Jude 1:5

(5-7) We now enter upon the main body of the Epistle. Three instances of God’s vengeance: the unbelievers in the wilderness; the impure angels; Sodom and Gomorrha.

(5) I will therefore put you in remembrance.—Or, But I wish to remind you. The “but” indicates opposition to the impiety of those just mentioned.

Though ye once knew this.—The best MSS. and versions compel us to substitute “all things” for “this,” and we must translate, because ye have once for all (as in Jud_1:3) known all things. You have once for all been taught all that I want to say to you; so that I need only remind you, there is no need to instruct. (Comp. Rom_15:14-15, where see Notes; 2Pe_1:12; 1Jn_2:21.) “All things” probably has special reference to Old Testament history, as what follows seems to show.

How that the Lord.—“How that” depends upon “remind,” not upon “have known.” There is very strong evidence in favour of substituting “Jesus” for “the Lord;” a most remarkable reading, showing how, in Christian language, the Man Jesus had become identified with the Eternal Son. The use of “Christ” in 1Co_10:4, though less striking, is similar.

Having saved the people.—Or, perhaps, having saved a people. A whole nation was rescued. The order of the three examples of signal punishment is in 2 Peter chronological: impure angels, flood, Sodom and Gomorrha; here not. But the order here is quite intelligible. St. Jude’s main object is to warn his readers against that party in the Christian community who, by its abuse of Christian liberty, transformed the gospel of purity into a gospel of wantonness, and to give them a safeguard against such. And the safeguard is this: to hold fast the faith once for all delivered to them, and to remember the consequences of being unbelieving. For this purpose, no warning could be more apposite than the fate of Jude’s own nation in the wilderness. This palmary instance given, two others follow, probably suggested by 2 Peter.

Afterward destroyed.—Better, secondly destroyed. Wiclif, “the secunde tyme”; Rheims, “secondly.” The Lord twice manifested His power on Israel: (1) in mercy; (2) in judgment. The reference is almost certainly to Num_14:35; Deu_1:35, &c. The destruction of Jerusalem can scarcely be meant, whatever date we assign to the Epistle, although the striking reading, “Jesus” for “the Lord,” gives some countenance to such an interpretation. The most obvious meaning is, that the people destroyed were those who, in the first instance, were saved. Had the destruction of Jerusalem been intended, the reference would probably have been more clear.

(6) And the angels which kept not.—Rather, because they kept not. The construction is similar to that in Mat_18:25, “Forasmuch as he had not to pay.” (See Note on Jud_1:8.) This second instance of the impure angels has nothing to do with the original rebellion of Satan, or “fall of the angels.” The reference is either to Gen_6:2, or (more probably), to passages in the Book of Enoch. (See Excursus at the end of this Epistle.)

Their first estate.—The Greek word has two meanings: (1) beginning, which our translators have adopted here; (2) rule or power, which would be better. Wiclif has “prinshood;” Rheims, “principalitie.” The word is translated “rule” (1Co_15:24) and “principality” (Rom_8:38; Eph_1:21; Eph_3:10; Eph_6:12; Col_1:16; Col_2:10; Col_2:15; Tit_3:1). The term belongs to the Jewish classification of angels, and here refers rather to their power over things earthly than to the beginning of their state. The two meanings are but two views of the same fact: their power or dignity was their first estate. Some explain the word of the power of God over the angels; but both wording and context are against this.

Their own habitation.—Their proper home. By leaving heaven and coming down to earth, they lost their power over the earth. (Comp. Milton’s Paradise Lost, Book 5)

He hath reserved.—Better, He hath kept, in ironical contrast to “which kept not” just above: the same Greek word is used in both cases. This ironical contrast does not exist in the parallel passage, 2Pe_2:4. Would a writer, quite willing to copy, have failed to copy this? On the other hand, what more natural than that St. Jude should add a forcible touch?

In everlasting chains.—Speculations as to how this and 2Pe_2:4 are to be reconciled with such texts as Luk_22:31, 1Pe_5:8, which speak plainly of the freedom and activity of Satan, and Eph_6:12, Rom_8:38, Col_2:15, which imply numerous agents akin to him, are not very profitable. The reality of powers of evil may be inferred, apart from Scripture, from their effects. That some of these powers are personal, some not, some free, some not, and that all are to be defeated at last, seems to be implied in Scripture; but its silence is a rebuke to curious speculation. Enough is told us for our comfort, warning, and assurance. It consoles us to know that much of the evil of which we are conscious in ourselves is not our own, but comes from without. It puts us on our guard to know that we have such powers arrayed against us. It gives us confidence to know that we have abundant means of victory even over them.

Under darkness.—The Greek word occurs only here, Jud_1:13, 2Pe_2:4; 2Pe_2:17, and possibly Heb_12:18. A separate English word, such as “gloom,” is desirable for these passages.

The great day.—So called Rev_6:17 (comp. Rev_16:14), and nowhere else in the New Testament. Perhaps it comes from Joe_2:31; Mal_4:5. St. John’s expression is the “last day” (Joh_6:39-40; Joh_6:44; Joh_6:54; Joh_11:24; Joh_12:48; and nowhere else). “The day of judgment,” “that day,” and “the day of the Lord,” are other common expressions.

(7) Even as.—Or, possibly, how, like “how that” in Jud_1:5, depending upon “put you in remembrance.” Sodom and Gomorrha are typical instances of divine vengeance both in the Old and New Testament (Isa_13:19; Jer_50:40; Rom_9:29).

And the cities about them.—Adma and Zeboim (Deu_29:23; Hos_11:8).

In like manner.—We must read, in like manner to these, and arrange the sentence thus: Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them, giving themselves over to fornication in like manner to these. Who are meant by “these”? Not the ungodly men of Jud_1:4, which would anticipate Jud_1:8; nor the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, which would be somewhat clumsy in the Greek; but the angels of Jud_1:6. The reference is again to the impurity of certain angels in having intercourse with the daughters of men, of which there is so much in the Book of Enoch. This sin of the angels was strictly analogous to that of the people of Sodom.

Going after strange flesh.—Strictly, going astray after other flesh—i.e., other than is allowed; leaving natural for unnatural uses.

Are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.—It would be possible to take “of eternal fire” after “example,” thus: are set forth as an example of eternal fire in undergoing punishment. (Comp. Wis_10:7.) The punishment of the submerged cities is perpetual; moreover, there are appearances as of volcanic fire under them. The Greek for “undergoing” occurs here only in the New Testament; but comp. 2Ma_4:48.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jud_1:5

I will therefore put you in remembrance.

Truth to be remembered

1. Great is the sin of those who despise repeated truths. A Christian must not have an itching, but a humble and obedient ear. Every truth, like a lease, brings in revenue the next year as well as this.

2. Christians must not only receive, but retain also the truths of God. Our memories must be heavenly storehouses and treasuries of precious truths; not like hour-glasses, which are no sooner full but they are running out. To help us in remembering heavenly truths, let us--

(1) Be reverent and heedful in our attentions, as receiving a message from God.

(2) Love every heavenly truth as our treasure; delight helps memory (Psa_119:16), and what we love we keep.

(3) Our memories should not be taken up with vanities. The memory which is filled only with earthly concerns, is like a golden cabinet filled with dung.

(4) Let instruction be followed with meditation, prayer, conference, and holy conversation; by all these it is hid in the heart the deeper, and driven home more thoroughly (Deu_6:6-7; Psa_119:97).

3. There is a constant necessity of a conscientious ministry. People know and remember but in part, and till that which is imperfect be done away we cannot spare ministerial remembrances.

4. The forgetfulness of the people must not discourage the minister. A boat is not to be cast up and broken in pieces for every leak.

5. The work of ministers is not to contrive doctrines, but to recall them. (W. Jenkyn, M. A.)

Afterward destroyed them that believed not.

Unbelief--its pusillanimity, impiety, and ruinous consequences

(with Psa_78:40):--Of the Church of God in the world, it is true, as of the world itself, that, with much that may be called variety, there is substantial sameness, in all ages, in its condition. In all ages believers have enjoyed the same privileges. Their trials and dangers have also been similar as to their effects; bearing, at one time, on the growth of their knowledge and their faith; and, at another, on the open profession of their attachment to Jesus. When we thus look on the condition of the Church, in one aspect, as being as unchanged by the lapse of time, and yet, in another, as partaking of all the mutability of man and of the world, we are prepared to find that, with circumstances of unfailing security in its condition, it is, nevertheless, not entirely beyond the reach of danger and loss. The Church, and every member of it, true to Christ the Head, is encompassed with Gods favour as with a shield. But unbelief detaches the hold from the Rock of Ages--from an unchangeable Saviour and His unchanging word. In consequence, so far as unbelief prevails in individuals or in Churches, they are exposed to wander, they cannot but fall into sin, and ultimately into ruin.

I. Let us endeavour to apprehend the spirit of our text, and the convictions present to the apostles mind, when he occupied the point of standing from which he contemplates the visible Church. Several things are presupposed in the language of our text. In the salvation of man, memory has its province as well as faith. Knowledge, like the light, must enter the soul, and remove its darkness. But if knowledge be of a vague and indefinite nature, it has no hold on the convictions and no power on the heart. And yet truth, once well known, may fade from the view, and become, although not entirely forgotten, yet practically inoperative in the life. Faded impressions, then, need to be revived, and forgotten truths recalled, so as to be ever present, as a light from heaven, shining on the soul and path of the man, and guiding him in all his purposes and acts, in a world of darkness and sin. The light of Gods truth, pre-eminently so called, is the revelation, not of the purity of His law and nature, nor of the unity of His Godhead and the supremacy of His government, but of the reality and fulness of His grace. It is implied, however, in our text, that, notwithstanding all this manifold grace of God, one and another, and many, may ultimately perish, and that we may receive the grace of God in vain. How many who profess to receive it obviously show that they have never intellectually apprehended its nature, nor felt its influence at all? A sense of grace received has never expanded their hearts in generous love, either to God or man. But our text not only implies the possibility of all this, but assumes it as a fact that grace may be abused to lasciviousness (Jud_1:4); so that those who have externally received grace, may become eminently more godless and wicked than if they had never known of its existence. But what Christian can say that he never needs the exhortation of the apostle, to fear lest a promise being left him of entering into rest, he may come short of it through unbelief?

II. Let us consider the fact to which the apostle specially directs our attention, viewing the sin in the light of the description of it which the Psalmist gives. How oft did they provoke Him in the wilderness and grieve Him in the desert! And often did the Lord destroy some of them. But we shall confine our remarks to that one occasion on which the Lord sware that they should not enter into His rest (Num_14:12).

1. In order that we may receive the full benefit to be derived from this alarming example, let us notice the stage in their history when they so grievously sinned against God by unbelief. We find that, in a period of little more than a year, the Lord had brought them from out of the house of bondage in Egypt, through the perils of the wilderness, to the very confines of the land of promise. It would be easy to trace, at least, ten instances of provocation; but it is enough to remark, as displaying the grace and forbearance of God with his stiff-necked people, that in almost every march, or at every stage throughout their journey, they tempted God. God had visited them with marks of His anger, but He still carries them forward, continues to be their God and guide, and the promised land now stretches out to their view. His miracles, which they saw in Egypt and in the wilderness, afforded every confirmation that God was able to fulfil His word; and they had no cause to fear or to be discouraged whatever obstacles might arise. We, like them, are called by God to take possession of blessings guaranteed by the oath of God to Abrahams spiritual seed. The kingdom of Christ, with all its blessings, is brought near to us, affording a rest to the weary and heavy laden traveller of the world. Wherever the gospel comes, every man is called to go up and possess. But this kingdom and its subjects have enemies,--the devil, the world, and the flesh; those who go up to possess the kingdom of God, must engage in conflict with these enemies, and only expect perfect rest in the degree to which the destruction of these enemies is accomplished. The one unrecalled command standing from age to age is, Go into all the world and preach the gospel. Sinners! go up and possess; fear not, neither be discouraged; behold the Lord hath set the land before you.

2. Let us next consider how the people treated this command of God. Did they at once obey Gods command? No. Did they positively refuse? Their disobedience did not manifest itself in that manner at first. Moses tells us that the people came near to him and said, We will send men before us, and they shall search out the land by what way we must go up, and to what cities we shall come (Deu_1:22). Some of you may say, Could anything be more reasonable? But you must observe the peculiar circumstances in which the children of Israel were placed. They had the unequivocal command of God to go up. This first hesitation, therefore, to go up, this prudent expedient, was in itself no small sin, and evinced the operation of the evil heart of unbelief. It formed part of the turning back and limiting of the Holy One of Israel of which the Psalmist speaks. But is this conduct of the children of Israel without its parallel among us, in our treatment of the call and the commands of the gospel? Are there no expedients to which we have recourse, by which to modify the authority and uncompromising severity of the Word of God; and by which we are actually, from fear and unbelief, regulating our steps by an ungodly prudence?

3. Let us observe how God deals with those who, by unbelief, had shrunk from the course to which He had called them. Did God instantly visit their transgression with judgment? So far from this, He bore with their abject timidity and dishonouring distrust. He permitted Moses to approve of the proposal of the people to send spies. Accordingly, the twelve rulers go forth to explore the land, and find that it surpasses their most sanguine expectations. Nevertheless, said the spies, the people be strong, the cities walled, and very great; moreover we saw the children of Anak there.

The disheartening effect of this intelligence on the hearts of the people was such that, when commanded to go up, they refused to obey. Persisting in their unbelief of this oath-secured presence of God, the anger of the Lord burned against them. This sin crowned all the past, and was aggravated by every possible enhancement of guilt. It was a rejection of Gods guidance, and a limitation of Gods grace and power. He swears in His wrath that He would destroy all from twenty years old and upward which have murmured against Me; and your little ones which ye said should be a prey, them I will bring in, and they shall know the land which ye have despised. Thus it was, that those whom God saved out of Egypt He destroyed in the wilderness. Hence we learn that it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God--the Holy One of Israel. In all ages there are some who do not, and who cannot, enter in, because of unbelief. Are any of us of that class?

1. The first lesson which we learn from the admonition of our text is, that it is with the very same God who destroyed unbelieving Israel that we have to do. The greater or less fulness of revelation which God gives of Himself does not affect His nature any more than the obscurity or brightness of a day affects the brightness or nature of the sun.

2. Mark the grace of God as exhibited at the period when He destroyed them who believed not. He permitted the spies to be sent. He bore with the pusillanimity and unbelief of the people; and so He always does in no small degree. But God, although He thus graciously tolerate much unbelief, does not prosper His people in the expedients which they adopt under its influence.

3. You learn from the fact to which our attention has been turned, that faith is not of efficacy, by any arbitrary appointment of God. As the captain who would lead an army to victory must possess their confidence, and as every teacher, who shall be able to educate his disciples, must possess their respect for his ability to instruct--so must the God and Captain of our Salvation possess the unfeigned and unwavering faith of His people.

4. We learn also that unbelief is not a trivial but most heinous sin. It operates at the seat of spiritual life in the heart within--it is only suspicion, doubt, questioning, shrinking, and simple inaction. But as the word, the promise, and the command come from God, it treats the Holy One of Israel with as much contumely and distrust as God lays to the charge of Israel, when they turned back, tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

5. But this passage of Jewish history admits of application to the conduct of communities as well as of individuals. There is ground for apprehension, that the doctrine of Gods decrees, instead of forming a source of comfort and strength in arduous duties, is often abused as an apology for inaction, and operates as a sedative on the moral sensibilities and aspirations of the heart, Now, looking at this passage in the history of the Israelites, we find it was Gods will, and could have been compatible with Gods purposes, that they should have entered into possession of Canaan forty years before the time that the land became theirs.

6. Let sinners, therefore, see that they are, under the gospel, saved to the extent that the children of Israel were, when delivered out of Egypt, and brought to the verge of the promised land. Immanuels kingdom stretches out before them, in the promises and privileges of the gospel, and Gods command to them is, Go up and possess the land. And if any have been so far awakened by Gods Spirit as to understand, in some measure, the better things which God has provided, but are yet halting between two opinions, or turning away sorrowful, from the requirement to yield themselves unreservedly to Christs revealed will and authority, let them know, that, in thus shrinking through unbelief, and returning to the world, they cannot engage in the pleasures and pursuits of the world as they did before, at least for a time. They will experience a misery which may fitly be represented by being driven into the wilderness to wander and drag out a dreary life, as if with Gods oath sounding in their ears, that they shall not enter into His rest. (John Grant.)

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

Jdg 1:5. I will therefore put you in remembrance, &c. — I will remind you of some examples of God’s judgments against such persons. Œcumenius observes, that “by proposing the following examples of the destruction of sinners from the Old Testament history, the apostle designed to show, that the God of the Old Testament is the same with the God of the New, in opposition to the Manicheans, who denied this; also to prove that the goodness of God will not hinder him from punishing the wicked under the new dispensation, any more than it hindered him from punishing them under the old.” In this passage Jude has mentioned two of the instances of the divine vengeance against atrocious sinners, which Peter took notice of, 2Pe 2:4-5, (where see the notes,) and in place of the third instance, the destruction of the old world, he hath introduced the destruction of the rebellious Israelites in the wilderness. Though ye once knew this — Were informed of it, and received it as a truth; that the Lord, having saved the people out of Egypt — By a train of wonderful miracles; afterward destroyed them that believed not — That is, destroyed the far greater part of that very people, whom he had once saved in a very extraordinary manner. Let no one, therefore, presume upon past mercies, as if he were now out of danger. Jude does not mention the various sins committed by the Israelites in the wilderness, such as their worshipping the golden calf, refusing to go into Canaan, when commanded of God, their fornication with the Midianitish women, their frequent murmurings, &c., but he sums up the whole in their unbelief, because it was the source of all their sins.

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

CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL NOTES

Jud_1:5. In remembrance.—That which we have in mind is often well and wisely brought up forcibly before our minds.

Jud_1:6. Angels, etc.—There is nothing in the Old Testament to which this can be referred, unless we take “angels” to be a figurative term for the antediluvians. It is most probably a reference to a tradition which is preserved in the book of Enoch, but whether that book was written before or after the epistle of Jude seems to be uncertain. The passages in the book of Enoch, or the traditions which these passages fix, are as follows: Chap. 7.1, 2—“It happened, after the sons of men had multiplied in those days, that daughters were born to them, elegant and beautiful. And when the angels, the sons of heaven, beheld them, they became enamoured of them, saying to each other, Come, let us select for ourselves wives from the progeny of men, and let us beget children.” Chap. 15.7—“Therefore I made not wives for you [angels] because, being spiritual, your dwelling is in heaven.” Chap. 18.16—“Therefore was he offended with them [the angels], and bound them, until the period of the consummation of their crimes in the secret year.” (Compare chap. 21.2, 3—“I beheld … a desolate spot, prepared, and terrific. There, too, I beheld seven stars of heaven [angels], bound in it together. These are those of the stars which have transgressed the commandment of the most high God; and are here bound, until the infinite number of the days of their crime be completed.” Compare chap, 87.2, 3.) Estate.—Principality. The term belongs to the Jewish classification of angels, and refers to their power or rule. Everlasting chains.—An evident figure of speech. “Everlasting” suggests “firm gripping,” “severe” rather than merely “continuous.” For other traditions influencing Jude, see Illustrations.

THE ANGELS AND THEIR FIRST ESTATE

Dean Plumptre’s Note on Jud_1:6.—St. Jude’s language, like that of St. Peter, follows the traditions of the book of Enoch, which speaks of fallen angels as kept in their prison-house until the day of judgment; and also those which are represented in the Midrasch Ruth in the Book of Zohar—“After that the sons of God had begotten sons, God took them and brought them to the mount of darkness, and bound them in chains of darkness which reach to the middle of the great abyss.” A fuller form of the Rabbinic legend relates that the angels Asa and Asael charged God with folly in having created man who so soon provoke Him, and that He answered that if they had been on earth they would have sinned as man had done. “And thereupon He allowed them to descend to earth, and they sinned with the daughters of men. And when they would have returned to heaven they could not, for they were banished from their former habitation, and brought into the dark mountains of the earth.” The resemblance between this tradition and that of the Zoroastrian legend of the fall of Ahriman and his angels, and again of the punishment of the Titans by Zeus in the mythology of Hesiod, shows the widespread currency of the belief referred to.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Jud_1:5-6

Privileges are always Conditional.—St. Jude is concerned for the maintenance of the Christian life in those to whom he writes. They had been highly exalted in being raised to a spiritual life. Their privilege is intimated in the style of his address to them, in Jud_1:1. But their fall from privilege was possible; continuance of privilege depended on continuance of faith, and on persistent effort to meet the obligations of privilege. Yet they were in a very perilous way exposed to temptation. It took form as the attractive teachings of men who claimed for them a liberty which was only rightly called “licence,” and who shook their confidence in the primary Christian truths which they had received from the apostles. The one thing that filled St. Jude with fear was, that they might presume upon their Christian standing and privilege and think themselves secure. There is no more perilous condition in which any man can be placed than that of self-security. “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” St. Jude therefore brings some striking and impressive illustrations of the truth that privileges never have been held, and never can be held, apart from conditions. No created being ever yet had absolute possession of any privilege. It can be lost; it can only too easily be lost. In the paragraph before us the illustrations are taken from two sources—history and tradition.

