat_10:33).

(2) By not professing Christ in evil times, for not to profess is to deny (Mat_10:32-33; Mar_8:38).

(3) Men deny Christ when they profess Him and walk unworthily and dishonourably to their profession. Actions are the best image of mens thoughts. Now their actions give their profession the lie (Tit_1:16). (T. Manton.)

Denying Christ

(1) As in profession God the only Lord and our Lord Jesus Christ is denied, so is God and Christ denied in doctrine.

(2) God the only Lord and Jesus Christ our Saviour is denied of me in conversation, when in words we give our names to Christs religion, yet in our deeds will not be obedient.

(3) God and our Lord Jesus Christ is denied of men by vainly trusting in worldly things, and not reposing all confidence in God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.

(4) God and our Saviour Jesus Christ is denied by revolting, backsliding, and falling away from the religion of God and the profession of our Saviour Jesus Christ.

(5) Finally, when we do not deny openly the doctrine of the gospel and the Word of God, yet notwithstanding we will not obey the admonitions of the ministers of Jesus Christ, nor fear the threatenings and punishment sounded out against our sins, we deny the Lord Jesus. (R. Turnbull.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jdg 1:4. For there are certain men (see the margin) crept in unawares — Insinuating themselves into people’s affections by their plausible pretences, and leavening them by degrees with their errors. The ungodly teachers here described seem to have been the Nicolaitans, mentioned Rev 2:6, whose doctrine Christ himself declared to be hateful to him. Perhaps the Gnostics and Carpocratians, the successors of the Nicolaitans, were also meant. The Nicolaitans are said to have maintained that marriage was a human invention, not binding on Christians; on which account they had women in common, and practised unnatural lusts, as is plain from Jude’s account of them. And they hardened themselves against the fear of punishment in a future state for these crimes, by extolling the goodness and mercy of God, which they thus perverted to lasciviousness. Who were of old ordained — Or rather, as the original expression, προγεγραμμενοι

εις τουτο το κριμα, literally signifies, written, or described, before to this condemnation — Even as early as Enoch, by whom it was foretold, that by their wilful sins they would incur this condemnation. “Jude means, that these wicked teachers had their punishment before written, that is, foretold, in what is written concerning the wicked Sodomites and rebellious Israelites, whose crimes were the same with theirs; and whose punishment was not only a proof of God’s resolution to punish sinners, but an example of the punishment which he would inflict on them. Others think that in the word προγεγραμμενοι, written before, there is an allusion to the ancient custom of writing laws on tables, which were hung up in public places, that the people might know the punishment annexed to the breaking of the laws. If this is the allusion, the apostle’s meaning will be, that the wicked teachers, of whom he is speaking, were, by the divine law, condemned to severe punishment from the beginning. Turning the grace of our God — Revealed in the gospel; into lasciviousness — Into an occasion of more abandoned wickedness, even to countenance their lewd and filthy practices. It seems these ungodly men interpreted the doctrine of justification by faith, in such a manner as to free believers from all obligation to obey the law of God, and taught that they might commit the worst actions without being liable to punishment, if they possessed faith; by which they meant the mere speculative belief and outward profession of the gospel. Denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ — See on 2Pe 2:1. The original words, και τον μονον δεσποτην Θεον και κυριον ημων Ιησουν Χριστον αρνουμενοι, “may be translated various ways, all equally literal: 1st, And denying the only Lord God, even our Lord Jesus Christ. According to this translation, one person only is spoken of here, namely, our Lord Jesus Christ, who is called the only Lord God. 2d, Denying both the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. According to this translation, two persons are distinctly spoken of, namely, the one Lord God, or God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ his Song of Solomon 3 d, And denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. This, which is the translation in our English Bible, and which, in sense, is not different from the second rendering, I have adopted,” says Macknight, “not only because, according to it, two persons are spoken of as denied, namely, the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ, but because it represents Jude’s sentiment as precisely the same with John’s 1st epist. 1Jn 2:22, He is the antichrist who denieth the Father and the Son. By declaring that those ungodly teachers denied both the Father and the Son, the apostle showed to what a pitch of impiety they had proceeded.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 32

THE PERSONS DENOUNCED IN THE EPISTLE ITS RELATION TO PETER.

Jud_1:4

WE have here the occasion of the letter stated very plainly. St. Jude was meditating a letter on a more general subject, when the grave peril created by the anti-Christian behavior of the persons condemned in the text constrained him to write at once on this more urgent topic. An insidious invasion of the Christian Church has taken place by those who have no right to a place within it, and who endanger its peace and purity; and he dare not keep silence. The strong must be exhorted to withstand the evil; the weak must be rescued from it.

These invaders are in one respect like those who are condemned in the Epistle to the Galatians, in another respect very unlike them. They are "false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily"; {Gal_2:4} but they have come in, not "to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage," but to "turn the grace of our God into lasciviousness." The troublers of the Galatian Church were endeavoring to contract Christian liberty, whereas these ungodly men were straining it to the uttermost. Both ended in destroying it. The one turned the "freedom with which Christ set us free" into an intolerable yoke of Jewish bondage; the other turned it into the polluting anarchy of heathen, or worse than heathen, license. How utterly alien these latter are from Christianity, or even from Judaism, is indicated by St. Judes pointed introduction of the pronoun "our" in two clauses in this verse: "turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ." Jehovah is "our God," not theirs; they are "without God in the world." And Christ is "our only Master and Lord," but not theirs; they have denied and rejected Him, choosing to "walk after their own lusts" (Jud_1:16), rather than to "walk even as He walked". {1Jn_2:6} They have repudiated His easy yoke, that they may follow their own bestial desires.

Who are these "ungodly men"? Clement of Alexandria ("Strom.," III 2. sub fin.) thinks that St. Jude is speaking prophetically of the abominable doctrines of the Gnostic teacher Carpocrates. Some modern writers adopt this view, with the omission of the word "prophetically," and thus obtain an argument against the genuineness of the Epistle. If the writer knew the teaching of Carpocrates, he cannot have been Jude the brother of James and the brother of the Lord. The date of Carpocrates is too uncertain to make this a perfectly conclusive argument, even if we admit the assumption that the writer of this Epistle is alluding to his teaching; for he is sometimes placed before Cerinthus, who was contemporary with St. John. But it may be allowed as probably correct that St. Jude was dead before Carpocrates was known as a teacher of Antinomian Gnosticism. There is, however, nothing whatever to show that it is to his teaching that St. Jude is alluding. He says nothing whatever about the teaching of these "ungodly men," who perhaps were not teachers at all; still less does he indicate that they belonged to those Gnostics who, from the Oriental doctrine of the absolutely evil character of matter and everything material, drew the practical conclusion that mans material body may be made to undergo every kind of experience, no matter how shameless, in order that the soul may gain knowledge; that the soul is by enlightenment too pure, and the body by nature too impure, to be capable of pollution; that filth cannot be defiled, and that pure gold remains pure, however often it may be plunged in filthiness. No such doctrine is hinted at by St. Jude. Dorner, therefore, goes beyond what is written when he says that "the persons whom Jude opposes are not merely such as have practically swerved from the right way; they are also teachers of error" ("Doctrine of the Person of Christ," Intr., p. 72, Eng. Tr.: T. & T. Clark, 1861). It is more reasonable, with De Wette, Bruckner, Meyer, Kuhl, Reuss, Farrar, Salmon, and others to regard these "ungodly men" as just what St. Jude describes them, and no more; libertines who ought never to have been admitted into the Church at all; who maintained that Christians were free to live lives of gross sensuality; and who, when rebuked by the elders or other officers of the Church for their misconduct, not only refused to submit, but reviled those who were set over them.. They were "teachers of error," but by their bad example, not by systematic preaching. They "screened their immoral conduct by blasphemous assumptions," because they assumed that "having been called for freedom, "they might" use their freedom for an occasion to the flesh," {Gal_5:13} not because they assumed that they ought to disobey the commandments of the Creator of the material universe. And for the same reason they may be called "libertines" on principle. When St. Jude says that they "denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ," he means that they denied Him by their lives. It is altogether unreasonable to read into this simple phrase, which is sufficiently explained by the context, a dogmatic denial of the Incarnation. That the germs of Antinomian Gnosticism are here indicated may be true enough; but they have not yet developed into a body of doctrine. Still less have those who are tainted by these germs developed into a heretical sect.

It is with the verse before us that the marked resemblance between the Epistle of St. Jude and the central portion of the Second Epistle of St. Peter begins; and it continues down to ver. 18 {Jud_1:18}. In this short letter of twenty-five verses, only the first three and last seven verses, i.e., about a third of the whole, have no intimate relations with 2 Peter. The last word has not yet been spoken upon this perplexing subject. The present writer confesses that he remains still uncertain as to the true relation between the two, and that he has inclined sometimes to the one, and sometimes to the other of the two rival hypotheses. Thus much of what he wrote on the subject more than ten years ago may be repeated now:-

"The similarity, both in substance and wording, is so great that only two alternatives are possible-either one has borrowed from the other, or both have borrowed from a common source. The second alternative is rarely, if ever, advocated; it does not explain the facts very satisfactorily, and critics are agreed in rejecting it. But here agreement ends. On the further question, as to which writer is prior, there is very great diversity of opinion. One thing, therefore, is certain, that whichever writer has borrowed, he is no ordinary borrower. He knows how to assimilate foreign material so as to make it thoroughly his own. He remains original, even while he appropriates the words and thoughts of another. He controls them, not they him. Were this not so there would be little doubt about the matter. In any ordinary case of appropriation, if both the original and copy are forthcoming, critics do not doubt long as to which is the original. It is-when the copy itself is a masterpiece, as in the case of Holbeins Madonna, that criticism is baffled. Such would seem to be the case here; and the present writer is free to confess his own uncertainty."

