Bible Commentaries
Jude

INTRODUCTION

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS

The Epistle of Jude was written to meet the need of the hour in which it was produced, and this circumstance determined its form and content. It appears to have been originally the inten-tion of the author to write a treatise on the common salvation, (see the comments on Judges 1:3) but an emergency suddenly arose which prompted him to revise his plan and to substitute this brief Epistle. False teachers, deceitful workers appeared on the scene the aim of whom being to seduce the saints and to corrupt the people of God; and the exigency of the situation led the writer to abandon his original plan and to write hurriedly this solemn warning.

These facts account for the vigorous style in which the book is written; this explains the rich and varied vocabulary which it contains. It is denunciatory in nature, severe in tone, and full of warning against those whose evil and ungodly activity was threatening the peace and security of the church. It is an im-passioned effort in which example after example of destruction upon the wicked is produced; charge after charge hurled, and the sternest of warnings issued. The author hurried from one warn-ing to another as if his words were not sufficient to contain the torrent of invective which he felt the occasion demanded. The aroused writer referred to these false teachers as ungodly, las-civious, infidels, murmurers, faultfinders, hypocrites, liars, deceivers and sensualists. He compared them to Cain and Baalam aid Korah, to the cities of the plain and to the fallen angels. Its descriptions of false teachers is sharp, incisive, convincing its exhortations touching, tender, full of warmth; its conclusion sub-lime, beautiful and vivid. The doxology with which it concludes is one of the most beautiful in the New Testament.

The author of the Epistle evidently had a fondness for triple arrangements, and the book is filled with ideas set out in groups of threes. Those whom he addressed are "called, beloved in God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ." (Verse 1.) He wishes for them mercy, peace and love. (Verse 2.) Instances of judg-ment upon the ungodly are the Israelites in the wilderness, the angels who sinned, and the cities of the plain. (Verses 5-7.) The filthy dreamers he mentions are corrupt, rebellious, and railing. (Verses 8-10.) They had walked in the way of Cain, Baalam and Korah. (Verse 11.) They were murmurers, discontented, self-willed; they were church dividers, sensual, without the Spirit. (Verses 16-19.) Those in error were to be regarded in three classes, the first to be dealt with in mercy, the second snatched as it were from the fire, the third pitied. (Verses 22-23.) Saints are to keep themselves in the love of God, pray in the Spirit, and await the mercy of Christ at the last day. (Verse 21.) Glory to God is ascribed before all time, in the present, and throughout eternity. (Verse 24.) Eleven times in twenty-five verses this ar-rangement of triple effect may be discerned, a circumstance un-paralleled in so short a space in any other portion of the sacred writings.

AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE

The author is by the Epistle itself designated as "Jude, a serv-ant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James." The "James" to whom reference is made here was the "James" prominently mentioned in connection with the church in Jerusalem (Acts 15:13; Galatians 1:18; Galatians 2:9), one of the sons of Joseph and Mary, and hence a brother of Jesus in the flesh. (Matthew 13:55; Mark 6:3.) Inas-much as "Jude" was a brother of this "James," he, too, was a fleshly brother of the Lord.

Very little information of a biographical nature is available concerning him. He was not an apostle; he appears to have designedly excluded himself from the ranks of the apostles (verse 17); and from motives of modesty and humility refrained from any mention of his relation to the Lord in the flesh. From the fact that he is mentioned last in Matthew’s list of the sons of Mary and Joseph, and third in Mark’s list, we are led to infer that he was either the youngest, or the next to the youngest of the children--at least of the sons. Along with the rest of his brothers, he was an unbeliever in the deity of Jesus during the Lord’s personal ministry. (John 7:3-8.) That they were with Mary in the upper room in Jerusalem after the ascension, indi-cates that they were convinced of the Lord’s claims by the resur-rection. (Acts 1:14.) Jude was married he appears to have traveled considerably, and to have been accompanied by his wife on his journeys. (1 Corinthians 9:5.)

Eusebius preserves a story which he derived from Hegesippus that in the time of the Roman Emperor Domitian, two grandsons of Jude, Zocer and James, were summoned before the king for examination on the ground that they belonged to the royal line of David and might seek to regain the throne. When he saw that they were poor peasants, that their hands were horny with toil, and that they owned only thirty-nine acres of land he dismissed them with contempt. From the same source, we learn that these men became elders, and lived until the time of Trajan; and that they were greatly honored because of their faithful testimony before the king.