I. The illustration from history.—The salvation of Israel from Egypt was a remarkable sign of Divine favour and interest which lifted the nation of Israel into a high place of dignity and privilege. But that privilege did not keep the rebellious members of that community from suffering the just judgment of God. Their privilege provided no security against their suffering the proper consequences of distrust and disobedience. Even when He had saved them, in such a glorious and gracious way, the “Lord afterward destroyed them that believed [trusted] not.” “St. Jude’s main object is to warn his readers against that party in the Christian community who, by its abuse of Christian liberty, transformed the gospel of purity into a gospel of wantonness, and to give them a safeguard against such. And the safeguard is this: to hold fast the faith once delivered to them, and to remember the consequences of being unbelieving. For this purpose, no warning could be more apposite than the fate of Jude’s own nation in the wilderness” (Plummer).

II. The illustration from tradition—It is quite certain that St. Jude did not get the illustration of the fallen angels from any Scriptures that have come down to our time, or of which we have any intimation. St. Peter indeed refers to the matter (2Pe_2:4), but he plainly draws his illustration from the same source as St. Jude. A little thought brings home to us the conviction that it is a matter concerning which men may speculate and imagine much, but can know nothing. The nature, estate, possibilities of angels have not been made the subjects of Divine revelation, and we must not attempt to be wise above what is written. Admitting, however, that St. Peter and St. Jude referred to a very familiar tradition of their day, it is important for us to see that their use of it in a way of illustration does not guarantee the historical truth of it. Such as it is, and whatever it is, it can be used to illustrate and enforce truths and principles. These angels were thought of as highly exalted in privilege. But they had no absolute security of the privilege. They went wrong when they presumed on their privilege, and failed to meet the conditions of dependence and obedience on which the retention of privilege depended. In a similar way a modern minister may illustrate, and press home some truth, by the stories in Tennyson’s Idylls of the King, and his using them in no sense implies his belief in their historic verity. The two illustrations effectively enforce the truth, which is true in every age, that “patient continuance in well-doing” alone can guarantee the retention of Christian privilege.

Jud_1:7-11. Denunciation of Moral Mischief-makers.—The reference to Sodom and Gomorrah is suggested by the terrible doom of the fallen angels. The connection of thought seems to be this—Those angels fell through sensual self-indulgence, and their miserable condition is appalling; Sodom and Gomorrah fell through sensual self-indulgence, and the present condition of the Sodomite sinners is appalling. And these false and mischievous teachers are tempting you to just that sensual self-indulgence which must as certainly bring a like appalling ruin round to you. Writing thus, St. Jude rouses himself into a very height of moral indignation which makes him pour forth burning words of denunciation. The danger for Christians lay in the attractiveness, personal fascination, of these mischief-makers, and in the subtlety with which they disguised the real purpose they had in view. To St. Jude they were maskers, “wolves in sheep’s clothing,” and with a rough hand he pulls the sheepskins off, and shows us plainly enough the gaunt and hungry wolves within. He bids us look at them as thus fully exposed, and see three things—they are irreverent, sensual, covetous.

I. The moral mischief-makers were irreverent.—It may be that it was characteristic of these teachers that they tried to undermine the authority of the apostles. We know how St. Paul had to vindicate his claims against them. But it is always a sign of the self-willed teacher, and always a cause for the gravest suspicion, that the tone of a man’s ministry is irreverent, either in regard to God or to His servants. The good, sincere man is not irreverent, and cannot possibly be. The self-contained man is almost sure to reveal himself by the tone in which he speaks of dignities. By this fruit you may always know him. They can be no true leaders of men who themselves cannot obey, who “despise dominion.” (The illustration from Michael is treated in a Suggestive Note.)

II. The moral mischief-makers were sensual.—The character of the teaching could be judged by the character of the teachers. Our Lord taught the same truth in the Sermon on the Mount. St. Jude says, “See how these teachers of liberty, which is licence, themselves act in relation to their sensual, animal natures.” The revelation is an awful one; it reminds of Sodom and its shameful sins. “What they understand naturally, like the creatures without reason, in these things they are destroyed.” The A.V. rendering is altogether more vigorous than the R.V., “What they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.” The teachers of the pure Christianity must themselves be pure. We have a perfect right to refuse any man’s teachings, when he does not match his teaching with his life. Sensual restraint is required by Christianity; sensual licence is the teaching of antichrist. And this truth is as true of the refined sensualities of civilisation as of the coarser and more animal forms that are characteristic of earlier times. “Be ye clean that bear the vessels of the Lord.”

III. The moral mischief-makers were covetous.—This almost necessarily follows from their self-centredness and self-sufficiency. Covetousness is getting for self, without consideration for the claims of others. The true teacher gets for those whom he teaches; the false teacher gets for himself. The three illustrations taken from Old Testament Scriptures impress this self-centredness which is sure to make a man covetous and grasping. Cain thought what he could get; Balaam considered what would pay; and Core [Korah] aimed to secure personal credit. We are right in testing all would-be teachers by the spirit which they show in doing their work. The Lord “pleased not Himself.” The apostle said, “We seek not yours, but you.” No man can ever do the work of Christ if he is possessed and ruled by a passion for serving himself.

SUGGESTIVE NOTES AND SERMON SKETCHES

Jud_1:8. The Course of Sin.—After citing the above examples of impenitence and punishment, the apostle returns to the τινες ἄνθρωποι of Jud_1:4, and proceeds to show an exact parallel between them and both the fallen angels and the inhabitants of the Cities of the Plain. To distinguish them, however, a term is applied—ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι, the exact application of which is open to a diversity of opinions. Beza, Grotius, and a host of other expositors take the word in a figurative sense, meaning idle and delusive fancies, in the same sense as Joseph was called the dreamer by his brethren. Some such idea is attached to the word in the A.V., where it is qualified by the word “filthy.” There is nothing in the original to indicate this except the context. In Act_2:17, we have καὶ οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ὑμῶν ἐνύπνια ἐνυπνιασθήσονται—“and your elders shall dream dreams.” When Jude calls the false teachers dreamers, it appears to us that the Gnostics of his day claimed supernatural illumination. The apostles claimed inspiration, and to meet this they assumed the same Divine authority. The R.V. has, “in their dreamings”; but this appears a forced translation of the participle, considering the case and the gender. Once more the apostle refers to their sodomy—σάρκα μὲν μιαίνουσι, which is a strong expression to denote an unnatural method of gratifying lust. By κυριότητα we understand apostolic authority; and by δόξας the apostles themselves. Translating according to our view—‘In like manner indeed also these, the dreamers, pollute the flesh, set at nought authority, and blaspheme the excellent.’ The course of sin is much the same in all places and at all times. Its marks are the same on the spirit of the fallen angels, the inhabitants of Sodom, and the false teachers in Asia Minor. The chameleon may change its colours, but not its nature. Whereever sin touches there is a black spot. In the text the course of sin is threefold.

1. The abuse of natural instincts. God has placed in the body appetites and passions. In this respect man is on the same plane as the animal. Singularly enough, the animal is above man in the observance of their requirements. Neither gluttony, intemperance, nor incontinency has invaded the animal creation. Vicar Pritchard, of Llandovery, had a goat, which followed him through the town. At one period he was in the habit of frequenting public-houses. On one occasion some young men forced the goat to drink beer until it was drunk. The next day, when the vicar entered a public-house, the goat remained outside the door, and would on no account enter. The vicar learnt the lesson, and became a reformer of no mean order. The history of sin is read in the perversion of the natural man.

2. The denial of Divine authority. God has spoken in every age and to every man. Nature and Providence, as well as Revelation, have spoken in His name. Inspired men have delivered His commands, but sin has refused every voice, and rejected every message. The denial could not be made effectively without substituting error for truth, and forms of immorality for holiness.

3. The persecution of the excellent of the earth. Every virtue has been assailed in the persons of the virtuous. Every weapon has been used to torture and destroy the godly, in whose life the glory of God shone. If human nature is perverted, if the authority of God is contemned, and if the best characters are destroyed, what must be the consequence? Expulsion from heaven, and an abode with devils in the lake of fire!—W. P.

Jud_1:9. Michael and the Devil.—We can hardly suppose that the interview between Michael and Satan was communicated to St. Jude by the Holy Ghost, because such a novel revelation would have rather startled his readers than illustrated the truth he was setting before them. To treat it as a fable without foundation in fact would have weakened the argument of the apostle. Some think that the reference is to Zec_3:1, “And he shewed me Joshua the high priest standing before the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan,” etc. But there was no reference then made to the burial of Moses, and the similarity in the expression is too slender a foundation to connect the two. Origen mentions an apocryphal book called Ἀνάληψις τοῦ Μωσέως, which was extant in his time. That the apostle quoted from that book is not improbable, although there is nothing in the narrative before us to warrant the belief. Then there is the other supposition, that among the traditions held by the Jews there was one relative to a controversy between the two chiefs of the opposing angels about the burial of Moses. As these traditions were largely taught in those days, it may be that the apostle simply reads a lesson to the false teachers from their own teaching. They brought railing accusations against the apostles, which even an archangel dared not, as the higher and final judgment awaits all. An accusation of blasphemy is the strongest, as blasphemy is a sin of the deepest dye, which, when made against the Holy Ghost, is unpardonable. The apostle therefore conveys but one lesson by his reference to the dispute about the body of Moses, viz. that the final judgment is reserved in God’s own keeping.

1. The text teaches that there are two orders of spirits in conflict concerning matters affecting the human race. Not only angels are ministering to the necessities of the saints, and devils using influence to destroy them; but the corner of the veil is lifted up in the text, that we may mentally see the battle-field on which these powerful spirits meet to contend for their side. The fact administers to the strength of our faith. Satan brings accusations against us, as was the case with Joshua; but the angel defends us, and hands over the accuser to a higher judgment.

2. The text teaches that controversy must be confined to its proper limits. This leads us to reflect on the spirit which has too often animated the controversies which have taken place between the polemics of the Church. Men have assumed so much authority as to consign their opponents to a literal fire and an eternal hell. In this they have assumed the function of judge. Michael was right, but he did not go further than controversy. However certain one may feel that he is contending for the truth, he must not utter imprecations on the head of his adversary.

3. The text teaches that judgment belongs to the Lord alone. The term “rebuke” implies far more than correction or admonition; it means to censure. Here we take it to indicate that God only has the power of final decision, and to Him must the prerogative be ascribed. Omniscience, impartiality, and power belong to Him. Christians must not avenge themselves, for vengeance belongs to the Lord.

4. The text teaches also another valuable lesson, viz. that the strongest side of controversy is an appeal to God. Bring your adversary into the presence of his Maker, and leave him in the Divine balance. He who can refer his matter to Him who is light, and in whom is no darkness, has his cause justified by the fact of his readiness to abide by God’s word.—W. P.

Dispute over the Body of Moses.—St. Jude evidently refers to something that was familiar to his readers. Now the Bible preserves nothing that can conceivably be twisted into the support of such a legend as this. “No tradition, precisely corresponding with this statement, is found in any Rabbinic or apocryphal book now extant, not even in the book of Enoch, from which Jude has drawn so largely in other instances (Jud_1:6; Jud_1:14). Œcumenius, indeed, writing in the tenth century, reports a tradition that Michael was appointed to minister at the burial of Moses, and the devil urged that his murder of the Egyptian (Exo_2:12) had deprived him of the right of sepulture; and Origen states that the record of the dispute was found in a lost apocryphal book, known as “The Assumption of Moses”; but in both these instances it is possible that the traditions have grown out of the words of St. Jude, instead of being the foundation on which they rested. Rabbinic legends, however, though they do not furnish the precise fact to which St. Jude refers, show that a whole cycle of fantastic stories had gathered round the brief, mysterious report of the death of Moses, in Deu_34:5-6. It should be carefully noticed that the name Michael, for an angel or archangel, does not appear until Dan_10:21. And it is in the book of Enoch” that he is prominent, as the “merciful, the patient, the holy Michael.” Perhaps, however, we are wrong in seeing any reference to the material body of Moses. John Bellamy makes a novel suggestion, which may receive some consideration, as he bases it on a careful examination of the original Greek. He says that the word “archangel” is a compound word, and means “the first messenger.” He thinks the reference is to John the Baptist, who was the “first messenger” of the new dispensation. The word “body” refers to the Messiah, as foretold in the shadows, types, and figures of the books of Moses; these shadows, types, and figures being called the “body of Moses,” the whole assemblage of all things that had respect to the manifestation of the Redeemer. The word “devil” should be translated Satan, “an adversary,” and really represents the rulers and Pharisees who resisted John’s teaching and Christ’s. “Thus we find that there was no celestial being called by the term ‘archangel,’ sent down from heaven to dispute with the devil about the fleshly body of Moses—no devil from hell, according to the vulgar opinion hitherto understood, to dispute with an archangel; but that it was the ‘arch-messenger,’ i.e. the first messenger; and that the word diabolo, rendered “the devil,” was applied as a collective noun singular to the assembled body of Pharisees, the adversary of the mission of the Baptist, the declared, interested enemy of the gracious Redeemer.” “Let those who suppose the contention was about the material body of Moses recollect that the material body of Moses had been buried in a valley in the land of Moab about fifteen hundred years, when it was said that Michael and the devil contended about it. A contention for the material body of Moses never took place between these two immaterial beings.” Thus mystically John Bellamy deals with the passage; but probably sober-minded Bible students will regard this spiritualising explanation as extravagant and unreasonable, and will prefer the simpler suggestion of a familiar legend, used by way of illustration.—H. B. D.

Jud_1:10. Presumption.—Dr. Bloomfield renders this verse as follows: “But those fellows, of things such as they have no knowledge of, they speak railingly; and, on the other band, such things as they do know—naturally, or sensually, as the irrational animals—they corrupt themselves therein.” At first sight it would appear that the meaning of the apostle is simply twofold; the holy truths of apostolic teaching, which the false teachers did not comprehend, they treated with scorn; the natural instincts, which they enjoyed in common with the brute creation, they abused. But on looking at the context we are inclined to think that there is a connection between the blasphemy of Divine things and the perversion of natural instincts. The parallel passage in 2Pe_2:12-13 says: “But these, as natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed, speak evil of the things that they understand not; and shall utterly perish in their own corruption; and shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time.” Dr. Peile develops the brevity of the expression thus: “In those things they first vitiate, then destroy themselves; first vitiate the thing (or doctrine, by abuse), and destroy themselves in that abuse.” St. Peter had before said of them: “And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.” One of the perversions was their covetousness, and through feigned words they made merchandise of the saints. One would infer that they sold indulgences, and pretended to absolve the people from their sins on payment of money. It also appears that there were other practices of such a forbidden nature that no apostle would disgrace his epistle by the mention of the same.

I. The presumption of ignorance.—The virulent opposition of the false teachers to the truths taught by the apostles, and their setting up opinions of their own as the standard of morality, was typical of a course of action from which the Church has in every age suffered. “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.” This class of ignorance is to be distinguished from the absence of knowledge. He who has never heard the gospel must be ignorant of it; but in his case there is no assumption against its truths. On the other hand, false teachers were wilfully ignorant of the principles of Christianity because they were opposed to their corrupt practices. It was what Charnock calls practical atheism. In this age, when religious knowledge is so general, much of the opposition to the teaching of the Church starts from the same source. We must wake up to the fact that with the heart man believeth unto righteousness. Faith in the truths of Revelation is impossible without a change of heart. The first step is to convert men, and then educate them.

II. The sin of presumption.—Those who have presumed to teach religion to others, whether their teaching has been a distorted gospel or some opinion of their own, have led people to the committal of sins far more heinous than is found in the heart of a heathen land. The morality of literal ignorance is far better than that of false teaching. This we have seen in the rise of various sects, some of which survive until the present day. Julian the apostate was a very violent opponent of Christianity, whose teaching led many into various immoralities. In the face of the boldness which is abroad, avowing that certain unnatural and immoral courses are lawful and desirable, the duty of the Church is clear. As the darkness flies from the light, so libertinism will not stand the presence of a high moral character. Therefore we think that the first concern of the Church is to utterly forsake all questionable practices, and confront the world with the virtues of the life of Jesus Christ.—Selected.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jud_1:5-15

Contents:—Three examples of the punitive justice of God, typical of the judgment awaiting those deceivers, introduced as a warning, Jud_1:6-8; more particular description of their sins. An exclamation of woe, Jud_1:11, followed by additional details of their character, and an application to them of a prophecy of Enoch.

5I will17 therefore18 put you in remembrance, though ye19 once knew this,20 how that the Lord,21 having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed22 them that believed not. 6And the angels23 which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved24 in everlasting chains25 under darkness unto the 7judgment of the great day. Even as26 Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner,27 giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange28 flesh, 8are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. Likewise29 also these filthy dreamers defile30 the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.31 32 9Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst33 not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 10But these speak evil of those things34 which they know not: but what they know35 naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. 11Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward,36 and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 12These are spots in your feasts of charity,37 when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about38 of winds; trees whose fruit withereth,39 with out fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; 13Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for 14ever. And Enoch, also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied40 of these, saying, Behold the Lord41 cometh with ten thousand of his saints,42 15To execute judgment upon all, and to convince43 all that ar44 ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against13him.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Jud_1:5. But I will remind you—believed not.—This connects with 2Pe_1:12, although there the reference is not to historical facts, but to doctrines. In like manner the words,“you who know all things once for all” revert to that passage as well as to προγινώσκοντες, 2Pe_3:17.—ἅπαξ τοῦτο (cf. Appar. Crit., N. 5). It is inadmissible to connect ἅπαξ with ὑπομνῆσαι, or to take it in the sense of once, formerly, from the beginning; it rather has here its usual meaning, you have heard it once for all and stamped it on your memory; you need not any new instruction on that head; but it is matter of urgent necessity for you to be reminded of it, earnestly to deliberate upon it, and to apply what has taken place to events as they occur. It is not related to the following τὸ δεύτερον. If we adopt the reading πάντα, all that is necessary is to connect it with the sequel, to the historical facts, and hence not to take it as at 1Jn_2:20. [εἰδότας πάντα. Remembering that Jude wrote against the Gnostics (the men of knowledge), who laid claim to superior knowledge, and on that pretence beguiled their hearers into corrupt doctrines and licentious practices (2Pe_1:2-3), the words εἰδότας πάντα seem to have an implied antithesis, and while affirming of his readers that they had all the knowledge necessary to their salvation (1Jn_2:20), put them on their guard against the pretended superiority of knowledge of the Gnostics. See Wordsworth in loc.—M.].—Huther says on the reading ὁ ̓Ιησοῦς that it unfolds the same view as 1Co_10:4, and that the name of Jesus in this connection may be accounted for by the popular character of a parenetic Epistle.—τὸ δεύτερον neither=afterward, nor=on the contrary (Grotius). Forced is also the explanation of Winer, pp. 642, 643: “The Lord, after having delivered them, did, on a second occasion (when they were in need of His helping grace), refuse them His delivering grace and destroy them.” Equally unnatural is that of Huther: “God did reveal Himself to His people in two ways, the first time as a Deliverer, the second time as Judge, that is in the latter instance as Judge of the unbelieving who did not trustfully and obediently rely upon His promise.” Similarly Stier: “After God’s deliverance and pardoning there is also a second time surely following in the case of the unworthy.” No, it is said, He destroyed them the second time, and should be referred to two judgments of destruction, once, when the people, with the exception of a few, perished in the wilderness, and again to the Babylonish captivity, Num_14:23; 2Ch_36:16, etc. The corresponding passage in 2 Peter (2:2) specifies the example of the flood; Jude wished to select a still stronger example, exhibiting a two-fold destruction of the chosen people. Notwithstanding the former wonderful deliverance, the people were twice destroyed. Had this Epistle been written after the destruction of Jerusalem, Jude might have added a τὸ τρίτον. [Notwithstanding Fronmüller’s emphatic assertion to the contrary, we feel constrained to advocate the view recommended in Appar. Crit., note 6. It is more telling in point of fact and more congruous in point of doctrine; it is perfectly sound in point of grammar, and the charge of its being forced and unnatural is arbitrary and unsupported by reasons.—M.]

