Sermon Tone Analysis

JUDE

Edwin A. Blum

Introduction to Jude

1. Authorship

The first verse identifies the author of this letter as "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James."

"James," an English form of the Hebrew name "Jacob," was a popular name among the Jews in NT times because of its patriarchal connection.

Likewise popular was "Judah," the name of Jacob's fourth son, founder of the tribe of Judah.

"Jude" is an English form of "Judas" (loudas), the Greek form of "Judah."

The name gained added luster from Judas Maccabaeus, a national hero of the Jews, who led the revolt against Antiochus Epiphanes in the second century B.C.

But the perfidy of Judas Iscariot may perhaps have led practically all major English versions (except the RV) to use the form "Jude" rather than "Judas" in translating this letter.

Can Jude be identified with any certainty among the number of men in the NT named Judas?

BAG lists eight possibilities (pp.

380-81).

The link of Jude with James provides the best clue for identifying the author of the letter.

After the martyrdom of James the son of Zebedee under Herod Agrippa I (c.

A.D. 44; cf.

Acts 12:2), the only James who is well enough known in the early church that the unspecified use of his name would be generally recognizable was James of Jerusalem.

Paul called him "James, the Lord's brother" (Gal 1:19).

Later, according to Hegesippus, he became known as "James the Just."

If the James of Jude 1:1 can be so identified, Jude was the brother of the leader of the Jerusalem church (Acts 12:17; 15:13; 21:18; 1Cor 15:7, Gal 1:19, 2:9, 12) and the half-brother of Jesus of Nazareth (Matt 13:55, Mark 6:3).

If the Jude of this letter was the half-brother of Jesus, he did not believe in the messiahship of Jesus until after the Resurrection (John 7:5; cf.

Acts 1:14 ["his brothers"]).

This probably explains the humility with which Jude introduces himself in 1:1 as a servant (slave) of the brother (now recognized as the Messiah) he had denied.

In a story that comes from Hegesippus and is related by Eusebius, this trait of humility was shown by the grandsons of Jude, "said to have been the Lord's brother according to the flesh."

(This is "the only mention of Jude [the man] in ecclesiastical history" [HDB, s.v.].)

The story tells how the grandsons were brought before Domitian, the Roman emperor (A.D. 81-96), and accused of belonging to the royal house of David.

The emperor questioned them about the Christ and his kingdom, and they explained that it was a heavenly kingdom that would come at the end of the age.

So the emperor dismissed them as simple peasants with no royal pretensions.

Modern objections to the authorship of the letter by a half-brother of Jesus include the fact that its language seems very Hellenistic for an author who grew up in Galilee.

In addition, the vocabulary abounds in ornate and rare words (there are thirteen words not found elsewhere in the NT).

Yet it is unreasonable to dogmatize about what facility in the Greek language and literature or what knowledge of Jewish apocalytic writings (cf. the possible use of the Assumption of Moses in v. 9 and the Apocalypse of Enoch in v. 14) the half-brother of Jesus might have had.

Greek was the lingua franca of the Mediterranean world, and the presence of the Decapolis to the east and to the south of the Sea of Galilee provided ample opportunity for Greek influence on nearby Nazareth.

Hughes has surveyed the evidence regarding the languages Jesus used in his ministry and concludes that, while more work needs to be done in this field, it is certainly probable that Jesus spoke Greek fluently.

His half-brother Jude grew up in a multilingual environment.

Turner describes the language of Jude as revealing a Jewish Christian author who had a distinctly Hellenistic style.

In addition, Turner finds evidence of biblical Greek in Jude's vocabulary.

Schrage opposes the authorship of the letter by the Lord's half-brother on the ground that it bears the marks of the beginning of early Catholicism (Fruhkatholizismus). "Early Catholicism" is a step in the development of the Catholicism of the later Roman church.

Schrage finds support for his view in the "Catholic" salutation of the letter as well as in the letter's artistic style and its appeal to tradition (v.

3).

From this slender evidential base, he alleges a late date of composition that would rule out the possibility that Jude the half-brother of Jesus wrote the letter (Balz and Schrage, pp.

219-20).

None of these objections are weighty, since the appeal to tradition is common in Paul's letters (cf.

1Cor 11:23ff.; 15:3ff.).

The salutation and artistic style of the letter do not prove a late date.

Christianity spread rapidly in the ancient world; so a "polished" work may well have been sent to the church at large in Jude's time.