AUTHENTICITY

Along with other New Testament books (e.g., James and 2 Peter), Jude was slow in gaining acceptance by the religionists of the second and third centuries and doubts were expressed by them regarding its right to a place in the sacred canon. But it should be remembered that these men were not inspired; they were without any supernatural direction in determining what should be regarded as canonical and what should not; and they were influenced by theological considerations as are their counterparts today. That it was seldom quoted in the early centuries is due to the fact that it is short; the themes with which it deals are limited; and it would obviously lack the prominence which would characterize a production of Paul or John or Peter.

That it is not without ecclesiastical sanction follows from the fact that Tertullian believed it to be genuine and apostolic ; Clement of Alexandria quoted it as scripture and commented on it Origen accepted it and Didymus of Alexandria wrote a commen-tary on it. The councils of Laodicea, A.D. 360, of Hyppo, A.D., 393, and Carthage, A.D. 397 put it in the canon where it has re-mained ever since. Questions which have since arisen regarding the right of certain books to appear in the canon of scripture have resulted from prepossessions of theologians whose theories were in conflict with the teaching of these books (Luther and the book of James, for example), or rationalists and modernists who seek to destroy what they cannot explain.

The question of apocryphal quotations which it is alleged the book contains is outside our province and purpose here and the reader is referred to more exhaustive works for a consideration of this matter. If it were granted that the writer did indeed quote from them, it does not follow that he endorsed other portions which he did not quote! Paul quoted from three heathen poets, and to one of the quotations added, "This testimony is true," but this does not mean that the whole poem is true. (Acts 17:28; Titus 1:12-13.)

THE PERSONS ADDRESSED

The address, occurring in the outset of the Epistle, is "to them that are called, beloved in God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ." (Judges 1:1.) Being thus without geographical detail, it is not possible to know certainly to whom it was originally sent. In a secondary sense we may be sure that it was the design of the writer to prepare a treatise which would have universal appeal, and be utilized by Christians in all ages and places, though it obviously was written to meet a local need. The churches generally, both in Palestine and in Asia Minor were constantly beset with false teachers during the apostolic age, and much of the New Testament was written to refute the various heresies which arose from time to time. It may be inferred that the readers for whom it was primarily written were of Jewish background from the fact that so many references and examples are cited from the Old Testament; but this is not conclusive evidence, since even Gentile Christians would be interested in, and accept as evidence these writings.

DATE AND PLACE OF WRITING

With reference to neither date nor place is it possible to speak with any degree of assurance, inasmuch as no data exist either in the Epistle, or out of it, from which such information may be derived. From the Jewish under-tones of the Epistle, traditions regarding the residence of Jude and his descendents, and the fact that other members of Joseph’s and Mary’s family resided in Palestine, the supposition is that such was the residence of Jude, and that the Epistle was written from there and per-haps the city of Jerusalem itself. All of which we may be sure is that it was written during the latter half of the first century of the Christian era; and that it has been preserved for us as a pro-duct of inspiration. Neither the date nor the place of writing involves matters of importance to us today.

RESEMBLANCE OF JUDE TO SECOND PETER

There is a close and obvious relation between the Epistles of Jude and Second Peter; and the effort to determine which pre-ceded the other--whether Jude borrowed from Peter or Peter from Jude, or whether both borrowed from a common source --has long occasioned the ingenuinty of commentators, Bible ex-positors and students generally. To those of us who accept both Epistles as inspired productions, the matter is of little consequence. Inasmuch as Peter was an apostle and Jude was not, it seems more likely that Jude would expand the teaching of an apostle than that an apostle would depend on Jude for what he wrote; and an examination of the internal evidence leads plausibly to the con-clusion that Jude followed the apostle. In verses 17. and 18, Jude appears to quote 2 Peter 3:3. Testimony to the apostolic office in the pharaseology of this verse indicates Jude’s knowledge of 2 Peter, and his use of it, a procedure entirely proper in his case, but difficult to believe if reversed. Jude confessed dependence on what the -apostles had taught as ground for the acceptance of matters; whereas, Peter never acknowledged, even in the most indirect fashion dependence on another.