Jud_1:6. And the angels—darkness.—The allusion in 2Pe_2:4 is here more fully explained. If it could be proved that Jude had before him the book of Enoch, which repeatedly adverts to the coming down of the angels in order to contaminate themselves with women, we should not be warranted to think here of the first fall in the world of spirits. But this presumption is not certain. See note on 2Pe_2:4.

Their first estate.—Huther explains ἀρχή of the dominion, originally assigned to them; others (e.g., Calvin, Grotius) of their original condition, estate, cf. Joh_8:44. Both ideas may be combined as Stier [and others] do. [In that case we have primam dignitatem, Carpz. al.—M.]

Their own habitation, not heaven in general, but their own dwelling of light assigned to them by the Creator. Their fall and guilt seem to have been the consequence of their leaving that habitation and arbitrarily going beyond the sphere allotted to them. There is no explicit reference to Satan, but μὴ τηρεῖν, which points to incitement from without, may allude to him. Delitzsch: “They made themselves at home on earth and exchanged the power belonging to their vocation in heaven with an earthly exhibition of power usurped for the sake of selfish sensual indulgence.”

For the judgment of the great day, i.e., for the last judgment at the end of the world; an amplification of 2Pe_2:4; cf. Act_2:20; Rev_6:17; Rev_16:14.

With everlasting bonds.—Peter has only “chains (bands) of darkness,” cf Jud_1:7. The book of Enoch has this variation: “Bind them for seventy generations under the earth until the day of judgment, then shall they be removed to the lowest depths of fire.”

Under darkness.—De Wette: “In the depth of the under-world, in the abyss.” Rev_20:2-3. At the same time the reference to the inward, spiritual darkness of the love of evil, must not be overlooked. See 2Pe_2:4. [Clement of Alex. says,“that the chains in which the evil angels are now confined, are the air near this earth of ours,(“vicinus terris locus, caliginosus aër), and that they may well be said to be chained, because they are restrained from recovering the glory and happiness they have lost.”

Wordsworth: “This passage is cited by Origen in Mtt. tom., XV., p. 693, and in Rom. lib. 3., vol. IV., p. 510, where he calls this Epistle Scriptura divina,” ibid, lib., V., p. 549.—M.]

Jud_1:7. How Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.—To the two examples taken from the past history of Israel and the invisible world, Jude, again agreeing with Peter, adds a new example, taken from the heathen world, of a punitive judgment the consequences of which still remain.

The cities around them, an addition to 2Pe_2:6. Admah and Zeboim. Deu_29:23; Hos_11:8.

In like manner as these men, τούτοις may be connected with Sodom and Gomorrah, that is, the inhabitants of those cities; as the sin of those cities is generally known, it cannot be thought strange that it is indirectly adverted to. It is less known of the other two cities, hence the selection of this word. Bengel refers τούτοις to the false teachers, Jud_1:4, but he thereby anticipates the thought of Jud_1:8. The majority of modern expositors believe the reference to be to the fallen angels, who, according to the book of Enoch, sinned in like manner. See on 2Pe_2:6. We cannot believe that Jude or Peter considered fables of apocryphal books, like those contained in the book of Enoch and the Gospel of the Twelve Patriarchs, and which cannot be substantiated by Genesis 4. to be true,(see Evangel. Kirchenzeitung, 1858, p. 35, sq.), although Jude refers to them and confirms some of their statements. [Bengel’s construction, which is also that of Wordsworth and others, seems to be more natural and less artificial than that recommended by Fronmüller. The anticipation of the thought of Jud_1:8, is no valid objection. Jude first points out the analogy in general terms and then develops it. The very sins of Sodom and Gomorrah were those of some of the Gnostic sects. See the description of the Nicolaitans in Iren. 1:20; Theodoret haer. fab., 1. Epiphan. haer. 25.—M.]

ἐκπορνεύειν, although not used elsewhere in the New Testament, is of frequent occurrence in the LXX., where it is generally applied to spiritual whoredom, but also to physical in Gen_38:24 for זָנָה. ἐκ is intensive, and denotes extravagant lust. The idea “transcending the limits of nature” belongs to what follows.

Gone after strange flesh, ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας;—ἀπέρχεσθαι ὀπίσω, to go after, literally, Mar_1:20; then tropically. Peter uses the term τορεύεσθαι ὀπίσω, 2Pe_2:10. See note there. It is evident that this term cannot apply to angels, who have no flesh.

Are set forth, etc.; πρόκεινται [literally: lie before the eyes, ante (oculos) jacent.—M.] The parallel passage, 2Pe_2:6, has a different turn,“having made [set, instituted—M.] them an example.” There we have ὑπόδειγμα, here δεῖγμα. The Dead Sea is to this day a testimony of that catastrophe; ruins of the sunken cities were perhaps still visible in the days of Jude at low-water; but this is not the case now, although such a myth of travellers is occasionally circulated. See Zeller Bibl. Wörterbuch, p. 510.

Πυρὸς αἰωνίου should be construed with δίκην,(de Wette), not with δεῖγμα. Stier: “They suffer a punishment intended to serve as an example and type of eternal fire.” Cf. Wis_10:7 [On the construction with δίκην, Wordsworth offers the following exposition: “As Sodom and Gomorrah suffer the vengeance of a fire that consumed them finally, so that they will never be restored, as long as the world lasts, so the bodies and souls of the wicked will suffer, as long as they are capable of suffering, which, since they are immortal, will, as Tertullian says: “be forever,” “erimus iidem, qui nunc, nec alii post resurrectionem: Dei quidem cultores, apud Deum semper, profani verò in pœnam aqueè jugis ignis habentes est ipsâ naturâ ejus, divinâ scilicet, subministrationem incorruptibilitatis.” Apol. 48.—M]. De Wette says that “subterraneous fire is presumed to be beneath the sea that covers the cities.” May this not be a false presumption?—ὑπέχειν, 2Ma_4:48; 2Th_1:9. [On the Eternity of future punishment, see Bp. Taylor’s Sermon on Christ’s advent to judgment, part III., §. 6.—M.]

Jud_1:8. Now in like manner, etc.—μέντοι has at once illative and adversative force. Now, in like manner, however—i.e., without taking warning from those Divine judgments.

These dreamers also, refers back to Jud_1:4. ̓Ενυπνιαζόμενοι, on account of μὲν and δὲ should be construed both with μιαίνουσι and ἀθετοῦσι. This sets aside various false interpretations, which make reference to voluptuous dreams, nocturnal pollutions, etc. As ἐνύπνιον differs from ὅνειρος in that the former denotes a confused state of soul, an abnormal influence of the imagination on the bodily organs, whereas the latter designates a clear and sometimes most significant dream, so ἐνυτνιαζόμενοι is designed to portray that state of the soul in which the Ego is controlled and held captive by the power of ungodly, sensual impulses. Stier: “Their inner man is benumbed, blinded, absorbed by gloomy visions, dreamy and holden with sleep. Cf. Isa_29:10.

[Bengel: “Uno verbo ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι hominum mere naturalium indoles graphice admodum descripta est. Somnians multa videre, audire, etc., sibi videtur; concupiscentia agitatur, gaudio, angore, timore, rel. At nescit imperare sibi in isto statu: sed qualis est imago in somnio ex imagine orta, talis hominum illorum conditio. Hinc, omnibus licet rationis nervis adhibitis, concipere nequeunt, filios lucis vera libertate, in luci expergefactos, perfrui.”

Hornejus: “Tam insipientes sunt, ut quasi lethargo quodam sopiti non tantum impure vivant, sed etiam quæ non norunt tam audaciter vituperent.”

Arnaud: “Cependant ceux-ci, comme des gens qui agissent sans savoir ce qu’ils font, comme s’ils rêvaient, pour ainsi dire.….”—M.]

Defile the flesh, i.e., their own and strange flesh. The idea has a turn somewhat different from 2Pe_2:10, to which Jude here alludes. Peter speaks of the lust, Jude of its gratification. In the sequel also Jude goes farther than Peter, a circumstance noteworthy with regard to their relation to each other. Ἀθετεῖν stronger than καταφρονεῖν; see on 2Pe_2:10. Jud_1:11. In like manner 9 contains an expansion of and deviation from 2Pe_2:11. The attempt of interpreting that passage by the verse under notice leads to confusion and forced meanings.

Jud_1:9. But Michael, the archangel, etc.—A comparison showing the daring and criminality of their blaspheming. They dare to do something against the lordship and the glories (see on them note on 2Pe_2:11), which even Michael, the archangel, did not venture to do against Satan. The Hebrew Michael signifies,“Who is like God,” and denotes the humility and greatness of this Prince of angels, as well as the standard of all his actions, cf. Exo_15:11; Psa_89:7-8. He is called one of the chief Princes, Dan_10:13; the great Prince standing up and fighting for the children of the people of God, Dan_12:1; cf. Rev_12:7; 1Th_4:16. In the book of Enoch, where however the incident mentioned is not recorded, we read of him (as cited by Huther): “Who (set) over human virtue, governs the nations.” Jude supposes his readers familiar with this incident. The Jews had from ancient times various traditions of the burial of Moses, of a contest about his soul. According to Oecumenius, the tradition ran that God had charged Michael the archangel with the burial of Moses; that Satan opposed him, bringing an accusation against him relating to the murder of the Egyptian; in consequence of which he was unworthy of such honourable burial. Jude, like Paul, 2Ti_3:8, probably drew from this tradition, the Spirit of God directing him to extract the truth from those traditions. It is therefore not necessary to assume here a special revelation vouchsafed to Jude. Origen, Epiphanius and others refer to a book called “The Ascension or Removal of Moses”, but that book is doubtless of a later origin, and it is more probable that Jude made use of oral tradition rather than of that book.

Contending with the devil.—Διακρινόμενος διελέγετο; διακρίνεσθαι, to get into dispute, to separate and disagree, particularly to carry on a dispute in law. The words διαλέγετο ὅτε τῷ διαβόλῳ show that it was a verbal altercation. Stier: “The powers of heaven and hell contended consequently for the, body of the man of God after his death.”

Dared not, etc.—Huther: “From fear of the original glory of the devil.” Better,“from profound dread of the majesty of God.” Κρίσιν ἐπιφέρειν, cf. Act_25:18, to give a sentence of condemnation against one. Βλασφημίας=βλάσφημον, 2Pe_2:11, words of insult, anger, or words of satire and mockery. Stier remarks, that even Father Luther did occasionally transgress in this respect and speak far too defiantly against the enemy.

The Lord rebuke thee.—The Angel of the Covenant addresses these words to Satan in Zec_3:2; cf. Act_23:3.; 2Ti_4:14. The enemy himself has betrayed the secret that he may be overcome by the words,“The Most Merciful rebuke thee.” Bengel: “Modesty is an angelic virtue.”

Jud_1:10. These, however, etc.—Jude now passes from the particular expression of that daring disposition to the general. They speak evil, in general, of all things which they know not. For ὅσα is not=â, but=quæcunque. The reference is to the whole sphere of things invisible and heavenly, including the δόξαι. They are held by the delusion of materialism, that only that is real which may be seen with the eyes and touched by the hands, cf. Col_2:18.

But those things which they understand.—̔Επίστανται, apparently stronger than οἴδασι, is an ironical expression. The things they thoroughly understand, viz., the objects and means of sensual enjoyment, they use for their destruction, and really understand nothing of their nature and effects.

Naturally, as the brute beasts; φυσικῶς ὡς τὰ ἄλογα ζῶα, go together. Their understanding does not go beyond that which the instincts of nature, the instinctive desire of food and procreation, teach brute beasts. But they sink even beneath them because of their own free will and deliberation, they prostitute in carnal indulgence those powers of the soul which ought to introduce them to God and heavenly things. The parallel passage, 2Pe_2:12, reads: “They speak evil of the things that they understand not,” with this difference, however, that Peter not only states the additional particular of the destiny of the brute creation, but connects also φυσικὰ with ζῶα, whereas here it goes with ἐπίστασθαι. It is evident that Jude made free use of the passage in Peter.

Therein do they ruin themselves, cf. 2Pe_2:12; Ps. 49:13, 21.

Jud_1:11. Woe unto them, etc.—An utterance of woe, of frequent occurrence in the speeches of our Lord, expressive of pain and indignation, and conveying the threat of punishment, cf. Mat_11:21; Mat_18:7; Mat_23:13; Mat_24:19; Mat_26:24; Mar_14:21; Mar_13:17; Luk_6:24-25; Luk_11:42; Luk_17:1. Bengel: “The only passage where this Apostle alone utters a woe for three reasons.” Paul says, 1Co_9:16 : “Woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel.” The expression occurs repeatedly in the book of Revelation, Rev_8:13; Rev_9:12; Rev_11:14; Rev_12:12; Rev_18:10; Rev_18:16; Rev_18:19. 2Pe_2:14, has “cursed children,” lit. “children of malediction.” Jude paraphrases it by,“woe unto them,” which threatens them with the curse. Jude, in addition to the example of Balaam, which we have in 2 Peter, produces the examples of Cain and the company of Core as types of the mind and judgment of those persons. He adverts rather to the order of the matter than to the order of time.

They walked.—De Wette: “Their career is regarded as already completed, the author prophetically foreseeing their end.” This contains a hint in favour of the genuineness of the Epistle.

The way of Cain; τῇ ὁδῷ, cf. Act_14:16; Act_9:31; the Dative of the direction in which [see above App. Crit., note 20.—M.], cf. 1Sa_15:20; LXX., Tob_4:5. It is not difficult to find the point of comparison. It is acting upon mere natural instincts, on the selfish impulses of nature (cf. φυσικῶς, Jud_1:10), in contempt of the warnings of God in the conscience and in His word. De Wette stops at the idea that Cain is here mentioned as the archetype of all bad men. Too general. Calov and others understand it of spiritual murder by deceiving the brethren, or of fiery persecution, so Lyra. Arbitrary. Schnecken, burger refers to the moral skepticism of the deceivers, since in the later writings of the Jews, Cain is represented to have said: “There is no Judge, no other world, no reward for the righteous, no punishment for the wicked.” Farfetched. Stier: “Selfish, hateful envy of the pious brother, because his piety was pleasing to God, consequently to God and man at one and the same time, the resistance of an evil conscience which is defiant instead of humbling itself, the root of the Cainite sin from which full hatred develops with fearful velocity into the act of murder.” Huther: “In comparing these false teachers with Cain, Jude intends to describe them as resisting God from envy of the grace shown to believers.” But this is not the description of those deceivers.—[Wordsworth: “Specially applicable to some classes of the Gnostics, who dared impiously to affirm that ‘Cain was made by a power superior to that of the Creator; and who acknowledged Esau, Korah and the Sodomites, and all such, as their own kindred.’ See Iren. 1, 31. (Stieren), 1, 35, p. 113 (Grabe). Cf. Tertull., Præscr. c. 47; Clem. Alexandr., Strom. 7, p. 549; Hippolyt., Phil. p. 133; Epiph., Hær. 38; Theodoret, Hæret. fab. c. 15; Philostr. c. 2; Tillemont, II., p. 21. These false teachers destroy like Cain; they love lucre and allure to sin like Balaam; they make divisions in the Church of Christ like Korah. Catena, p. 164, and cf. Bede on 1Jn_1:6.”—M.]

And in the error of Balaam, etc.—Peter has,“They went astray, following the way of Balaam, the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness.” Jude gives this in a contracted form. See 2Pe_2:15-16. πλάνῃ, cf. 2Pe_2:18; Jam_5:20; Eze_33:16, LXX. Huther: “Vicious life averted from the truth.” Not=εἰς πλάνην, but the Dative of direction in which, like τῇ ὁδῷ and with ἐξακολουθεῖν, 2Pe_2:15; in the direction of erring.

Has drawn them along [they rushed headlong, see Appar. Crit., note 20.—M.]; ἐκχεῖσθαι, Middle, to stream forth like a torrent without a dam (Bengel), to suffer oneself to be carried away like the Latin effundi in venerem, in libidines. At the same time we may think of the meaning of שָׁפַךְ, to slip and fall, Psa_63:2. [The force of the Greek verb is rather “to pour oneself out in a torrent.” See Loesner, p. 583.—M.]. Ἐξεχύθησαν μισθοῦ.The explanation,“They threw themselves into the error of Balaam for hire (=ἀντὶ or ἔνεκα),” is false; so is that of Schnecken burger: “They threw themselves into the error of Balaam in expectation of reward.” De Wette’s rendering also is very forced: “Through the seduction of Balaam’s reward they poured themselves out in vice.” In that case we ought to have τοῦ μισθοῦ Βαλαάμ.—Μισθοῦ should rather be taken in apposition with Βαλαάμ, a brief allusion, which is easily explained on the supposition that Jude had before him 2Pe_2:15. The point of comparison lies first in selfishness and avarice, then in seduction to unchastity.

In the gainsaying of Core they perished.—ἀντιλέγειν, to contradict, to quarrel, to offer resistance, used in LXX. for מְרִיבָה, cf. Joh_19:12; Heb_6:16; Heb_7:7; Heb_12:3. Κορέ, cf. Num_16:32; Num_26:10. It was an insurrection against the Lord and His representatives under the cover of right and religion. Huther: “They lost themselves in the gainsaying of Core.” He thinks that both the parallelism of the three clauses and the Preterite of the verb favour such a construction. The last reason proves nothing (see above), and the first is counterbalanced by the circumstance that ἀπολέσθαι is not used in the sense of losing oneself into a thing, of entangling oneself. Mat_10:6 is not a parallel passage. Grammatical usage permits no other explanation than this: “they perished in the gainsaying of Core, by offering like resistance to God and His holy ordinances.” Stier sees a gradation in the words way, error and gainsaying. “The end and the beginning of the whole way is illustrated at the very commencement of history in the case of Cain, the rushing progress in the way of error is especially exhibited in the case of Balaam, the final insurrection and provocation of judgment is typified in Korah.” Huther calls to mind that opposition to God sprung, in the case of Cain, from envy, in that of Balaam, from covetousness, in that of Korah from pride; Jud_1:12 gives a further delineation of these deceivers, similar to 2Pe_2:13; 2Pe_2:17. [Irenæus, IV., 43, ed. Grabe: “The doom of those who rise against the true faith, and excite others against the Church of God, is to be swallowed up by the earth, and to remain in the gulf below, with Korah, Dathan and Abiram.”—M]

Jud_1:12. These are spots in your love-feasts, etc.—ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις ὑμῶν, in your love-feasts, not, as Luther renders, in your alms, the exhibitions of love. The early degeneracy of the love-feasts connected with the Lord’s Supper is evident from 1Co_11:20, etc. [Hippolytus, Ref. Hæres., p. 172, states that the Simonians said that their promiscuous μίξεις were τελείαν ἀγάπην and μακαρίζοντας ἑαυτοῦς ἐπὶ τῇ μίξει.—M.].—Σπίλάδες; σπίλαξ or really denotes a rock or a cliff, from σπέος, while σπίλος, the word used by Peter, means both a cliff and a spot. De Wette and Huther favour the literal sense: “It is these who are cliffs in your love-feasts, i.e., on which these feasts split, or good morals suffer shipwreck (cf. 1Ti_1:19).” It is more simple to understand it of the seductive, dangerous power of these men. But we agree with Stier in preferring the sense of stain, spot, because, as he remarks, grammatical usage might easily change in words of such near affinity; these words having a common root might be used more or less loosely, and the parallel in 2 Peter favouring it. Possibly both (Peter and Jude) alluded to Deu_32:5. [Aretius:—“σπίλας non solum est glarea, hoc est, ferræ species quæ maculas facile relinquit, sed est etiam concavum saxum in littore maris, seu lacuum ac fluminum, in quam concavitatem tanquam in commune receptaculum sordes aquarum confluunt.” Mack. (Scott, Bloomf.): “The word σπιλάδες properly signifies rocks in the sea, which, when they the above its surface, appear like spots.” Oecumen., Theophyl. (ὕφαλοι πέτραι), Lightoot, Wetstein, Whitby, Meyer, de Wette, Schleusner, Huther, Peile, Lillie, Alford, Wordsworth, al., all agree in rendering “rocks.” It is the only sense in which it occurs in ancient authors; it is, moreover, in better unison with the other metaphors by which Jude describes the false teachers (clouds, trees, waves, wandering stars) than spots. On these grounds we prefer “rocks” to “spots.”—Wordsworth:—“These σπιλάδες may be well said to be ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις, where the Church looks only for peace and safety, as in a deep and placid harbor. The words scopulus, φάρανξ, Charybdis, Euripus barathrum, etc., are thus applied frequently to persons. See Floruas, 4, 9, where Antony is called a scopulus; and Aristoph. Equites, 248, φάραγγα, καὶ Χάρυβδιν ἁρπαγῆς, and Anthol., 2, 15. 1, εἰς δολίους, where treacherous persons are compared to ὕφαλοι πέτραι. Horat., Ep. I., 15. 31,—

Pernicies et tempestas barathrumque macelli,

Quicquid quæsierat ventri donabat avaro.—M.]