2. Date

The letter is so short that it contains little to help fix its date of composition other than the points mentioned above and inferences that can be drawn from the heresy the author opposes.

If the author was the younger half-brother of Jesus (the older half-brother being the influential James of Jerusalem), the most probable time of writing would be between A.D. 40 and 80.

If the letter was used by Peter in 2 Peter, the writing would have to be sometime prior to Peter's death or before A.D. 65.

However, Peter's use of Jude is not certain (cf.

Introduction to 2 Peter: Special Problem).

Guthrie thinks Jude could have been written in the period between 65 and 80.

The heresy of the false teachers could have developed quite early.

So all things considered, the letter may most probably be dated about 60 to 65.

3. Canonicity

If 2 Peter utilized Jude and if Peter wrote 2 Peter (both positions are disputed), then 2 Peter is the oldest witness to Jude, and its "apostolic" character or canonicity is, in principle, settled at a very early date.

In the early church fathers, a number of allusions to Jude have been identified (cf.

Bigg, pp.

305-9).

The Muratorian Canon (c.

200) states that an epistle of Jude was accepted in the Catholic church.

Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen all knew the book.

Eusebius, in speaking of the Epistle of James, says, "It is to be observed that its authenticity is denied since few of the ancients quote it, as is also the case with the epistle called Jude's which is itself one of the seven called Catholic; nevertheless we know that these letters have been used publicly with the rest in most churches."

Eusebius later ranks Jude as a book of the church that has been spoken against (Antilegomenon) and distinguishes it from the spurious books (Notha).

Schelkle (p.

144) says that Jude was considered canonical by the end of the second century in Rome, Africa, and Egypt.

On the other hand, there were doubts about the letter.

Those who spoke against it objected to its use of noncanonical writings and noted also the limited number of citations of the letter in the literature of the early church.

These doubts were overcome, and the worth of the book was recognized by the church.

Didymus of Alexandria (c.395) defended the book, and since then little objection to its canonicity has been voiced.

4. Place of Origin

The lack of internal clues makes determining the letter's place of origin a problem.

Egypt and Palestine are common guesses.

5. Destination

Since the address is so general—"To those who have been called, who are loved by God the Father and kept by Jesus Christ" (v.

1)—it is quite possible that the author intended the letter to be circulated to a number of churches.

Against this are the internal indications that the author knows the conditions within the church or churches to whom he writes (v.

4).

It is possible, however, that Jude itinerated and thus knew the dangers affecting the churches of a region or a circuit of churches within a region.

The fixing of the destination remains speculative.

Asia Minor, Syrian Antioch, or even Palestine are common suggestions.

6. Purpose

Jude had desired to write on the subject of the church's teaching ("the salvation we share," v. 3).

But he found it necessary to warn his readers concerning innovators who were smuggling false teaching into the churches.

Quite likely, these teachers had an itinerant ministry in imitation of the apostles.

Both Paul (cf.

Gal, Col) and John (cf. 1 and 2 John) faced the problem of false teachers who promoted a different gospel and erroneous instruction.

Jude's purpose is to give a strong denunciation of the errorists.

He evidently hopes that by his concise but vigorous exposure of them, the church will see the danger of their error and be alert to the coming judgment on it.

Jude also wants to reassure the church by showing that the fact that such scoffers would come was part of the content of apostolic prophecy.

In his last paragraphs, he calls the Christians to exercise their faith within the received common instruction.

He also praises God as the one who is able to keep both the church and individuals from falling.

Christians may have confidence that the God who began a good work of salvation within them (Philippians 1:6) will keep them (v. 1) and finally bring them safely into his glorious presence (v.

24).

The Book of Jude has been called "the most neglected book in the New Testament."

There may be various reasons for its neglect, e.g., its brevity, its citation of noncanonical Jewish writings, and its burning denunciation of error.

Yet Christians and the church today need to listen to Jude's contribution to biblical revelation.

The emphasis on a "fixed" core of truth known as "the faith" needs to be pondered.

Jesus is God's Word to man (cf.

Rom 6:17; Heb 1:1-4).

"God is light; in Him there is no darkness" (1 John 1:5ff.) is the apostle John's summary of the revelation of God in Jesus.

God is righteous and true and he hates sin and error.

Contemporary culture is becoming indifferent to the question of truth.

Christians have found truth in Jesus (Eph 4:21).

Jude warns of the dangers in the mixture of error with this truth.

So his eloquent tract for maintaining the purity and truth of the Christian faith is needed in view of the relativity and syncretism so common today.