As evidence of the close connection between the two Epistles, it may be noted that both warn of heretics who deny the Lord that bought them (2 Peter 2:1; Judges 1:4); these false teachers, in both instances, were turning the grace of God into lasciviousness (Judges 1:4; 2 Peter 2:2) they had crept into the congregations privily and were doing their work deceptively (2 Peter 2:1; Judges 1:4); their motive was covetousness (Judges 1:11; 2 Peter 2:3; 2 Peter 2:15); in both refer-ences the heretics despised authority, and railed at dignitaries (2 Peter 2:10; Judges 1:8); both writers call attention to the fact that they employed swelling words of vanity (2 Peter 2:18; Judges 1:16); they are described in both Epistles as ignorant, being influenced by neither reason nor the gospel, but acting like brutes (2 Pet. 2 12; Judges 1:10); they are likened to Baalam (2 Peter 2:5; Judges 1:11) ; and to "springs without water," and "clouds carried along by winds" (2 Peter 2:17; Judges 1:12).

From the foregoing instances, and numerous others which might be offered, it seems certain that either Jude or Peter was familiar with, and followed, in some detail, the work of the other, though which it is not possible to pronounce with certainty. Again we would emphasize that it is of little consequence; both are divine productions, both dealt with similar conditions; and it was, therefore, entirely legitimate to follow the same pattern and plan and utilize the same arguments. If the apostles Peter, John and Paul could cite Old Testament prophecy in support of their inspired utterances, what objection could be raised to a New Testament writer citing a prior production for the same reason?

Review of Jude

Brent Kercheville

Structure:

The author of this letter is Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James. As the brother of James, Jude is also one of the four brothers of Jesus that we read about in Matthew 13:55 (Judas). It is interesting that Jude does not make sure that the recipients know he is the brother of Jesus to give himself credibility. Rather, Jude simply calls himself a servant of Jesus Christ, equating himself with all Christians. The recipients seem to be universal in this letter (“to those who are called, who are sanctified [beloved] by God, and preserved in Jesus Christ”). Thus, it would seem that all Christians are in view. Perhaps this is the case. But it seems that Jude is dealing with a particular group of people who are causing problems for the Christians. In verse 2 we read the standard salutation in first century letters: “Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you.”

We would now expect a section of thanksgiving in this letter. However, Jude goes right to the point of the letter in verse 3 telling the recipients about how he wanted to write to them about their common salvation. But Jude cannot write to them about their common salvation because there is a problem. Jude says, “I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” Why did Jude have to change the purpose of his letter from writing about the common salvation they share to writing about contending earnestly for the faith?

Verse 4 reveals the problem: “For certain men whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are godless men, who change the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord” (NIV). Some people have mixed into the number of the Christians who are ungodly men. They have secretly slipped in and are taking the grace of God and perverting it into a license to commit sin. Further, these people are denying that Jesus is the Lord. After our study of First, Second, and Third John it seems reasonable to believe that these people who have crept in unnoticed hold the Gnostic doctrine. Both of these tenets that Jude identifies (committing sins and denying Jesus as the Lord) were problems that the early Christians had to fight against. Therefore Jude must write to the Christians to deal with this problem rather than encourage the Christians about their common salvation.

Description of False Teachers (Judges 1:5-16)

Past Judgment of False Teachers (Judges 1:5-7). In verses 5-7 Jude reminds the recipients about the past judgments that have been laid against false teachers. The first example is Israel in the wilderness. The people were led out of Egypt but those who did not believe perished in the wilderness before entering Canaan. The second example is concerning the angels who did not keep their proper positions. They are kept in darkness, bound in eternal chains for judgment. Unfortunately, this is all the information Jude gives us about angels, but he states this as if it is well known. Rebellious angels will also receive condemnation. The third example is Sodom, Gomorrah, and the other cities of the plain who gave themselves over to sexual immorality and suffered punishment for doing so. The point Jude is making is that these false teachers should not be listen to because their condemnation is clearly seen in the examples of the past.

Present Judgment of False Teachers (Judges 1:8-13). These false teachers that Jude is fighting are destined for the same judgment. They pollute their own bodies with their sexually immoral acts and reject the authority of God. Verse 9 gives us another statement as if it is well-known. Jude points out that Michael the archangel, when disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not make a slanderous remark against Satan, but simply said “The Lord rebuke you!” These false teachers dare to slander all sorts of celestial beings and people, actions the angels would not even take.

