From: Over 50 Interpreters Explain Second Peter
and Jude Return to Home
By
Roland H. Worth, Jr. © 2018
List of All Sources
Quoted At End of File
Jude
Verses
12-25
Verse 12 Translations
WEB: These
are hidden rocky reefs in your love feasts when they feast with you, shepherds
who without fear feed themselves; clouds without water, carried along by winds;
autumn leaves without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots;
Young’s: These
are in your love-feasts craggy rocks; feasting together with you, without fear
shepherding themselves; clouds without water, by winds carried about; trees
autumnal, without fruit, twice dead, rooted up;
Conte (RC): These ones are defiled within their
banquets, enjoying themselves and feeding them-
selves without fear; waterless clouds, which are
tossed about by winds; autumn trees, unfruitful,
twice dead, uprooted;
Verse 12 These are spots [so
rendered also by NKJV; “hidden reefs,” English Standard Version; New American
Standard Version]. Seen indeed, but their true nature
concealed. [51]
In 2 Peter
Nothing is so terrible to the sailor as the rock hidden out of sight by
the ocean. The ship striking goes down
to rise no more. An old sailor told me
he witnessed a case of this kind. The collision was so sudden that seven
hundred passengers were all buried in a watery sepulcher; only about forty
sailors, by good fortune, were saved, while the great steamer with her contents
sank immediately. This is a fearful
metaphor. [48]
On whether to translate “spots” or
“reefs:
“These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with
you.”—Rather, “These are the rocks in your feasts of charity, banqueting
with you fearlessly;” or, “These are they who banquet together fearlessly,
rocks in your feasts of charity.” The
former is preferable. But in any case we must probably read rocks—i.e., that on
which those who meet them at your love-feasts will be wrecked—not “spots,”
which is borrowed from 2 Peter 2:13. But
it is just possible that as spiloi, Peter’s
word, may mean either “spots” or “rocks” (though most commonly the former), so
Jude’s word (spilades) may mean either “spots”
or “rocks” (though almost invariably the latter). In an Orphic poem of the fourth century, spilades means “spots “; but this is rather late
authority for its use in the first century.
Here “rocks” is the safer translation.
Peter is dwelling on the sensuality of these sinners, and for him
“spots” is the more obvious metaphor.
Jude, in tracing an analogy between them and Cain, would be more likely
to select “rocks.” [46]
in your feasts of
charity [love feasts, NKJV]. The reference is probably to the Lord‘s
Supper, called a feast or festival of love, because: (1) it revealed the love of Christ to the
world; (2) it was the means of strengthening the mutual love of the disciples:
a festival which love originated, and where love reigned. It has been supposed by many, that the reference
here is to festivals which were subsequently called “Agapae,”
and which are now known as “love-feasts”--meaning a festival immediately
“preceding” the celebration of the Lord‘s Supper. But there are strong objections to the
supposition that there is reference here to such a festival. [31]
Or: There
was clear-cut authority for individuals to sponsor dinners that centered on
helping the poor independent of what a congregation did or did not
do: “ . . . When you give a dinner or a supper, do not ask your
friends, your brothers, your relatives, nor rich neighbors, lest they also
invite you back, and you be repaid. 13 But when you give a
feast, invite the poor, the maimed, the lame, the
blind. 14 And you will be
blessed, because they cannot repay you; for you shall be repaid at the
resurrection of the just” (Luke 12, NKJV).
Similarly, when one’s spiritual brothers and sisters would be invited to
such a private affair, it would also be a “love feast” to demonstrate one’s
appreciation and affection for the others.
[rw]
when they feast
with you. Showing that they were
professors of religion. [31]
feeding themselves. Literally, shepherding themselves; and so Revision, shepherds
that feed themselves; further their own schemes and lusts instead of
tending the flock of God. Compare
Isaiah 56:11. [2]
Jude is evidently referring to Ezekiel 34:2, 8, “Woe
unto the shepherds of
“Feeding themselves without
fear,” should be, “Shepherds that without fear feed themselves.” It is characteristic of the heretical teacher
that he is thinking of himself rather than the flock. [32]
without fear. Of such judgments as visited Anannias and
Sapphira.
Possibly, as Lumby suggests, implying a rebuke
to the Christian congregations for having suffered [= permitted without
punishing] such practices. [2]
That is, without any fear of God, or reverence,
selfishly and as gluttons, feeding themselves, not feeding the flock (34:2, 8,
10). Such were the sons of Eli (1 Samuel
Even at a sacred feast they had no fear to indulge in excess and license. And by their seductions they were as rocks
under surface, dangerous to the unsuspecting mariners. [39]
clouds they are without water. Which
promise rain in time of drought, but perform nothing of what they promise. [5]
Empty, useless, easily carried along therefore by the
wind, ostentatious and deceptive wherever they go. [51]
A like comparison is found in Proverbs 25:14 (“Whoso boasteth himself of a false gift is like clouds and wind
without rain”). Men look in the hot
climate of the East look to the cloud as giving promise of the rain from
heaven. It is a bitter disappointment
when it passes away leaving the earth hard and unrefreshed
as before. [38]
The figures emphasize the idea that the professions
of the “ungodly” held out a promise of spiritual helpfulness, which their
practice wholly belied. [45]
carried about of winds. The
clouds are not only useless but purposeless, driven about by winds. [37]
Men would look in vain to these false teachers,
shifting alike in their movements and their teaching, borne to and fro by
“every wind of doctrine” (compare Ephesians
This figure describes the internal emptiness and
deceptive ostentation of these men (Huther), as well
as their want of stability in the truth.
See 2 Peter 2:17. [50]
trees whose fruit withereth. The word rendered “withereth”
(φθινοπωρινὰ
phthinopōrina) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means, properly, “autumnal;” and the
expression here denotes “trees of autumn,” that is, trees stripped of leaves
and verdure; trees on which there is no fruit.--Robinson‘s Lexicon. The sense, in the use of this word,
therefore, is not exactly that which is expressed in our translation, that the
fruit has “withered,” but rather that they are like the trees of autumn, which
are stripped and bare. [31]
Or: Literally, autumn-withering
trees. This may mean either simply “autumnal trees,” as “in the sere and
yellow leaf” that is the forerunner of decay, or “trees that wither just at the
very season when men look for fruit,” and which are therefore fit symbols of
the false teachers who are known “by their fruits.” The use of a cognate word in Pindar (Pyth.
v. 161) suggests, however, that the part of the compound word that corresponds
to “autumn” may, like our “harvest,” be taken as a collective expression for
the fruits of that season, and so the term, as used by Jude, would mean “trees
that wither and blight their fruit instead of bringing it to maturity.” The addition of “without fruit” is
accordingly not a mere rhetorical iteration, but states the fact that the
withering process was complete.