συνευωχούμενοι. De Wette objects to supplying ὑμῖν, and translates “carousing together without fear;” so Stier. But since 2Pe_2:13 has ὑμῖν, and ἀφόβως thus gets a better sense, moreover since otherwise σύν would be superfluous, it is perhaps better to render: “They carouse with you, push themselves to your love-feasts.” It is singular, however, that they not only would do so with impunity, but that Jude does not insist upon separation. The same objection, however, arises at 2Pe_2:13, and is not so very difficult to be met. [It is to be regretted that Fronmüller has withheld the solution of the difficulty. The only one we are able to supply is that these false teachers abused the well-known liberal hospitality of the early Christians by clandestinely appearing at their love-feasts. The insertion of ὑμῖν is against the weight of MSS. evidence, and discountenanced by the majority of versions and reliable exegetes.—M.]

Without fear.—The most natural construction is to take ἀφόβως with συνευωχούμενοι, not with ποιμαίνοντες (Stier), which would isolate the former too much. They are so insolent as to dread neither correction nor expulsion, and still less the monitions of their own conscience. Bengel misses the sense by rendering,“To feast together is not wrong per se, therefore, ἀφόβως ought to be connected with this verb (ποιμαίν.).”

Feeding themselves.—Jude refers to Eze_34:2; Eze_34:8,“Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves,” cf. Isa_56:11. We learn from this circumstance that those deceivers set up as guides and leaders of the flock, and that they sought the wool of the sheep, not the sheep themselves, cf. 1Pe_5:2. [Alford:—“Using the ἀγάπαι not for their legitimate purpose, the realization of the unity of Christians by social union, but for their own purposes, the enjoyment of their lusts and the furtherance of their schemes.”—M.]. The remark of Huther, that there is no other hint of said adversaries having filled the ecclesiastical office, is perfectly true, but that does not exclude their setting up as teachers and leaders. The true point of view is displaced if ποιμαίνοντες is restricted to the agapæ and expounded (as de Wette does),“They take their fill while they suffer the poor (the majority, the flock) to want,” 1Co_11:21. ποιμαίνειν, in that sense, would be an inappropriate term. The sequel also does not relate to the agapæ.

Clouds without water, driven fast by winds.—[Alford:—“Driven out of course by winds;” he reads παραφερόμενοι (with A. B. C. K., al.), borne out of their course, hither and thither.—M.]. In 2Pe_2:17 another figure, viz.: “wells without water,” precedes the parallel to this, while here one is added which is wanting there, viz.: “dead trees.” De Wette, who applies the figure to the agapæ, is certainly wrong in saying that these men added largely to the agapæ, without sharing their contributions with the poor. No, the reference is rather to the promise and boasting of great and profound knowledge, but it is idle show and vapour, cf. Pro_25:14. They are carried about by every wind of doctrine, and cannot satisfy the wants of those who thirst for the truth. Huther:—“The figure delineates the inward spiritual emptiness of those men, who on that account are unable to do good, but it seems also to intimate their deceptive ostentation, which has been pointed out by Calvin.” The reference to doing good, however, belongs not to this, but to the next figure. ποιμαίνοντες and νεφέλαι point unmistakably to their arrogated teaching and leading.—Περιφερόμεναι, driven about, fitfully driven to and fro. [See above Appar. Crit., note 22.—M.] Peter has ἐλαυνόμεναι.

Late autumnal trees, etc.—Φθινοπωρινά, from φθίνω and ὀπώρα; ὀπώρα signifies the hottest season of the year; when that is over (φθίνει), the φθινόπωρον, late autumn, the beginning of winter, sets in; the adjective denotes, therefore,“late-autumnal,” not “fruit spoiling,” as Stier renders, contrary to grammatical usage. [The best account of this word is that given by Lillie in loco, which is here transcribed: “According to Passow (as translated by Liddell and Scott), ὀπώρα Isaiah , 1,‘the part of the year between the rising of Sirius and of Arcturus. … not so much …. autumn as our dog days, or at most the end of summer;, and then, because this was the season of fruit, it stands, 2, for ‘the fruit itself, esp. tree-fruit;—and hence also the verb ὀπωρίζω is to gather fruits. φθίνω, again is used, 1, intransitively, to decay, wither, and, 2, transitively, to corrupt, destroy. Joining the two words, each in its first signification, we have φθινόπωρον, autumn, or more commonly, senescens auctumnus et in hyemem vergens (Steph. Scap.), late autumn, the fall of the year (L. and S.); and φθινοπωρινός, belonging to that season—which are the only meanings of those compounds which the lexicons recognize as classical. In that sense, accordingly, is the Adjective taken here, in connection with ἄκαρπα, by Wicl. (harvest-trees without fruit), Tynd., Cranm.,(without fr. at gathering time), Castal.,(autumnales infructuosæ), Thom.,(auctumnal trees without fruit), Dav.,(aut. trees stripped of their fruit); and apart from that connection, by Rhemish; Vulg., and its followers generally, Dutch, French, Swiss, margin; Engl., Ann., Hamm.; Cocc.; Beausobre and L’Enfant, margin; Bengel, Moldenh; Hænlein (erroneously cited by Huther), Meyer, Gerlach, Barn.; de W.; Peile,(trees on the wane—“fallen into the sere and yellow leaf”), Huther;—Wahl, Robinson, Green,(autumnal, sere, bare), Schirl. The same interpretation is allowed also by Zeg., Wits., Gill, Laurm., Rosenm., Trol.,(‘without leaves,’ [which is also Wesley’s version],‘as trees are in autumn’), Bloomf.;—Schleusn. The second significations of φθίνω and ὀπώρα, however, appear combined in the use, according to Phavor., of φθινόπωρον to denote νόσος φθίνουσα ὀπώρας (hence Clarke: galled or diseased trees; an etymology and sense allowed also by Wits., Laurm., Trol., cankered;—Schleus.), and in Pindar’s use of φθινοπωρίς. Liddell and Scott do, indeed, mark this last word as a ‘pecul. fem.’ of φθινοπωρινός, which they explain to mean autumnal. But in the passage referred to—Pyth., 5, 161, 162, φθινοπωρὶς ἀνέμων χειμερία καταπνοά—φθινοπωρὶς evidently does not mean that, but rather the blighting influence of these wintry blasts, and so it is explained by the best commentators of Pindar. Heyne translates thus: ‘fructibus exitialis ventorum hibernus flatus;’ and the most recent editor, Prof. Schneidewin, has the following note: ‘ὀπώρα,ὥρα auctumus, annus dicuntur pro iis quæ giguntur iis temporibus. Jam sensus: Valeas viribus et consilio etiam in posterum, ne ventus brumalis tibi perdat temporis fructus.’ If it be said that the common version requires the noun to be taken in its second signification and the verb in its first, it may be replied, 1, that this acknowledged secondary meaning of the noun is its meaning in the only place where it is found in the New Testament, viz.: Rev_18:14;—2, that the intransitive use of the verb is by far the more frequent;—and, 3, that the verb retains this intransitive sense in other analogous cases of composition; e.g., φθινόκαρπος, applied by Pindar, Pyth., 4, 471, to an oak from which the limbs had been lopped; and φθινόκωλος, with wasting limbs (L. and S.). While, therefore, our present form φθινοπωρινός may not, in the one or two instances where it is found elsewhere, bear the meaning here ascribed to it, I concur nevertheless in the remark of Grotius: ‘Si usum vocis respicias, dicit arbores auctumnales. Sed magis respicitur ἐτυμολογία vocis, ut dicat eos similes esse arboribus, quarum fructus perit illico.’ This sense, moreover, is more in harmony with the design of the writer, which is to describe the characteristic and inward spiritual desolation of these wicked men …., and it lays a firmer basis for the dreadful climax whereby he effects that object, cf. Mat_13:22; Luk_8:14, etc.”—M.] They stand there, like late-autumnal trees, which have no fruit but only dry leaves. They deceive our expectations, as the baren fig-tree, Mat_21:19; Luk_13:6, and are therefore ripe for the curse and woodman’s axe. As we expect the clouds to yield water, so we expect the trees to yield fruit. The former relates to their teaching, the latter to their life. Bengel:—“Trees, as they appear at the end of autumn, without fruit and leaves,” cf. Isa_1:30. Jude thinks of persons, who year after year are like late-autumnal trees. This is not a weak, but a very striking description, whereas, if we follow the etymology, the addition of ἄκαρπος would be superfluous.

Unfruitful.—Not “whose fruit has been taken off,” as de Wette, but without fruit [or better, incapable of yielding fruit.—M.]

Twice dead, not=wholly dead, which is arbitrary, for the figure is taken from trees which have at different times suffered fatal injury by frost or from insects. Stier: “By nature we are through the fall altogether dead trees; now these persons, having received the grace of regeneration, have died a second time (2Pe_2:20). This is the second death in guilt and punishment.” Others (like Grotius) erroneously interpret these words of the first (earthly) and the second (post-terrene) death, seeing death had not yet affected them in either respect. [Wordsworth: “So these men are trees, which died twice, because these men having been once dead in trespasses and sins, arid raised to life in baptism, have relapsed and apostatized into the death of sin, and so have died twice; and because by their sins they have incurred the second death. See Rev_2:11; Rev_20:6; Rev_20:14; Rev_21:8, where it is said that the second death is the penalty of the unbelieving, abominable, and fornicators.” Oecumenius: “τὰ φθινοπώρινα δένδρα δὶς ἀποθνήσκοντα,ἔν τε τῇ τοῦ καρποῦ αὐτῶν ἀποβολῇ,καὶ ἐν τῇ τῶν φύλλων ἀποῤῥοῇ.” De Wette illustrates by “bis dat qui cito dat,” and Horace’s “pro quo bis patior mori.” Alford refers to the double death in a tree, which is not only as it seems to the eye in common with other trees, in the apparent death of winter, but really dead: dead to appearance and dead in reality.—M.]

Uprooted, not trees dug out and thus eradicated, but such as still remain in the earth, shaken loose by their roots, and thus incapable of shedding leaves and bearing fruit. Figurative description of men torn loose from this vital foundation and the communion of the Church, no longer moved by the Holy Spirit, having ceased to do good works, and doomed to the penalty of the obdurate, cf. Joh_15:6; Mat_3:10. [Arnaud: “Tous ces mots sont des métaphores energiques pour montrer le néant de ces impures, la légèreté de leur conduite, la sterilité de leur foi et l’absence de leurs bonnes mœurs.”—M.]

Jud_1:13. Raging waves of the sea [German,“wild waves,” better than raging, so Alford.—M.]. The Apostle probably thought of Isa_57:20 : “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt,” cf. Wis_14:1. ἄγριος is elsewhere used of wild beasts. The figure describes their passionate conduct, their rushing against divinely-ordered barriers, their inward impurity and hurtfulness, cf. Psa_46:4. The figurative expression of Isaiah has a literal application in the Epistle.

̓Επαφρίζειν, properly to foam over, cover with foam, foam out. αἰσχύνας, an emphatic Plural, as 1Pe_4:3, all kinds of shame proceeding from the evil treasure of the heart. Huther: “Shameful lusts, which they exhibit in their wild, immoral life.”

Wandering stars, etc.—ἀστέρες πλανῆται, wandering stars, from πλανᾷν,πλανᾶσθαι, cf. 5:11; 2Ti_3:13. [Alford: “Comets, which astonish the world for awhile and then pass away into darkness.—Those professing Christians, by their profession of being lights in the world, instead of letting that light shine on more and more into the perfect day, are drifting about in strange errors of doctrine and practice, until it will be utterly extinguished in eternal darkness.”—M.]. It is difficult to see why the reference to comets, which were known to the people in ancient times, should be pronounced arbitrary (Huther). “That have no regular course, and depart from the sun (of righteousness).” Meyer. So also de Wette and Stier; the latter says: “If a star loses or deviates from its place or course, it either falls forthwith down dark, or, and, that is the sense here, it roves awhile with deceitful light until it reaches the point and catastrophe, which God has appointed.” The word ἀστέρες again contains a reference to men, that set up for lights of the Church, cf. Rev_1:20; Dan_12:3; Php_2:15. So Oecumenius. We must not think of authorized teachers, but remember that men, in order to gain distinction in those Churches, had to render themselves prominent by the light of knowledge; de Wette interprets the metaphor of the outward splendour of the luxury and perhaps also of the authority of those men; Huther applies the metaphor to unstable men, driven hither and thither by their carnal appetites, whose life presents the strongest contrast to the calm, well-ordered life of Christians. But this does not explain the term ἀστέρες.—Bengel observes: “It has recently been discovered that planets are opaque bodies that shine with borrowed light. Jude was enabled to intimate this in virtue of Divine illumination.” But the reference is neither to planets nor their opacity.

To whom [better, for whom.—M.] the blackness of darkness is reserved forever.—Cf. the parallel passage, 2Pe_2:17, and the commentary on it. Stier: “The comets, as unstable, disrupted ruins, may be hastening forward to a final darkness among the slags of the last process of reconstruction.”

Jud_1:14. But of [for.—M.] these also prophesied Enoch, the seventh from Adam..—Now follows a prophecy of Enoch of these people. τούτοις, with reference to them; see Winer, p. 244, cf. Luk_18:31.—καὶ should be connected with προφήτευσε, not with τούτοις. As other prophets, so Enoch also, the most ancient of prophets.

The seventh from Adam, cf. Gen_5:18. There are really only five patriarchs between Enoch and Adam, viz., Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel and Jared, but Adam is included as the first. This designation, although omitted by commentators, occurs repeatedly in the book of Enoch; e.g., we read, Enoch 93:3: “I, as the seventh, am born in the first week, while judgment and justice were delayed;” cf. Enoch 60:8: “In the seventh week there shall arise an apostate generation;” Enoch 37:1, traces back the genealogy of Enoch to Adam, not for the sake of embellishment, but in order to remove all doubt as to his personal identity.” The epithet “the seventh” cannot be without meaning; Calvin thinks that it is intended to denote the great age of this prophecy; others see in it a secret, mystical meaning. Bengel: “Every seventh is the most esteemed.” Stier: “The seventh from Adam is personally a type of the sanctified of the seventh age of the world (of the seventh millennium, of the great earth-sabbath), therefore he prophesies for this time.” Menken: “The number seven was esteemed in the ancient world as an important signature pointing to the sacred and mystery. The fact that after sin and death had freely exerted their unhappy power during the first six generations, in the seventh generation mankind appeared in the person of one man (who had led a godly life, and was taken by God to God without seeing death) in a state of high completeness and blessed freedom from death, has a kind of prophetico-symbolical significance, and intimates that mankind in general, after having duly completed its course and fought its battle under the oppression of sin and death through six long world-periods, shall appear in the seventh world-period in a state of higher completeness, in a more Divine life and more blessed freedom from death. The seventh world-period is the Kingdom of God on earth. To Adam, the first, was revealed and promised the appearance and advent of the Lord, as a Helper and Saviour; to Enoch, the seventh from Adam, was revealed the last advent of the same Lord, Helper and Saviour, as a Judge and Avenger, and he was the first prophet, who spoke and taught this among men.” [“The number seven is sacred above all; Enoch is seventh from Adam and walks with God; Moses is seventh from Abraham; Phineas is seventh from Jacob our father, as Enoch was seventh from Adam. And they correspond to the seventh day, which is the Sabbath, the day of rest. Every seventh age is in the highest esteem.” Wetstein, citing Rabbinical writings, p. 737. Wordsworth deems it worthy of remark, that Enoch lived as many years as there are days in a solar year, viz., 365, and was then translated (Gen_5:24.)—M.]. The words which follow are found almost literally in the above-mentioned apocryphal book of Enoch, which was formerly known only by fragments and notices of the early fathers, but has recently been discovered in an Æthiopic translation and translated from the Æthiopic into German. It became known in Europe about the close of the last century. Winer, Dorner and others ascribe its authorship to a Jew of the first century of the Christian era; Ewald places its date at the end of the second century before Christ. A new edition and translation of this book was published by D. Dillmann in 1853, who pronounces it to have been written about B. C. 110. The book consists, according to the careful investigation of the last-named scholar, of three parts: 1. The proper and original book of Enoch, which constitutes the greatest part of this apocryphal work. 2. Of historical additions for the elucidation of several doctrines and ideas from the pen of another author, who wrote not long afterwards. 3. Of so-called Noachian additions connected with other interpolations made by a third author, belonging at least to the end of the first century B. C. The passage in question is rendered by Dillmann thus: “And behold, He comes with myriads of saints to execute judgment on them, and He will destroy the ungodly and judge all flesh in all things which the sinners and the ungodly have committed and done against Him,” Jud_1:9. Considering that the variations between the Epistle and the book of Enoch are not inconsiderable, and that the book of Enoch is not expressly cited, there is still room to doubt whether Jude knew that book. But the tradition of Enoch’s prophecy he must at all events have known and considered true as to its kernel. [There is an English translation by Archbishop Lawrence, with an introduction and notes, which passed through three editions, 1821, 1833, 1838, but has been completely superseded by that of Dillmann, with an introduction and commentary, published at Leipzig in 1853. See Introduction § 7.—M.]

Behold the Lord came with His holy myriads.—Now follows the substance of the prophecy.—Ἠ̄λθε, the Aorist, because Enoch speaks in a vision, in which the future appears to him as present [really a prophetic past.—M.], as in Isa_9:6; Isa_53:4. The Æthiopic text of the book of Enoch seems to have the Present.

With His holy myriads; ἐν. In them, i.e., to be glorified in them, as 2Th_1:10, and with them. Myriads, literally ten thousands, then absolutely, many thousands. The book of Enoch in other similar passages with reference to Daniel 7, uses the terms thousand times thousand, and ten thousand times ten thousand; so Enoch 40:1; 71:10. In Deu_33:2, Jehovah is represented as revealing Himself from Sinai, shining forth from among many thousands of saints. According to Zec_14:5, He will come to judgment with all His saints, cf. Mat_25:31; Rev_5:11. The term denotes not only angels, but also the elect from among men; cf. Heb_12:22; 1Co_6:2.—With His, αὑτοῦ. They belong to Him, stand before His throne, and wait for His commands.

Jud_1:15. To give judgment, etc.—κρίσιν ποιεῖν. Joh_5:27; cf. Gen_18:25; to execute it in fact. [The term here and in the references seems rather to denote the functions of the Judge, than those of the executor.—M.]

To convict all the ungodly; ἐξελέγξαι, the composite form intensifies the idea, which is their thorough and absolute conviction, not their punishment; the reference is to inward conviction in the conscience. [I doubt whether this interpretation is exhaustive; the conviction of course begins with the conscience, but the intensive nature of the composite seems to imply a conviction that shall bring the convicted to judgment, and entail the execution of the judicial sentence.—M.]

Wherein they were ungodly; ἀσεβεῖν used transitively, cf. 2Pe_2:6. Winer, p. 236. The guilt of ungodliness is here made very prominent, the same word being used four times, cf. Zep_3:11.

Of all the hard speeches; σκληρός, hard, dry, rough, indigestible [?—M.], used figuratively of daring, impious blasphemy; cf. 1Sa_2:3; Mal_3:13; Num_16:26. Differently, Joh_6:60. This involves even greater guilt than the works which were the result of their ungodly disposition; hence they are named first. In the above-cited passage from the book of Enoch, nothing is said of such hard speeches; but soon after we read: “Ye have reviled His greatness with arrogant, blasphemous speeches of your unclean mouth; ye hard-hearted, ye shall find no peace,” Enoch 5:4; cf. Enoch 46:7.