Jude pronounces woe upon these false teachers because they have taken the path of destruction like Cain, Balaam, and Korah. Cain offered an improper sacrifice to the Lord which the Lord rejected, leading to Cain killing his brother Abel. Balaam was a prophet for hire, sucked into the sins of covetousness and greed. Balaam also tried to corrupt the Israelites into engaging in sexually immoral acts and idol worship (Numbers 31:16). Korah went up against the leadership of Moses and was consumed by fire.

Jude goes further to point out that these false teachers are blemishes on their love feasts. Much has been argued about the love feasts that Jude refers to, but we must be honest and recognize that we do not know what this is referring to. This may be speaking of the Lord’s Supper. This may be speaking about times when the Christians are gathered together. The love feast is really not the point. The point is that these false teachers are blemishes on their fellowship and worship together. Jude speaks of these supposed followers of God as completely useless. They are shepherds who only feed themselves, rather than the sheep. They are clouds without rain. They are trees without fruit. They are wild, choppy waves. They are completely useless.

Future Judgment of False Teachers (Judges 1:14-16). In the final verses about these false teachers, Jude describes what will happen to these troublers who have secretly slipped in. They are ungodly, committing ungodly acts in ungodly ways. They are grumblers, faultfinders, boastful, and followers of their own desires. They fit the category of wickedness that existed even in the days of Enoch.

What To Do (Judges 1:17-23)

The rest of the letter is an explanation to the recipients on that they are to do because these false teachers have slipped in among the flock.

Remember the apostles’ words (Judges 1:17-19). The apostles foretold of these times when there would be scoffers trying to distort the truth and follow after their own error. They do not have God, but are merely divisive. Be discerning in what is being taught. This is an important lesson for us today as well. People do not come in with the words “false teacher” imprinted on their foreheads. But there will be people who claim to be Christians who are actually very divisive people. There are people who will be in our number who are more interested in following their own desires. We must make sure that we are not or do not become one of those kinds of people. We want to be self-controlled and humble. We want to be people who are seeking out the glory of God and not the glory of men. We also need to remain on watch for people who try to destroy harmony and cause division.

Build yourselves up in the most holy faith (Judges 1:20). Get strong in the word. Be strong in the faith. Jude calls for the Christians to build up their faith. Get to know God’s word better. Know the words of the apostles. We have to be knowledgeable enough in the scriptures so that we can recognize error. The secret service’s primary role is to fight against people who counterfeit our currency. They train by knowing the currency. They do not study the counterfeit currency. They study the true currency so that they will be able to spot the counterfeit quickly and easily. This is the way that we will be able to identify error. We must know the word of God and our build ourselves up in the most holy faith so that when something is taught or said that is not in the scriptures, we will quickly recognize it.

Pray in the Holy Spirit (Judges 1:20). Paul also commanded Christians to pray in the Spirit in Ephesians 6:18. I do not believe that this is referring to using their spiritual gifts in prayer to discern the doctrine of these false teachers (though it is possible). But, I believe the Christians are being told to pray according to the will of God and not according to our own lusts and desires. We need to pray for spiritual growth. We need to pray for spiritual strength. To pray in the Spirit is to tune our hearts to the will of God and not to pray in a selfish way.

The Expositors Bible Commentary says this about praying in the Holy Spirit: “Because all believers have the Spirit, they are to pray according to the Spirit’s will (set forth in the written Word and made known by inner promptings) to accomplish God’s work by God’s power.” The key phrase I want to examine is “made known by inner promptings.” Here is Jude talking about knowing the scriptures so that we can avoid false doctrine. Where in the scriptures do we read about Christians have inner promptings coming from the Holy Spirit? Where do the scriptures command us to listen to our hearts for the Holy Spirit to prompt us to do something? Do not the scriptures teach us to not listen to our hearts, to not listen to our minds, and not listen to our desires! We are supposed to listen to the scriptures! How is a person supposed to determine the difference between temptation and the Holy Spirit’s “inner promptings?” This is a popular yet dangerous teaching which tells people they are obeying God by listening for the Holy Spirit’s inner promptings. This doctrine is not found in the scriptures.

Keep in God’s love (Judges 1:21-23). Finally, Jude instructs the Christians to keep themselves in the love of God. How do we remain in God’s love? I think the context is clear as well as Jesus’ words: “If you obey My commands, you will remain in My love, just as I have obeyed My Father’s commands and remain in His love” (John 15:10). Part of the Lord’s command is that we love one another and look out for them. “Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.” In the midst of a scathing condemnation for these false teachers, Jude reminds us to maintain balance and try to save those who have fallen into this error. Our role and our goal is to snatch people from the fire and save them through the grace of God.