The parable implied in the description was familiar to the disciples
from the teaching both of John the Baptist and our Lord (Matthew
without fruit. Either
they are wholly barren, like the barren fig-tree, or the fruit which was set
never ripens, but falls off. They are, therefore, useless as religious
instructors--as much so as a tree is which produces no fruit. [31]
twice dead. In sin, first by nature, and afterwards by apostasy. [15]
Not only the apparent death
of winter, but a real death; so that it only remains to pluck them up by
the roots. [2]
That is, either meaning that they are seen to be dead
in two successive seasons, showing that there is no hope that they will revive
and be valuable; or, using the word “twice” to denote emphasis, meaning that
they are absolutely or altogether dead. Perhaps the idea is,
that successive summers and winters have passed over them, and that no signs of
life appear. [31]
An emphatic way of saying that it was absolutely
certain that these men would never be of any use whatever. [45]
plucked up by the roots. And so never likely to bear fruit, and fit only for the fire; it notes the incurableness of their apostasy, and their nearness to destruction. [28]
The
wind blows them down, or they are removed by the husbandman as only cumbering
the ground. They are not cut
down--leaving a stump that might sprout again--but they are extirpated root and
branch; that is, they are wholly worthless. There is a regular ascent in this
climax. First, the apostle sees a tree
apparently of autumn, stripped and leafless; then he sees it to be a tree that
bears no fruit; then he sees it to be a tree over which successive winters and
summers pass and no signs of life appear; then as wholly extirpated. [31]
In depth: Differences
on what “love feasts” would refer to [47]. Commentators,
however, are not agreed what sort of feasts they were. Some think they were those suppers which the
first Christians ate previous to their eating the Lord’s supper, of which Paul
is supposed to have spoken 1 Corinthians 11:21; but which, in consequence of
the abuse of them by persons of a character like those here described, were
soon laid aside. Others think Jude is
speaking of the ancient love-suppers, which Tertullian
hath described, (Apol., chap. 39,) and which do not seem to have
been accompanied with the eucharist. These were continued in the church to the
middle of the fourth century, when they were prohibited to be kept in the
churches. Dr. Benson observes, “they were called love-feasts, or suppers, because the
richer Christians brought in a variety of provisions to feed the poor, the
fatherless, the widows, and strangers, and ate with them to show their love to
them.”
And: The “feasts of charity” or of love
(Agapae) spoken of in these verses are not strictly
the Lord’s Supper, though it is probable that the observance of the Lord’s
Supper was sometimes connected with them.
The historical facts, the use of the pronoun “your feasts of
love” (Jude verse 12), and the customs spoken of in 1 Corinthians 11, all point
to a wider meaning. They seem to have
been social gatherings of Christians for promoting kindly feeling and
helping the poor. Dr. Lightfoot
notes (on 1 Corinthians
In depth: Tertullian’s description of what “love feasts” were like
approaching 200 A.D. [45]. Tertullian
in his Defense of Christianity, addressed to the Roman Government, about A.D.
197, gives the following account of the love-feast, chapter 39, “As it is an
act of religious service, it permits no vileness or immodesty. The participants, before sitting down to
supper (literally, “reclining,” the [posture] in which the Greeks and the
Romans took their meals), taste first of prayer to God. As much is eaten as satisfies the cravings of
hunger; as much is drunk as befits the chaste.
They say it is enough, since they remember that they must worship God
even at night; they talk as those who know that the Lord is one of their
hearers. After washing of hands, lights
are brought in, and each is asked to stand forth and sing, as he can, a hymn to
God, either one from the holy Scriptures or one of his own composing—a proof of
the moderation of our drinking. As the
feast began with prayer, so also it is closed with prayer.”
Verse 13 Translations
WEB: wild
waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the blackness of darkness has been reserved forever.
Young’s: wild
waves of a sea, foaming out their own shames; stars going astray, to whom the
gloom of the darkness to the age hath been kept.
Conte (RC): raging waves of the sea, foaming
from their own confusion; wandering stars, for
whom the whirlwind of darkness has been
reserved forever!
Verse 13 Raging waves of the sea. The
image here seems to be, that they were noisy and bold in their professions, and
were as wild and ungovernable in their passions as the billows of the sea. [31]
Unstable
in their doctrine, and turbulent and furious in their tempers and manners,
having no command of their irascible passions. [47]
foaming out their own shame. That wickedness whereof they should be ashamed; like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt, Isaiah 57:20. [28].
So with these noisy and vaunting
teachers. What they impart is as unsubstantial and valueless as the foam
of the ocean waves, and the result is in fact a proclamation of their own
shame. Men with so loud professions
should produce much more. [31]
The Greek word for “shame” is in the plural, as
indicating the manifold forms of the impurity of the false teachers. [38]
wandering stars. Wandering from one error to another, and from one foul deed to another. [42]
The word for “wandering stars” is that which in the
terminology of astronomy distinguishes the “planets” from the fixed stars. Here, however, the ordered regularity of
planetary motion supplies no fit point of comparison, and we may probably see
in the words a reference either to comets or shooting stars, whose irregular
appearance, startling and terrifying men, and then vanishing into darkness,
would present an analogue to the short-lived fame and baleful influence of the
false teachers whom Jude has in view. [38]
However: Nothing is
gained by understanding comets, which have their orbits, and do not wander, in
Jude’s sense, any more than planets do.
The image is that of stars leaving their place in the heavens, where
they are beautiful and useful, and wandering away (to the utter confusion of
every one who directs his course by them) into sunless gloom, where their light
is extinguished, and whence they cannot return.
[46]
The sense seems to be, that the
aid which we derive from the stars, as in navigation, is in the fact that they
are regular in their places and movements, and thus the mariner can determine
his position. If they had no regular
places and movements, they would be useless to the seaman. So with false religious
teachers. No dependence can be
placed on them. It is not uncommon to
compare a religious teacher to a star, Revelation 1:16; 2:1. Compare Revelation 22:16. [31].
to whom is
reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. As the shooting stars go
out in darkness, so these will pass into eternal darkness. [22]
Verse 14 Translations
WEB: About
these also Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied, saying, "Behold, the
Lord came with ten thousands of his holy ones,
Young’s: And
prophesy also to these did the seventh from Adam -- Enoch -- saying, 'Lo, the
Lord did come in His saintly myriads,
Conte (RC): And about these, Enoch, the seventh
from Adam, also prophesied, saying: “Behold, the
Lord is arriving with thousands of his saints,
Verse 14 And Enoch also,
the seventh from Adam. Thus described to distinguish him from
Enoch the son of Cain (Genesis
The seventh in the direct line of
descent from Adam. The line of
descent is Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan,
Mahaleel, Jared, Enoch; see
Genesis 5:3, following. On the character
of Enoch, see Hebrews 11:5. [31]
The ancient image of Enoch as evangelist to the heavenly
angels [46]: The
following passage from Irenæus (IV. X vi. 2) shows that he was acquainted with the book, and
throws light on Jude’s use of it:—“Enoch also, pleasing God without
circumcision, was God’s ambassador to the angels, although he was a man, and
was raised to heaven, and is preserved even until now as a witness of the just
judgment of God. For the angels by
transgression fell to earth for judgment, while a man, by pleasing God, was
raised to heaven for salvation.” The
mission of Enoch to the fallen angels is narrated in the Book of Enoch,
12-16.
The number seven as having a special significance in regard to Enoch [46]: This is not inserted without special meaning. It was scarcely needed to distinguish the son of Jared from the son of Cain; in that case it would have been more simple to say, “the son of Jared.” It either points to the extreme antiquity of the prophecy, or else to the mystical and sabbatical number seven. Enoch was [considered] a type of perfected humanity, and hence the notion of “divine completion and rest” is perhaps suggested here.