Against Him.—“Although they did not believe that all their ungodly speeches were aimed at Him.”

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Those who know the book of Enoch, with its absurd fancies and its coarse notions of the heavenly world, must revere more strongly than ever the chasteness and truth of our canonical writings, and be grateful to the Church for rejecting such clumsy fabrications. In that book we read, e.g., of the giants or tyrants mentioned in Genesis 6, that “the women with whom the angels had intercourse, conceived and brought forth great giants 6000 feet [German: 3000 Ellen.—M.] in height. These ate up all the produce of men, until men were unable to sustain them any longer. Then the giants turned upon the men to devour them,” etc. The book is full of the coarsest materialism, stating as irrefragable facts that there are in heaven particular receptacles for the winds, for hail, snow and rain, for thunder and lightning, that there is a literal cornerstone of the earth, and that the sky is supported by columns. Here is something to learn for the modern friends of an extreme realism.

2. The guilt of the heavenly spirits that apostatized from God is the more aggravated, because in their case there was no temptation from without, as in that of men.

3. Those deceivers confirm the old, but in most instances not sufficiently acknowledged truth, that the decisions of the will are not so much the result of thinking and perceiving, as, on the contrary, thinking and perceiving the result of the decisions of the will. Demosthenes (Olynth., II., 32) already declared “that persons accustomed to do mean and bad acts cannot understand a great and powerful thought, and that the thoughts and intentions of men are the reflections of their manner of life.”

4. In reading the account of corruption given in this Epistle, we have to apply the rule belonging to the prophecies of the Old Testament, that the events described in them take place at different times and stages of development before they meet their final and highest fulfilment.

5. “The whole development of evil, as well as of good, grows like a tree, the very beginnings of which contain the same kind in the germ, and foretell the end; but the Spirit of God has, with prophetic vision, described to us the events and delineated the persons for the future.” Stier.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

Our curiosity should not lead us to seek to penetrate the mysterious incidents of the apostasy of angels; we should rather take warning from so much of it as is clear.—The necessity of continuing in grace, lest somebody spoil us of our crown.—Whoso rejects the light here and does not walk in the light now, will hereafter dwell in eternal darkness.—Whatever is spoken or written against the servants of God, the Eternal Judge will consider as spoken or written against Himself.

H. Rieger:—It is an old experience of constant and multiform repetition, that the most licentious men are generally also the most impatient of all checks emanating from human sources, that they decry all government and authority as an invention of the devil, and abuse, the liberty of the Gospel as a cloak of maliciousness. [Sensuality and lawlessness go together.—M.]—Those who walk in the way of Cain hypocritically observe the externals of religion and its exercise, but are at mortal enmity with whatever aims at the spirit and the truth, and thus end with being driven away from the face of God.

Starke:—It often happens that the more good God does to man, the more man wanders away from God, Deu_32:15. But if men resist the goodness of God, He has recourse to severity and justice, Rom_2:4; Rom_11:22.—Unbelief is certainly the greatest sin, and the source of all other vices.—Heaven is a many-mansioned house, Joh_14:2. Thank God that through Christ we may once more return to our first home, whereas the devils have left their habitation forever, 2Co_5:1-2.—The life of heaven is a state of liberty, light and peace; the life of hell is a state of confinement, darkness and perpetual fear of more punishment.—Sins that cannot be named in decency, or on account of ignorance, are yet so common among Christians that a preacher does not know whether he ought to speak of them, or be silent, Eze_8:8-9.—O! the mad blindness of men, that will not grow wise by other people’s injury, but will persist in their daring even to the extent of being made examples of the Divine judgment, 2Ch_30:8; Eze_13:4-5.—Although some governments are not what they ought to be, men ought to honour in them the image of God, Ex. 22:38.—True zeal, be it never so great, is always humble and modest, whereas false zeal is defiant and passionate, Rom_10:2.—Jesus uttered His woes on none more than on false teachers and hypocrites, Mat_23:13. They have the heart of a Cain, a Balaam and a Korah.—Gold and honours are two hooks with which the devil fishes and catches many thousand souls for his kingdom, Joh_13:2; 1Ch_22:1.—All the feasts of Christians ought by rights to be love-feasts, Neh_8:10.—Can there be anything more unhappy than being rooted out and separated from the communion of the life of Christ? Col_2:7.—Think ye that the pagans were allowed to revile their gods, as God is, without let or punishment, blasphemed among Christians? But have patience, Jesus will summon those mighty blasphemers to His bar, and avenge the insult that has been heaped upon Him.

[Literature on Jud_1:9;—

Hecht, Joannes, Disputatio inauguralis de certamine Michaëlis cum Diabolo de corpore Mosis, 4to., Jenæ., 1853.

Nieremberg, N., Exercitatio exegetico-polemica de Angelica super corpore Mosis discrepatione, 4to., Ratisbonæ, 1682.

Bachmann, I. G., De certamine circa corpus Mosis, Crit. Sac, Thes., 2, 794.

Hensel, M. Z., De certamine Archangeli Michaëlis cum Diabolo de corpore Mosis, Crit. Sac, Thes., 2, 797.

Calmet, A., La Mort et la Sépulture de Moyse, Dissertations, Commentaire, 8, 753.—M.]

Footnotes:

[17]Jud_1:5. [βούλομαι, to wish, to desire. Its force ought to be brought out in a stronger form than the ambiguous “I will.”—M.]

[18] Jud_1:5. [δὲ, not=therefore, but=but.

Kühner: “δέ most generally has an adversative force, and hence can express every kind of contrast. In respect to its signification, it ranks like the Latin autem, between the copulative connectives (τέ, καί) and the adversative (ἀλλά, etc.), since it contains both a copulative and adversative force, and hence either opposes one thought to another, (adversative), or merely contrasts it (copulative). Hence it is very frequently used in Greek, where the English uses and. The new thought being different from the preceding is placed in contrast with it.”

Winer (pp. 472. 473): “δέ never means therefore, then; nor for, nor does it ever serve as a mere copula or particle of transition.”—M.]

[19]Jud_1:5. [ὑμᾶς. The force of the second ὑμᾶς is lost in E. V.; it is emphatic, and the emphasis ought to be brought out. “ But I wish to remind you, you who … ”—M.]

[20]Jud_1:5. [εἰδότας has a Present sense. They know it once for all, certainly, fully. This thorough knowledge of theirs is the motive of Jude’s reminding them. They know it now; not that they knew it once and have now forgotten it.—M.]

[21] Jud_1:5. Lachm., Tisch. read εἰδότας ἅπαξ πάντα, ὅτι ὁ Ἰησοῦς. So Vulgate. Stier says, that this would be unexampled, unintelligible, remarkabl; that the dark Epistle had been much corrected and glossed. De Wette agrees with Lachmann, following A. B. C. and other authorities, but not in respect of Ἰησοῦς. [The reading πάντα is also sustained by Cod. Sin., several Cursives, Copt. Syriac. It is on many accounts preferable to τοῦτο.

Ἰησοῦς instead of Κύριος is the reading of A. B., several Cursives, Vulg., Copt., Sahidic, Æthiopic and Armenian verss.; also of Didymus, Cyril, Jerome, Cassian, and received by Griesb. and Lachmann. In point of doctrine, it agrees with that of Paul. Cf. 1Co_10:1-11; Heb_3:7-19; Heb_4:1-2.—M.]

[22] Jud_1:5. [δεύτερον, the second time, again not afterwards, as in E. V. The first thing was deliverance, the second destruction. So Engl. Annot., Stier, Peile, Huther, Wordsw., Lillie.—M.]

[German: “But I will remind you, you that have known this once, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, for the second time destroyed those who believed not.”

Translate: “But I wish to remind you, you who know all things once for all, that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, the next time destroyed those who believed not.”—M.]

[23]Jud_1:6. [ἀγγέλους. The omission of the Article here contrasts angels with men, of whom Jude has spoken in the previous verse. τοὺς μὴ κ. τ. λ. specifies the particular class of angels in question.—M.]

[24] Jud_1:6. [“τετήρηκεν, says Huther, stands in sharp opposition to μὴ τηρήσαντας.” Hence the same word ought to be used in order to bring out the opposition.

[German:—“And the angels that kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath kept for the judgment of the great day with everlasting bonds under darkness.”

[Translate:—“And angels that kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath kept with everlasting bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day.”—M.]

[25]Jud_1:6. [δεσμοῖς ἀϊδίοις, Abl. instr. “With everlasting bonds.” “E. V., 18 times out of 20 (the other exception being Mar_7:35, string) has bands or bonds.” Lillie. Calvin: “ Quocunque pergant, secum trahunt sua vincula et suis tenebris obvoluti manent. Interea in magnum diem extremum eorum supplicium differtur.” Milton, Par. Lost. IV., 75: “ Which way I fly is hell; myself am hell.”—M.]

[26]Jud_1:7. [ὡς connected with ὑπομνῆσαι, viz.: “I wish to remind you. … how Sodom and Gomorrah, etc.”—M.]

[27]Jud_1:7. [τὸν ὅμοιον τούτοις τρόπον=in like manner as these men.—M.]

[28] Jud_1:7. ἑτέρας. “Nowhere else does E. V. translate ἕτερος, which occurs 98 times, by strange.” Lillie.—M.]

[German:—“How Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them, having whored themselves out in like manner as these, and gone after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

[Translate:—…. having given themselves over to fornication in like manner as these men, and gone after other flesh, are set forth, etc.—M.]

[29]Jud_1:8. [μέντοι, omitted in E. V., has adversative force, and should be rendered by some such word as yet, however, etc.—M.]

[30]Jud_1:8. [μὲν … .δὲ, on the one hand, on the other. Calvin:—“Notanda autem est antithesis, quum dicit eos carnem contaminare: hoc est, quod minus præstantiæ habet, dehonestare: et tamen spernere quasi probrosum, quod in genere humano maxime excellit.”—M.]

[31] Jud_1:8. [Cod. Sin. has κυριότητας.—M.]

[German:—“Now in like manner these dreamers also defile the flesh, and thus (dabei=therewith, at the same time) reject the dominion and revile the majesties.”

[Translate:—“In like manner, however, these dreamers also on the one hand defile the flesh, on the other reject lordship and speak evil of dignities.”—M.]

[32]Jud_1:9. Lachm. reads: ὅτε Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος τότε τῷ διαβόλῳ; but we prefer, with Stier, the common reading.

[33]Jud_1:9. [οὐκ ἐτόλμησε, did not dare, or dared not, better than durst not of E. V. The former is Lillie’s rendering, the latter that of German version.—M.]

[34] Jud_1:10. ὅσα has distributive force, and is variously rendered quæcunque (Vulg.), quotquot (Laurm.), quæ et quanta (Wordsw.), omnia quæ (Bengel), whatsoever things (Kenr., Lillie).

ὅσα μὲν … .ὅσα δὲ state an antithesis, which should be brought out.—M.]

[35] Jud_1:10. [ἐπίστανται is stronger than οἴδασι of the first clause, cf. Mar_14:68; the former is to understand, the latter, to know.

[German:—“These, on the contrary, revile those things which they know not; but those things which they understand naturally, as the brute beasts, even therein do they ruin themselves.”

[Translate:—“These, however, on the one hand, speak evil of whatsoever things they know not, on the other, whatsoever things they understand naturally, as the brute beasts, in those they corrupt themselves.”—M.]

[36] Jud_1:11. [καὶ τῆ πλάνῃ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ μισθοῦ; the construction of this difficult clause, which has the most weighty authorities, is that which takes τῇ πλάνῃ as a Dative of the direction in which (Dodd., Mack. Thom., Scott, Stier, Peile, Wahl, Robins., Wordsw., Lillie), and μισαθοῦ=ἑνεκα μισθοῦ, or Oec.’s κέρδους χάριν; (so Wic., Tynd., Cran., Reims, vss.; Grot., Beng., Bloomf., Stier, Winer, Robins., Wordsw., Lillie. al.). See Winer, p. 219, § 30, 10, e.—M.]

[German:—“Woe unto them, for they have walked in the way of Cain, and the error of Balaam with his hire has drawn them along, and in the gainsaying of Korah they have perished.”

This can hardly be called a translation; it is a paraphrase, which takes considerable liberty with the grammar of the original. Translate:—“Woe unto them, for in the way of Cain they walked, and in the error of Balaam they rushed headlong (Beng.: ‘effusi sunt, ut torrens sine aggere;’ Green, Lillie as here), and in the gainsaying of Core they perished.”—M.]

[37] Jud_1:12. Lachm. reads αὐτῶν instead of ὑμῶν, and supplies οἱ before ἐν ταῖς. Stier also prefers on internal grounds the reading “in their love-feasts.” ἀπάταις is less authentic here than in 2 Pet.

[οἱ ἐν ταῖς, A. B., Cod. Sin., G., Syr., Lachm., Tisch. Cod. Sin. has the reading οὗτοι εἰσιν γογγύσται μεμψίμυροι κα (**κατα) τὰσ ἐπιθυμίασ αὐτῶν πορευόμενοι, which Tischendorf characterizes thus: **improb. γογγ. usque πορ.—M.]

[38]Jud_1:12. Tisch., al. read παραφερόμεναι, driven fast. The sense is not essentially different [i.e., from περιφερόμεναι, which is certainly an unauthentic reading. A. B. C., Sin., Griesb., Scholz, Lach., Tisch., Words., Alford, Lillie are all in favour of the former. Cod. Sin. has παντί ἀνέμῳ παραφερόμεναι.—M.]

[39] Jud_1:12. [Sin., φθινοπωρικὰ for φθινοπωρινὰ.—M.]

[German:—“These are spots in your love-feasts, carousing together without fear, feeding themselves, clouds without water, driven fast by winds, late-autumnal trees, unfruitful, twice dead, uprooted.”

[Translate:—“These are rocks in your love-feasts, carousing together without fear, feeding themselves, clouds without water, borne along by winds, late-autumnal trees, unfruitful, twice dead, uprooted.”

For reasons see below in Exegetical and Critical.—M.]

[40]Jud_1:14. προφήτευσε δὲ καὶ τούτοις (Sin., προεπροφήτευσε). “But for these also prophesied Enoch,” better than “But of these” (German), and E. V.—M.]

[41]Jud_1:14. Sin., ὁ κύριος.—M.]

[42]Jud_1:14. Sin., ἁγίων ἀγγελῶν. German inserts between brackets after myriads (of angels).—M.]

[43]Jud_1:15. Lachm., Tisch. read simply: ἐλέγξαι [following A. B., Cod. Sin., which latter has the variation: ἐλέγξαι πάσαν ψυχὴν; and omits afterwards ἀσεβείας αὐτῶν.—M.]

[44] Jud_1:15. αὐτῶν restored by Tischend. in his last edition, after A. B. G. K., while Lachmann omits it.

[German:—“To give judgment against all, and to convict all ungodly ones of all their ungodly deeds, wherein they have shown themselves ungodly, and of all the hard speeches, which the ungodly sinners have spoken against Him.”

[Translate:—“To exercise judgment upon all, and to convict all the ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds, wherein they were ungodly (Lillie), and of all the hard speeches which sinners spake against Him.”—M.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Chapter 33

DOUBTFUL READINGS AND THE THEORY OF VERBAL INSPIRATION-THREE PALMARY INSTANCES OF DIVINE VENGEANCE UPON GRIEVOUS SIN.

Jud_1:5-7

WITH these three verses the main portion of the Epistle begins, the first three verses being introductory. These put before us three instances of Divine vengeance upon those who were guilty of grievous sin-the unbelieving Israelites in the wilderness, the impure angels, and the inhabitants of the cities of the plain; and in. the three verses which follow (Jud_1:8-10) St. Jude points out the similarity between the offences of these wicked persons and the offences of the libertines who were provoking God to execute similar vengeance upon them. It is quite possible that we have here the explanation of the words, "Who were of old set forth unto this condemnation" (Jud_1:4). The doom of these impious profligates has long since been written in the doom of those who sinned in a similar manner.

The Greek text of the opening verse exhibits a great variety of readings, and one may suspect with Westcott and Hort that there has been some primitive error, and that none of the existing readings are correct. Of the points in which they differ from one another three require notice:-

(1) In the words, "The Lord, having saved a people out of the land of Egypt," the authorities vary between "the Lord" (with or without the article), "God," and "Jesus." This last is far the best attested (AB, the best cursives, the Vulgate, both Egyptian Versions, both Ethiopic, the margin of the Armenian, and several Fathers); but the internal evidence against it is immense. Nowhere else in Scripture is Jesus said to be the author of anything which took place before the Incarnation. Had St. Jude written "Christ," we might have compared "the rock was Christ". {1Co_10:4} But the general adoption of the reading "Jesus" shows how completely in Christian thought and language the Man Jesus had become identified with the Eternal Son. If "Lord" be correct (κυριος, without the article), it should be understood as meaning Jehovah; and therefore "God," though not likely to be right as the reading, is right as an interpretation. In the Latin translation of the "Hypotyposeis" of Clement of Alexandria we have these two readings combined, Dominus Deus, and the Greek of Didymus has "Lord Jesus" combined. Possibly all three readings are insertions, and should be omitted, the true text being simply, "He who saved a people out of the land of Egypt."

(2) In the words, "though ye know all things once for all," some authorities, which were followed by the translators of 1611, have "this" for "all things," while one authority makes "all" to be masculine instead of neuter (παντας for παντα). This last may be correct, for the final letter of the masculine might easily be lost (especially in front of οτι); and in that case the meaning would be, "though ye all know it," i.e., "know what I am going to point out." There is a similar confusion of reading in 1Jn_2:20, where for "Ye know all things" (οιδατε παντα) we should perhaps read "Ye all know" (οιδατε παντες). But here the masculine has too little support to be adopted.

(3) The Sinaitie MS. transposes the "once" or "once for all" (απαξ) from "know" to "saved," and makes it answer to the "afterwards," or "the second time" (τοτερον) which follows. In this it is supported by the Armenian Version and a single cursive of the fourteenth century. If it were adopted the sentence would run thus: "Now I desire to put you in remembrance, though ye know all things, how that the Lord, having once saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed them that believed not." The correspondence between "once" and "afterwards"-"having a single time saved…the second time He destroyed"-is at first sight attractive; but it is precisely this superficial attractiveness which has caused the corruption of the text. A recent writer pleads for its adoption, but his reasons are not convincing. The external evidence against the proposed transposition is enormous; and there is no strong internal evidence against the best-attested text (as there is against the reading "Jesus") to turn the scale. "Though ye know all this once for all" makes excellent sense; and so also does "He who saved a people out of Egypt, the second time (viz., in the wilderness) destroyed them that believed not."

This collection of various readings out of which it is impossible to select the true text with anything like certainty, is worth remembering in considering the theory of verbal inspiration. If every word that St. Jude wrote was supernaturally dictated, why has not every word been supernaturally preserved? It is manifest that God has not, either miraculously or in any other way, secured that the exact words written by St. Jude should come down to us without alteration. The alterations are so ancient, so widely diffused, and so numerous, that we are unable to decide what St. Judes exact words were. We are not even certain that among the numerous variations we have got his exact words. This is not a common case. The usual problem, when various readings occur, is to select the right reading out of several that have been handed down to us, there being no reason to doubt that one of them is the original reading of the autograph. But there are a few passages, and this is one of them, where one may reasonably doubt whether the original reading has not been altogether lost. Act_7:46; Act_13:32; {comp. Heb_11:4; Rom_15:32; 1Co_12:2; Col_2:18; Col_2:23; Heb_4:2; Heb_10:1; 1Ti_6:7; 2Ti_1:13; 2Pe_3:10; 2Pe_3:12; Jud_1:22-23} This result might easily be produced through an error in the earliest copies made from the original document, or through a slip made by the amanuensis who wrote the original document. There are minds to which this supposition is very repugnant; and there are writers who assure us that in Biblical criticism "conjectural emendation must never be resorted to, even in passages of acknowledged difficulty," or that "conjectural criticism is entirely banished from the field." But if the whole of an Apostolic Epistle may have been lost, {1Co_5:9; 3Jn_1:9} why may not a word or two of an extant Epistle have been lost? And is it quite natural that there should sometimes be a doubt as to which of the several existing readings is the original, and yet quite inconceivable that there should ever be a doubt as to whether any of them is original? In either case we are left in uncertainty as to the precise words which are inspired; and we are thus confronted with the perplexing result that the Almighty has specially guided a writer to use certain words and phrases to the exclusion of all others, and yet from very early times has, in not a few cases, allowed Christians to be in doubt as to what these exact words and phrases are. Have we any right to assume that there was this special Divine care to produce a particular wording, when it is quite manifest that there has not been special Divine care to preserve a particular wording?

