In the
first
installment, I set out the traditional Greco-Roman letter format and looked
at the “Judases” and “Jameses” in the New Testament. There seemed to be only
one good option for whom the Judas/Jude to whom this letter is attributed could
be, the Judas/Jude who is the brother of Jacob/James and Jesus.
In the
second
installment, I weighed the arguments on authorship and decided the best
evidence does indeed point in that direction. I then looked at what this means
for the date of the letter and the location, or place, in which the letter was
written.
In the
third
installment, I examined the salutation, verses 1-2, in which I studied the letter
itself, the reasons the letter was sent, and the goals of the letter. Lastly,
in
the fourth installment I studied the “Reason for Writing” in verses 3-4, a
part of the letter typically called the “Thanksgiving,” but in Jude lacking that
element. In this, the fifth entry, I look at the first three charges Jude makes
against the “intruders…
who pervert
the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord,
Jesus Christ” (vv.3-4).
6. The Letter of Jude:
If you look at
the
first entry in the commentary, some scholars speak of an “Opening of the Body
of the Letter,” while others just speak of the “Body of the Letter.”
This labeling is, in many ways, simply a
matter of preference, since the body is the largest part of the letter and
takes on its shape and form according to the needs of the recipients and the
style of the author(s). But an “opening” often does announce the concerns of
the author and the type of argument to be used. As a result, I identify verses
5-7 as opening of Jude, announcing the manner in which the intruders have
strayed.
c) Opening of the Body
of the Letter: Three Reminders: verses 5-7
5
Now I desire to remind you, though you are fully informed, that the Lord, who
once for all saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward
destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their
own position, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains in
deepest darkness for the judgment of the great day. 7 Likewise, Sodom and
Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they,
indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve
as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.(
NRSV)
The body of the letter opens with a “reminder” of what they
already know from Scripture and tradition. Jude uses this opening as “a marker
identifying the beginning of the argument based on past examples” (
Hartin,
52). In addition, it is a way of affirming their understanding of Scripture and
their present situation and have them immediately align themselves with Jude as
people “in the know.”
The second clause is interesting, though, as in Greek it is
literally “although you know all things,” while the NRSV has “though you are
fully informed.” It would help to know what the overarching concern of this
verse is. What is the knowledge/information which they have? Is it only about
the examples which Jude will subsequently give? Or is it about the ways of God
and the Scripture as a whole? The manner in which it is translated matters to
some extent, but even more is how the clause is understood grammatically. The
NRSV sees this as a complete clause and ends it with a comma after “fully
informed” (translating
panta -“all”- and the participle
eidotas – know – as “fully informed”);
what they have been fully informed of is all that is essential to their
spiritual understanding.
William
Brosend (172) keeps the NRSV translation, “though you are fully informed,”
but does not have a comma after the clause, so that it reads:
“though you are fully informed that the Lord…
afterward destroyed those who did not believe.” It is a subtle change, but it
places the stress more fully on their information or knowledge being concerned
with this one incident and their knowledge of “all things” is limited. My sense
is that Jude is making a more general statement, though, about their
understanding of the spiritual realities which arise from their knowledge of
the Scripture and inform their ability to understand the situation they are now
in and the applicability of all the Scripture which is relevant to them.
I
like the NRSV’s addition of the comma, but think that a more literal “although
you know all things” is preferable (see
Hartin,
52). Whatever the case, the first example is included in what they know.
The first example concerns the Israelites who were saved by
God out of Egypt “once for all” (
hapax)
and “afterward (
to deuteron) destroyed
those who did not believe” (v.5). The delivery out of Egypt is clear, but what
about those who were “destroyed”? The word translated “afterward” means
literally “the second time.” To what “second time” does this refer? Does it
indicate those Israelites who were destroyed before being able to enter the
Promised Land? Or does it refer to all those who subsequently disobeyed even up
to the present day? Since it is an example from the past, and specific examples
can be gained from the Old Testament (
Numbers 14:27-30;
Exodus 32:25-35)
regarding those rescued from Egypt who subsequently fell,
I do think Jude’s point is to indicate by past
example: those who were in the past saved from Egypt did not all gain entry
into the Promised Land; in the same way, if the Christians do not continue to
remain faithful, they will not necessarily share in the final salvation. It is
intended to reflect on the current “intruders” and is a promise that if present
behavior and belief continues, they will not be saved (see
Keating,
203 for a similar interpretation).