Thus, Augustine, in his reply to Faustus the Manichæan (xii. 14):—“Enoch, the seventh from Adam, pleased
God and was translated, as there is to be a seventh day of rest, in which all
will be translated who during the sixth day of the world’s history are created
anew by the incarnate Word.” Several of
the numbers connected with Enoch in Genesis seem to be symmetrical, and
intended to convey a meaning.
prophesied of these. That is, to men of this same character, who lived in his own day, as well as to these false teachers in the early Church. [7]
God has had in every age some to testify against the
ungodly, and to warn them of the consequences of their sin at the future
judgment. [10]
The credibility of
Enoch being a prophet: Though Moses has said nothing
concerning Enoch’s prophesying, yet by telling us that he was a person of such
piety, as to be translated to heaven in the body without dying, he hath
warranted us to believe Jude’s account of him; namely, that God employed
him. [47]
saying.
He doth not say wrote, and therefore from hence it cannot be proved that
there was any such book as Enoch’s prophecies, received by the Jews as
canonical Scripture; but rather some prophecy of his delivered to them by
tradition, to which here the apostle refers, as a thing known among them; and
so argues against these heretics from their own concession, as Jude 1:9. So here; q.d. These men own [= accept] the prophecy of Enoch, that
the Lord comes to judgment, &c., and they themselves are in the number of
those ungodly ones, and they to whom the prophecy is to be applied. [28]
Or: The quotation is from a book of Enoch, which,
though apocryphal, doubtless had some truth in it, for we cannot suppose that
the apostle puts in Enoch’s mouth what he never uttered. [13]
Behold, the Lord cometh [the Lord comes, NKJV; the Lord has
come, God’s Word, ISV, Weymouth; the Lord came, English Revised Version, NASB,
WEB; the Lord did come, Young’s Literal]. As
reference to yet future events:
That is, the Lord will come. It
would seem from this to have been an early doctrine that the Lord would descend
to the earth for judgment. [31]
As reference to events
fulfilled long before the first century: Greek, came or as come; describing, as
not unfrequently, an occurrence in the midst of which
the prophet sees himself standing. [51]
We have the past tense of prophetic vision. So certain is the event that the prophet describes it as already fulfilled. The delay may seem long, sinful apostates may feel secure, but the hour will strike, and the Judge surely will appear. [7]
If Jude cites
the text as already fulfilled, he then is not citing it as proof of what
would happen in the yet future. He cites
it as precedent for Divine judgment.
What God has done previously, He is quite capable of doing again. [rw]
Behold. The
certainty of Divine promises:
The deacons in Chrysostom’s time were
appointed to call often upon the people in these words, Oremus,
attendamus, Let us pray, let us pay
attention. I am afraid, saith a divine [=minister], most of us do believe the
predictions of Scripture but as we believe the predictions of an almanac, which
tells you that such a day will be rain, and such a day will he wind; you think
it may come to pass, and it may not. So here; such a threatening may be fulfilled,
and it may not; let us venture it [= the latter]; it may be “the Lord will
deal” with us not according to his present menaces, but “according to all his
wondrous works,” as those rebellious Jews suggested to Jeremiah 21:2. [29]
with ten thousands of his saints. It is not with “his saints [KJV],” but with his holy ones, or holy angels, that He will come. All the “myriads” of them shall descend with him from their blessed abodes, to increase the solemnity of that day, and to honor Him, to whom they owe their very existence. This accords with the description given by Daniel (Daniel 7:9, 10), by Paul (2 Thessalonians 1:7, 8), and by Christ Himself (Matthew 25:31). [10]
I.e. with his glorious attendance
of myriads of angels; so called Hebrews 12:22. So was He present at mount Sinai when He
delivered the law; whence the psalmist saith, “The
chariot of God is myriads of angels:” so the Chaldee;
“And the Lord is among them as in Sinai,” Psalms lxviii.
18. So, Deuteronomy 32:2, “The Lord
cometh from Sinai with his myriads of holy ones:” “with myriads of holy angels,” says the
Talmud of Jerusalem, and Jonathan; and Zechariah 14:5, “The Lord my God shall
come, and all his holy ones with Him,” i.e. and all his guards of angels; those
who attend Him sitting on His throne (Daniel 7:10), or coming to execute judgment
(Matthew 16:27, 25:31, 2 Thessalonians 1:7).
[4]
In depth: Because
this incident is unmentioned in Scripture, is it automatically to be rejected? Martin Luther: For
this reason some of the Fathers did not receive this Epistle, although there is
not a sufficient reason for rejecting a book on this account. For Paul, also, in 2 Timothy 3, makes mention
of two that opposed Moses—Jannes and Jambres—names that are not even to be found in the
Scriptures. [21]
In depth: The “Book of Enoch” as viewed by ancient church leaders [38]. The history of the book which bears this title is a sufficiently remarkable one. Jude’s reference to the prophecy of Enoch does not necessarily prove that he was acquainted with the book, but it at least shows the existence of traditions that had gathered round the patriarch’s name. Allusions elsewhere to the fall of the angels (Justin, Apol. ii. 5) or to the work of Enoch in preaching to them (Iren. iv. 6), or to his knowledge of astronomy (Euseb. H. E. vii. 32), in like manner do not indicate more than the widely diffused belief that he represented not only the holiness, but the science of the antediluvian world.
The first Church writer who seems really to have known it is Tertullian (De Hab. Mul., c. 3), who, after giving at length the story how the angels that fell were allured by the beauty of the daughters of men, adds that he knows that the Book (scriptura) of Enoch is rejected by some as not being admitted into the Jewish “Storehouse” of holy writings. He meets the supposed objection that such a book was not likely to have survived the deluge by the hypothesis that it might have been committed to the custody of Noah, and been handed down after him from one generation to another, or that he might have been specially inspired, if it had perished, to rewrite it, as Esdras was fabled (2 Esdras 14:38-48) to have re-written the whole Hebrew Canon. He defends his acceptance of it on the grounds (1) that it prophesied of Christ, and (2) that it had been quoted by Jude.
In another passage (de Idol. c. 15) he names Enoch as predicting certain superstitious practices of the heathen, and so as being the most ancient of all prophets.
Augustine, on the other hand, adopting the view that the “sons of God” of Genesis 6 were righteous men who fell into the temptation of lust, rejects the book (which he clearly knew) as apocryphal, and while he admits the prophecy quoted by Jude as authentic, dismisses all the rest as fabulous (De Civ. Dei, xv. 23).
After this the book seems to have dropped out of sight, and it is not again referred to by any ecclesiastical writer. Fragments of it were found by Scaliger in the Chronographia of Georgius Syncellus, and printed by him in his notes on Eusebius in 1658. In 1773, however, Bruce, the Abyssinian explorer, brought over three copies which he had found in the course of his travels, and one of these, presented to the Bodleian Library, was translated by Archbishop Lawrence and published in 1821. Another and more fully edited translation was published in German by Dillmann in 1853.
In depth: The “Enochian prophecy” that has survived: A brief overview [2]. It is quoted from the apocryphal book of Enoch, directly, or from a tradition based upon it. The passage in Enoch is as follows: “Behold he comes with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and to destroy the wicked, and to strive (at law) with all the carnal for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done and committed against him.”
The Book of Enoch, which was known to the fathers of the second century, was lost for some centuries with the exception of a few fragments, and was found entire in a copy of the Ethiopic Bible, in 1773, by Bruce. It became known to modern students through translation from this into English by Archbishop Lawrence, in 1821.
It was probably written in Hebrew. It consists of revelations purporting to have been given to Enoch and Noah, and its object is to vindicate the ways of diving providence, to set forth the retribution reserved for sinners, angelic or human, and “to repeat in every form the great principle that the world--natural, moral, and spiritual--is under the immediate government of God.”