The theory of verbal inspiration imports unnecessary and insuperable difficulties into the already sufficiently difficult problem as to the properties of inspired writings. It maintains that "the line can never rationally be drawn between the thoughts and words of Scripture"; which means that the only inspired Word of God is the original Hebrew and Greek wording which was used by the authors of the different books in the Bible. Consequently, all who cannot read these are cut off from the inspired Word; for the inspired thoughts are, according to this theory, inseparably bound up with the original form of words. But if it is the thought, and not the wording, that is inspired, then the inspired thought may be as adequately expressed in English or German as in Hebrew or Greek. It is the inspired thought, no matter in what language expressed, which comes home to the hearts and consciences of men, and convinces them that what is thus brought to them by a human instrument is indeed in its origin and in its power Divine. "Never man thus spake" was said, not of the choice language that was used, but of the meaning which the language conveyed.

In the passage before us there are several points which call for attention, most of which are independent of the differences of reading.

It may be doubted whether the participle (ειδοτας) is rightly rendered "though ye know all things once for all." It makes good, and perhaps better sense to understand it in the equally possible signification of "because ye know all things once for all." Their being already in full possession of a knowledge of Old Testament history is the reason why St. Jude need do no more than remind them of one or two particulars which throw a terrible light upon the position of those whose conduct is being discussed. That "once" here does not mean "formerly," as the Authorized Version takes it, "though ye once knew this," is manifest to every one who knows the meaning of the participle and adverb here used (ειδοτας απαξ). Nor is there much doubt that both here and in ver. 3 it does mean "once for all." This Greek adverb, like its Latin equivalent semel, is sometimes "used of what is so done as to be of perpetual validity and never need repetition." It is twice so used in the Epistle to the Hebrews: "For as touching those who were once enlightened and tasted of the heavenly gift"; {Heb_6:4} i.e., once for all enlightened, so that no second enlightenment is possible. And again, "Because the worshippers, having been once cleansed, would have had no more conscience of sins". {Heb_10:2} So also in 1 Peter: "Because Christ also died for sins once". {1Pe_3:18} The meaning is similar in both the passages here (Jud_1:3; Jud_1:5). The Gospel was once for all delivered by the Apostles to the Church; for there can be no second Gospel. And this Gospel Christians receive and know once for all.

Doubt has been raised as to the event or events to which St. Jude refers in the words "afterward destroyed them that believed not." Hofman. Schott, and others, adopting the best-attested reading, "Jesus, having saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not," interpret the latter clause of the destruction of Jerusalem or of the overthrow of the Jewish nation. It is felt that this makes a very unnatural contrast with the deliverance of Israel from Pharaoh by the hand of Moses, and therefore, "saved a people out of the land of Egypt" has to be interpreted to mean "the redemption from the bondage-house of the Law and of sin wrought in Israel and for Israel by Christs act of salvation" (Schott, Erlangen, 1863, p. 225). This is very forced and improbable. Let us hold by Hookers "most infallible rule in expositions of sacred Scripture, that where a literal construction will stand, the farthest-from the letter is commonly the worst" ("Eccl. Pol.," 5. 59:2). The literal construction of "saved a people out of the land of Egypt" will certainly stand here, and the words must be understood of the passage of the Red Sea and all that accompanied that event. This is the clause of which the meaning is plain, and it must be the interpreter of the clause of which the meaning is less plain: to work backwards from the latter is singularly unreasonable. The "saving" being understood of the deliverance of the Israelites from the tyranny of Pharaoh, the "destroying" is most naturally understood of the overthrow of these same Israelites in the wilderness; not of any catastrophe, such as followed the matter of Korah {Num_16:49} or of Baal-peor (25), but of the gradual destruction, during the forty years of wandering, of the rebellious and unbelieving, "whose carcasses fell in the wilderness. And to whom sware He that they should not enter into His rest, but to them that were disobedient? And we see that they were not able to enter in because of up-belief". {Heb_3:17-19} It is quite unnecessary to add to this, with Fronmuller, the Babylonish captivity, as if "afterward" or "the second time" (toteron) referred to two destructions. It refers to two Divine acts-one of mercy, and a second of judgment.

"And angels which kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation, He hath kept in everlasting bonds." This is St. Judes second instance of Gods vengeance upon gross sin, and this and the next are common to both Epistles. For the destruction of the unbelieving Israelites 2 Peter has the Deluge. The Revised Version has several improvements here. It substitutes "principality" for "first estate," in harmony with other passages, where the same word occurs, {Rom_8:38; Eph_3:10; Eph_6:12; Col_1:16; Col_2:10; Col_2:15} and inserts "own"-"their own principality"; thereby marking the difference between "own" and "proper" - "their proper habitation." Above all, it preserves St. Judes irony in the double use of the word "kept"; "angels which kept not their own principality He hath kept in everlasting bonds"; which is destroyed in the Authorized Version by the substitution of "reserved" for the second "kept." The alteration of "chains" into "bonds" is of less moment; but it is worth while marking the difference between two Greek words, both of which are frequent in the New Testament, and of which the former is always used in a literal sense, {Mar_5:3-4; Luk_8:29; Act_12:6-7; etc.} and the other sometimes literally, {Luk_8:29; Act_16:26; Act_23:29; etc.} and sometimes metaphorically. {Mar_7:35; Luk_13:16; Phm_1:13} It is the latter which is used here.

It may be regarded as certain that this passage does not refer to the original rebellion of the angels, and their fall from being heavenly powers to being spirits of evil and of darkness. Nor is it a direct reference to the Rabbinic interpretation of "the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all that they chose". {Gen_6:2, where the best texts of the Septuagint have "angels of God" for "sons of God"} Much more probably it is a reference to a topic which is very prominent in the Book of Enoch, which, however, in this particular is based upon the common interpretation of the passage in Genesis. A discussion of this most interesting and perplexing writing is reserved for a later chapter. At present it suffices to say that the work is a composite one, written at different times and by different authors, and that the allusions to it here, and the quotation from it in vv. 14 and 15 {Jud_1:14-15}, are from the first portion of the Book of Enoch (chapters 1-36.), which, together with the last portion (chapters 72-105.), may safely be considered as the original writing, and undoubtedly pre-Christian. Whether any of the book was composed in the Christian era is doubtful, and that any of it was written by a Christian is very doubtful indeed. Hofmann, Philippi, and Weisse have not succeeded in persuading many people that the whole work is of Christian origin. The portion of which St. Jude makes use may, with a good deal of probability, be assigned to the latter part of the second century before Christ. A sketch of the section respecting the sin of the angels will throw much light on the passage before us. A portion of it had long been known through two considerable extracts, which the Byzantine writer Georgius Syncellus (cir. A.D. 800) makes from it in his "Chronographia" (pp. 20-23 and 40-42, Dindorfs ed., Bonn, 1829). The quotation in our Epistle and those made by Syncellus constituted all that was known of the Book of Enoch in Europe until 1773, when the English traveler Bruce brought home three MSS. of an Ethiopic version of the whole which was still extant in the Abyssinian Church.

The section about the sin of the angels and their punishment (7-36) begins very abruptly after a short introduction (1-6), in which Enoch blesses the righteous, and states that he received a revelation from the angels in heaven. "And it came to pass, when the sons of men had multiplied, that daughters were born to them, very beautiful. And the angels, the sons of heaven, desired them, and were led astray after them, and said to one another, Let us choose for ourselves wives of the daughters of the men of the earth." Two hundred of them then made a conspiracy, and went down to the earth, and begat an offspring of giants. They imparted a knowledge of sorcery and many baneful arts; and the corruption thus diffused, and the voracity and violence of their offspring, produced the evils which preceded the Deluge. Then the sinful angels are sentenced by the Almighty, and Enoch is commissioned to make the sentence known to them. "Then the Lord said to me, Enoch, scribe of righteousness, go tell the watchers of heaven, who have deserted the lofty sky, and their holy everlasting station, who have been polluted with women that on earth they shall never obtain peace and remission of sin." The fallen angels persuade Enoch to intercede for them; but his intercession is not heard, and he is told to repeat the sentence which has been pronounced upon them. The following particulars of their punishment are of interest. Azazel, {comp. Lev_16:26, R.V} one of the ringleaders, is to be bound hand and foot, thrown into a loft in the wilderness, and covered with darkness; there he is to remain, with his face covered, till the great day of judgment, when he is to be cast into the fire. The others, after they have seen their offspring kill one another in mutual slaughter, are to be bound for seventy generations underneath the earth, till the day of their judgment, when they shall be thrown into the lowest depths of the fire, and be shut up for ever (10:6-9, 15, 16). "Judgment has been passed upon you; your prayer shall not be granted you. From henceforth never shall you ascend to heaven. He hath said that on the earth He will bind you, as long as the world endures" (14:2). And Enoch is afterward shown their punishment in a vision. "These are those of the stars which have transgressed the commandment of the most high God, and are here bound, until the infinite number of the days of their crimes be completed. Why art thou alarmed and amazed at this terrific place, at the sight of this place of suffering? This is the prison of the angels; and here are they kept for ever" (21:3, 6).

It is specially worthy of remark that it is in these older portions of the Book of Enoch that we meet for the first time in Jewish literature with the distinct conception of a general judgment. The idea is very frequent, and is expressed in a great variety of ways. Thus, what St. Jude calls "the Judgment of the Great Day" (κρισιν μεγαλης ημερας), a phrase which occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, is called in the Book of Enoch "the Great Day of Judgment" (10:9), "the Day of the Great Judgment" (93:8; 97:15; 104:3), "the Day of the Great Trouble" (99:5), "the Great Day" (16:2)"; the Great Judgment" (22:5), "the General Judgment" (22:9).

St. Jude of course need not have derived this idea from the Book of Enoch; but the fact that it is so very frequent there, especially in connection with the sin of the impure angels, may have influenced him in writing the passage before us. At any rate all these numerous de-fails will not leave us in much doubt as to the origin of St. Judes statement, "angels which kept not their own principality, but left their proper habitation, He hath kept in everlasting bonds under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." It comes either directly from the Book of Enoch, or from a source of which both the writer of the book and St. Jude make use.

It was "in like manner with these" angels that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah sinned, going astray after unlawful and unnatural indulgences; and "in like manner with these "angels, they also" are set forth as an example, suffering the punishment of eternal fire." The meaning is not quite clear, but apparently it is this, that the sinful angels are in prison awaiting the day of judgment, when they will be cast into the lake of fire; and that the destruction of the cities of the plain by fire, and their perpetual submersion, are an example of the eternal fire in which the angels will be submerged. Perhaps there is also the idea that under the Dead Sea volcanic fires are burning. It is quite possible to take "of eternal fire" after "example" instead of after "punishment"; and this rendering makes the statement more in accordance with the actual facts: "are set forth as an example of eternal fire, suffering punishment." But the two last words come in rather awkwardly at the end of the sentence, and most commentators decide against this construction. {comp. /RAPC 3Ma 2:5}

The three cases exhibit, not a climax, but great diversity, as regards persons, sin, and punishment. We have both Jews and Gentiles, and between them beings superior to both. The Israelites by unbelief rejected their promised home, and perished slowly in the wilderness. The angels left their proper home, sinned grossly, and are in banishment and in prison, awaiting still worse punishment. The men of Sodom and Gomorrah sinned grossly in their home, and both they and it were suddenly, horribly, and irrevocably destroyed. This great diversity gives point to the moral. No matter who may be the sinners, or what the circumstances of the sin, outrageous offences, such as impurity and rebellion, are certain of Divine chastisement.

If fallen angels are evil spirits actively compassing the ruin of souls, how can fallen angels be "kept in everlasting bonds until the judgment of the great day"? More than one answer might be given to this question, but the reserve of Scripture on the subject seems to warn us from unprofitable speculation. Even without Scripture the reality of spiritual powers of evil may be inferred from their effects. Scripture seems to tell us that some of these powers are personal, and some not, that some are more free than others, and that all shall be defeated at last. That is enough for our comfort, warning, and assurance. It consoles us to know that much of the evil within us is no part of ourselves, but comes from without. It makes us wary to know that such powers are contending against us. It gives us confidence to know that even Satan and his hosts can be overcome by those who resist steadfast in the faith.

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.

1:5-16 This section elaborates on the “condemnation recorded long ago” (1:4) by applying to the false teachers Old Testament examples of God’s judgment.

1:5 The preexistent Jesus rescued the people of Israel from Egypt and later destroyed the unfaithful (cp. 1 Cor 10:4). • After rescuing the nation of Israel from Egypt, God led them toward the Promised Land. Most of the people did not trust the Lord to protect them. Because of their unbelief, God sentenced that generation (except Joshua and Caleb) to wander in the wilderness until they died (see Num 14).

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

Jud 1:5. Ὑπομνῆσαι, to remind) In an active sense.—εἰδότας ὑμᾶς, though you know) The Accusative Absolute, as Act 26:3. The reason why he only admonishes or reminds them is, because they already know it, and have ascertained it once for all. This expression answers to that of Peter, knowing this first.—ἅπαξ) once for all: Jud 1:3, note.—σώσας, having saved) There is an antithesis in, destroyed.

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

Jud_1:5. From this verse to Jud_1:7 we have three examples, as representations of the judgment which threatens those mentioned in Jud_1:4. Compare with this 2Pe_2:4-6.

ὑπομνῆσαι δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι] δέ is used metabatically (as a mere particle of transition); not in order to put ὑπομνῆσαι in contrast to παρακαλῶν (Jud_1:3), which is only to be justified by the explanation of Schott, that Jude intends not properly to exhort the readers, but by παρακαλεῖν he means only that he will remind them. ὑμᾶς is not the subject, but the object to ὑπομνῆσαι; comp. 2Pe_1:12 (Rom_15:15).

εἰδότας [ὑμάς] ἅπαξ πάντα] εἰδότας is either in an adversative sense = καίπερ εἰδότας (de Wette); or, which is to be preferred on account of ἅπαξ, the statement of the reason of ὑπομνῆσαι, Nicolas de Lyra: commonere autem vos volo et non docere de novo; et subditur ratio; Bengel: causa, cur admoneat duntaxat: quia jam sciant, semelque cognitum habeant; so also Wiesinger and Schott.

ἅπαξ is not to be united per hyperbaton with σώσας; also not = first, so that δεύτερον corresponding to it would be = secondly, and both referred to εἰδότας (Jachmann); but ἅπαξ belongs to εἰδότας, and τὸ δεύτερον to ἀπώλεσεν. Hornejus incorrectly explains ἅπαξ by: jampridem et ab initio (Arnaud: vous qui lavez su une fois); it has here rather the same meaning as in Jud_1:3, rendering prominent that a new teaching is not necessary (de Wette, Stier, Wiesinger, Fronmüller, Schott, Hofmann).

πάντα; according to Nicolas de Lyra = omnia ad salutem necessaria; better: everything which is an object of evangelical teaching, here naturally with particular reference to what directly follows, to which alone the τοῦτο of the Rec. points.[15]

ὍΤΙ Ὁ ΚΎΡΙΟς (ἸΗΣΟῦς) ΛΑῸΝ … ΣΏΣΑς] ὍΤΙ belongs not to ΕἸΔΌΤΑς ΠΆΝΤΑ, but to ὙΠΟΜΝῆΣΑΙ.

With the reading (Ὁ) ἸΗΣΟῦς (Stier calls it: without example, and incomprehensibly strange) Jude here would speak from the same point of view as Paul does in 1Co_10:4 (comp. also 1Pe_1:11), according to which all the acts of divine revelation are done by the instrumentality of Christ, as the eternal Son and revealer of God. The name ἸΗΣΟῦς, by which Christ is designated in His earthly and human personality, is, however, surprising; but Jude might have so used it from the consciousness that the eternal Son of God and He who was born of Mary is the same Person (comp. 1Co_8:9; Php_2:5). With the reading ΚΎΡΙΟςcertainly the more naturalwhich de Wette-Brückner and Hofmann prefer, whilst Wiesinger and Schott consider ἸΗΣΟῦς as the originala designation of God is to be understood.

ΛΑΌΝ] That by this the people of Israel is meant is evident; the article is wanting, because Jude would indicate that Israel was saved as an entire people, with reference to the following ΤΟῪς ΜῊ ΠΙΣΤΕΎΣΑΝΤΑς.[16]

τὸ δεύτερον] is to be retained in its proper meaning, and to be explained neither, with Nicolas de Lyra and others, as = post (Arnaud: de nouveau, ensuite, après), nor, with Grotius and Wolf, as = ex contrario. It indicates that what was said in the preceding participial sentence, namely, the divine deliverance of the people from Egypt, is considered as a first deed, to which a second followed. The definite statement of what this second is, is usually derived from the preceding σώσας, and by it is accordingly understood a second deliverance; but there are different views as to what deliverance is meant. In this commentary the deliverance of the people from the wilderness was designated as this second deliverance, which certainly occurred to the people, yet only so that those who believed not did not attain to it, but were destroyed by God in the wilderness (so in essentials, Stier, Brückner, Wiesinger). On the other hand, Schmidt (bibl. Theologie, II.), Luthardt, Schott, Hofmann understand by it the deliverance effected by Christ; whilst they regard as the punishment falling on unbelievers, the destruction of Jerusalem, or the overthrow of the Jewish state. But both explanations are arbitrary; for, first, it is unauthorized to refer τὸ δεύτερον only to σώσας and not to ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου σώσας; and, secondly, in the principal sentence a deliverance is not at all indicated.[17] Whilst, then, Jude thinks on the deliverance from Egypt as a first deed, he does not mention a deliverance, but the destruction of those who believed not, as the second deed following the first. But this second is not indicated as a single deed, and therefore by it is to be understood generally what befell the unbelieving in the wilderness after the deliverance from Egypt; what this was is expressed in the words τοὺς μὴ πιστεύσαντας ἀπώλεσεν. It is arbitrary to refer this, with Ritschl, only to the history recorded in Num_25:1-9; and still more arbitrary to refer it, with Fronmüller, to the Babylonish captivity (2Ch_36:16 ff.). Compare, moreover, with this verse, Heb_3:16-19.

ΤΟῪς ΜῊ ΠΙΣΤΕΎΣΑΝΤΑς] On ΜΉ, with participles, see Winer, p. 449 f. [E. T. 606 f.]; comp. Jud_1:6 : ΤΟῪς ΜῊ ΤΗΡΉΣΑΝΤΑς. It is to be observed that in the corresponding passage, 2 Peter 2, instead of this example, the deluge is named.

[15] Schott, indeed, explains πάντα correctly; but he erroneously thinks that ἅπαξ with εἰδότας indicates this knowledge is meant as a knowledge effected by a definite individual act, and that ἅπαξ is to be understood of the instruction given in Second Peter.

[16] Calvin observes: nomen populi honorifice capitur pro gente sancta et electa, ac si diceret, nihil illis profuisse, quod singulari privilegio in foedus assumpti essent; but were this correct, a αὑτοῦ would at least have been added.

[17] Against Winers explanation, p. 576 [E. T. 775]: the verb connected with τὸ δεύτερον should properly have been οὐκ ἔσωσε (ἀλλά κ.τ.λ.); the Lord, after having saved, the second time (when they needed His helping grace) refused them this saving grace, and left them to destruction. But there is nothing indicated in the context of a state of being in want of grace.