Other persons are able to write with much more confidence. Dean Mansel says, "Some eminent modern critics have attempted, on the very precarious evidence of style, to assign the priority in time of writing to St. Jude; but there are two circumstances which appear to me to prove most conclusively that St. Judes Epistle was written after that of St. Peter, and with express reference to it. The first is, that the evils which St. Peter speaks of as partly future St. Jude describes as now present. The one says, There shall be false teachers among you"; {2Pe_2:1; the future tense being continued through, the two following verses} the other says, There are certain men crept in unawares. "The other circumstance is still more to the point. St. Peter in his Second Epistle has the remarkable words, Knowing this first, that in the last days mockers (εμπαικται) shall come with mockery, walking after their own lusts. {2Pe_3:3} St. Jude has the same passage, repeated almost word for word, but expressly introduced as a citation of Apostolic language: But ye, beloved, remember ye the words which have been spoken before by the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; how that they said to you, In the last time there shall be mockers (εμπαικται), walking after their own ungodly lusts (Jud_1:17-18). The use of the plural number (των αποστολων) may be explained by supposing that the writer may also have intended to allude to passages similar in import, though differently expressed, in the writings of St. Paul (such as 1Ti_4:1-2; 2Ti_3:1), but the verbal coincidence can hardly be satisfactorily explained, unless we suppose that St. Jude had principally in his thoughts, and was actually citing, the language of St. Peter" ("The Gnostic Heresies of the First and Second Centuries," Murray, 1875, pp. 69, 70). Hengstenberg puts forward the same arguments, and considers the second to be decisive as to the priority of 2 Peter.

Not less confident is Archdeacon Farrar that exactly the opposite hypothesis is the right one. "After careful consideration and comparison of the two documents it seems to my own mind impossible to doubt [the italics are Dr. Farrars] that Jude was the earlier of the two writers"…

"I must confess my inability to see how any one who approaches the inquiry with no ready-made theories can fail to come to the conclusion that the priority in this instance belongs to St. Jude. It would have been impossible for such a burning and withering blast of defiance and invective as his brief letter to have been composed on principles of modification and addition. All the marks which indicate the reflective treatment of an existing document are to be seen in the Second Epistle of St. Peter. In every instance of variation we see the reasons which influenced the later writer…The notion that St. Jude endeavored to improve upon St. Peter is, I say, a literary impossibility; and if in some instances the phrases of St. Jude seem more antithetical and striking, and his description clearer, I have sufficiently accounted for the inferiority-if it be inferiority-of St. Peter by the supposition that he was a man of more restrained temperament; that he wrote, under the influence of reminiscences and impressions; and that he was warning against forms of evil with which he had not come into so personal a contact" ("The Early Days of Christianity," Cassell & Co., 1882, 1. pp. 196-203). The main arguments in favor of the view that the Second Epistle of St. Peter was used by St. Jude, besides those stated by Dean Mansel, are the following:-

(1) If 2 Peter is genuine, it is more probable that St. Jude should borrow from St. Peter than that the chief of the Apostles should borrow from one who was not an Apostle at all. If 2 Peter is not genuine, it is improbable that the forger would borrow from a writing which from the first was regarded with suspicion, because it quoted apocryphal literature.

(2) St. Jude tells us (Jud_1:3) that he wrote under pressure to meet a grave emergency, and therefore he would be more likely to make large use of suitable material ready to his hand, than one who was under no such necessity.

The main arguments on the other side are these:-

(1) It is more probable that the chief portion of a short letter should be used again with a great deal of additional matter, than that one section only of a much longer letter should be used again with very little additional matter.

(2) It is more probable that the writer of 2 Peter should omit what seemed to be difficult or likely to give offence, than that St. Jude should insert such things; e. g., "clouds without water" {Jud_1:12} is a contradiction in terms, and therefore is naturally corrected to "wells without water"; {2Pe_2:17} the particular way in which the angels fell, {Jud_1:6} the allusion to certain Levitical pollutions (Jud_1:23), and the citations from apocryphal books (Jud_1:9; Jud_1:14-15) are either entirely omitted by the writer of 2 Peter, or put in a way much less likely to seem offensive. {2Pe_2:4; 2Pe_2:11} And Jud_1:9 has been so toned down by the writer of 2 Peter that without St. Judes statement respecting Michael and the devil we should scarcely understand 2Pe_2:11.

Besides these points there are two arguments which are used on both sides of the question:-

(1) There are certain elements in St. Judes Epistle of which the writer of 2 Peter would probably have made use, had he seen them, e. g., the ironical play upon the word "kept" in "the angels which kept not (μησαντας) their own principality He hath kept (τετηρηκεν) in everlasting bonds"; the telling antithesis in ver. 10 (Jud_1:10), that what these sinners do not know, and can not know, they abuse by gross irreverence; and what they know, and cannot help knowing, they abuse by gross licentiousness; and the metaphor of "wandering stars" (Jud_1:13), which would fit the false teachers, who lead others astray, in 2 Peter, much better than the ungodly men, who are not leaders at all, in Jude. As the writer of 2 Peter makes no use of these points, the inference is that he had never seen them. But, on the other hand, there are certain elements in 2 Peter of which St. Jude would probably have made use, had he seen them; e.g., the destruction of "the world of the ungodly" by the Flood; the "eyes full of an adulteress"; and the explanation of the "great swelling words" as "promising them liberty," which would exactly have suited St. Judes purpose in condemning those who turned liberty into license. As St. Jude makes no use of these points, the-inference is that he had not seen them.

(2) St. Jude, as will be shown presently, groups nearly everything in threes. It is scarcely an exaggeration to say that wherever he can make a threefold arrangement he does so. Is this artificial grouping a mark of originality or not? Some would urge that it is the writer who is using up anothers material who would be likely to add this fanciful arrangement, and that, therefore, St. Jude is the borrower. Others would urge that such triplets would be just the things to be overlooked or disregarded by the borrower, and that, therefore, St. Jude is the original. About the existence of the triplets in Jude, and their absence in 2 Peter, there can be no question, whatever view we may hold as to their significance. They begin in the very first verse of our Epistle, and continue to the last verse, although those at the close of the letter are lost in the Authorized Version, owing to the fact that the translators used a faulty Greek text.

It will be worth while to run through them.

(1) Judas, a servant.., and brother.

(2) To them that are called, belovedand kept.

(3) Mercy unto you and peace and love.

(4) Ungodly men, turning and denying.

(5) Israelites, angels, cities of the plain;

(6) Defile set at naught, and rail.

(7) Cain, Balaam, Korah.

(8) These are These are These are…

(9) They who make separations, sensual, having not the Spirit.

(10) Building up yourselves, praying looking for the mercy.

(11) On some have mercy; and some save; and on some have mercy with fear.

(12) Before all time, and now, and for evermore.

Before parting with this verse it will be well to put readers on their guard against a misinterpretation of the phrase, "They who were of old set forth unto this condemnation"; a misinterpretation all the more likely to be made by those who use the Authorized Version, which has, "Who were before of old ordained to this condemnation." The text is a favorite one with Calvinists; but when rightly translated and understood, it gives no support to extreme predestinarian theories. When literally rendered it runs, "Who have been of old written down beforehand for this sentence"; or possibly, "Who have been written up beforehand"; for the metaphor may be borrowed from the custom of posting up the names of those who had to appear before the court for trial. Be this as it may, "of old" (παλαι) cannot refer to the eternal counsel and decree of Almighty God, but to something in human history, something remote from St. Judes own day, but in time, and not in eternity. Perhaps some of the warnings and denunciations in the prophets of the Old Testament or in the Book of Enoch are in his mind. "Condemnation" is a justifiable rendering of the Greek word (κριμα) because it is manifest from the context that the sentence or judgment intended is one of condemnation, and not of acquittal; but this word when coupled with "ordained" is likely to be grievously misunderstood. "Ordained to condemnation" suggests with fatal facility "predestined to damnation"-a doctrine which has perhaps been a more fruitful cause of the rejection of Christianity than all the doctrines included in the creeds.

Probably in all ages of the Church there have been men such as St. Jude here describes-nominal members of the Church who are nothing but a scandal to it, and professing Christians whose life is one flagrant denial of Christ. Such persons certainly trouble Christendom now. By their luxury and licentiousness they set an evil example and create a pestilential moral atmosphere. They practice no self-control, and sneer at self-denial in others. They reject all Christian discipline, and mock at those who endeavor to maintain it: And sometimes they are not at once recognized in their true character. They are plausible and amusing, obviously not strict, but not obviously scandalous in their manner of life. It is then that such men become specially dangerous. Such may have been the case in the Churches which St. Jude has in mind. Therefore he strips off all this specious disguise, and describes these profligate scoffers according to their true characters. Moreover, we must remember that there were some, and perhaps many, who, like Simon Magus, {Act_8:13} accepted baptism without any real appreciation of the meaning of Christianity, and who remained either Jews or heathen at heart, long after they had enrolled themselves as Christians. Where dangerous material of this kind abounded, it was necessary to put the faithful on their guard about the danger; and hence the strength and vehemence of St. Judes language. A sharp, clear statement of the evil was necessary to put the weak and the unwary on their guard against a peril to which they might easily succumb, before they were fully aware of its existence. We all of us need such warnings still, not merely to form a truer estimate of the nature and tendency of certain forms of evil, and thus keep on our guard against courting needless temptation, but also to preserve us from becoming in our own persons, through manifest self-indulgence and a carelessness of life, a snare and a stumbling-block to our brethren.