Besides
an introduction it embraces five parts:
1. A
narrative of the fall of the angels, and of a tour of Enoch in company with an
angel through heaven and earth, and of the mysteries seen by him. 2.
Parables concerning the
In depth: The “Enochian prophecy” that has survived: A more detailed overview [38]. As regards its contents, it is a sufficiently strange farrago. The one passage which specially concerns us is found in c. ii., and is thus rendered by Archbishop Lawrence. It comes as part of the first vision of Enoch: God will be manifested and the mountains shall melt in the flame, and then “Behold he comes with ten thousand of his saints to execute judgment upon them, and to reprove all the carnal for everything which the wicked and ungodly have done and committed against him.”
In c. vii., viii. we have the legend of the loves of the angels and the birth of the giants, and the invention of arts and sciences.
Then comes a prophecy of the deluge (c. x.), and
visions of the city of
Vision follows upon vision, until in c. xlvi. we have a reproduction of that in Daniel 7. of the Ancient of Days in the Son of Man, who is identified with the Messiah (c. xlvii.), the Chosen One of God. And so the book goes on, leaving on the reader’s mind an impression like that of a delirious dream, with endless repetitions and scarcely the vestige of a plan or purpose.
The reader of the English Apocrypha may find the
nearest accessible approach to the class of literature which it represents in
the Second Book of Esdras, but that, in its profound
and plaintive pessimism, has at least the elements of poetry and unity of
purpose. The Book of Enoch stands on a
far lower level, and belongs to the class of writings in which the decay of
Judaism was but too prolific, on which St Paul seems to pass a final sentence
when he speaks of them as “old wives’ fables” (1 Timothy 4:7).
Verse 15 Translations
WEB: to execute judgment on all, and to convict all the ungodly
of all their works of ungodliness which they have done in an ungodly way, and
of all the hard things which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Young’s: to do
judgment against all, and to convict all their impious ones, concerning all
their works of impiety that they did impiously, and concerning all the stiff
things that speak against Him did impious sinners.'
Conte (RC): to execute judgment against every-
one, and to reprove all the impious concerning all
the works of their impiety, by which they have
acted impiously, and concerning all the harsh
things that impious sinners have
spoken against God.”
Verse 15 To execute
judgment.
i.e
to pronounce the doom, and see that it is carried out. Then follows the
description of these sinners. The
characteristic of the antediluvians, as of those whom Jude addresses, is
ungodliness: [three] times is this quality named [in this verse], first and
last and midst, in the description. [51]
The Greek phrase occurs
only here and John 5:27. [46]
upon all. That is,
he shall come to judge all the dwellers upon the earth, good and bad. [31]
and to convince
[convict, NKJV] all that are ungodly among them. The image of a trial is presented. The evidence is now all in; the record fully
complete. Now the only question is what
to do with the rightly accused. [rw]
The
double meaning of the Greek word is only half represented by “convince,” and
only half by “convict;” both meanings are in the word, though the second
meaning is the predominant one here. [51]
of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed. Saying it once would be enough to establish the fact. Saying it twice makes it even more emphatic. In other words their behavior is viewed as without the least moral validity. [rw]
and of all their
hard speeches [harsh things,
NKJV]. When
you don’t have the power to actually change things, all you have left are
bitter and insulting words. Since no one
can make God do anything, the only resource His haters have left is to despise
Him with the most insulting and outrageous misrepresentations they can conjure
up. [rw]
Hard speeches.—Compare John 6:60, the only other
place where this epithet is applied to words.
The meaning is somewhat similar in each case: harsh, repulsive, inhuman. It does not mean “hard to understand.” Nabal (1 Samuel
25:3) has this epithet with the LXX, where the Authorized version
has “churlish.” In the Ethiopic version
of the Book of Enoch there appears to be nothing to represent “hard speeches .
. . spoken” in this passage. [46]
Rough, coarse [language]; used here in its ethical
sense, and especially to describe arrogant blasphemy (1 Samuel 2:3; Malachi
which ungodly
sinners have spoken against Him. Although
the immediate target may be believers who have compromised the Divine moral
code, those who have never embraced it in the first place also find it equally
necessary to conjure up empty and vain excuses for laying it all aside as
well. [rw]
In depth: Some are convinced that not only verse 14 but also this verse represent a part of the prophecy of Enoch [31]. In regard to this passage, thus quoted from an ancient prophecy, we may remark: (1) That the style bears the marks of its being a quotation, or of its being preserved by Jude in the language in which it had been handed down by tradition. It is not the style of Jude. It is not so terse, pointed, energetic.
(2) It has every probable mark of its having been actually delivered by Enoch. The age in which he lived was corrupt. The world was ripening for the deluge. He was himself a good man, and, as would seem perhaps, almost the only good man of his generation. Nothing would be more natural than that he should be reproached by hard words and speeches, and nothing more natural than that he should have pointed the men of his own age to the future judgment.
(3) The doctrine of the final judgment, if this was uttered by Enoch, was an early doctrine in the world. It was held even in the first generations of the race. It was one of those great truths early communicated to man to restrain him from sin, and to lead him to prepare for the great events which are to occur on the earth. The same doctrine has been transmitted from age to age, and is now one of the most important and the most affecting that refers to the final destiny of men.
In depth: The
concepts of verse 15 as found in “Enoch” [38]. The following is given as a literal
translation of the prophecy as it stands in the Book of Enoch: “And He cometh with ten thousands of His holy
ones, that He may execute judgment upon them and destroy the ungodly, and may
plead with all the carnal ones for all the things which sinners and the ungodly
have done or wrought against Him.”
Jude’s version differs from this in the reiterated use of the word
“ungodly” as noun, adjective, verb and adverb.
Verse 16 Translations
WEB: These
are murmurers and complainers, walking after their
lusts (and their mouth speaks proud things), showing respect of persons to gain
advantage
Young’s: These
are murmurers, repiners;
according to their desires walking, and their mouth
doth speak great swellings, giving admiration to persons for the sake of
profit;
Conte (RC): These ones are complaining
murmurers, walking according to their own desires.
And their mouth is speaking arrogance, admiring
persons for the sake of gain.
Verse 16 These are murmurers [grumblers, NKJV]. Against men. [15]
Or: What
these persons murmured and complained about is not indicated. Probably they found fault with everything
that they did not like in the doctrine and administration of the church. [16]
Only here in New Testament. Doubtless, originally, with
some adaptation of sound to sense, gongustai. It is used of the cooing of doves. [2]
complainers. Literally, discontented with their lot. Men who “shape their course according to
their own lusts” can never be content, for (1) the means of gratifying them are
not always present, and (2) the lusts are insatiable. Such was eminently the case with Balaam, in
his cupidity and his chafing against the restraints which prevented him from
gratifying it. There is a possible
reference to this verse in the Shepherd of Hermas (Sim. IX. xix. 3). [46]
Or: Literally,
complainers of their fate, against God. [15]
Nothing is more common than for
men to complain of their lot; to think that it is hard; to compare theirs with
that of others, and to blame God for not having made their circumstances
different. The poor complain that they
are not rich like others; the sick that they are not well; the enslaved that
they are not free; the bereaved that they are deprived of friends; the ugly
that they are not beautiful; those in humble life that their lot was not cast
among the great and the frivolous. The
virtue that is opposed to this is “contentment”--a virtue of inestimable
value. [31]
The Greek word for “complainers” has a more specific
meaning, and means strictly blamers of fate, or, in
modern phrase, finding fault with
walking after their
own lusts. Giving unlimited
indulgence to their appetites and passions. See 2 Peter 3:3. [31]
This stands in connection with the foregoing as cause
and effect. The temper of
self-indulgence, recognizing not God’s will, but man’s desires, as the law of
action, is precisely that which issues in weariness and despair. The Confessions of the Preacher present the
two elements often in striking combination (Ecclesiastes 2:1-20). [38]
and their mouth speaketh great swelling words. The utterances of
arrogance, and of assumption to being much greater and higher personages than
they truly are. [39]
When it was safe to do so, they blustered, and
bullied, and played the superior person, but they cringed to rich men, and
flattered them for the sake of dinners and presents. [45]
having men's persons
in admiration [flattering people, NKJV]. Admiring, flattering men to their faces, for whom they,
perhaps, have no real respect. [39]
Paying court to the corrupt, the
rich, and the great, to further their own selfish designs. [14]
Showing great respect to certain
persons, particularly the rich and the great. The idea is, that
they were not “just” in the esteem which they had for others, or that they did
not appreciate them according to their real worth, but paid special attention
to one class in order to promote their selfish ends. [31]
Or: Whether they flatter the powerful, or whether
they flatter the mob, it is all one. All
is done for popularity—all for profit. [41]
because of [to gain,
NKJV] advantage. Admiring and
commending them only for what they can get.