Conclusion: (Judges 1:24-25)

Rather than have a closing and a greeting as most first century letter had, Jude concludes with a blessing and prayer to God on behalf on the recipients. Jude’s prayer is that the saints do not fall but are presented before God without fault and with great joy.

Introduction to Jude

David Hersey

In the opening verse of Jude, the author identified himself as, "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James". We know this Jude is not one of the apostles from verse 17 where he wrote, "But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ". This Jude affirmed himself to be the brother of James. This brother of Jude cannot be the apostle we know as James because his only brother was the apostle John, both of whom were identified in scripture as the sons of Zebedee and also as the "sons of thunder" (Mark 3:17). There is never a reference either in scripture or non-biblical historical writings of any son of Zebedee named Jude or Judas.

There was another James mentioned in scripture who was not an apostle who did have a brother named Judas. In Matthew 13:55 we see a listing of the brothers of Jesus Christ, "Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas?" The name "Judas" is identical to the name "Jude" as used in the title of this epistle.

James, the Lord’s brother was not an apostle, in fact he was not even a believer in Jesus as the Messiah at first as indicated in John 7:5 "For even His brothers did not believe in Him." James, the brother of Jude later grew to be a prominent figure within the 1st century church as evidenced in Galatians 2:9-12 and Acts 15:13. James, the brother of John had been slain by Herod prior to these events as recorded in Acts 12:2 so we know the James spoken of with such prominence in Acts 15 and Galatians was James the brother of Jesus. Having grown in the faith to such distinction, the readers of Jude’s letter, who knew the Apostle James had been executed would associate this letter with James the brother of Jesus upon hearing the connection. Jude effectively identified himself to his readers when he wrote that he was the brother of James.

So being a brother to James who was the brother of Jesus, we know that the Jude who wrote the epistle which bears his name was in fact one of the brothers of Jesus, the sons of Mary and Joseph. There is a lot of speculation among the historians and commentators as to why Jude chose not to identify himself as the brother of Jesus.

It is important to keep in mind that the brothers of Jesus were not at first believers in Him as the Christ. Upon one occasion when Jesus was teaching to the multitudes, his family had come seeking to speak with him. This account is found in Matthew 12:46-50, Mark 3:31-35 and Luke 8:19-21. Upon hearing that His family sought to speak with Him, Jesus made replied, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" And He [Jesus], stretched out His hand toward His disciples and said, "Here are My mother and My brothers! For whoever does the will of My Father in heaven is My brother and sister and mother" (Matthew 12:48-50). Jude and James were both aware that servants of Jesus Christ held a higher place of distinction with Him than his own biological family. Thus by identifying himself as a servant of Christ, Jude appealed more to that noble distinction than he did to his own kinship with Jesus. In his mind, it was preferable to be recognized as a servant of Jesus than it was as His fleshly brother. By doing this, he effectively showed humility and piety in that scripture plainly teaches that no Christian is to ever elevate himself in stature to be more than his brethren. To have claimed kinship with Jesus would have served no purpose other than to set himself up as somebody of importance when there is no greater station in life than that of a bond-servant of Jesus Christ.

Another reason not to identify oneself as the brother of Jesus was the danger to oneself and to their readership in the perilous times which surrounded the 1st century church. It was dangerous in the 1st century to be a Christian. And to identify oneself as a brother of Jesus Christ would not only put the author in great danger, but also those who might be found with a copy of a letter written by him. There is an account in the writings of Eusebius that detail two grandsons of Jude who were taken before emperor Domitian on suspicion of an insurrection by the Jews. Being of the lineage of king David, it was feared that Jude’s grandsons could be the leaders of just such a rebellion against the empire. It was not conducive to a long life in the paganistic 1st century Roman Empire to be identified as a blood relative to Jesus Christ.

James the apostle being formerly slain by Herod, left James, the brother of Jesus who had grown to be such a prominent figure in the church that no further introduction other than "Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James" was necessary. James, the brother of Jesus was reputed among the Christians of the first century as a "pillar" in the church (Galatians 2:9). Jude’s readership knew exactly who he was without any further identification.

