Jude 1:4

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

Jude 1:4. παρεισεδύησαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι. For this form which is found in [784] and adopted by WH, Veitch cites διεκδυῆναι in Hippocr. 1. 601, and compares ἐφύην, ἐρρύην. The aor. is here used with the perfect force, as in Jude 1:11 ἐπορεύθησαν, etc. cf. Blass, Gr. p. 199, my edition of St. James, p. 202. and Dr. Weymouth there cited. The verb occurs in Deinades 178, ἄδικος παρεισδύνων λόγος εἰς τὰς τῶν δικαστῶν γνώμας οὐκ ἐᾷ συνορᾶν τὴν ἀλήθειαν, Clem. Al. p. 659 ὅπως εἰς τὴν τῶν αἰνιγμάτων ἔννοιαν ἡ ζήτησις παρεισδύουσα ἐπὶ τὴν εὕρεσιν τῆς ἀληθείας ἀναδράμῃ, D. Laert. ii. 142. λαθραίως παρεισδύς εἰς τὴν πατρίδα, Plut. M. p. 216 B, τὰ ἁρχαῖα νόμιμα ἐκλυόμενα ἑώρα, ἄλλα δὲ παρεισδυόμενα μοχθηρά, other examples in Wetst. The noun παρείσδυσις occurs in Barn. ii. 10, iv. 9, ἀντιστῶμεν ἵνα μὴ σχῇ παρείσδυσιν ὁ μέλας, Clem. Al. p. 189, ἀκροσφαλὴς ἡ τοῦ οἴνου παρείσδυσις. Similar compounds are παρεισφέρω in 2 Peter 1:5, παρεισάγω in 2 Peter 2:1, παρείσακτος in Galatians 2:4, διὰ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους οἵτινες παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ὑμῶν, Romans 5:20 2Ma 8:1 παρεισπορευόμενοι λεληθότως εἰς τὰς κώμας, so παρεισέρπω, παρεισπέμπω, παρεισπίπτω. The earliest prophecy of such seducers comes from the lips of Jesus Himself, Matthew 7:15, προσέχετε ἀπὸ τῶν ψευδοπροφητῶν, οἵτινες ἔρχονται πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐν ἐνδύμασι προβάτων, ἔσωθεν δέ εἰσι λύκοι ἅρπαγες, cf. Acts 20:29-30, and Introduction on the Early Heresies in the larger edition.

[784] Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα. “Designated of old for this judgment.” Cf. 2 Peter 2:3, οἷς τὸ κρίμα ἔκπαλαι οὐκ ἀργεῖ. The word πάλαι precludes the supposition that the second epistle of Peter can be referred to. [785] The allusion is to the book of Enoch quoted in Jude 1:14-15. In Jude 1:18 below the same warning is said to have been given by the Apostles. The phrase οἱ προγ. is in apposition to τινες ἄνθρωποι, cf. Galatians 1:7 with Lightfoot's n., Luke 18:9, εἶπεν δὲ πρός τινας τοὺς πεποιθότας ἐφʼ ἑαυτοῖς. For προγ., cf. Romans 15:4, ὅσα γὰρ προεγράφη εἰς τὴν ἡμετέραν διδασκαλίαν ἐγράφη. The word is intended to show that they are already doomed to punishment as enemies of God. As such they are to be shunned by the faithful, but not to be feared, because, dangerous as they may seem, they cannot alter the Divine purpose. Dr. Chase compares Hort's interesting note on 1 Peter 2:8, εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν. By “this” Spitta understands “that judgment which I am now about to declare,” i.e., the condemnation contained in the word ἀσεβεῖς used by some ancient writer. Zahn however remarks that οὗτος usually refers to what precedes, and he would take τοῦτο here (with Hofmann) as referring to παρεισεδύησαν. Better than this logical reference to some preceding or succeeding word is, I think, Bengel's explanation “the now impending judgment,” Apostolo iam quasi cernente pœnam.

[785] Zahn, it is true, following Schott and others, argues in favour of this reference, holding that πάλαι may be equivalent to “lately”; and the word is of course very elastic in meaning; but unless the contrast makes it clear that the reference is to a recent past, I think we are bound to assign to the word its usual force, especially here, where it stands first, giving the tone as it were to what follows, and is further confirmed and explained by ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδάμ in Jude 1:14.

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

τὴν τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριτα μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν. With this we may compare 1 Peter 2:16, μὴ ὡς ἐπικάλυμμα ἔχοντες τὴς κακίας τὴν ἐλευθερίαν, 2 Peter 2:19, ἐλευθερίαν ἐπαγγελλόμενοι, 2 Peter 3:16. δυσνόητά τινα ἃ οἱ ἀμαθεῖς στρεβλοῦσιν πρὸς τὴν ἰδίαν αὐτῶν ἀπώλειαν, Romans 3:1-2; Romans 3:5-8 (If man is justified by free grace and not by works, then works are unnecessary), Romans 6:1; Romans 6:15; Romans 8:21, 1 Corinthians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 10:23 f., John 8:32-36; Galatians 5:13, ὑμεῖς ἐπʼ ἐλευθερίᾳ ἐκλήθητε · μόνον μὴ τὴν ἐλευθερίαν εἰς ἀφορμὴν τῇ σαρκί. For μετατιθέντες see Galatians 1:6, for ἀσέλγειαν 2 Peter 2:2, πολλοὶ ἐξακολουθήσουσιν αὐτῶν ταῖς ἀσελγείαις, 2Pe 2:7; 2 Peter 2:18; 1 Peter 4:3, and Lightfoot on Galatians 5:19, “A man may be ἀκάθαρτος and hide his sin: he does not become ἀσελγής until he shocks public decency. In classical Greek the word ἀσέλγεια generally signifies insolence or violence towards another.… In the later language the prominent idea is sensuality … cf. Polyb. xxxvi. 2, πολλὴ δέ τις ἀσέλγεια καὶ περὶ τὰς σωματικὰς ἐπιθυμίας αὐτῷ συνεξηκολούθει. Thus it has much the same range of meaning as ὕβρις ”. On the meaning of χάρις see Robinson, Ephes. p. 221 f. The form χάριν used elsewhere in the N.T., except in Acts 24:27.

τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι. So 2 Peter 2:1, τὸν ἀγοράσαντα αὐτοὺς δεσπότην ἀρνούμενοι. On the denial of God and Christ see 1 John 2:22, οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἀντίχριστος, ὁ ἀρνούμενος τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὸν υἱόν, Titus 1:16, Θεὸν ὁμολογοῦσιν εἰδέναι, τοῖς δὲ ἔργοις ἀρνοῦνται βδελυκτοὶ ὄντες καὶ ἀπειθεῖς καὶ πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἀδόκιμοι, Matthew 10:33, ὅστις ἂν ἀρνήσηταί με ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων, ἀρνήσομαι κἀγὼ αὐτὸν ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ πατρός μου, Matthew 26:70 (Peter's denial). Such denial is one of the sins noticed in the book of Enoch, xxxviii. 2: “When the Righteous One shall appear … where will be the dwelling of the sinners and where the resting-place of those who have denied the Lord of Spirits? “ Ib. xli. 2, xlv. 2, xlvi. 7, xlviii. 10: “They will fall and not rise again … for they have denied the Lord of Spirits and His Anointed”.

Two questions have been raised as to the meaning of the text, (1) is τ. μόνον δεσπότην to be understood of the Son, (2) what is the force of ἀρνεῖσθαι ? The objection to understanding δεσπότης of our Lord is that in every other passage in the N.T., where δεσπότης occurs, except in 2 Peter 2:1 (on which see n.), it is spoken of God the Father; that, this being the case, it is difficult to understand how Christ can be called τὸν μόνον δεσπότην. It seems to me a forced explanation to say that the phrase μόνος δεσπότης has reference only to other earthly masters. No Jew could use it in this connexion without thinking of the one Master in heaven. Again μόνος is elsewhere used of the Father only, as in John 5:44, τὴν δόξαν τὴν παρὰ τοῦ μόνου Θεοῦ οὐ ζητεῖτε, John 17:3, ἵνα γινώσκωσίν σε τὸν μόνον ἀληθινὸν Θεον Romans 16:27, μόνῳ σόφῳ Θεῷ διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, 1 Timothy 1:17, τῷ βασιλεῖ τῶν αἰώνων … μόνῳ Θεῷ τιμὴ κ. δόξα, 1 Timothy 6:15-16, ὁ μακάριος κ. μόνος δυνάστης ὁ μόνος ἔχων ἀθανασίαν, and by Jude himself, below 25, μόνῳ Θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰ. Χ., τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα. Wetst. quotes several passages in which Josephus speaks of God as ὁ μόνος δεσπότης. On the other hand, the phrase, so taken seems to contradict the general rule that, where two nouns, denoting attributes, are joined by καί, if the article is prefixed to the first noun only, the second noun will then be an attribute of the same subject. In the present case, however, the second noun (κύριον) belongs to the class of words which may stand without the article, see Winer, pp. 147 163. A similar doubtful case is found in Titus 2:13, προσδεχόμενοι τὴν μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα καὶ ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Χ. Ἰ. ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς, where also I should take τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ to refer to the Father. Other examples of the same kind are Ephesians 5:5, οὐκ ἔχει κληρονομίαν ἐν τῇ βασιλείᾳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ καὶ Θεοῦ (where Alf. notes “We cannot safely say here that the same Person is intended by Χ. κ. Θεοῦ merely on account of the omission of the art.; for (1) any introduction of such a prediction regarding Christ would here be manifestly out of place, (2) Θεός is so frequently anarthrous that it is not safe to ground any such inference on its use here),” 2 Thessalonians 1:12, ὅπως ἐνδοξασθῇ τὸ ὄνομα τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ ἐν ὑμῖν καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐν αὐτῷ κατὰ τὴν χάριν τοῦ Θεοῦ ὑμῶν καὶ κυρίου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ; 1 Timothy 5:21 (cf. 2 Timothy 4:1), διαμαρτύρομαι ἐνώπιον τοῦ Θεοῦ καἰ Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ καὶ τῶν ἐκλεκτῶν ἀγγέλων, which Chrysostom explains μάρτυρα καλῶ τὸν Θεὸν καὶ τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ; 2 Peter 1:1; 2 Peter 1:4 ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἡμῶν καὶ σωτῆρος Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, where see my n. The denial of the only Master and our Lord Jesus Christ may be implicit, shown by their coquet, though not asserted in word, as in Titus 1:16; but it is more naturally taken as explicit, as in 1 John 2:22, where Westcott notes that a common gnostic theory was that “ ‘the Aeon Christ' descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism and left Him before His passion. Those who held such a doctrine denied … the union of the divine and human in one Person … and this denial involves the loss of the Father, not only because the ideas of sonship and fatherhood are correlative, but because … it is only in the Son that we have the [full] revelation of God as Father.” The phrase τὸν μόνον δεσπότην might also refer to the heresy attributed to Cerinthus by Hippolytus (Haer. vii. 33, x. 21) οὐχ ὑπὸ τοῦ πρώτου θεοῦ τὸν κόσμον γεγονέναι ἠθέλησεν ἀλλʼ ὑπὸ δυνάμεώς τινος ἀγγελικῆς, and Irenæus Haer. i. 26. See Introduction on Early Heresies in the large edition.