[15, 47]
Their reverence, such as they are capable of, is
reserved for the possessors of wealth and influence. [51]
Verse 17 Translations
WEB: But
you, beloved, remember the words which have been spoken before by the apostles
of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Young’s: and
ye, beloved, remember ye the sayings spoken before by
the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ:
Conte (RC): But as for you, most beloved, be
mindful of the words which have been foretold by
the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Verse 17 But, beloved. Better, as in verse 20, “But ye, beloved.” “Ye” is
emphatic in both cases: “ye,” in
contrast to these impious men. All
previous English versions insert the “ye.”
While taking the form of an exhortation, the passage still remains
virtually descriptive. “Be not ye
deceived by their impudent boasting and interested pandering, for these are the
scoffing sensualists against whom the Apostles warned you.” [46]
remember ye. He now
exhorts the faithful to remain steadfast in the belief and practice of what
they had heard from the apostles, who had also foretold that in after times
(literally, in the last time [verse 18]), there should be false
teachers, scoffing. [12]
the words. You have available not just the “thoughts” of
the apostles as relayed through others, but their actual words. There is simply no gainsaying what is about
to be said as coming from any less an authoritative source than the very
apostles themselves. [rw]
which were spoken
before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. The
persons to whom Jude writes had received the Gospel message from the mouth of
the Apostles themselves. This warning
had not only been spoken before, but
it was a prophecy, which now had already received a partial fulfillment. [50]
The passage stands in close parallelism with 2 Peter
3:2, but differs in speaking only of “apostles” and not of prophets, and
apparently also in referring only or chiefly to the predictions of the apostles
and not to their commandments. If we
could assume that 2 Peter was the earlier of the two Epistles, we might see in
Jude’s language a reference to that of the Apostle. [38]
The language implies that Jude was not an apostle. [22]
On the other hand: Jude does not exempt himself from the number
of the apostles; for in the next verse he says, to you, not, to us. [26]
When Jude entreats
them to remember the words which were spoken by “the apostles,” it is not
necessarily to be inferred that he was not himself an apostle, for he is
speaking of what was past, and there might have been a special reason why he
should refer to something that they would distinctly remember which had been
spoken by the other apostles on this point. Or it might be that he meant also to include
himself among them, and to speak of the apostles collectively, without
particularly specifying himself. [31]
Verse 18 Translations
WEB: They
said to you that "In the last time there will be mockers, walking after
their own ungodly lusts."
Young’s: that
they said to you, that in the last time there shall be
scoffers, after their own desires of impieties going on,
Conte (RC): who declared to you that, in the end
time, there would arrive mockers, walking according
to their own desires, in impieties.
Verse 18 How that they told [said to, ESV] you. The New
Testament does not contain any apostolic saying couched in exactly these words;
the verse is probably a summary of more detailed teaching often repeated. “Said” (elegon) means, strictly, “were in the habit of saying;”
cf. on 1 John
you. The churches addressed had, therefore, been
ministered to by the apostles. [45]
there should be
mockers. Better, “that there shall be scoffers.” The quotation is direct, and is introduced
formally by a word which in Greek commonly precedes a direct quotation. This, however, scarcely amounts to proof that
the quotation is from a written document. The word for “mockers” here is the
same as that translated “scoffers” in 2 Peter 3:3. The translation should be the same in both
passages. [46]
The general character of those described agrees with
the picture drawn in 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy
3:1. Jude, it will be noted, does not
dwell on the specific form of mockery, the taunts as to the delay in the second
coming of the Lord, on which Peter lays stress.
[38]
Those who “railed” and “blasphemed” would naturally
pass to derision through their insolent assurance. [45]
in the last time. There is nothing to show that the
author of our Epistle regards the Apostles as considerably removed in time from
himself. “In
the last time” is their expression, not his; and by it they did not mean any
age remote from themselves. (Compare 1
John 2:18; 2 Timothy 3:1-2; 2 Timothy 3:6; Hebrews 1:2; 1 Peter 1:20.) [46]
The propriety of “last time” language being used in more than one sense: The early church looked for a speedy close of the Christian era by the second coming of Christ; the years immediately before this would be “the last time.” The period when the “ungodly” and “antichrists” came upon the scene was, however, really a “last time” [as well]; their appearance marked the close of the first great Christian epoch, that of special inspiration. They were the most obvious symptoms that the tide of spiritual force had begun to ebb, and that a reaction had set in, through which selfish and worldly motives would gain a foothold in, and sometimes control, the church itself. [45]
who should walk
after. They
follow their desires (“lusts”). What is
right does not guide them. What they
prefer to do is their moral lodestone and they become even more indignant if
circumstances or events keep them from carrying out those preferences. At the worst extreme, life exists for them
and them only and others become mere tools to make it more enjoyable. [rw]
their own ungodly
lusts. Literally, after
the lusts of their own impieties.
The last word adds a special feature to the description already given,
in nearly the same words, in verse 16. [38]
Each begetting the other; every lust rejecting the
Divine that is opposed to it, and the rejection of what is Divine ending ever
in aggravated immorality (see Romans
Verse 19 Translations
WEB: These
are they who cause divisions, and are sensual, not having the Spirit.
Young’s: these
are those setting themselves apart, natural men, the Spirit not having.
Conte (RC): These are the ones who segregate
themselves; they are animals, not
having the Spirit.