William Robertson Nicoll, ed., The Expositor's Bible (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1887–1910) — public domain. 65 of 66 books (1 Corinthians is not separately keyed, as that volume carries no machine-parseable verse references); section-level commentary keyed to the opening verse. Introductory and overview sections not keyed to a specific passage are excluded.

1:4 Abusing God’s marvelous grace by saying that it allows us to live immoral lives is a constant temptation (cp. Rom 6).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Jud 1:4. Παρεισέδυσαν, have crept in unawares) παρὰ, under, by the way.—οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, who were of old forewritten for this judgment) For their coming was predicted, Jud 1:17; and that they should undergo the judgment, which he is about to describe, is evident from the examples of punishments inflicted upon others of similar impurity—examples which have long been written. There is no reference to predestination; respecting which, however, there is a similar expression, οἱ γραφέντες εἰς ζωὴν, they who are written unto life, Isa 4:3; but he is speaking of the prediction of Scripture. Πάλαι, of old, in the time of Enoch, Jud 1:14; and since he himself only spake it, and did not also write it, it must be regarded as an abbreviated expression, in this sense: They were long ago foretold by Enoch, and afterwards marked out by the written word. Therefore comp. the word ἀσεβεῖς, ungodly, with Jud 1:15. The meaning of εἰς is as far as relates to. Τοῦτο, this, is forcibly demonstrative; the apostle already, as it were, seeing their punishment. The language used by Enoch comprises all the ungodly of the beginning and of the end of the world. The disposition and the punishment of all are alike.—ἡμῶν, of us) not of the ungodly.—χάριν, the grace) of the Gospel.—τὸν μόνον δεσπότην, the only Master) Sir 18:33, in the Complutensian Edition: Κρείσσων παῤῥησία ἐν δεσπότῃ μόνῳ, εἴπερ νεκρὰ καρδία νεκρῷ ἀντέχεται.—καὶ Κύριον, and Lord) St Jude shows that the impiety of those whom he censures, makes attacks both against God and against Christ: τὴν τοῦ ΘΕΟΥ ἡμῶν χάριν μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν, καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ Κύριον ἡμῶν ΙΗΣΟΥΝ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΝ ἀρνούμενοι· who alter the grace of our GOD as relates to [“into”] lasciviousness, and deny our only Master, and Lord JESUS CHRIST. This was not observed by those who inserted Θεὸν after δεσπότην.[1] A passage exactly parallel occurs, 2Pe 2:1, ΤῸΝ ἈΓΟΡΆΣΑΝΤΑ ΑὐΤΟῪς ΔΕΣΠΌΤΗΝ ἈΡΝΟΎΜΕΝΟΙ, denying the, Lord that bought them.—ἀρνούμενοι, denying) Let the portentous fictions (heresies) of the ancient heretics, as mentioned by the fathers, be thoroughly weighed.

[1] ABC Vulg. and most Versions omit Θεόν. Rec. Text inserts it, with more recent Uncial MSS., and with the two Syr. Versions alone of very ancient authorities.—E.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jud_1:4. Compare 2Pe_2:1-3.

παρεισέδυσαν γάρ] the reason of ἀνάγκην ἔσχον. παρεισέδυσαν marks the entrance of false teachers into the church as a secret and unauthorized creeping in of such as do not properly belong to it, but are internally foreign to it (comp. Gal_2:4 : παρείσακτοι, explained by the scholiasts by ἀλλότριοι); it is synonymous with παρεισέρχεσθαι; comp. 2Ti_3:6.

τινες ἄνθρωποι] In the same indefiniteness the false teachers are also mentioned in 1Ti_1:6. Arnaud observes: le mot τινες a quelque chose de méprisant, comme dans Gal_2:12; so also Wiesinger and Schott; this is possible; but the appeal to Gal_2:12 is unjustified. That the expression ἄνθρωποι is used in order to bring forward the fact that they with their entrance into the church remained in their natural state (Schott), is highly improbable. Hofmann unnecessarily separates τινες from ἄνθρωποι, taking ἄνθρωποι, οἱ κ.τ.λ., as in apposition to τινες.

οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα] By the participle with the article a peculiar circumstance worthy of remark concerning these men is brought forward (Winer, p. 127 [E. T. 167]); but not, as Schott, after Rampf, arbitrarily maintains, a mark perfectly clear to the readers is given for the recognition of those who are meant; the article being equivalent to isti, those notorious men.

προγεγραμμένοι] The preposition προ in this verb indicates either antea, earlier, before; thus always in the N. T.; see Gal_3:1 (comp. Meyer in loc.); Rom_15:4; Eph_3:3; or palam. If it has this last meaning, then προγράφειν signifies to announce something publicly by writing; thus in an entirely special sense proscribere; accordingly Wolf explains it: qui dudum sunt accusati et in hoc judicium (εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα) vocati. Yet this is inaccurate, as the peculiar idea of proscribere is not retained; for, if retained, it would not suit εἰς τ. τ. κρίμα. Yet more arbitrarily Wahl explains προγράφειν by designare. Oecumenius, Hornejus, and others have correctly taken προ here as a preposition of time. According to Isa_4:3, LXX.: οἱ γραφέντες εἰς ζωήν, the sense might be: those who are written before (as in Gods book of fate, and consequently destined) εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα (Calvin: haec metaphora inde sumpta est, quod aeternum Dei consilium, quo ordinati sunt fideles ad salutem, Liber vocatur); but the term πάλαι is unsuitable, as it is never in the N. T. used of Gods eternal counsels. προγράφειν is here rather to be understood entirely as in the adduced passages of the N. T.; and with de Wette a pregnancy of expression is to be assumed; thus: those who are already before by writing destined to this judgment. Hofmann explains προγεγραμμένοι according to Joh_1:46 compared with Joh_5:46 (γράφειν τινα = γρ. περί τινος): those of whom it is written before; and then εἰς τοῦτο τ. κρ. = in reference to this judgment; but with regard to the former it is to be remarked, that the form of expression here is different from Joh_1:46; and with regard to the latter, that by it a weakening of the preposition in its direct connection with προγεγραμμένοι takes place.[11] Oecumenius refers this to the prophecies concerning future false teachers contained in the Epistles of Paul and Peter. Grotius, Schott, Hofmann, and others point particularly to 2 Peter 2. But πάλαι combined with προγεγρ. evidently points back to an earlier period,[12] so that only older prophecies can be meant, namely, the prophecies and types of the O. T., and perhaps particularly the prophecies contained in the Book of Enoch: see Jud_1:14 (so also Wiesinger). Against Calvin and Beza, who find the idea of the decretum aeternum here expressed, Bengel remarks: non innuitur praedestinatio, sed scripturae praedictio.

εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα] Although κρίμα in itself is not equivalent to κατάκριμα, yet here a condemnatory judgment is meant; τοῦτο, namely, that which Jude has in view, and which is indicated in the following verse; Stier: for this judgment, which I now announce to them; Arnaud: il y a τοῦτο, parceque cette punition est lobjet qui loccupe. It is incorrect, with Wiesinger and Hofmann, to refer τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα to παρεισέδυσαν, as something including judgment in itself; or, with Schott, to the damnable error of those men, specified in the words τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ κ.τ.λ.; for neither the entering in nor the error can in themselves be called a κρίμα.

ἀσεβεῖς] to be taken by itself; not to be united with οἱ προγεγραμμένοι (against Tischendorf, who has placed no comma before ἀσεβεῖς). The ungodliness of these men is further indicated, according to its nature, by the participial clauses which follow (comp. 2Pe_2:6).

τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριν κ.τ.λ.] who pervert the grace of our God into lasciviousncss. χάρις, not = doctrina gratiae (Vorstius), nor evangelium (Grotius), nor fides catholica nobis gratis data (Nicolas de Lyra); but grace itself as the proffered gift of God in the forgiveness of sin and redemption from the law; so also Wiesinger, Fronmüller, Hofmann. It is incorrect to explain the idea by the life of grace (de Wette-Brückner), or by the ordinances of grace (Schott). ἡμῶν, belonging to τοῦ Θεοῦ, is to be understood as an expression of the feeling of sonship; Bengel: nostri, non impiorum.

In μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν, ἀσέλγ. is either the purpose of the change of the grace of God, or that into which grace is changed. In the former case μετατίθημι here would in itself have a bad subsidiary meaning (de Wette: who pervert the grace of our God for the purpose of licentiousness); but it never elsewhere so occurs in the N. T. Accordingly, the second explanation is better (Brückner), according to which the meaning is: they have converted the χάρις, which God gave to them, into something different, namely ἀσέλγεια; inasmuch as liberty was converted by them into lasciviousness; comp. Gal_5:13; 1Pe_2:16; 2Pe_2:19.

καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χρ. ἀρνούμενοι] In 2Pe_2:1 the epithet δεσπότης is used of Christ; this favours the combination of τὸν μόνον δεσπότην as an attribute with Ἰησ. Χρ. (so de Wette, Schmidt, Rampf, Wiesinger, Schott, Fronmüller, Hofmann). But, on the one hand, in every other place this word denotes God; and, on the other hand, δεσπότης would hardly be distinguished from the word κύριος, if both were to be referred to Christ;[13] add to this that μόνος elsewhere expresses the unity of the divine nature; comp. Jud_1:25; Joh_5:44; Joh_17:3; Rom_16:27; 1Ti_1:17; 1Ti_6:15-16; Rev_15:4; against which view Schott incorrectly urges 1Co_8:6 and Eph_4:5. For these reasons, it is more probable that τὸν μόνον δεσπότην is not an appellation of Christ, but a designation of God (Brückner); comp. 1Jn_2:22 : ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν (also Enoch xlviii. 10 is to be compared: they have denied the Lord of the spirits and His Anointed). No argument against this explanation can be drawn from the want of the article before κύριον; see authors commentary on Tit_2:3 (Winer, p. 121 ff. [E. T. 162]),[14] which is in an unjustifiable manner denied by Hofmann. The denial may be considered as either practical (comp. Tit_1:16) or theoretical. Since throughout this Epistle the carnal and godless disposition of these men is brought forward, it is most probable that Jude at least had the first kind of denial specially in view. At all events, such explanations as those of Grotius: abnegabant Jesum, quia eum dicebant hominem natum ex homine, are to be rejected, as Jude never reproaches his adversaries with such a definite erroneous doctrine.