This leaves us with two books of our New Testament written by half brothers of our Lord. This is even more significant given the fact that none of our Lord’s brothers believed in Him at first. These men knew intimate details of the life of Jesus that nobody else could know. If Jesus were some kind of imposter, there is no way he could have fooled someone he grew up with. Jesus was said to be completely without sin (2 Corinthians 5:21, Hebrews 4:15; Hebrews 7:26; Hebrews 9:28, 1 John 3:5). If at any time during the childhoods of the children of Joseph and Mary that Jesus would have in any way sinned, there is no way His siblings would have known this. One cannot spend that much time in the company of someone else and not have their character scrutinized to the degree that it must have been and come out of it sinless in reputation unless they were indeed sinless. The fact that any of Jesus’ brothers converted to Christianity is compelling evidence in favor of the authenticity of Jesus Christ as the Messiah and we have in our possession two epistles written by them.

While we are on the subject of the brothers of Jesus Christ, we should give attention to the doctrine of the ’Perpetual virginity of Mary’. This doctrine is part of the teaching of Catholicism and Eastern and Oriental Orthodoxy, and Anglo-Catholics as expressed in their liturgies, in which they repeatedly refer to Mary as ’ever virgin’.According to this teaching, Jesus was the only biological son of Mary.

This doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary is one element in the well-established theology known as Mariology. The virginity of Mary at the time of her conception of Jesus is a key topic in Roman Catholic Marian art, usually represented as the annunciation to Mary by the Archangel Gabriel that she would virginally conceive a child to be born the Son of God. Frescos depicting this scene have appeared in Roman Catholic Marian churches for centuries.Mary’s virginity even after her conception of Jesus is regularly represented in the art of both the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox as well as in early Western religious art.

Four New Testament passages contradict the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary. Matthew 1:24-25 says of Joseph and Mary "... When Joseph woke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him: he took his wife, but knew her not until she had given birth to a son..." Matthew 13:55-56 says of Jesus "... aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren’t all his sisters with us?", demonstrating by inspiration that Jesus had siblings. Mark 3:31-35 records an event that occurred while Jesus was preaching: "... And his mother and his brothers came, and standing outside they sent to him and called him. And a crowd was sitting around him, and they said to him, ’Your mother and your brothers are outside, seeking you.’" While affirming the right of disciples to be supported by the church if necessary, Paul affirmed that Jesus had brothers in 1 Corinthians 9:5-6, when he wrote, "Do we have no right to take along a believing wife, as do also the other apostles, the brothers of the Lord, and Cephas?"

Based on the teachings of the inspired record and historical evidence, we reject the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary and we recognize Jude, the brother of James as being one of four brothers of our Lord and savior, all children of Mary and her husband, Joseph.

Being a son of Joseph, we can draw some conclusions about the kind of person Jude was. Joseph was a carpenter and we learn from Mark 6:3 that Jesus was referred to by those who knew Him as a carpenter as well. From this we can assume that all of the sons of Joseph would have been trained in this craft as part of their upbringing. No doubt they were all required to work with their father in his craft as they grew up. Joseph was described in scripture as a "just" man when his espoused wife was found to be with child and he chose not to make a public spectacle of her. Being called a "just" man meant that he was a pious man who lived in accordance with the law of Moses. Having been instructed by an angel that Mary had not been unfaithful to him, he made the decision to allow Mary to remain a virgin until after Jesus was born. Joseph was obviously a man of God and coupled with the fact that two of his natural sons grew up to be inspired writers of scripture, we can reasonably infer that the whole house of Joseph lived and worshipped as faithful children of God. Jude would have been as well versed in the writings of the old testament as anyone in the family. Jesus certainly demonstrated His familiarity with the old testament writings on the occasion when he talked with the doctors of the law in the temple. It is obvious that this family, though poor carpenters of the working class, were required by the head of the household to be familiar with scripture and the law of Moses. Jude had good parents and grew up to be a well known enough member of the Lord’s church that an epistle written by his hand is included in the inspired record.

Being of the working class, Jude probably never received any formal training such as a doctor of the law would have. Jude was simple of speech and phrased his thoughts in direct and frank terms, easy to understand and to the point. He demonstrates his love for his Christian brethren in his epistle when he refers to them as "beloved" three times in his epistle (Judges 1:3; Judges 1:17; Judges 1:20). And on the opposite side, he clearly communicates his disdain for ungodly men and pronounces the condemnation of God upon them in the harshest of terms possible for a man of God. There is no room for speculation as to the feelings of Jude towards those who would lead his "beloved" brethren away from Christ and down the road to destruction.