Verse 19 These be they who. One possibility as to their reasoning: Their mocking, however, consists in this, that they make a difference between themselves as spiritual Christians and the others, whom they in derision call psychical persons, i.e. men who, without possessing higher enlightenment, know only what man can grasp with his natural psychical life. This is clear from the manner, in which by way of contrast Jude designates them as sensual persons, who yet walk in their natural and sinful mind, because they do not possess the Spirit, who has been given us in Christ. [9]
separate themselves
[cause divisions, NKJV]. From the wise and the good who adhere to
the doctrines and duties of the gospel. [14]
They break up the Church into parties and sects: compare 1 Corinthians 1:12. [24]
It was characteristic of the false teachers and
mockers who are spoken of that they drew lines of demarcation, which Christ had
not drawn, between themselves and others, or between different classes of
believers, those, e.g., who had the higher gnosis, or
exercised a wider freedom (2 Peter 2:19), and those who were content to walk in
“the Apostles’ doctrine and fellowship” (Acts 2:42). They lost sight of the unity of the
The context rather leads us to suppose that these
libertines claimed to be the only “spiritual” Christians, inasmuch as they said
that to their exalted spiritual natures the things of sense were purely
indifferent, and might be indulged in without loss or risk; while they taunted
other Christians, who regulated their conduct carefully with regard to such
things. [46]
sensual. The Greek
word is psychic, and has no English equivalent; “sensuous” would perhaps be
best. The LXX do[es] not use it, but it occurs six times in the New
Testament. Four times (1 Corinthians
Or: I do not
accept the English “sensual.” Doubtless the preachers are
sensual, but I prefer “intellectual.” The Greek is “psychikoi,”
from psychee, the soul or the mind. From this
we have the word psychology, the science of mind. The most literal translation of this word is
psychical, which is little used. I
prefer intellectual. Again the
antithesis with “not having the Spirit,” decidedly
favors “intellectual.” True religion is
not morality, philanthropy nor churchianity, but
spirituality. False religion always
gives prominence to intellectualism. These preachers “not
having the Spirit,” preach by the power of their intellect and
education. Hence their grandiloquent, unspiritual sermons, gathered up to
please the people. [48]
having not the Spirit. They had body and animal soul, but they had
lost their highest nature, spirit. This
does not literally mean that a part of their human constitution had been
annihilated, but nullified; reduced to nullity; just as we severely say
that a man is conscienceless when his conscience seems dead. [39]
Or: The word for “Spirit” stands without the
article in the Greek, and though this does not necessarily exclude the thought
that the Spirit of God is spoken of, it is, perhaps, better to rest in the
meaning that the false teachers were so absorbed in their lower, sensuous
nature that they no longer possessed, in any real sense of the word, that
element in man’s compound being, which is itself spiritual, and capable
therefore of communion with the Divine Spirit.
[38]
However: It is rather to be understood of the Holy
Spirit (De Wette-Bruckner, Wiesinger,
Hofmann); the want of the article and of an epithet is
no objection against this interpretation, since the simple word [spirit] is
often used in the N.T. as a designation for the objective Holy Spirit. It is erroneous to affirm that by this
interpretation the conclusion of the description is too flat, for nothing worse
can be said of a man who desires to be esteemed a Christian than that he wants
the Holy Spirit. [8]
In depth: More on the Greek language connotations of “separate themselves [cause divisions, NKJV]” [45]. The Authorized Version, following inferior manuscripts, “separate themselves.” The meaning of the phrase is much disputed. It is stated that the word for “make separations” (apodiorizo) only occurs once elsewhere in the whole range of Greek literature, viz. in a passage in Aristotle, where it means “mark off by defining.” Hence it has been understood here as “those who indulge in a subtle casuistry of immoral definitions, and—in the light of the following words—distinguish the ‘natural’ man from the ‘spiritual,’ and claim as ‘spiritual’ men to be superior to the moral conventions which are binding on the ordinary man.”
This would be a perversion of Paul’s teaching as to the liberty of the spiritual man from the Mosaic law. “The spiritual man,” they may have said, in the words of 1 Corinthians 2:15, “is judged of no man.” Paul himself had found it necessary to guard against such abuse of his teaching in Romans 6.
But the simpler word diorizo, in classical Greek [means] both to “separate” and to make
“definitions” [and] occurs in the Greek version of Leviticus
Verse 20 Translations
WEB: But
you, beloved, keep building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in
the Holy Spirit.
Young’s: And
ye, beloved, on your most holy faith building yourselves up, in the Holy Spirit
praying,
Conte (RC): But you, most beloved, are building
yourselves up by your most holy faith, praying in
the Holy Spirit,
Verse 20 But ye, beloved. Exactly as in verse 17: “ye” in emphatic contrast to these sensuous
and unspiritual men. [46]
building up yourselves. Paul, 1
Corinthians 3:10, &c., speaks of building upon the
one foundation, Christ; the idea here is the same. [45]
Making yourselves firm on the sure foundation of
faith, in contradistinction to those “who separate,” and fancy themselves firm
in their impious conceits. The notion is
not so much that of increasing and completing an edifice as of strengthening
its foundations. [46]
on your most holy faith. The “most holy faith” is the object of faith, the person and work of Christ. On this they were to build character and a spiritual life, partly, no doubt, through mutual conference and encouragement. [45]
They are to build themselves up on the objective contents of faith which has been delivered to them, and which they believe, so that this faith and belief is “the foundation which supports their whole personal life, the soul of all their thinking, willing and doing” (Wiesinger). Jesus Christ is the foundation upon which we build, and into which we must ever root ourselves deeper and deeper. [50]
He calls their faith most holy, in order that they might wholly rely on it, and that, leaning on its firmness, they might never vacillate. [35]
praying in the Holy
Ghost. It means that we pray in His strength
and wisdom: He moves our hearts and directs our petitions. (See Romans 8:26.)
Or: The
precise combination [of words] is not found elsewhere in the New Testament, but
the fact which it expresses corresponds with Paul’s language in Romans 8:26,
and the almost identical phraseology of 1 Corinthians 14:15. What is meant is the ecstatic outpouring of
prayer in which the words of the worshipper seem to come as from the Spirit who
“helpeth our infirmities” and “maketh
intercession for us,” it may be in articulate speech, it may be also as with “groanings that cannot be uttered” (Romans 8:26). [38]
Verse 21 Translations
WEB: Keep
yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ
to eternal life.
Young’s: yourselves in the love of God keep ye, waiting for the
kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ -- to life age-during;
Conte (RC): keeping yourselves in the love of
God, and anticipating the mercy of our Lord Jesus
Christ unto eternal life.
Verse 21 Keep yourselves. By hearkening diligently to His voice in the Scriptures, believing heartily His declarations, and cheerfully, steadfastly, and perseveringly obeying His commands. [14]
Hence it is evident, that we are not so kept by the
power of God, but that something must be done on our parts, to preserve
ourselves in the divine favor. And also,
that men once in this state may neglect to keep
themselves in the love of God. [4]
in the love of
God. The words admit equally of being taken of our
love for God, or God’s love for us, but the latter meaning is more in harmony
with the general tenor of Scripture, and, in particular, with our Lord’s
language (“continue ye in my love”) in John 15:9, and probably also Paul’s
(“the love of Christ constraineth us”) in 2
Corinthians 5:14. [38]
Or: That is,
in love to God, arising from a sense of his love to you. [47]
looking for the mercy
of our Lord Jesus Jesus Christ unto eternal life. The mercy which He will show as Judge at the Last Day. By prayer in the Spirit we are kept in the
love of the Father for the mercy of the Son.
[46]
Desiring and expecting salvation only through rich
grace in Christ. [14]
The word here really means, especially in the present
tense, “waiting to receive,” and even “receiving” itself (Hebrews
of our Lord Jesus
Christ. [Acting and preparing for the future]
according to His directions, under His influence, and by His aid. [14]
Note the prominence here given to the three Persons
of the Trinity, “the Holy Spirit” [verse 20], “God,” and “Jesus Christ” [verse
21]. [50]
unto eternal life. [This]
might be connected with “keep yourselves” or with “mercy;” or, as Jude has not
shown clearly what he meant it to qualify, we may suppose that this was the
hope and object to which all the exhortations in verses 20, 21 were
directed. [45]
Verse 22 Translations
WEB: On
some have compassion, making a distinction,
Young’s: and to
some be kind, judging thoroughly,
Conte (RC): So certainly, reprove them, after they
have been judged.