[11] Luthers translation: there are certain men crept in, of whom it is written before, to this punishment, by which προγεγρ. is separated from εἰς τ. τ. κρ., is contradicted by the natural verbal connection.

[12] Schott aud Hofmann contest the fact that πάλαι points to an earlier period. πάλαι, which generally indicates the past in contrast to the present (Pape), may certainly be used when that past is not distant (comp. Mar_15:44); but, on the one hand, this use of the term is rare; and, on the other hand, it is not here applicable, as the reference to the past generally is already contained in the προ of the compound verb; πάλαι here can only be put to mark this past as lying in the distance.

[13] Hofmann gives the distinction of these two ideas as follows: Christ is our δεσπότης, as we are His property bound to His service; He is our κύριος, as His will is the standard of ours. But if this be correct, it is not in favour of Hofmann but against him, because Jude would then in an incomprehensible manner make the weaker idea to follow upon the stronger.

[14] When Wiesinger and Schott appeal for their explanation to the fact that the relation to God is already expressed in the preceding clause, and that therefore it would be unsuitable to express it here again, it is to be observed that in that clause the relation to Christ is also indicated, since the grace of God is communicated through Christ; also, there is no reason why Jude should not have indicated μετατιθέναι as a denial both of Jesus Christ and of God. Whilst Schott grants that the expression the only master may only refer to God, he so interprets the article τόν before μόνον δεσπ. that he explains it as equivalent to he who is.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jud 1:4 . Nature of the Threatened Danger . It is stealthy; it is serious enough to have been predicted long ago; its characteristic is impiety, showing itself in the antinomian misuse of the Gospel of God’s free grace, and in the denial of God and Christ.

Jud 1:4 . παρεισεδύησαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι . 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 Jud 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, ἄδικος παρεισδύνων λόγος εἰς τὰς τῶν δικαστῶν γνώμας οὐκ ἐᾷ συνορᾶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν , Clem. Al. p. 659 ὅπως εἰς τὴν τῶν αἰνιγμάτων ἔννοιαν ἡ ζήτησις παρεισδύουσα ἐπὶ τὴν εὕρεσιν τῆς ἀληθείας ἀναδράμῃ , D. Laert. ii. 142. λαθραίως παρεισδύς εἰς τὴν πατρίδα , Plut. M. p. 216 B, τὰ ἁρχαῖα νόμιμα ἐκλυόμενα ἑώρα , ἄλλα δὲ παρεισδυόμενα μοχθηρά , other examples in Wetst. The noun παρείσδυσις occurs in Barn. ii. 10, iv. 9, ἀντιστῶμεν ἵνα μὴ σχῇ παρείσδυσιν ὁ μέλας , Clem. Al. p. 189, ἀκροσφαλὴς ἡ τοῦ οἴνου παρείσδυσις . Similar compounds are παρεισφέρω in 2Pe 1:5 , παρεισάγω in 2Pe 2:1 , παρείσακτος in Gal 2:4 , διὰ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ὑμῶν , Rom 5:20 , 2Ma 8:1 παρεισπορευόμενοι λεληθότως εἰς τὰς κώμας , so παρεισέρπω , παρεισπέμπω , παρεισπίπτω . The earliest prophecy of such seducers comes from the lips of Jesus Himself, Mat 7:15 , προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῶν ψευδοπροφητῶν , οἵτινες ἔρχονται πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν ἐνδύμασι προβάτων , ἔσωθεν δέ εἰσι λύκοι ἅρπαγες , cf. Act 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.

οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα . “Designated of old for this judgment.” Cf. 2Pe 2:3 , οἷς τὸ κρίμα ἔκπαλαι οὐκ ἀργεῖ . 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 Jud 1:14-15 . In Jud 1:18 below the same warning is said to have been given by the Apostles. The phrase οἱ προγ . is in apposition to τινες ἄνθρωποι , cf. Gal 1:7 with Lightfoot’s n., Luk 18:9 , εἶπεν δὲ πρός τινας τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς . For προγ ., cf. Rom 15:4 , ὅσα γὰρ προεγράφη εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν διδασκαλίαν ἐγράφη . 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 1Pe 2:8 , εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν . 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 ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδάμ in Jud 1:14 .

ἀσεβεῖς . This word may be almost said to give the keynote to the Epistle ( cf. Jud 1:15 ; Jud 1:18 ) as it does to the Book of Enoch.

τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριτα μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν . With this we may compare 1Pe 2:16 , μὴ ὡς ἐπικάλυμμα ἔχοντες τὴς κακίας τὴν ἐλευθερίαν , 2Pe 2:19 , ἐλευθερίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενοι , 2Pe 3:16 . δυσνόητά τινα ἃ οἱ ἀμαθεῖς στρεβλοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν , Rom 3:1-2 ; Rom 3:5-8 (If man is justified by free grace and not by works, then works are unnecessary), Rom 6:1 ; Rom 6:15 ; Rom 8:21 , 1Co 6:12 ; 1Co 10:23 f., Joh 8:32-36 , Gal 5:13 , ὑμεῖς ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε · μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί . For μετατιθέντες see Gal 1:6 , for ἀσέλγειαν 2Pe 2:2 , πολλοὶ ἐξακολουθήσουσιν αὐτῶν ταῖς ἀσελγείαις , 2Pe 2:7 ; 2Pe 2:18 ; 1Pe 4:3 , and Lightfoot on Gal 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, πολλὴ δέ τις ἀσέλγεια καὶ περὶ τὰς σωματικὰς ἐπιθυμίας αὐτῷ συνεξηκολούθει . 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 Act 24:27 .

τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι . So 2Pe 2:1 , τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι . On the denial of God and Christ see 1Jn 2:22 , οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος , ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν , Tit 1:16 , Θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι , τοῖς δὲ ἔργοις ἀρνοῦνται βδελυκτοὶ ὄντες καὶ ἀπειθεῖς καὶ πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἀδόκιμοι , Mat 10:33 , ὅστις ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων , ἀρνήσομαι κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός μου , Mat 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 . μόνον δεσπότην 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 2Pe 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 τὸν μόνον δεσπότην . It seems to me a forced explanation to say that the phrase μόνος δεσπότης 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 Joh 5:44 , τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου Θεοῦ οὐ ζητεῖτε , Joh 17:3 , ἵνα γινώσκωσίν σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεον Rom 16:27 , μόνῳ σόφῳ Θεῷ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ , 1Ti 1:17 , τῷ βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων … μόνῳ Θεῷ τιμὴ κ . δόξα , 1Ti 6:15-16 , ὁ μακάριος κ . μόνος δυνάστης ὁ μόνος ἔχων ἀθανασίαν , and by Jude himself, below 25, μόνῳ Θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰ . Χ ., τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα . Wetst. quotes several passages in which Josephus speaks of God as ὁ μόνος δεσπότης . 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 Tit 2:13 , προσδεχόμενοι τὴν μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χ . Ἰ . ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς , where also I should take τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ to refer to the Father. Other examples of the same kind are Eph 5:5 , οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ (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),” 2Th 1:12 , ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ ὑμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ ; 1Ti 5:21 ( cf. 2Ti 4:1 ), διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ καἰ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν ἀγγέλων , which Chrysostom explains μάρτυρα καλῶ τὸν Θεὸν καὶ τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ ; 2Pe 1:1 ; 2Pe 1:4 ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ , 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 Tit 1:16 ; but it is more naturally taken as explicit, as in 1Jn 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 τὸν μόνον δεσπότην might also refer to the heresy attributed to Cerinthus by Hippolytus ( Haer. vii. 33, x. 21) οὐχ ὑπὸ τοῦ πρώτου θεοῦ τὸν κόσμον γεγονέναι ἠθέλησεν ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ δυνάμεώς τινος ἀγγελικῆς , and Irenæus Haer. i. 26. See Introduction on Early Heresies in the large edition.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He condemneth this first in them, that they take a pretense or occasion to wax wanton, by the grace of God: which cannot be, but the chief empire of Christ must be abrogated, in that such men give up themselves to Satan: as at this time the sect of the Anabaptists doth, which they call Libertines.