There is no shortage of disagreement over the date of Jude. The best evidence we have puts the date of authorship in the latter half of the first century. Looking at Judges 1:17-19, we see that the writer appeals to the words spoken by the apostles in a way that looks back on them as to a former age. In Judges 1:3 we see, concerning the faith, as being "once delivered" demonstrating that at the time of this writing, "the faith" had been completely delivered and recorded. Jude points to prophecies regarding heretics by the apostles and affirms that these predictions have indeed been fulfilled. The entire book takes on a general feeling of looking back to a former time, therefore it is entirely possible that this book could be one of the latest written works we have. It is entirely possible, given the evidence at hand that this book could have been written after the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

While no conclusive evidence exists as to the exact date, it is of little importance in the grand scheme of things. Whenever the book was written, it has an application to any who would pervert the doctrine of Christ. Given the current state of religion today with all the division and denominationalism, Jude may very well be one of the most relevant books we have today. One cannot conduct a through and honest study of this epistle without taking a critical look at the myriad array of denominations among those professing Christ as savior and come away from such a study without any misgivings towards division in the body of Christ. Let those who would pervert the gospel of Christ and teach the doctrines and commandments of men instead, beware. Jude’s condemnation for such behavior leaves no room for speculation as to the fate facing those who would depart from the truth and teach doctrine in opposition to that which was once for all time delivered.

The intended audience of this epistle according to Judges 1:1 is to all Christians. Jude did not target a specific group in his introduction such as Jews or any one congregation or individual. It was a common practice for the epistles to be copied and distributed among all the churches. Such would have been the case here and obviously was in view of the fact that it was preserved and included in the inspired record of scripture we have today. The purpose for this epistle is very simple. It is stated early in the letter with urgency that there were those who having apostatized from the faith, were leading others down the road to destruction with them. Jude is a letter of warning, with application to all Christians of all ages, against apostasy and following after its destructive effects.

Any study of Jude should include a parallel study of 2 Peter 2. Peter prophecies of a group of apostates who will come in secretly and lure many away from the truth and who will suffer eternal condemnation. Jude identifies a group of apostates who did that very thing and used many of the same examples that Peter did in illustrating these people and the characteristics which would help in identifying them. One cannot help but be impressed by the similarity and draw a conclusion that Jude was identifying and condemning those who Peter forewarned his readership of.

There are a number of false doctrines in existence today. When one looks out over the array of denominations, many having their own so called interpretation of the truth, it is hard to accept the notion that they can all be correct. Anybody with any kind of serious approach whatsoever to their soul’s eternal wellbeing must at some point in their life behold all the religious diversity and reflect on the state of their own soul. There are various slants on Biblical truth, but one the most prevalent which helps gives rise to all the rest is the doctrine of salvation by faith alone. When one believes one is saved by faith alone, then the necessity of attention to correctness in other matters is of secondary importance. Advocates of this doctrine, believing that salvation is obtained by faith alone, feel the freedom to exercise their own wants and wishes into their religious service. Such supposed freedom has opened the door to all kinds of religious diversity. Those claiming Christ feel they can window shop for a "church" that suits their personal taste with no ill consequences because they feel their salvation is secure in their faith alone.

The book of James, in particular chapter 2, presents some serious hurdles for this doctrine. One cannot accept James chapter 2 at face value and hold in any way to the doctrine of Salvation by faith alone. This doctrine is here mentioned because Jude is all about those who would apostatize from God’s truth and James was one book written to combat the beliefs of a group of apostate Christians who, wrongly believing that one is saved by the merits of God’s grace alone, had crept into the church bringing this unholy doctrine with them. They used this perversion to justify all kinds of illicit sexual behavior and to even promote it.

Another doctrine which has arisen through the centuries is the doctrine of ’Once Saved, Always Saved’. This doctrine teaches that once one is saved, there is nothing they can do which will cause them to so sin so as to lose their salvation. Proponents of this doctrine have some serious hurdles to overcome with the book of Jude which is all about apostatizing Christians. Jude contains words of condemnation for those who do pervert the truth of God’s word and likewise for those who would follow their unholy teachings. If the possibility of apostasy did not exist, then Jude, as well as 2 Peter chapter 2, would be an altogether unnecessary inclusion in God’s word. Like James chapter 2, there is no way one could take the book of Jude at face value and continue to believe in the specific doctrine it is intended to condemn.