Verse 22 And of some. Who have
been bewildered as to truth and duty, seduced into error and sin. [14]
have compassion. Treating them gently and kindly and thus alluring them back to truth and duty. [14]
making a difference
[distinction, NKJV]. Between them and others that are more guilty
and stubborn. [47]
According to their character,
condition, and wants. [14]
This, then, is the first and least hopeless
class—those who are still in doubt, though inclined the wrong way. They may still be remonstrated with, convicted
of error, and reclaimed (Matthew
In depth: Some
thoughts on differences in the manuscript tradition of this verse [38]. The MSS present a strange variety of
readings. Those of most authority give,
“Some rebuke (or convict, the same word as that used in John 16:8;
Ephesians
More on the manuscript differences [45]. These two verses [22-23] are given very
differently in various manuscripts and versions, and we cannot be certain what
it was that Jude originally wrote. The
A.V., following inferior manuscripts, has “And of some have compassion, making
a difference: and others save with fear,
pulling them out of the fire, hating,” &c.
The R.V. text, “And on some have
mercy, who are in doubt; and some save, snatching them out of the fire; and on
some have mercy with fear; hating,” &c. follows the two oldest
manuscripts, the Sinaitic and the Vatican. Instead of the first “have mercy,” the
Alexandrian Manuscript and Codex Ephremi have “convict.”
Verse 23 Translations
WEB: and
some save, snatching them out of the fire with fear, hating even the clothing
stained by the flesh.
Young’s: and
some in fear save ye, out of the fire snatching, hating even the coat from the
flesh spotted.
Conte (RC): Yet truly, save them, seizing them
from the fire. And have mercy on others: in fear,
hating even that which is of the flesh, the defiled
garment.
Verse 23 And others save
with fear. An injunction to the same caution in the
mental sphere as would be exercised toward the very garments of one having a
contagious disease. [1]
Lest yourselves be infected with the disease you endeavor to
cure. [15]
Or: by fear
orientated teaching. The idea
seems to be that the arguments on which they relied were to be drawn from the
dangers of the persons referred to, or from the dread of future wrath. It is undoubtedly true, that while there is a
class of persons who can be won to embrace religion by mild and gentle
persuasion, there is another class who can be aroused only by the terrors of
the law. Every method is to be employed,
in its proper place, that we “by all means may save
some.” [31]
pulling them out of the fire. Of temptation, sin, and
divine wrath, into which they are fallen, or are just ready to fall. As if he had said, And
if you desire that your efforts in either of these cases should be successful,
you must take great care to preserve your own purity; and while you love the sinners,
to retain the utmost abhorrence of their sins.
[47]
The writer has in mind Zechariah 3:2, a brand plucked from the burning. Compare Amos 4:11. [2]
hating even the
garment spotted [defiled, NKJV] by the flesh. While the utmost effort was to be made to
save them, they were in no way to partake of their sins; their conduct was to
be regarded as loathsome and contagious; and those who attempted to save them
were to take every precaution to preserve their own purity. Not a few have been deeply corrupted in their
attempts to reform [others]. [31]
The injunction as due to the extreme evil of the person you are dealing with: As he, who hates every pollution that proceeds from the flesh, will regard as disgusting also the undergarment, because it is worn next to the body and is thereby polluted by the flesh, thus he who is anxious scrupulously to preserve himself will also regard as something hateful even the most superficial touch of him who is living in such sin. [9]
Or--Do so lest you
yourself be fatally compromised:
The words are so closely connected with the preceding that I cannot but
think the meaning is: “Let, however,
your endeavors to reform them be made with great caution; be careful to avoid
being ‘yourselves’ corrupted by their society, and show a hatred of whatever
partakes, in the slightest degree, of vice and sin.” [11]
The conceptual underpinning of
the defiled garment imagery: The “garment” is the inner tunic worn
next to the flesh, and therefore thought of as contaminated by its impurity,
and it serves accordingly as a symbol of all outer habits of life that are
affected by the inner foulness of the soul that is in bondage to the
flesh. As men would loathe the touch of
a defiled garment, bearing the stains of a cancerous ulcer, so they were to
hate whatever was analogous to it in conduct (compare Isaiah 30:22). The allusion to Zechariah 3:2 in the previous
clause makes it probable that here also there is a reference to the “filthy
garments;” polluted, i.e., with some ceremonial uncleanness, in which the
high-priest Joshua the son of Josedech first appears
in the prophet’s vision. In the
benediction of Revelation 3:4 on those who “have not defiled their garments,”
we have the same imagery. [38]
In depth: Some thoughts on differences in the
manuscript tradition of this verse [38]. Here again the MSS present a striking
variation, those of most authority giving “others save, snatching them out of
the fire, and have compassion on others with fear.” If we adopt this reading we have two classes
of offenders brought before us, those who are to be saved as from the fire, as
on the very verge of destruction, and those who are for some reason or other
objects of a more tender pity, though they do not come within the range of
immediate action. That pity, however,
the context shows, was not to be accompanied by any tolerance of the evils into
which they had fallen. [38] Or:
They are not in such wretched condition that to help them is about as
dangerous as trying to grab something out of a burning fire. It is not that “immediate action” is delayed,
but that the personal danger of the attempted rescue is far less. [rw]
Verse 24 Translations
WEB: Now
to him who is able to keep them from stumbling, and to present you faultless
before the presence of his glory in great joy,
Young’s: And to
Him who is able to guard you not stumbling, and to set you in the presence of
His glory unblemished, in gladness,
Conte (RC): Then, to him who has the power to
keep you free from sin and to present you, immaculate,
with exultation, before the presence of his glory at the
advent of our Lord Jesus Christ,
Verse 24 Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling. [Falling] from truth and duty into error and sin. [14]
The readers had been told to “keep” themselves in the
love of God; now they are assured that God will keep them; in spite of pitfalls
and snares, He “is able to guard you from stumbling”; regardless of moral
perils and present sorrows. [7]
The form of the concluding doxology is determined
naturally by the thoughts that have led up to it. The writer had been dwelling
on the various ways in which men had stumbled and fallen. He now directs their thoughts to God as alone
able to preserve them from a like disastrous issue. [38]
and to present you faultless. The word
here rendered “faultless” is the same which is rendered “unblamable”
in Colossians 1:22. [31]
What traps and pitfalls beset us! How many have fallen who had as good or a
better chance than we! The angels kept
not their first estate; Adam, though created in innocency,
fell; Cain was rejected; Balaam, who saw with open eyes, was slain; Korah, who had carried a censer filled with holy fire, was
hurled into the abyss! How can we expect
to stand! Be of good cheer! He is able to keep you from
falling, and to present you faultless! [33]
before the presence
of His glory. The “glory” spoken of is that which is to be
manifested at the coming of Christ “in his own glory, and that of the Father,
and of the Holy Angels” (Luke
with exceeding joy. Think: jubilant, ecstatic. [46]
Verse 25 Translations
Weymouth: to the
only God our Saviour--through Jesus Christ our Lord,
be ascribed glory, majesty, might, and authority, as it was before all time, is
now, and shall be to all the Ages! Amen.
WEB: to
God our Savior, who alone is wise, be glory and majesty, dominion and power,
both now and forever. Amen.