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 1:5-13 . Illustrations of Sin and Judgment Derived from History and from Nature . The judgment impending Over these men is borne witness to by well-known facts of the past, and may be illustrated from the phenomena of nature. God showed His mercy in delivering the Israelites from Egypt, but that was no guarantee against their destruction in the wilderness when they again sinned by unbelief. The angels were blessed beyond all other creatures, but when they proved unfaithful to their trust they were imprisoned in darkness, awaiting there the judgment of the great day. The men of Sodom (lived in a land of great fertility, they had received some knowledge of God through the presence and teaching of Lot, they had been lately rescued from captivity by Abraham, yet they) followed the sinful example of the angels, and their land is still a prey to the fire, bearing witness to the eternal punishment of sin. In spite of these warnings the heretics, who are now finding their way into the Church, persist in their wild hallucinations, giving themselves up to the lusts of the flesh, despising authority, and railing at angelic dignities. They might have been taught better by the example of the archangel Michael, of whom we are told that, when disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, he uttered no word of railing, but made his appeal to God. These men however rail at that which is beyond their knowledge, while they surrender themselves like brute beasts to the guidance of their appetites, and thus bring about their own destruction, following in the wake of impious Cain, of covetous Balaam, and rebellious Korah. When they take part in your love-feasts they cause the shipwreck of the weak by their wantonness and irreverence. In greatness of profession and smallness of performance they resemble clouds driven by the wind which give no rain; or trees in autumn on which one looks in vain for fruit, and which are only useful for fuel. By their confident speaking and brazen assurance they seem to carry all before the; yet like the waves bursting on the shore, the deposit they leave is only their own shame. Or we might compare them to meteors which shine for a moment and are then extinguished for ever.

Jud 1:5 . ὑπομνῆσαι δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι , εἰδότας ὑμᾶς πάντα . [786] Cf. 2Pe 1:12 , διὸ μελλήσω ὑμᾶς ἀεὶ ὑπομιμνήσκειν καίπερ εἰδότας , 2Pe 1:13 , διεγείρειν ὑμᾶς ἐν ὑπομνήσει , 2Pe 3:1 , διεγείρω ὑμῶν ἐν ὐπομνήσει τὴν εἰλικρινῆ διάνοιαν , Rom 15:14 , πέπεισμαι δὲ ὅτι καὶ αὐτοὶ μεστοί ἐστε ἀγαθωσύνης , πεπληρωμένοι πάσης τῆς γνώσεως … τολμηροτέρως δὲ ἔγραψα ὑμῖν ἀπὸ μέρους ὡς ἐπαναμιμνήσκων ὑμᾶς . The word εἰδότας justifies ὑπομνῆσαι : they only need to be reminded of truths already known, so that it is unnecessary to write at length. The repeated ὑμᾶς contrasts the readers with the libertines of the former verse. The words in themselves might be taken ironically of persons professing (like the Corinthians) to “know all things,” but the broad distinction maintained throughout the epistle between ὑμεῖς and οὗτοι (the Libertines) forbids such an interpretation. If we read ἅπαξ πάντα with some MSS., it suggests something of anxiety and upbraiding, which may be compared with the tone of St. Paul in writing to the Galatians. See, however, the following note for the position of ἅπαξ . Instead of πάντα some MSS., have τοῦτο . The former finds some support in Enoch i. 2, “I heard everything from the angels,” xxv. 2, “I should like to know about everything,” Secrets of En. xl. 1, 2, “I know all things from the lips of the Lord … I know all things and have written all things in the books,” lxi. 2 (quoted by Chase in Dict. of the Bible ). It should probably be understood of all that follows, including the historical allusions, implying that those addressed were familiar not only with the O.T. but with rabbinical traditions: so Estius “omnia de quibus volo vos commonere”. Bede’s note is “omnia videlicet arcana fidei scientes et non opus habentes recentia quasi sanctiora a novis audire magistris”. In what follows he takes ἅπαξ with αώσας , “ita clamantes ad se de afflictione Aegyptia primo salvavit humiles, ut secundo murmurantes contra se in eremo prosterneret superbos … Meminerimus ilium sic per aquas baptismi salvare credentes, ut etiam post baptismum humilem in nobis requirat vitam.”

[786] On the readings see Introduction.

ὅτι Κύριος , ἅπαξ λαὸν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου σώσας , τὸ δεύτερον [ τοὺς ] μὴ πιστεύσαντας ἀπώλεσεν .] For text, see Introduction on Readings. Clement in his Adumbrationes gives the paraphrase “Quoniam Dominus Deus semel populum de terra Aegypti liberans deinceps eos qui non crediderunt perdidit”.

τὸ δεύτερον has given rise to much discussion. According to the reading I have adopted, it contrasts the preceding saving with the following destruction . The deliverance from Egypt was the creation of a people once for all, but yet it was followed by the destruction of the unbelieving portion of the people, i.e. by all but Caleb and Joshua (Num 14:27 ; Num 14:37 ). So in 1Co 10 . we have the privileges of Israel allowed, and yet all was in vain because of their unbelief. There seems less force in the connection of ἅπαξ with εἰδότας : ἤδη would have been more suitable. For the opposition to τὸ δεύτερον , cf. Heb 9:28 , ὁ Χριστὸς ἅπαξ προσενεχθεὶς εἰς τὸ πολλῶν ἀνενεγκεῖν ἁμαρτίας ἐκ δευτέρου χωρὶς ἁμαρτίας ὀφθήσεται , Theoph. Autol. ii. 26, ἵνα τὸ μὲν ἅπαξ ᾖ πεπληρωμένον ὅτε ἐτέθη , τὸ δὲ δεύτερον μέλλῃ πληροῦσθαι μετὰ τὴν … κρίσιν , Liban. ap. Wetst. ἐμοὶ δὲ ἅπαξ ἀρκεῖ γέλωτα ὀφλεῖν , δεύτερον δὲ οὐκέτι .

I am inclined to think that the article before μή is an intrusion, as it seems to be before ἐν in Jud 1:12 . Omitting it, we can take δεύτερον with μὴ πιστεύσαντας , getting the sense: “In the 1st case of unbelief (in Egypt) [787] salvation followed; in the 2nd (in the wilderness) destruction,” lit. “when they, a second time failed to believe, He destroyed them”. If this was the original reading, it is easy to understand the insertion of τούς as facilitating the plural construction after λαόν . We may compare the solemn utterance in Heb 10:26 , ἑκουσίως ἁμαρτανόντων ἡμῶν μετὰ τὸ λαβεῖν τὴν ἐπίγνωσιν τῆς ἀληθείας οὐκ ἔτι περὶ ἁμαρτιῶν ἀπολείπεται θυσία , and the belief, apparently based upon it, in the early Church as to sin after baptism.

[787] Cf . Exo 2:14 ; Exo 4:1 ; Exo 5:21 ; Exo 6:9 ; Exo 14:11-12 .

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

He setteth forth the horrible punishment of them which have abuseth the grace of God to follow their own lusts.

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

(Heb 3:16; Heb 4:13.)

therefore--Other oldest manuscripts and Vulgate read, "But"; in contrast to the ungodly Jde 1:4.

though ye once--rather, "once for all." Translate, "I wish to remind you, as knowing ALL (namely, that I am referring to; so the oldest manuscripts, versions, and Fathers) once for all." As already they know all the facts once for all, he needs only to "remind" them.

the Lord--The oldest manuscripts and versions read, "Jesus." So "Christ" is said to have accompanied the Israelites in the wilderness; so perfectly is Jesus one with the God of the Israelite theocracy.

saved--brought safely, and into a state of safety and salvation.

afterward--Greek, "secondly"; in the next instance "destroyed them that believed not," as contrasted with His in the first instance having saved them.

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 5. I will therefore put you in remembrance] That is, how such persons were proscribed, and condemned to bear the punishment due to such crimes.

Though ye once knew this] The word απαξ, here translated once, has greatly puzzled many interpreters. It has two meanings in the sacred writings, and indeed in the Greek writers also. 1. It signifies once, one time, as opposed to twice, or several times. 2. Altogether, entirely, perfectly, interpreted by Suidas αντι τον διολου, ολοσχερως. and of this meaning he produces a proof from Josephus; This appears to be the sense of the word in Heb 6:4: τους απαξ φωτισθεντας. those who were FULLY enlightened. Heb 10:2: απαξ κεκαθαρμενους. THOROUGHLY cleansed. See also Heb 10:3 of this epistle. Ps 62:11: απαξ ελαλησεν ο θεος. God spoke FULLY, completely, on the subject. St. Jude is to be understood as saying, I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye are THOROUGHLY instructed in this.

Saved the people] Delivered them from the Egyptian bondage.

Afterward destroyed them] Because they neither believed his word, nor were obedient to his commands. This is the first example of what was mentioned Jude 1:4.

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

5. I will therefore put you in remembrance, or, remind you. He either modestly excuses himself, lest he should seem to teach as it were the ignorant things unknown to them; or, indeed, he openly declares in an emphatical manner, (which I approve more of,) that he adduced nothing new or unheard of before, in order that what he was going to say might gain more credit and authority. I only recall, he says, to your mind what you have already learnt. As he ascribes knowledge to them, so he says that they stood in need of warnings, lest they should think that the labor he undertook towards them was superfluous; for the use of God’s word is not only to teach what we could not have otherwise known, but also to rouse us to a serious meditation of those things which we already understand, and not to suffer us to grow torpid in a cold knowledge.

Now, the meaning is, that after having been called by God, we ought not to glory carelessly in his grace, but on the contrary, to walk watchfully in his fear; for if any trifles thus with God, the contempt of his grace will not be unpunished. And this he proves by three examples. He first refers to the vengeance which God executed on those unbelievers, whom he had chosen as his people, and delivered by his power. Nearly the same reference is made by Paul in the tenth chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians. The import of what he says is, that those whom God had honored with the greatest blessings, whom he had extolled to the same degree of honor as we enjoy at this day, he afterwards severely punished. Then in vain were all they proud of God’s grace, who did not live in a manner suitable to their calling.

The word people is by way of honor taken for the holy and chosen nation, as though he had said that it availed them nothing, that they by a singular favor had been taken into covenant. By calling them unbelieving, he denotes the fountain of all evils; for all their sins, mentioned by Moses, were owing to this, because they refused to be ruled by God’s word. For where there is the subjection of faith, there obedience towards God necessarily appears in all the duties of life.

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.

5. I will therefore put you in remembrance] More accurately, I wish to put you in remembrance, or, to remind you. The language presupposes, like that of 2Pe_1:12, to which it presents a close parallel, the previous instruction of the readers of the Epistle in the faith once delivered to the saints.

though ye once knew this] The better MSS. give “knew all things,” reminding us of “ye know all things” of 1Jn_2:20. The word is limited in both cases, by the context, to all the essential elements of Christian faith and duty.

how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt] The MSS. present a curious variation of reading, some giving “the Lord,” some “Jesus,” and some “God.” St Paul’s use of the name of “Christ” in 1Co_10:4 is, in some sense, parallel to that of “Jesus,” which seems, on the whole, the best-supported reading. The reference to the judgment that fell upon Israel in the wilderness takes the place of that drawn from the flood in 2Pe_2:5, and may, perhaps, be traced to St Paul’s way of dealing with that history in 1Co_10:1-10, or to Heb_3:12-19.

afterward] More literally, secondly, or in the second place.

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.

I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once know this,.... The Alexandrian copy, and some others, and the Vulgate Latin version, read, "knew all things"; but rather it is to be restrained by the following instance of, God's vengeance on unbelievers; which with others is produced, to vindicate the divine conduct in the condemnation of the above persons, and to show that that is certain, and may be expected, since God has always dealt thus with such persons; and this they knew by reading of the Scriptures; at least they had known it once, though it might now be forgotten by them; and they had known it once for all; they had been perfectly acquainted with it; which is said, lest the apostle should be thought to write to persons ignorant, and rude in knowledge, and to show that he wrote nothing new and unheard of, and so should have the more weight and influence upon them; and he thought fit to remind them of it, though they had known it: it is one part of the work of the ministers of the word to put people in mind of what they have known; which is necessary, because of the inattentiveness of hearers, their forgetfulness, and loss of knowledge, and the weakness of some capacities to take in, and retain things; and if the judgment is not more informed hereby, yet the affections may be afresh raised, and grace be drawn out into exercise, and the mind be established and confirmed. The instance follows,

how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt; that is, the people of Israel, who were the chosen people of God, a special people, above all others, and had peculiar privileges; these the Lord brought out of the land of Egypt, with an high hand, and a mighty arm, and saved them out of their bondage, and delivered out of their oppressions and afflictions: the Alexandrian copy, and some others, the Vulgate Latin, and Ethiopic versions, instead of "the Lord", read "Jesus": and yet, though they were a special people, and notwithstanding this wonderful deliverance, and great salvation, he

afterward destroyed them that believed not; their carcasses fell in the wilderness by one judgment or another upon them; so that of all that came out of Egypt, but two entered into the land of Canaan: this shows the evil nature of unbelief; and that God will not suffer sin to go unobserved in any; no outward privileges and profession will screen any from divine vengeance; God sometimes makes severe examples of mere nominal professors; nor must false teachers, deniers of Christ, and perverters of his Gospel, expect to go free: moreover, it may be observed, that God may do great things for persons, and yet after all destroy them; great riches and honours may be conferred on some, great natural gifts on others; some may seem as if they had the grace of God, and were brought out of spiritual Egypt, and enjoy great mercies and favours, and have many deliverances wrought for them, and yet at last perish.

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

I will therefore put you in remembrance - “To show you what must be the doom of such men, I will call certain facts to your recollection, with which you are familiar, respecting the Divine treatment of the wicked in times past.”

Though ye once knew this - That is, you were formerly made acquainted with these things, though they may not be now fresh in your recollection. On the different significations affixed to the word “once” in this place, see Bloomfield, “Crit. Digest, in loc.” The thing which seems to have been in the mind of the apostle was an intention to call to their recollection, as bearing on the case before him, facts with which they had formerly been familiar, and about which there was no doubt. It was the thing which we often endeavor to do in argument - to remind a person of some fact which he once knew very well, and which bears directly on the case.

How that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt - Compare the notes, 1Co 10:5-12. The bearing of this fact on the case, before the mind of Jude, seems to have been this - that, as those who had been delivered from Egypt were afterward destroyed for their unbelief, or as the mere fact of their being rescued did not prevent destruction from coming on them, so the fact that these persons seemed to be delivered from sin, and had become professed followers of God would not prevent their being destroyed if they led wicked lives. It might rather be inferred from the example of the Israelites that they would be.

Afterward - τὸ δεύτερον to deuteron - “the second;” that is, the second thing in order, or again. The expression is unusual in this sense, but the apostle seems to have fixed his mind on this event as a “second” great and important fact in regard to them. The “first” was that they were delivered; the second, that they were destroyed.

Destroyed them that believed not - That is, “on account” of their unbelief. They were not permitted to enter the promised land, but were cut off in the wilderness. See the notes at Heb 3:16-19.

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

But I will admonish you, that once [5] (that is, some time ago, when you were converted and instructed) knew all things that were necessary as to the Christian faith, I will then put you in mind of the judgments and chastisements that such sinners may expect, that Jesus,[6] not as man, but as God, having saved the people of Israel from their slavery in Egypt, did afterwards on several occasions punish and destroy those among them, who believed not; who were rebellious and incredulous to his promises. (Witham) --- The Greek, and after it the Protestant version, have the Lord saved; the Vulgate has Jesus, which signifies Saviour, and may in this place be understood of the Word, who from his incarnation took the name of Jesus (Bible de Vence) --- Menochius says it means Josue [Joshua], who is thus styled by the seventy interpreters [in the Septuagint].

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

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Scientes semel omnia, Greek: eidotas apax apanta. Semel, pro jamdudum, says Estius.

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

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Quoniam Jesus, some would have here meant Josue [Joshua]: they seem not to reflect, that it was not Josue [Joshua], but Moses that saved the people out of Egypt.

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).

Though ye once: this may be joined either with the verb following, knew, according to our translation, and the sense is, though ye knew this certainly, as the word once is taken, Psa 89:35, or perfectly and thoroughly, or once for all; or rather, with what goes before, and the words may be read, I will yet once (viz. while I am in this tabernacle) put you in remembrance of this, though you know it; as 2Pe 1:12.

Having saved the people; the people of Israel.

Afterward destroyed them; viz. in the wilderness, by plague, fiery serpents, &c.

That believed not; he sets forth the Israelites’ unbelief, as the original of all their disobedience and rebellions, and the great cause of their destruction. See Heb 3:17-19; 4:2.

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

5. Put you in remembrance—Parallel to 2Pe_3:1, “I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance.”

Once—For all knew, by their early knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures. The well-known truths had long slumbered in their memories, but must now be aroused to meet the crisis of their fulfilment. Jude now gives a triad of similar cases of guilt, followed by condign punishment, recorded in the Old Testament scriptures. FIRST EXAMPLE.—The Israelite people.

The Lord—Here we are surprised by the fact disclosed to us by modern scholarship, that the true reading is doubtless not Lord, but Jesus. Somewhat similarly we have the unexpected Christ in 1Co_10:2-4, and Heb_10:28-31. Yet Jesus here is the more surprising as it is the more purely human name of the Lord than Christ. Some would read Joshua, of which Jesus is the Greek form, as in Heb_4:8; but Joshua did not save and then destroy the people. We have, therefore, the conclusion that to Jude, the maternal brother of Jesus, Jesus was Jehovah.

Destroyed them—For sins, and especially lusts. From the Phenicians or Canaanites came the rites of Ashtoreth, in which courtezans were the priestesses, houses of license were the temples, obscene images were the idols, and debauchery was the worship. Against this fulness of iniquity the religion of Jehovah was arrayed, and when Israel apostatized thereto Jehovah destroyed him.

Believed not—Adhered not to the pure worship of Jehovah, but yielded to the seductions of idolatrous lust.

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

Vers. 5-7. Three instances of the judgments of God are now referred to. They are cited as typical examples of the Divine retribution, with which the readers can be taken to be familiar, and which they will recognize to give point to the terror of the condemnation overhanging the men in question.

The first is taken from the history of Israel. It is introduced, not as a contrast with what precedes, but as a natural transition from it. It is given, too, as a matter quite within their knowledge, and of which consequently they need only to be reminded. The Authorized Version is short of the mark in several respects here. What the writer expresses is not the mere fact that he is to do a certain thing, but that he has the wish to do so. Hence the now I desire to put you in remembrance of the Revised Version is preferable to the I will therefore, etc., of the Authorized Version. The next clause is more decidedly astray. For the term rendered" once" means "once for all," and the knowledge is given as a present possession. Hence the rendering should be though ye know once for all; or better, knowing as ye do once for all a form of expression which might be paraphrased in our English idiom, as Mr. Humphry rightly observes, "though ye have known all along." There is, however, very considerable difficulty in the reading here. It varies between "ye know this which is accepted by the Authorized Version, "ye know all things which is preferred by the Revised Version, and "ye all know" which, though poorly accredited, is yet supposed by Professor Herr to be not improbably the original. The documentary evidence is, on the whole, on the side of "all things;" and if this is adopted, the universal term will naturally be limited by the context to a knowledge of all that is pertinent to the point in question. This knowledge of the principles at issue in the case of these evil men, and of the retributive deeds of God by which these principles have been signally vindicated, is a reason why Jude needs simply to refresh the memories of his readers, and not to tell them anything new. In the second half of the verse there is a still more serious difficulty in the text. Instead of the term "Lord," some of the very best authorities read "Jesus." If this must be accepted, we have an act of the Jehovah of the Old Testament ascribed to the Jesus of the New Testament. But this would be an entirely unexampled usage. For, while the New Testament not unfrequently introduces the name of Christ when it refers to deeds of grace or claims of honour which the Old Testament connects with the name of Jehovah, (cf. 1Co_10:4 1Pe_3:15, etc.) it never does this with that name of the Redeemer of the New Testament which specially marks his human nature and origin. Hence Professor Herr speaks of the reading "Jesus" here as a blunder, however supported. The ordinary reading may, therefore, be adhered to, especially as it is by no means ill accredited, having on its side two of the primary uncials and other weighty authorities. These clauses are peculiar in other respects. They speak not of "the people" as the Authorized Version puts it, but rather of "a people." And this is not without its purpose. For the idea is not simply that the ancient Israel experienced both redemption and judgment at the hands of their Lord, but that Israel"s Lord, by bringing Israel out of Egypt, secured a people for himself, though he had also to destroy unbelievers among them. Again, the phrase rendered "afterward" by the Authorized Version means strictly "the second time," as is noticed by the margin of the Revised Version. What is intended, therefore, may be that Israel was the subject of two great deeds on Jehovah"s part in the first instance a redeeming deed, in the second instance a punitive deed. And his purpose in seeking a people for himself was not inconsistent with his doing what he did in this second instance. What, then, is referred to? Those seem to interpret it best who take it to be a general reference to the wilderness-fate of unbelieving Israel, rather than to any single instance of the terrors of the Divine judgment, such as that reported in Num_25:1-9. It is far-fetched to suppose that the event in view is one so remote from the deliverance of Israel from Egypt as the Babylonian captivity. We may compare with this verse, therefore, such passages as Psa_106:12-21 Heb_3:16-19; Heb_4:1-5.