The second example concerns the “angels who did not keep
their own position, but left their proper dwelling,” who as a result God “has
kept in eternal chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great day”
(v.6).
This verse concerns the angels of
Genesis
6:1-4, who fell by having sexual relations with women, and the later
expansion of this story in 1 Enoch, a Jewish Hellenistic text which is cited
later in this letter (vv.14-15). In 1 Enoch 10:4-6, 12-13, for instance, we are
told of the punishment which these angels (‘watchers” in 1 Enoch) received
which was to be cast into pits and chained to await the final judgment at the
end of time. The expansion of the story in 1 Enoch included these “watchers”
coming to earth and not just having sexual relations with women and creating
the “giants” or Nephilim, but teaching human beings all the ways and secrets of
evil. This story in Genesis and its
much
longer counterpart in 1 Enoch are fascinating tales which will be examined when
we look at the citation from 1 Enoch later in the letter (vv.14-15).
The final example concerns Sodom and Gomorrah and the
surrounding cities which “indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural
lust” and so “serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire”
(v.7). As with the previous two examples, this is taken from the Old Testament
and is an instance of eternal punishment. I think it is clear with Jude’s interpretation
of this passage as “a punishment of eternal fire,” that each example is
intended to point to eternal punishment for all those who go astray and do not
repent, even if such “eternal punishment” is not noted specifically in the Old
Testament or in the judgment of those who fell on the journey to the Promised
Land. Here in v.7 Jude notes it in the context of apocalyptic judgment and 1
Enoch notes eternal punishment for the fallen angels as does Jude who says they
are “kept in eternal chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great
day” (v.6).
The judgment of Sodom and Gomorrah is a challenging passage
for interpreters today, for some interpreters want to use it as a general
condemnation of homosexuality, while others want to focus on the lack of
hospitality – at the very least! - the people of Sodom showed to their
visitors. It does refer back to the behavior of the fallen angels who breached
boundaries between heaven and earth through their sexual behavior, since the
phrase “in the same manner as they” cannot refer to the cities around Sodom and
Gomorrah or Sodom and Gomorrah themselves. All of these cities are feminine
nouns in Greek, while “they” is masculine, just like the angels from verse 6. When
we combine this reference to the angels with the claims of “sexual immorality”
and “unnatural lust,” it is obvious that Jude is criticizing the sexual
behavior of Sodom and by extension the sexual behavior of the “intruders” which
was mentioned in verse 4 as
“licentiousness.”
The verb that refers to “sexual immorality” here is
porneuô, a word that appears often in
the New Testament. This is a general word which refers to all manner of sexual
behavior and is not specific in its focus. It is sometimes translated as “adultery”
or “unchastity.”
The phrase “pursued unnatural lust” is translated from the Greek which
literally reads “went after
other flesh”
(
sarkos heteras). There are two ways
to interpret this.
Schreiner
understands this to refer to homosexuality and reads “other flesh” as the
desire for the men in Sodom (451-454).
Kelly,
however, understands “other flesh” as a reference to angelic beings, since
verse 7 is linked back to verse 6, as we saw above, and the fallen angels who
had sex with women (258-259). Why is this connection possible?
It is possible because the visitors in Sodom were
themselves angels (
Genesis
19:1). It is not clear which of these two options is the best possibility
here, for though many ancient Jewish texts criticized homosexuality in Sodom,
they also criticized the inhabitants for arrogance, injustice and lack of care
for the poor. And Kelly has demonstrated a fascinating reading of verse 7which
connects it to Genesis 6:1-4, 1 Enoch and the previous verse 6 in Jude.
The next entry will explore how Jude applies these examples
specifically to the “intruders.”
John W. Martens