Young’s: to the
only wise God our Saviour, is glory and greatness, power and authority, both now and
to all the ages! Amen.
Conte (RC): to the only God, our Savior, through
Jesus Christ our Lord: to him be glory and magni-
ficence, dominion and power, before all ages, and
now, and in every age, forever.
Amen.
Verse 25 To the only wise
God our Saviour. In the use of the word “Saviour” as applied to God we have a parallelism with 1 Timothy 2:3.
The Father, no less than the Son, was thought of by both writers as the Saviour and Preserver of all men. [38]
A favorite phrase in the Pastoral Epistles, also in
Luke 1:47. [45]
[Addition here by translations using a “critical” text such
as ESV and NASB: through Jesus Christ
our Lord.”]
This is especially
directed against those who did not acknowledge Jesus as the Christ and the
Mediator between God and man. [50]
be glory and
majesty, dominion and power. “Glory” and “dominion” are frequent
in the New Testament doxologies: the Greek words represented by “majesty” and
“power” occur here only. [46]
Manuscript variation: The better MSS insert after “power”
the words “before all time” (literally, before the whole æon), so that the doxology includes the past
eternity as well as the future. [38]
The three
chief manuscripts [= Vatican, Sinaitic, Alexandrian] read the latter part of this
doxology as follows: “To the only God
our Saviour through Jesus Christ our Lord is glory,
majesty, dominion and power before all time, and now and forever more.” [40]
both now. In the present state of life and things. [18]
and ever. In the words “for ever” we have literally “unto all the ages, or æons.” [38]
Amen. The Epistle ends with the “Amen” which
was the natural close of a doxology, and, like the Second Epistle of Peter,
contains no special messages or salutations.
[38]
BOOKS/COMMENTARIES
UTILIZED IN THIS STUDY:
1 [Anonymous]. Teacher’s Testament/Nelson’s Explanatory
Testament
Thomas
Nelson & Sons;
2 Marvin
R. Vincent, D.D. Word
Studies in the New Testament.
Charles
Scribner’s Sons;
3 Robert
Young. Commentary
on the Holy Bible. A. Fullarton & Co;
4 Daniel
Whitby, D.D. and Moses Lowman. A Critical Commentary and
Paraphrase
on the New Testament. Carey Hart,
5 Matthew
Henry. Vol. IV: Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible.
6 Rev. Dr
C. G. Barth. The Bible Manual.
1865
7 Charles
R. Erdman. The
General Epistles.
Press, 1918.
8 Joh. Ed. Huther, Th. D., Critical
and Exegetical Handbook to the
General
Epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude
[Meyer’s Commentary
on the New Testament].
9 Professor
Bernhard Weiss, D.D. A
Commentary of the New Testament Vol. IV.
10 Charles
Simeon, M.A. Horae
Homileticae Vol. XX.
and Ball, 1833.
11 Rev. S.
T. Bloomfield, M.A. Recensio
Symoptica Annotations Sacrae
[
12 George
Leo Haydock. Haydock’s Catholic Family Bible and Commentary
UTS,
13 Howard
Crosby, D.D. New
Testament, With Brief Explanatory Notes. New
14 Anonymous [Justin
Edwards]. The New
Testament of Our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.
This edition has more notes, but Edwards’ name is
attached to a shorter
edition of the
same material at UTS,
15 John
Wesley, M.A. Explanatory Notes upon
the New Testament.
16 Orello Cone, D.D. International Handbooks to the N.T. Vol. 3:
The Epistles. New York:
G. P. Putnam’s Sons / Knickerbocker Press,
1901.
17 Philip
Doddridge, D.D. The Family Expositor
(Paraphrase and Version of
the New
Testament [American edition]).
Amherst, Ms.: J. S. & C.
Adams,
and L. Boltwood;
18 Adam
Clarke, LL.D., F.S.A., etc.
The New Testament of our Lord and
Saviour Jesus Christ Vol. VI.
19 Donald
Fraser, M.A., D.D. Synoptical
Lectures of the Books of Holy Scripture Vol.
II.
20 Rev.
Robert Jamieson, D.D. Rev. A. R. Fausset, A.M. Rev. David Brown D.D. A
Commentary, Critical and explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments Vol. II The S. S. Scranton Company
21 Martin
Luther. The Epistles of St. Peter and
St. Jude Preached and
Explained (
Gillett.
22 Barton
W. Johnson. People’s New Testament. Internet Edition. 1891.
23 Arno Gaebelein. Annotated Bible. Internet Edition. 1920s.
24 John R. Dummelow. Dummelow’s Commentary on the Bible. Internet Edition. 1909.
25 Robert Hawker. Poor Man’s Commentary. Internet Edition. 1828.
26 Johann
A. Bengel. Gnomon of the New
Testament. Internet Edition.
1742.
27 Alexander
MacLaren. Exposition of the Holy Scriptures. Internet Edition.
18--.
28 Matthew
Poole. English
Annotations on the Holy Bible.
Internet Edition.
1685.
29 John Trapp. Complete Commentary. Internet Edition.
Written 1600s;
1865-1868 edition.
30 Joseph Sutcliffe. Commentary on the Old
and New Testaments. Internet
Edition. 1835.
31 Albert Barnes. Notes on the New
Testament. Internet Edition. 1870.
32 James Gray. Concise Bible Commentary. Internet Edition. 1897-1910.
33 F. B. Meyer. Thru The Bible
(Commentary). Internet Edition. 1914 edition.
34 John and Jacob Abbott. Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament. Internet
Edition. 1878.
35 John Calvin. Commentaries. Internet Edition. Written in 1500s. Printing:
1840-1857.
36 William R. Nicoll,
editor. Expositor’s Greek Testament. Internet
Edition.1897-1910.
37
38
E. M. Plumptre. Internet Edition. 1890.
39 D. D. Whedon. Commentary on the New Testament;
volume 5: Titus to
Revelation. Internet Edition.
40 Ariel A. Livermore. The Epistles to the Hebrews, the Epistles
of James,
Peter, John, and Jude and the Revelation of John the Divine[:] Commentary
and Essays. Internet Edition.
1881.
41 M[ichael] F.
Sadler. The General Epistles of SS.
James, Peter, John, and
Jude. Second
Edition.
42 Robert S. Hunt. The Epistle to the
Hebrews and the General Epistles.
In
the Cottage Commentary series.
43 A. T. Robertson. New Testament Interpretation (Matthew to
Revelation):
Notes on
Lectures. Taken
stenographically. Revised Edition by William
M.
Fouts and Alice M. Fouts.
44 William G. Humphry. A Commentary on the Revised Version of the
New
Testament.
45 W. H. Bennett. The General Epistles: James, Peter, John and Jude. In the
Century Bible series.
46 A. J. Mason. “First Epistle of Peter” in Ellicott’s New
Testament
Commentary for English
Readers. Internet Edition. 1884.
47 Joseph Benson. Commentary on the Old
and New Testaments. Internet
Edition. 1811-1815.
48 William B. Godbey. Commentary on the New
Testament. Internet Edition.
1896-1900.
49 James Nisbett,
editor. Church Pulpit
Commentary. Internet Edition. 1876.
[Note: this is not “The Pulpit
Commentary.”]
50 Revere F. Weidner. Annotations on the General Epistles of
James, Peter,
John,
and Jude. In the Lutheran
Commentary series.
Literature Company, 1897.
51 Schaff’s
Popular Commentary on the New Testament.
Internet
Edition.
1879-1890.