Vers. 5-7. The invasion of the Church by error is no accident or surprise.

"I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this," etc. It is not to be taken "as though some strange thing happened". (1Pe_4:12) Faith is apt to be staggered or darkened by it. Yet it is to be anticipated. It has been the subject of prophecy. It is provided for in the Divine guidance of the Church, and it works to its own retribution. The history of God"s ways, too, is the best corrective for faith"s perplexities and fears in presence of the march of error. The history shows that what is, is only that which also has been. The dread things in its record bear witness to the fact that victory is not on the side of evil, but that there is a defeat predetermined for it a penalty which follows it by a certain law. God"s terrible deeds in righteousness attest the temporal punishment of sin. The Old Testament history, in which these are registered, is the nurse of a faith which should be humble, strong, courageous, hopeful. To neglect it is certain loss, It is gain to be "put in remembrance" of it. "Them that believed not the explanation both of the sin, and of the destruction of the generation in the wilderness. So the evil heart of unbelief is the final secret of guilt and error, the hidden laboratory of all perversions of truth and all depravations of the moral life, the subtle inspiration of enmity to God and defiance to law.

First example of Divine vengeance.

Jude then proceeds to give three instances of this sort the first being that of the unbelieving Israelites in the wilderness.

I THE NECESSITY OF REMINDING SAINTS OF FAMILIAR SCRIPTURE FACTS. "Now I desire to put you in remembrance, though ye know all things once for all, how that the Lord, having saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed them that believed not.

1. Every private Christian ought to be well acquainted with the Scriptures. Jude concedes that those he addressed were so. The Bible is a book for the people as well as for ministers. Knowledge is highly commendable in a Christian, (Rom_15:14) as well as goodness.

2. The best of people need to have their pure minds stirred up by way of remembrance; for memory is too often "like the sieve which holds the bran and lets the flour go.

II THE SAINTS REMINDED OF A FAMOUS DELIVERANCE. "I removed his shoulder from the burden, and his hands were delivered from the pots". (Psa_81:6)

1. No difficulties could hinder Israel"s deliverance from Egypt.

2. Israel went down to Egypt a family, and emerged out of it a nation.

3. This nation curried the destinies of the world in its bosom.

III THE SAINTS REMINDED OF A GREAT DESTRUCTION. The Lord dealt first in mercy, then afterward in judgment.

1. Destruction overtook the Israelites from plague, fire, serpents, earthquake, sword. The wilderness was strewn besides with the carcasses of all except those of twenty years old and under, who alone were privileged to enter the land of Canaan.

2. This destruction was a disappointment of high hopes as well as a fall from a high position of privilege.

3. Yet it was but partial. The stock of Israel was spared. And the doom was long deferred, so as to give more than a generation of time for repentance.

4. The Lord"s judgment in this case proves that punishment cannot be averted by privileges abused.

IV THE SAINTS REMINDED OF THE CAUSE OF THIS DESTRUCTION. It was unbelief. "They could not enter in because of unbelief". (Heb_4:6)

1. Difficulties soon discover the untrustful heart.

2. Unbelievers forsake their own mercies, and are their own worst enemies.

3. There is no folly like unbelief. "Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

4. The end of unbelief is utter and absolute destructions. T.C.

Vers. 5-16. Here are reasons for resisting evil men drawn from examples of the Divine anger against others.

As a scribe well-instructed, Jude brings from the treasures of Old Testament truth suitable illustrations to inspire believers with becoming earnestness in the work of defending the purity of the Church, and the completeness of Christian doctrine. They are reminded that no special relation to Jehovah like that which subsisted between Israel and their Redeemer from the slavery of Egypt will avail to protect men from the penalties of disobedience; and therefore many who had been delivered by miracle and by the mighty power of God were overthrown in the wilderness. There is a higher illustration adduced, which affirms that no dignity of nature such as the angels possessed, and no past perfection of adoration and service, will screen offenders from merited punishment. The "first estate" of the angels was one of splendour ample knowledge drawn from the unclouded revelation of God, and blessedness of emotion; but the awful righteousness of the eternal throne cast them into outer darkness, and reserves them for future condemnation and shame. The last example is drawn from the wide and hateful corruption of those who dwelt in one of the fairest and most fruitful regions of ancient Canaan. The spot, which was well watered and like the garden of the Lord, was defiled by man, whose sin drew down the flames of the Divine anger, which turned the region into desolation and made it permanent witness for the hatred of God against iniquity. Such demonstrations of the mind of Jehovah respecting sinners and their punishment should create in believers definite impressions of the evil of disobedience, and a determination, by Christian methods, to denounce it wherever they find it active, and endeavour to check and restrain its spread and influence.

I IT INVITES US TO CONSIDER THE SHAMEFUL MISUSE OF KNOWLEDGE AND SPEECH. These men who crept into the Church appear to have revealed the corruption of their nature during the hours of sleep since they were the same wicked offenders as when they were full of activity during the day, and their nature, like the "troubled sea, cast forth mire and dirt." With this sad feature of their life there was connected the spirit of contempt for magistracy and the powers that were "ordained of God." To condemn this spirit of scorn and derision a fact is introduced which shows the spirit of reverence which obtains in heaven. Michael the archangel, one of the most lofty and noble among the "principalities and powers," is brought to oppose and turn aside the accusations of Satan, who is a fallen and lying spirit, and is eager, agreeably to the vision of Zechariah (Zec_3:2) to urge the destruction of Israel, whose plight is represented by the high priest clothed in filthy garments. The Jews restored from captivity are like a half-consumed brand or branch; and Satan, as a murderer, desires the annihilation of the tribes of Israel. He is rebuked with calm dignity, when Michael might have overpowered him with terrific and well-deserved upbraidings. The evil users of their speech and knowledge are condemned because they presumptuously venture to speak scornfully of Divine things, which, as "natural men," they cannot understand; and whereas the light and instincts of nature should guide to certain lines of conduct, even there they grossly abuse and pervert their faculties and powers to dishonourable indulgence. These facts show the deplorable activity of sin, and should awaken the prayer for that preservation from the evil of the world, which is impressively suggested in the intercessory petitions offered by our Lord just before his sufferings and death.

II THE FEARFUL PORTRAIT WHICH JUDE PRESENTS OF THESE TRANSGRESSORS AND THEIR FINAL CONDEMNATION BY THE LORD JESUS AT HIS APPEARING. They are described as murmurers and complainers against the methods of providence the rulers of countries and the claims of the gospel. They have men"s persons in admiration; as Tertulius complimented Felix, who was a cruel governor, to prejudice his mind against Paul, (Act_24:2, Act_24:3) by means of "great swelling words." These offenders followed Cain in his unacceptable worship, in which there was no sacrifice of a victim, no contrition of spirit, and no prayer for mercy. They imitated the temper of Balaam, who for gain would have injured the tribes of Israel; and in the way of ambition rose up, as Korah and his company, against the solemn appointments of the Aaronic family to serve at the altar. In the agape, or love-feast, they act as rocks at sea, upon which the ship is driven and wrecked. They are shepherds who feed themselves without restraint; clouds that promise rain, and yet distil no moisture on the thirsty soil; trees which bear no fruit; and wandering stars which guide no traveler; and hasten to deserved and eternal darkness. The ancient "Book of Enoch" foretells their certain and inevitable doom. The Son of God who in his own character, and in the treatment of his people, who are members of his mystical body, has endured reproach, accusation, and calumny will come to be glorified in his saints, and take vengeance upon them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel, of which he is the Center and the Glory. In view of the vast corruption of these men, and the fearful prospects which await them, the allusion to believers being "preserved in Christ Jesus" acquires a power and depth of meaning which could scarcely fail to awaken the ardours of gratitude to him who had kept them in times of fiery temptation. J.S.B.

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

He afterwards destroyed - The far greater part of that very people whom he had once saved. Let none therefore presume upon past mercies, as if he was now out of danger.

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

saved

(See Scofield "Rom 1:16").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Examples of the judgment of God:

v. 5. I will, therefore, put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

v. 6. And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the Judgment of the great day.

v. 7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

The apostle offers a number of illustrations from the Old Testament to show that the Judgment will finally come upon all deceivers: But I desire to remind you, since you are perfectly aware of it all, that the Lord, having delivered the people out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed those that did not believe. The examples of God’s wrath and punishment which Jude intended to refer to had, of course, been included in the instruction which the readers had received in the doctrine of Scriptures. Therefore Jude feels that it is but necessary for him to remind them of a few in order to bring out his point; it was not necessary to write at length. There was, first of all, the illustration from the history of the children of Israel. God had indeed delivered them from the hand of Pharaoh, brought them out of the land of Egypt with great might and with an outstretched arm. But when they were afterwards disobedient and refused to believe the words which He spoke to them through His servant Moses, He kept them in the wilderness for forty years until all those had been destroyed and perished that had left Egypt as adults.

A further example of God’s wrath and punishment is that of the evil angels: And angels that kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He has reserved for the Judgment of the great day, with everlasting bonds under darkness. In the beginning God made all His creatures good, including the angels, Gen 1:31. But certain of His angels were not satisfied with their position, with their office, with their dignity. They rose up in rebellion against the Lord and left the habitation which the Lord had given them. The punishment of the Lord, therefore, came upon them with almighty force: they are being reserved, or kept, in everlasting chains under darkness, in a state of confinement from which they cannot escape. With God’s permission they may move around in the world, but they are still under the doom from which there is no escape; they have been cut off forever from true fellowship with God, from the hope of salvation, 2Pe 2:4.

A third illustration is taken from the book of Genesis: Just as Sodom and Gomorrah and the cities around them, having glutted themselves in fornication in like manner as these men and gone after other flesh, are set forth for an example, sentenced to suffer the vengeance of eternal fire. So unspeakably filthy were the transgressions of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah that they have become synonyms for all that is unmentionably debased in human nature. And the cities nearby, Adamah and Zeboim, Deu 29:23; Hos 11:8, followed their example and became guilty of like excesses in unnatural fornication, not even hesitating to cohabit with beasts. The curse of the Lord, therefore, Deu 27:21; Lev 18:23; Lev 20:15-16, descended upon these cities and their inhabitants. Fire from heaven fell down and destroyed their possessions even to the last stone, and to this day the Dead Sea is a warning sign of the fierceness of God’s vengeance, just as the transgressors are suffering the pains of everlasting fire in hell.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

In this, and the following verses, our apostle, to deter them from following the pernicious ways of these seducers, sets before them the several examples of God’s judgments inflicted in former times upon persons guilty of such crimes as these seducers were stigmatized for, and guilty of; he begins with the Israelites in the wilderness; as they perished through unbelief, after they were brought out of Egypt, so shall revolters perish, notwithstanding their baptism, and fair beginnings.

Learn hence, 1. That God’s judgments inflicted on some, are, and ought to be, warnings unto all.

2. That God’s ancient judgments were ordained to be our warnings and examples; his holiness is the same as ever, his justice the same, his hatred of sin the same, and his power to revenge it the same as ever; his judgments now may be more spiritual, but they are not less terrible.

Learn, 3. That unbelief will as certainly bring destruction upon Christians now, as it did upon the Israelites of old. Did God destroy them that believed not his power then? no less will he destroy them that believe not his power now.

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

ARGUMENT 2

THE SECOND BLESSING ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY

5. “But I wish you to remember, once knowing, all things, that the Lord having saved the people out of the land of Egypt destroyed them that believed not the second time.” This verse is the strongest Scripture in the Bible for the second blessing, literally sweeping all possible controversy from the field and positively revealing the undeniable fact that our faith is put to a second test, in which failure is final and fatal. This statement of the Holy Ghost is so fortified by the example of Israel, as to be perfectly luminous even to the most stupid mind and absolutely uncontrovertible by all the logic of earth and the sophistry of hell. You all know how wonderfully God saved Israel from Egyptian bondage when He led them through the sea. You remember well the sad faltering of their faith at Kadesh-Barnea, in consequence of which they passed under the curse, forfeiting Canaan and bleaching their bones on the burning sand. Unfortunately to deuteron, which means the “second time,” was lost out of this important passage during the Dark Ages, so it does not appear in the English. The construction of this Scripture is unmistakable. God having saved the people at the Red Sea responsive to their faith, “destroyed” the same in the wilderness because of their unbelief at Kadesh-Barnea. There is but one possible conclusion, i.e., that the faith of every soul is put to a second decisive crucial test. Though your faith stood the test of conversion, when you had to believe for pardon or abide in condemnation, God will test you again, when you must believe for sanctification or lose your soul. Heb 12:14.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

5–7. I will therefore put you in remembrance. Of how God speaks judgments on sinners. How that the Lord, etc. Having saved the people out of Egypt, the people were destroyed for their sins in the wilderness. See Num. 14:29.

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.

Connecting Statement:

Jude gives examples from the past of those who did not follow the Lord.

I wish to remind you

"I want you to remember"

although once you fully knew it

"although at one time you completely knew this"

the Lord saved a people out of the land of Egypt

"the Lord rescued the Israelites long ago from Egypt"

the Lord

Some texts read "Jesus."

their own position of authority

"the responsibilities God entrusted to them"

left their proper dwelling place

"abandoned their own assigned places"

God has kept them in everlasting chains, in utter darkness

"God has put these angels in a dark prison from which they will never escape"

utter darkness

Here "darkness" is a metonym which represents the place of the dead or hell. AT: "in utter darkness in hell" (See: Metonymy)

the great day

the final day when God will judge everyone

translationWords

lord

save

Egypt

believe

angel

eternity

darkness

judge

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

5. Jude’s first example of sin and punishment is not used in 2 Peter, probably because it seemed too vague and obscure. It is indeed somewhat difficult. The general sense is like that of the passage 1Co 10:1-11. In that we are reminded how Israel was delivered, and nourished in the wilderness (1–4); and how for all that they sinned and were punished (5–11). The same theme recurs over and over again in Psalms 78. The special sin which Jude has in mind seems to be Israel’s want of faith when the spies brought back reports of the Promised Land (τοὺς μὴ πιστεύσαντας). But no good explanation of the words τὸ δεύτερον has been suggested. They are less emphatic, and therefore less awkward, if we are allowed to read (with א 68 and several versions) κύριος ἅπαξ λαὸν σώσας. With the text before us I see no other reasonable rendering but to take τὸ δεύτερον as simply equivalent to ὕστερον, “afterwards”: but no authority has been cited for such a use. There are other points of uncertainty about the text of this verse which it is worth while to note: for εἰδότας ἅπαξ πάντα אKL and others read εἰδ. ὑμᾶς (which Mayor adopts), B has εἰδ. ὑμᾶς ἅπαξ and for κύριος (read by אCKL etc.) AB 13 and four versions read Ἰησοῦς (see further Introd.). This was interpreted by some Fathers, e.g. Jerome, as signifying Joshua (who, of course, in Greek and Latin is called Jesus). But the subject of both this and the next verse is the same, and Joshua cannot be the subject of Jud 1:6. If Jude did write Ἰησοῦς, it was not without a recollection of Joshua. The identity of name appealed to many early Christian writers.

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.

5-7.] Examples of Divine vengeance.

5.] First example: unbelieving Israel in the wilderness. Cf. Heb 3:16-5. But (solemn contrast to the conduct just mentioned) I wish to remind you, knowing as ye do (better here than “although ye know,” on account of ἅπαξ. “Causa, cur admoneat duntaxat; quia jam sciant, semelque cognitum habeant.” Bengel. The E. V. is doubly wrong: in rendering εἰδώς as an aor. part., “though ye … knew,” and in giving to ἅπαξ the signification of “olim,” “once”) once for all (i. e. having once for all received the knowledge of) all things (all that refers to that of which I am speaking: the τοῦτο of the rec. was a good explanation: but πάντα is more forcible, and carries with it a latent admonition, to apply other examples for yourselves), that Jesus (critical principles seem to require this remarkable reading. It is not entirely precedented by 1Co 10:4: for there St. Paul uses not the personal human name, but χριστός, in which there is no such difficulty. The only account to be given seems, that the Person designated by the two names being the same, they became sometimes convertibly used in popular exhortation. On the fact see Exo 14:19; Exo 23:20, Exo 23:23: 32:2; Isa 63:9, where however note the remarkable rendering of the LXX), having saved the people (perhaps “a people:” λαός is not one of those words of which we can say that they are constantly found without the art. where yet their meaning is definite: cf. Act 15:14, Rom 10:21, 2Co 6:16, Heb 8:10, 1Pe 2:9 (10). But we are never safe in strictness on this point in these later Epistles; and especially when an objective case is thus thrown forward into emphasis, which emphasis often does the work of the definite article) out of the land of Egypt, secondly (not as E. V., “afterward:” still less with Grot., Wolf, “ex contrario:” but it indicates a second deed of the Lord, His first-mentioned having been the deliverance out of Egypt. By this τὸ δεύτερον the former aor. part. is marked as being not contemporary with but antecedent to the aor. verb following) destroyed them that believed not (viz. by forbidding their entrance into the land of promise (cf. Heb 3:18), and slaying them in the wilderness. This example is not mentioned in 2Pe_2, but instead of it, the judgment of the flood).

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

5. ὑπομνῆσαι. cf. 2Pe 1:12, ὑπομιμνήσκειν. 1:15. μνήμην ποιεῖσθαι: 1:13, 3:1, διεγείρειν ἐν ὐͅοιννσευ See note on σπουδήν, ver. 3. Either Peter has caught up and reiterated certain unimportant words from Jude, or Jude had read the first chapter of the Petrine Epistle and adopts from it words which, from their iteration there, were likely to catch the ear. The latter is the more probable view. Jude exhibits manifest tokens of haste, abbreviation, and confusion. A glance back at the preceding Epistle will show that St. Peter uses “remind” quite naturally, where he is recalling to the memory of his readers lessons that they had certainly often been taught. Jude “reminds” his people of the instances of judgment, none of which belonged to the catechism, and some of which, at least the story of Michael, may have been quite new to them. The δέ also is difficult. Probably we must find the antithesis in ἀσεβεῖς and ἀρνούμενοι : they are impious and deny the Lord, “but” God punishes such men. Certainly the sense is more clearly unfolded in 2 Peter; and this is a remarkable fact, because Jude is the more skilful writer of the two.

εἰδότας ἅπαξ πάντα. “Though once for all ye know all things.” But the things which Christians know once for all are those which are included in “the faith once for all delivered to the saints,” not historical instances of God’s wrath. Here again we have a confused reminiscence of καίπερ εἰδότας 2Pe 1:12, where the words are quite intelligible.

For the comparison between the instances of Judgment as they are given in the two Epistles, see Introduction to 2 Peter, p. 221. The first instance, that of the destruction of the sinful Israelites in the desert, is peculiar to Jude. It reminds us of Heb 3:18-2; 1Co 10:5-11. Its introduction here disturbs the strictly chronological order of the instances given in 2 Peter.

ὃτι ὀ κύριος. “That the Lord, when He had brought the people safe out of the land of Egypt, afterwards destroyed them which believed not.” By “the Lord” is no doubt meant Christ, cf. 1Co 10:4, 1Co 10:9. With τὸ δεύτερον cf. δευτερον, 1Co 12:28; ἐκ δευτέρον, Heb 9:28. Here it marks a strong contrast, and sharpens the point of the warning. “It is true that the Lord saved Israel from Egypt; yet notwithstanding He afterwards slew the faithless. So he has saved you, but so also He may slay you.”

The text of the verse is uncertain. א K L insert a second ὐμᾶς after εἰδότας. א, many Fathers, and versions place ἅπαξ after Κύριος (Θεός). For πάντα K L and others read τοῦτο. K L and many others have ὁ Κύριος· א C Κύριος A B and many versions with Didymus and Jerome Ἰησοῦς, and there is some inferior authority for ὁ Θεός. The second ὑμᾶς is probably a mere slip; the transposition of ἅπαξ may be due to a desire to provide an antecedent for τὸ δεύτερον though, if so, it involves a grammatical error, as ἅπαξ, cannot mean “firstly.” Τοῦτο for πάτα is again a slip, or an attempt at emendation. The variants Θεός and Ἰησοῦς for Κύροις are also emendations; the copyists did not feel quite certain what Jude meant.

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

Ye once knew [ειδοτας απαξ] . Entirely wrong. The participle is to be rendered as present, and the once is not formerly, but once for all, as ver.

Jude 1:3So Rev., rightly, though ye know all things once for all.

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