It is by God’s providence and not by chance, that many wicked men creep into the Church.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

certain men--implying disparagement.

crept in unawares--stealthily and unlawfully. See on Pe2 2:1, "privily shall bring in damnable heresies."

before . . . ordained--Greek, "forewritten," namely, in Peter's prophecy Jde 1:17-18; and in Paul's before that, Ti1 4:1; Ti2 3:1; and by implication in the judgments which overtook the apostate angels. The disobedient Israelites, Sodom and Gomorrah, Balaam and Core, and which are written "for an example" (Jde 1:7, and Jde 1:5-6, Jde 1:11). God's eternal character as the Punisher of sin, as set forth in Scripture "of old," is the ground on which such apostate characters are ordained to condemnation. Scripture is the reflection of God's book of life in which believers are "written among the living." "Forewritten" is applied also in Rom 15:4 to the things written in Scripture. Scripture itself reflects God's character from everlasting, which is the ground of His decrees from everlasting. BENGEL explains it as an abbreviated phrase for, "They were of old foretold by Enoch (Jde 1:14, who did not write his prophecies), and afterwards marked out by the written word."

to this condemnation--Jude graphically puts their judgment as it were present before the eyes, "THIS." Enoch's prophecy comprises the "ungodly men" of the last days before Christ's coming to judgment, as well as their forerunners, the "ungodly men" before the flood, the type of the last judgment (Mat 24:37-39; Pe2 3:3-7). The disposition and the doom of both correspond.

the grace of our God--A phrase for the Gospel especially sweet to believers who appropriate God in Christ as "our God," and so rendering the more odious the vile perversity of those who turn the Gospel state of grace and liberty into a ground of licentiousness, as if their exemption from the law gave them a license to sin.

denying the only Lord--The oldest manuscripts, versions, and Fathers omit "God," which follows in English Version. Translate as the Greek, "the only Master"; here used of Jesus Christ, who is at once Master and "Lord" (a different Greek word). See on Pe2 2:1. By virtue of Christ's perfect oneness with the Father, He, as well as the Father, is termed "the ONLY" God and "MASTER." Greek, "Master," implies God's absolute ownership to dispose of His creatures as He likes.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 4. For there are certain men crept in unawares] παρεισεδυσαν. They had got into the Church under specious pretences; and, when in, began to sow their bad seed.

Before of old ordained] Οἱ παλαι προγεγραμμενοι Such as were long ago proscribed, and condemned in the most public manner; this is the import of the word προγραφειν in this place, and there are many examples of this use of it in the Greek writers. See Kypke.

To this condemnation] To a similar punishment to that immediately about to be mentioned.

In the sacred writings all such persons, false doctrines, and impure practices, have been most openly proscribed and condemned; and the apostle immediately produces several examples, viz., the disobedient Israelites, the unfaithful angels, and the impure inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha. This is most obviously the apostle's meaning, and it is as ridiculous as it is absurd to look into such words for a decree of eternal reprobation, c., such a doctrine being as far from the apostle's mind as from that of Him in whose name he wrote.

Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness] Making the grace and mercy of God a covering for crimes intimating that men might sin safely who believe the Gospel, because in that Gospel grace abounds. But perhaps the goodness of God is here meant, for I cannot see how they could believe the Gospel in any way who denied the Lord Jesus Christ; unless, which is likely, their denial refers to this, that while they acknowledged Jesus as the promised Messiah, they denied him to be the only Lord, Sovereign, and Ruler of the Church and of the world. There are many in the present day who hold the same opinion.

The only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.] Μονον Δεσποτην Θεον και Κυριον ἡμων Ιησουν Χριστον αρυουμενοι. These words may be translated, Denying the only sovereign God, even our Lord Jesus Christ. But θεον GOD, is omitted by ABC, sixteen others, with Erpen's Arabic, the Coptic, AEthiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate, and by many of the fathers. It is very likely that it was originally inserted as a gloss, to ascertain to whom the title of τονμονον δεσποτην, the only Sovereign, belonged; and thus make two persons where only one seems to be intended. The passage I believe belongs solely to Jesus Christ, and may be read thus: Denying the only sovereign Ruler, even our Lord Jesus Christ. The text is differently arranged in the Complutensian Polyglot, which contains the first edition of the Greek Testament: Και τον μονον Θεον και Δεσποτην, τον Κυριον ἡμων Ιησουν Χριστον αρνουμενοι· Denying the only God and Sovereign, our Lord Jesus Christ. This is a very remarkable position of the words, and doubtless existed in some of the MSS. from which these editors copied. The Simonians, Nicolaitans, and Gnostics, denied God to be the creator of the world; and Simon is said to have proclaimed himself as FATHER to the Samaritans, as SON to the Jews, and as the HOLY GHOST to all other nations. All such most obviously denied both Father, Son, and Spirit.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4. For there are certain men crept in unawares. Though Satan is ever an enemy to the godly, and never ceases to harass them, yet Jude reminds those to whom he was writing of the state of things at that time. Satan now, he says, attacks and harasses you in a peculiar manner; it is therefore necessary to take up arms to resist him. We hence learn that a good and faithful pastor ought wisely to consider what the present state of the Church requires, so as to accommodate his doctrine to its wants.

The word παρεισέδυσαν, which he uses, denotes an indirect and stealthy insinuation, by which the ministers of Satan deceive the unwary; for Satan sows his tares in the night, and while husbandmen are asleep, in order that he may corrupt the seed of God. And at the same time he teaches us that it is an intestine evil; for Satan in this respect also is crafty, as he raises up those who are of the flock to do mischief, in order that they may more easily creep in.

Before of old ordained. He calls that judgment, or condemnation, or a reprobate mind, by which they were led astray to pervert the doctrine of godliness; for no one can do such a thing except to his own ruin. But the metaphor is taken from this circumstance, because the eternal counsel of God, by which the faithful are ordained unto salvation, is called a book: and when the faithful heard that these were given up to eternal death, it behooved them to take heed lest they should involve themselves in the same destruction. It was at the same time the object of Jude to obviate danger, lest the novelty of the thing should disturb and distress any of them; for if these were already long ago ordained, it follows that the Church is not tried or exercised but according to the infallible counsel of God.

The grace of our God. He now expresses more clearly what the evil was; for he says that they abused the grace of God, so as to lead themselves and others to take an impure and profane liberty in sinning. But the grace of God has appeared for a far different purpose, even that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we may live soberly, righteously, and godly in this world. Let us, then, know that nothing is more pestilential than men of this kind, who from the grace of Christ take a cloak to indulge in lasciviousness.

Because we teach that salvation is obtained through God’s mercy alone, the Papists accuse us of this crime. But why should we use words to refute their effrontery, since we everywhere urge repentance, the fear of God, and newness of life, and since they themselves not only corrupt the whole world with the worst examples, but also by their ungodly teaching take away from the world true holiness and the pure worship of God? Though I rather think, that those of whom Jude speaks, were like the libertines of our time, as it will be more evident from what follows.

The only Lord God, or, God who alone is Lord. Some old copies have, “Christ, who alone is God and Lord.” And, indeed, in the Second Epistle of Peter, Christ alone is mentioned, and there he is called Lord. But He means that Christ is denied, when they who had been redeemed by his blood, become again the vassals of the Devil, and thus render void as far as they can that incomparable price. That Christ, then, may retain us as his peculiar treasure, we must remember that he died and rose again for us, that he might have dominion over our life and death.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

For there are certain men crept in unawares,.... These words contain a reason why the doctrine of faith should be contended for, because of false teachers, who are described as being then upon the spot; the Apostles Peter and Paul had foretold that they would come, but Jude here speaks of them as in being; wherefore present rigour and vigilance were necessary to be used: their names are not mentioned, nor their number, only that there were "certain", or "some men"; which is done to stir up the saints to self-examination, whether they were in the faith; to diligence, in finding out these men; to vigour, in opposing them; and to care, to nip error and heresy in the bud: and they are said to have "crept in unawares": either into private houses, as was the custom of those men; or into the churches, and become members of them being the tares the enemy sows among the wheat; or into the ministry, assuming that office to themselves, without being called and sent of God; and so into the public assemblies of the saints, spreading their poisonous doctrines among them; and also into their affections, until discovered; and so the Ethiopic version reads here, "because ungodly men have entered into your hearts"; and all this was at an unawares, privily, secretly, without any thought about them, or suspicion of them:

who were before of old ordained to this condemnation; or judgment; meaning either judicial blindness of heart, they were given up to, in embracing and spreading errors and heresies; so that these are not casual things, but fall under the ordination and decree of God, which does not make God the author of them, nor excuse the men that hold them; and they are ordained and ordered for many valuable ends; on the part of God, to show his power and wisdom; and on the part of truth, that it might be tried and appear the brighter, and to manifest his people and their graces: or else punishment is designed, even everlasting condemnation, to which some are preordained of God; for this act of preordination respects persons, and not mere actions and events; and is not a naked prescience, but a real decree, and which is sure, certain, and irrevocable; is God's act, and springs from his sovereignty, is agreeably to his justice and holiness; nor is it contrary to his goodness, and is for his glory: the date of this act is "of old"; or as the Syriac version renders it, , "from the beginning"; that is, from eternity; see Th2 2:13; for reprobation is of the same date with election; if the one is from eternity, the other must be so too, since there cannot be one without the other: if some were chosen before the foundation of the world, others must be left or passed by as early; and if some were appointed unto salvation from the beginning, others must be foreordained to condemnation from the beginning also; for these words cannot be understood of any prophecy of old, in which it was forewritten, or prophesied of these men, that they should be condemned for their ungodliness; not in Mat 24:1, in which no such persons are described as here, nor any mention made of their punishment or condemnation; nor in Pe2 2:1; for then the apostle would never have said that they were "of old", a long while ago, before written, or prophesied of, since according to the common calculation, that epistle of Peter's, and this of Jude's, were written in the same year; nor in the prophecy of Enoch, Jde 1:14; for Enoch's prophecy was not written, as we know of; and therefore these men could not be said to be before written in it; besides, that prophecy is spoken of as something distinct from these persons being before written, to condemnation; and after all, was a prophecy referred to, the sense would be the same, since such a prophecy concerning them must be founded upon an antecedent ordination and appointment of God; the word here used does not intend their being forewritten in any book of the Scriptures, but in the book of God's eternal purposes and decrees; and the justice of such a preordination appears by the following characters of them,

ungodly men: all men are by nature ungodly, some are notoriously so, and false teachers are generally such; here it signifies such who are destitute of the fear of God, and of all internal devotion, and powerful godliness; and who did not worship God externally, according to his institutions and appointments, and much less sincerely, and in a spiritual manner; and who even separated themselves from the true worshippers of God, and gave themselves up to sensuality, and therefore their condemnation was just:

turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness; not the love and favour of God, as in his own heart, or as shed abroad in the hearts of others; for that can never, be turned to such a purpose, it always working in a contrary way; nor the principle of grace wrought in the soul, which being of a spiritual nature, lusteth against the flesh, and cannot be turned into it; more likely the goodness of God in his providential dispensations, which is despised by some, and abused by others; but rather the doctrine of grace, which though lasciviousness is not in its nature, nor has it any natural tendency to it, yet wicked men turn or transfer it from its original nature, design, and use, to a foreign one: and they may be said to turn it into lasciviousness, either by asserting it to be a licentious doctrine, when it is not; or by treating it in a wanton and ludicrous manner, scoffing at it, and lampooning it; or by making the doctrine of grace universal, extending it equally alike to all mankind, and thereby harden and encourage men in sin,

And denying the only Lord God; God the Father, who is the only sovereign Lord, both in providence and grace; and the only God, not to the exclusion of the Son and Spirit, but in opposition to nominal and fictitious deities, or Heathen gods; and he was denied by these men, if not in words, yet in works: the word "God" is left out in the Alexandrian copy, and in the Vulgate Latin version,

And our Lord Jesus Christ; as his deity, or sonship, or humanity, or that he was the Messiah, or the alone Saviour, or his sacrifice, satisfaction, and righteousness; with respect to either of which he may be said to be denied doctrinally, as he is also practically, when men do not walk worthy of their profession of him; and both might be true of these men, and therefore their condemnation was righteous. The copulative "and" is omitted in the Syriac version, which seems to make this clause explanative of the former.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

For there have crept in some men, impious men, (who were of old[2] foretold that they should fall into condemnation, by their own obdurate malice) the disciples of Simon, and the Nicolaites, who endeavour to turn the grace of our God, and Christian liberty into all manner of infamous[3] lasciviousness; who, by their ridiculous fables, deny the only sovereign Ruler, and our Lord Jesus Christ. Some by the only sovereign, or master of all things, understand God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to his divine Person, is the same God, Master, and Lord with him, and the Holy Ghost. But many interpreters think the true sense and construction is this, denying Jesus Christ, our only sovereign master,[4] and Lord. The reasons for this exposition are: 1. That this verse of St. Jude seems correspondent to that of St. Peter, (2 Peter ii. 1.) where he says of the same heretics, that they deny the Lord who bought them, or deny him that bought them, to be Lord. 2. Because the disciples of Simon denied Jesus Christ to be truly Lord God, but denied not this of the Father. 3. Because the Greek text seems to denote one and the same to be sovereign master and the Lord. See Cornelius a Lapide. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Who were foretold; præscripti, Greek: progegrammenoi, prædicti. It is not well translated appointed, by Mr. N., especially since Calvin and Beza pretended, from this expression, that God was the cause of their resisting the truth.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Luxuriam, Greek: aselgeian.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Solum Dominatorem, & Dominum nostrum, Jesum Christum negantes. The ordinary Greek ton monon despoten Theon, kai Kurion emon Iesoun Christon arnoumenoi.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Who were before of old ordained; Greek, forewritten, i.e. of whom it was formerly written, or foretold, viz. by Christ and his apostles; or rather, it is to be understood according to our translation, before ordained, viz. in the eternal counsel of God; God’s decree being compared to a book, in which things to be done are written down. This the apostle adds to prevent any offence that might be taken at the wickedness of these seducers; and therefore lets these saints know, that though such men crept in unawares to them, yet it was not without the providence of God so ordering it.

To this condemnation; or, judgment; and it may be understood, either of a reprobate sense, to which they who thus perverted the gospel were given up by God, according to his preordination; or of that damnation he decreed should follow upon their wickedness, in making shipwreck of the faith themselves, and subverting others. This seems best to agree with 2Pe 2:3.

Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness; abusing the doctrine of the grace of God, and benefits of Christ revealed in the gospel, especially the doctrine of Christian liberty, to the encouraging themselves and others in the vilest lusts, 2Pe 2:1.

And denying the only Lord God: either this may be understood of the Father distinctly from Christ, expressed in the following clause, and only is put in not to exclude either of the other Persons of the Trinity from being God, but to exclude idols and false gods: or it may be understood of Christ, as well as the words following; not only because there is but one article in the Greek relating to the whole sentence, but because it seems best to agree with the parallel place, 2Pe 2:1, which is most generally understood of Christ; and because the heresies of those times, which Jude cautions these saints against, struck especially at the Godhead of Christ, which he therefore the more expressly asserts.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

4. For—Reason for this burst of alarm.

Certain men—Not, apparently, as yet a solid body, but a large number of individual leaders scattered throughout the Church of Jude’s section.

Crept in unawares—Whose demoralizing teachings had circulated from the time of Simon Magus among the population outside of the Church. Their dogmas had streaked obscurely through the general atmosphere. But now, lo! their propagators have disclosed themselves in various quarters in the very bosom of the Church itself.

Ordained—Fore-written or pre-described; that is, in the predictions of the apostles Paul and Peter, and in the evil types of the Old Testament, Cain, Balaam, and Korah, Jud_1:11. Thus the ancient Greek commentator, Theophylact, pertinently says: “He calls them fore-written because Peter and Paul had said concerning them that in the last times such deceivers” should come. The Greek word is sometimes used in the classics to signify the publicly, placarding the threatened death of a doomed individual. In this manner Sylla, the Roman consul, publicly advertised the names of persons whom he intended to execute. So the prophecies quoted by Jude were an advertisement that all those persons whose characters suited the prophetic descriptions were by those same prophecies advertised for death.

This condemnation—The condemnation described in this epistle. Alford remarks, “It may be observed that the ultra-predestinarians, Beza and Calvin, find, as we might expect, strong defence for their views in their interpretation here. Beza, indeed, gathers from this place that ‘this eternal decree of God comprehends not only the event, but especially the persons themselves.’”

Into lasciviousness—Making Christianity subservient to sexual lusts. This trait identifies them with the Nicolaitans.

Lord—Greek δεσποτης, despotes, whence our word despot.

God—This word is rejected by the best critics as a spurious reading. It then becomes a question whether God or Christ is here designated. The word despotes designates God in Rev_6:10, and Act_4:24; Luk_2:29. But in the parallel passage in 2Pe_2:1, it designates Christ. By the usually received doctrine of the Greek article the rendering would be denying our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ. This seems the more probable sense, as the heretics did not so much reject the true God as the true Christ.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

It has been inferred that the writer had been actually at work upon another Epistle, when he felt it necessary to give it up and compose this one. That is not a certain inference from the previous verse. What that verse makes clear is that it had been Jude"s purpose to compose an Epistle on the general subject of the common salvation, and that something emerged which made him change his plan and write a letter dealing with certain specific matters of urgent importance, and hortatory in its form. The circumstance which led to this change is here stated it was the appearance of a corrupt and insidious party in the Church. For, he says, there are certain men crept in unawares; or, as the Revised Version more forcibly renders it, privily. The verb describes the men as men who had no rightful standing in the Church, but had made their way into it secretly and by false pretences. Compare Paul"s description of the "false brethren unawares brought in, the came in privily to spy out our liberty. which we have in Christ Jesus"; (Gal_2:4) but especially the picture which two of the latest Epistles give of the "false teachers who privily shall bring in damnable heresies", (2Pe_2:1) and those who "creep into houses and lead captive silly women". (2Ti_3:6) The men thus generally described are next designated more precisely as those who were before of old ordained to this condemnation. So the Authorized Version renders it. But the point is more correctly caught by the even they who" of the Revised Version. The men just spoken of in general terms are immediately described as the very men to whom something more precise applies, which is now to be stated. There is some difficulty, however, as to the exact sense of the statement. The term which is translated "ordained" by the Authorized Version is of doubtful interpretation, the doubt turning on the question whether it has a temporal or a local reference. The latter idea seems to be expressed in Gal_3:1, where the verb means either publicly placarded or openly set forth ("evidently set forth," according to the Authorized Version). For the most part, however, the temporal sense prevails, and that this is the sense here is confirmed by the fact that the verb is connected with the temporal adverb "of old." It has been contended that the biblical figure of a book of the Divine counsels is at the basis of the expression here, anti that it should be rendered "ordained" (with the Authorized Version), in the Calvinistic sense of "foreordained." But this is opposed by the fact that the term here rendered" of old" is not applied in the New Testament to the eternal purpose of God. The reference, therefore, is to ancient prophecy, and the term means "who were of old written of," "who were of old set forth," as the Revised Version puts it, or "designated" in prophecy. The writer does not specify what particular prophecies are in view. Hence some take them to be predictions of the evils of the last days spoken of by the apostles, such as we find recorded in the Pastoral Epistles and in 2 Peter. But the force of the phrase "of old," in its present connection, points to what is of ancient date in the stricter sense. The Old Testament prophecies, therefore, are probably those referred to, and the fact that mention is made by-and-by of Enoch as one of the prophets of old, makes it likely that the predictive sections of the book which bears his name are also in the author"s mind. The phrase, "to this condemnation," explains that unto which these men were prophetically designated in ancient time. The noun denotes usually, if not invariably, the judgment of a judge on something wrong, and here, therefore, it seems to have the sense of penal judgment or condemnation. It is not quite apparent what judgment is intended. It is supposed by some that the writer is looking to the unhappy relations of these men to the Church, and finds in these relations and in the moral conditions thereby revealed the judgment "of God upon them. It is more probable that he refers to the penal retribution, of which he is immediately to give examples. Three strokes are added to the picture of the men. These bring out in darkest outline both their character and their faith. There is first the general description of them as ungodly men impious men, in whom there is no spirit of reverence, as the adjective literally implies. The same note appears in Peter"s description. (2Pe_2:5, 2Pe_2:6) (Compare the use of the same term in Rom_4:5 Rom_5:6 1Ti_1:9 2Pe_3:7) This ungodliness is next shown to take the form of an immoral perversion of spiritual privilegeturning the grace of our God into lasciviousness. By the grace of God is meant the whole gift of redemption offered in the gospel. It is called here the grace of our God; the turn thus given to the expression indicating at once the dear and intimate relation to God into which the writer and his fellows in the faith have been introduced, and their shuddering sense of the shameless use to which his gift was debased. The thing to which that grace was perverted is described by a word of wide and evil application, denoting every species of unbridled conduct, but particularly unblushing licentiousness. The same ungodliness in these men is further declared to rise to a denial and disavowal of all Divine claims upon them. The Revised Version, which is more rigorously true to the original here than the Authorized Version, gives an alternative rendering, denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ, in the text, but denying the only Master, and our Lord Jesus Christ in the margin. The question is whether God and Christ are separately mentioned as both objects of the denial, or whether Christ alone is referred to; both the titles, Master and Lord, being applied to him. The question is not easy to decide. Among the strongest arguments in favour of the latter view are the two considerations that the attitude of these men to God has been already stated in the previous clause, and that in 2Pe_2:1 we find both the verb and the noun which are used here applied to Christ. On the other side, it is urged that the parallel in 1Jn_2:22 favours the double reference here; that the title hero rendered "Master" is never applied to Christ except in the single instance of 2Pe_2:1; that the epithet "only" is used more properly of God, as in verse 25 of this same Epistle; that it is difficult to distinguish between the two titles, if both are referred to Christ here; and that the analogous expression in the Book of Enoch (Enoch 48:10) is to be considered. The case is stronger on the whole on the side of the twofold subject being in view. But it is further asked whether this denial of God and of Christ is meant to be a theoretical denial or a practical. It is the practical disavowal of God, which appears in a godless and unbridled life, that seems chiefly in view. But there is no good reason for excluding the idea of corrupt doctrine or teaching. The latter is not expressed, it is true, in the terms adopted in the Epistles of John. Neither is there anything to warrant the supposition that the writer was thinking of Simon Magus in particular, or of Carpocrates, or any of the early Gnostics a supposition entertained both by the earliest Christian writers and by some in our own time. But it is possible enough that the seeds which were to develop into the pronounced Gnosticism of a later time were already sown, and that in such speculative error Jude saw the ally of a life which was regardless of all Divine restraint.

Reasons to enforce the duty of contending for the faith.

The principal reason is the presence of antinomian errorists in the Church.

I THE ENTRANCE OF WICKED ERRORISTS INTO THE CHURCH. "For there are certain men crept in privily, even they who were of old set forth unto this condemnation.

1. These men are not named, either because Jude did not care to give them the celebrity their vanity might have desired, or because their names were already known to the saints.

2. It is not possible for man to guard the Church against the entrance of such men. Even apostles themselves could not keep the Church pure.

3. The entrance of errorists is usually effected by hypocritical arts. They are "false apostles," "deceitful workers," "deceiving the hearts of the simple," "drawing many disciples after them," "false teachers privily bringing in damnable hercules." They usually conceal their real opinions; they mix wholesome truth with destructive errors; and they preach doctrines palatable to the corrupt nature of man. They usually effect an air of novelty or originality in their teaching. The best Christians may therefore be sometimes mistaken in such seducers.

4. The presence of such men in the Church does not destroy the being of the Church.

5. Their destructive influence and the retribution that awaits them were predicted beforehand. For "they were of old set forth unto this condemnation." Not in the prophecies by Peter and Paul, but in the Old Testament; for the phrase, "of old," refers to something in history. The condemnation is that illustrated by the examples recorded in the following verses.

6. It is needful that Christians should be on the watch against the entrance and the influence of wicked errorists.

II THE CHARACTER OF THESE MEN. "Ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

1. They were godless men.

(1) They denied to God the honour due to him. They lived without relation to God. They were practically "without God in the world." "In their works they denied him." "They called not upon the Lord.

(2) They gave to the world, to sin, to folly, the allegiance that was due to God. They "served the creature more than the Creator.

(3) They sought to honour God in a wrong manner. They worshipped not according to his Word; and their service was selfish, or partial, or inconstant, or profane.

(4) Ungodliness leads to all wicked practices.

2. They perverted the doctrines of grace. Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness;" arguing, as Trapp says, from mercy to liberty, which is the devil"s logic.

(1) The true design of the grace of God. It is that "denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we may live soberly, righteously, godly, in this world," As the free gift of God, our election and our calling being both of grace, we are bound to see that we receive it not in vain. (2Co_6:1)

(2) The perversion of this grace is effected

(a) by men "using their liberty for a cloak of maliciousness", (1Pe_2:16) "for an occasion to the flesh", (Gal_5:13) by "continuing in sin that grace may abound"; (Rom_6:1)

(b) by rejecting the Law as a rule of life;

(c) by abusing their liberty to the offence of weak consciences.

(3) The heinousness of, such conduct.

(a) It implies the sin of hypocrisy.

(b) It is a profound dishonour to God and his doctrine.

(c) It argues a boundless ingratitude.

(d) It is almost the most hopeless of all sins against God.

3. They denied Jesus Christ. Wearing the livery of Christ, they were all the while vassals of the devil.

(1) Christ is the only Lord and Master of believers. This Lordship is based upon the idea of property. We are the Lord"s, whether living or dead. (Rom_14:9)

(a) He gives laws to his servants.

(b) He binds them lovingly to obedience.

(c) He rewards them according to their service.

(d) He has power both to give and to take away.

(e) There is no escape for his enemies.

We may, therefore, infer:

(a) How serious an error it is to deny Christ"s Deity!

(b) How foolish to trust in any other Saviour!

(1) How blessed are believers in possessing such a Lord!

(2) These errorists denied this Lord.

(a) Doctrinally; perhaps, like the Gnostics, they denied his true Deity and his true humanity.

(b) Practically,

(a) by opposing his gospel;

(b) by apostasy from his truth;

(c) by a wicked and lewd life. These men, by rejecting Christ"s authority as well as his salvation, "forsook their own mercy. T.C.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

There are certain men crept in, who were of old described before - Even as early as Enoch; of whom it was foretold, that by their wilful sins they would incur this condemnation. Turning the grace of God - Revealed in the gospel. Into lasciviousness - Into an occasion of more abandoned wickedness.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Here we have a reason of the foregoing exhortation assigned, why we should contend so earnestly for the Christian faith once delivered by Christ to his apostles, because there were crept, by little and little, such seducers into the church, as would endeavour to adulterate and corrupt it: There are certain men crept in unawares.

Note here, That corruptors and corruptions creep secretly and gradually into the church; and heretics do not broach all their errors and false doctrines at once; vain then and frivolous is the question which the church of Rome asks us, When did their innovations and false doctrines come first into the church? They crept in, and that unawares; it is enough for us that we find them there, though we assign not the time when, not the manner how, they did come in.

Observe next, The character and description which our apostle gives of these seducers crept in amongst them.

1. He tells us they were men fore-ordained to condemnation; mark, not fore-ordained to seduction to sin, but to condemnation for sin; the word rendered fore-ordained, signifies before written, or before prophesied of, by Enoch and others, that they would by their great sins and impieties fall into that condemnation which God hath ordained as a just reward to their transgressions; God never ordaineth or decreeth any man’s sin, but he decreeth and foretelleth their condemnation for sin.

2. He styles them wicked, ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness; pointing at the Nicolaitans, Gnostics, and other impure heretics, that sprang from Simon Magus, who made the doctrine of the free grace of God, discovered in the gospel, a cloak for their looseness and lasciviousness. Errors in doctrine are usually accompanied with corruption in manners, as being most suitable to man’s corrupt, vile nature, and will be sure never to want followers.

3. He charges them with denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ; that is, Jesus Christ our only Master, God, and Lord, called by St. Peter, the Lord that bought them: lessening the dignity of his person, and invalidating what they could the merit of his death and sufferings.

Learn hence, 1. That Jesus Christ, the Master of the world, the Lord of the church, is truly God; he is called the great God, and the mighty God, to show that he is not a God inferior to, but equal to, the Father, and that by nature, not by office.

Learn, 2. That it is an horrid impiety to deny our Lord Jesus Christ, to deny him in either of his natures, or in any of his offices; to deny him either in opinion, or in practice, is a sin that carries a prodigious appearance with it: They denied the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4. For there are certain men. Men who have crept in without their character being understood. Who were before of old ordained to this condemnation. Whose coming was predicted and whose lives were placed under condemnation. See verse 14 and also verse 17. To this condemnation. This condemnation which comes on all the ungodly. Turning the grace of our God. Of the gospel. Instead of self-restraint they live lascivious lives. The warrant for this was found in “the freedom of the children of God.” From the very times of the apostles there have been Antinomians who have held that what was sin to others might be permitted to the sanctified. They asserted that the Spirit was not defiled by the sins of the body. Denying our only Lord Jesus Christ. “Lord God” is not found in the best manuscript. Their denial of Christ was a denial that he had come in the flesh. These sectaries held that the flesh was wholly sinful.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

4. παρεισεδύησαν κ.τ.λ. It is here that the parallelism with 2 Peter begins most obviously. To comment upon the matter common to the two Epistles would be to repeat the notes on 2 Peter. I shall therefore only call attention to selected points.

προγεγραμμένοι. Not “predestinated” but predicted by Enoch (Jud 1:14) and others.

χάριτα μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν. By making Christian liberty an excuse for licence. Cf. Rom 6:1, 1Pe 2:16.

ἀρνούμενοι. Perhaps by teaching, as many Gnostics did, that Jesus was a mere man upon whom a heavenly spirit, Christ, descended at His baptism, leaving Him before or at the Passion. (In the apocryphal Gospel of Peter the cry of our Lord on the Cross is given in this form, “My Power, My Power, why hast thou forsaken me?”) Or else by the doctrine that the God of creation (ὁ μόνος δεσπότης) was not the supreme God.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4.] Purpose, and occasion, of the Epistle.

4.] For there crept in (aor. explaining the arising of the occasion of his thus writing. On παρεισέδυσαν, cf. 2Pe 2:1, παρεισάξουσιν, and note: also Gal 2:4, where we have both παρεισάκτους and παρεισῆλθον. Secrecy, and lack of legitimate introduction, are plainly expressed in this word. “Crept in,” viz. into the Christian church) certain men (“le mot τινες a quelque chose de méprisant, comme dans Gal 2:12,” Arnaud. And so, it may be observed, has ἄνθρωποι in this connexion) (men) who have been of old written down in prophecy (by the οἱ προγεγρ. these persons are again brought up and designated; q. d. “namely, the very men who &c.” προγεγραμμένοι has been variously interpreted. The prep. may have two meanings: either 1) that of time, previously, as in Gal 3:1, where the various meanings of the word are discussed: 2) that of publicity, “openly,” taking “to proscribe” as the sense of the word. But it is against this latter that this sense is never found in the N. T.: and that “proscribed,” if taken in its usual meaning, will not admit of εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρῖμα following it. Wolf’s interpretation, “qui dudum sunt accusati in hoc judicium,” lets go the proscripti altogether. There can be little doubt then that we must keep ποό to its temporal sense, as indeed do Œc., Thl. (but understanding the reference wrongly: προγεγραμμένους δὲ αὐτοὺς έλεγεν, ὅτι καὶ Πέτρος κ. Παῦλος περὶ αὐτῶν εἴρηκεν ὅτι ἐν ἐσχάτοις χρόνοις ἐλεύσονται πλάνοι τοιοῦτοι κ.τ.λ.), and most recent Commentators. Then, thus understanding it, to what time and fact are we to refer such designation of them? Clearly not to God’s eternal purpose, in this place, from the term πάλαι, which, as Huther remarks, is never used of that purpose, but points to some fact in time. And if so, then the previous writing down of these men can only point to the O. T. prophecies. In that case there is a pregnant construction, “of old fore-described (and destined).” What special description of them is intended, might be difficult to say were it not for the quotation below ver. 14 from the prophecy of Enoch. The warnings contained in the historical facts adduced below may also be meant. It may be observed that the ultra-prædestinarians, Beza and Calvin, find, as we might expect, strong defence for their views in their interpretation here. Beza indeed gathers from this place, “hoc æternum Dei decretum non modo eventum rerum, sed ipsas imprimis personas comprehendere”) to this judgment (what judgment, or rather result of judgment? “Judicium de quo mox,” as Bengel: the sentence which St. Jude has in his mind and proceeds in the following verses to unfold. κρῖμα, as so often, though not = κατάκριμα, yet gets the condemnatory meaning from the character of the context), impious, changing the grace of our God (τὴν χάριτα, the gift of grace, the state of salvation, in which our sins are forgiven us and we are admitted into the freedom of God’s children. ἡμῶν, drawing closer the bond of God’s true children to Him and one another, and thus producing greater abhorrence of those who have thus abused His grace) into lasciviousness (the words might mean, “perverting the grace of our God in the direction of, for the purpose of, lasciviousness:” and so De Wette: but it is against this, that μετατιθέναι in reff. is simply to change, not to pervert: and we therefore must understand, as above, that they made the state of grace and Christian liberty into a state of (moral) licence and wantonness: as , “hanc ejus gratiam transferunt in luxuriam, qui nunc tanto licentius et liberius peccant quanto minus se vident asperitate legis de admissis facinoribus examinari”), and denying (see 2Pe 2:1) the only Master, and our Lord Jesus Christ (in 2Pe 2:1 δεσπότης is used of Christ: which circumstance might tempt us to refer it to Christ here also: and so Bengel, De Wette, Stier, al. But probability seems to weigh on the other side. In every other place (see reff.) δεσπότης is used of God: 2) the addition μόνος seems to bind this meaning to it here: (3) the denial of God by disobeying His law is the epexegetic resumption of the last clause: 4) δεσπότης κ. κύριον are hardly distinguishable if both applied to Christ. For these reasons I must agree with Huther, in regarding the rejected θεόν as having been, although a gloss, yet a true one: and would remind the reader, once for all, that the reference of any term in the parallel place of 2 Peter is no guide for us here, seeing that it belongs to the extremely curious relation of the two passages to each other, that many common terms are used in different senses).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4. παρειαέδυσαν γάρ. “For certain men have crept in privily, who of old were appointed in scripture unto this doom.” Γάρ introduces the reason of ἀνάγκην ἓσχον. For παρεισέδυσαν B has παρεισεδύησαν, a vulgar form; see Blass, p. 43. The aorist is here not distinguishable in sense from the perfect; as to the meaning of the compound verb, refer to note on παρειγειν, 2Pe 2:1. Πάλαι is most naturally taken to mean in the Old Testament, in the many denunciations of false prophets. The word, however, does not always denote a long interval of time; hence Zahn and Spitta would render, “who were some time ago appointed in a writing for this doom,” and find here a direct reference to 2Pe 2:3. But though the Greeks (more especially the poets; see references in Liddell and Scott) sometimes use πάλαι in a loose colloquial way, just as we use “long ago” of things that happened quite recently, we must not give the word this sense without good reason. Jude could hardly have spoken of 2 Peter as written πάλαι, unless he were looking back over a space of twently or thirty years. Unless we are to suppose that the two Epistles were separated by such an interval as this, the explanation of Zahn and Spitta can hardly be adopted.

Nevertheless we have here a reference to 2Pe 2:3. As used by Jude, κρίμα has no meaning, for he has entirely omitted to say what the doom is. The best explanation of this curious difficulty is that he was writing in haste, with 2 Peter fresh in his mind, and that his words are suggested by οἷς τὸ κρίμα ἔκπαλαι οὐκ ἀργεῖ in the Petrine passage. If this be so, we have here one of the strongest proofs of the posteriority of Jude.

Some support for this view may be found in the weakness of the various explanations which have been found for κρίμα. Wiesinger, Hofmann, Schott find the key in παρεισέδυσαν, they have wickedly crept in, and this is their judgment. But, we must answer, the creeping in is their sin, not their punishment. Zahn also (Einleitung, ii. 80) goes back for his solution to the main verb; they have crept in, and their appearance is a judgment, not on them, but on the Church, inasmuch as it will lead to a sifting out of bad Christians from among the good. Cf. Joh 9:39, εἰς κρίμα ἐγὼ εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἦλθον, ἵνα οἱ μὴ βλέποντες βλέπωσι, καὶ οἱ βλέποντες τυφλοὶ γένωνται: the reader may refer to Westcott’s note upon this passage. But it seems evident that here the κρίμα is one which hangs over the intruders themselves. Huther found the explanation of κρίμα in the ἀπώλεσεν of ver. 5: but this verb stands much too far off, and does not directly apply to the evildoers in question; further, if this had been the writer’s meaning, we should have expected γάρ, not δέ, after ὑπομνῆσαι. Spitta finds it in the words ἀσεβεῖς … ἀρνούμενοι: their judgment is that they are impious and deny the Lord. But here again impiety and denial are sins, not sentences. It may be replied that sin may be regarded as its own punishment, but this idea certainly does not belong to Jude. Not one of these views is satisfactory. Each commentator destroys the opinion of others without establishing his own, and we are really driven to suppose that St. Jude, in his hurry, picked out St. Peter’s word without observing that it required an explanation.

χάριτα. The grace is the πίστις, or the gospel (1Pe 1:10); it promises a freedom which these impious men turn into lasciviousness.

τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ Κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι. Cf. 2Pe 2:1, τὸν ἀγοράσασαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι. St. Peter’s phrase is certainly the finer, and is probably the original: it is marked by his favourite iambic rhythm; the ἀγοράσαντα explains and limits δεσπότην, and here, as in other passages to be noticed as we proceed, Jude has a tendency to exaggerate and harden the thought of St. Peter. Τὸν μόνον δεσπότην is so strong a phrase that it has been regarded as impossible. Hence K L P and several other authorities, followed by the textus receptus, insert Θεόν after δεσπότην: and many commentators, who do not accept this reading, yet translate in the same sense, “the only Master and our Lord Jesus Christ.” But this misrendering is needless. If Christ may be called δεσπότης, He may also be called μόνος δεσπότης in distinction not from the Father, but from all false masters. Cf. note on ver. 25.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

With the whole verse compare 2Pe 2:1.

Crept in unawares [παρεισεδυσαν] . Rev., privily. See on 2Pe 2:1. The verb means to get in by the side [παρα] , to slip in by a side - door. Only here in New Testament.

Ordained [προγεγραμμενοι] . The meaning is in dispute. The word occurs four times in New Testament. In two of these instances pro has clearly the temporal sense before (Rom 14:4; Eph 3:3). In Gal 3:1, it is taken by some in the sense of openly, publicly (see note there). It seems better, on the whole, to take it here in the temporal sense, and to render written of beforehand, i e., in prophecy as referred to in vv. 14, 15. So the American Rev.

Lasciviousness. See on 1Pe 4:3.

Lord God. God is omitted in the best texts. On Lord [δεσποτην] , see on 2Pe 2:1.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.