1. Please note that in general, when the authors discuss words in the original biblical languages, the series uses a general rather than a scholarly method of transliteration.
1. See, e.g., Carroll D. Osburn, “Discourse Analysis and Jewish Apocalyptic in the Epistle of Jude,” 311 (Note: all works without bibliographical data are listed in the Annotated Bibliography).
2. J. A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (London: SCM, 1976), 193–99; R. Riesner, “Der Zweite Petrus-Brief und die Eschatologie,” in Zukunftserwartung in Biblischer Sicht: Beiträge zur Eschatologie, ed. Gerhard Maier (Giessen: Brunnen, 1984), 130–31.
3. See the detailed comparisons in Duane F. Watson, Invention, Arrangement, and Style: Rhetorical Criticism of Jude and 2 Peter, 163–87.
4. Other reasons for thinking that 2 Peter borrowed from Jude are: (1) Peter’s failure to include the references to noncanonical books found in Jude suggest that it was written later, when the church has a stronger “canon consciousness”; (2) Jude’s tight structure makes it likely that it was freely composed rather than based on another document; and (3) the false teaching combated in 2 Peter is probably later than that combated in Jude. For these arguments, see esp. Werner Georg Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament (rev. ed.; London: SCM, 1975), 430–31; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 141–43.
5. Michael Green (The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 50–55) provides a solid defense of this option.
6. For this view, see especially Theodor Zahn, Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1953; reprint), 2.238–55; Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 216–24. See also Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1990), 924.
7. Two of the problems with the identification are: (1) Jude refers to “apostles” (plural); and (2) the scoffers in 2 Peter are questioning the return of Christ, an issue not clearly present in Jude. But Jude may be using the Peter text as a convenient summary of apostolic teaching generally; and Jude may also be referring to people who mocked the idea of future judgment.
8. This is also the implication of Jude 5–6, where Jude argues that the false teachers will share the fate of the Old Testament people of God who rebelled after being delivered at the Exodus and “the angels who did not keep their positions of authority” (Jude 6).
9. See esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 154–57.
10. Among those who make the identification are Kümmel, Introduction to the New Testament, 426, 432; Ernst Käsemann, “An Apologia for Primitive Christian Eschatology,” in Essays on New Testament Themes (London: SCM, 1964), 171–72.
11. It is for this reason that a few scholars think that Peter and Jude might be combating “incipient gnosticism” (cf. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 227–31). This is possible.
12. See the references to the “Nicolaitans” at the church of Ephesus and Pergamum (Rev. 2:6, 15) and the followers of the teaching of Balaam in the church at Pergamum (2:14–15).
13. The “Cephas” in these verses is a transliteration of the Aramaic word for “rock” and is thus equivalent to “Peter” (Gk. petros).
14. Peter sends greetings from “she who is in Babylon” (1 Peter 5:13), probably a reference to the church in Rome.
15. See Eusebius, The History of the Church 2.25.8
16. Irenaeus, Against the Heretics 3.1.1.
17. See 1 Clement 5–6; cf. Tacitus, Ann. 15.44.
18. This tradition is found in the apocryphal book, The Acts of Peter. On Peter’s life and death, see R. P. Martin, “Peter,” in The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. G. W. Bromiley (4 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979–88), 3.802–7.
19. For these points, see especially Kümmel, Introduction, 430–33; Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, cxv–cxlv; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 158–62; Käsemann, “Apologia,” 169–77.
20. In a recent monograph David Meade has suggested a different perspective on this issue. He claims that references to people like Peter at the beginning of many books were not intended to be a claim to authorship, but were only a claim that the book carried on the tradition associated with that name (David G. Meade, Pseudonymity and Canon: An Investigation Into the Relationship of Authorship and Authority in Jewish and Earliest Christian Tradition, WUNT 39 [Tübingen: Mohr, 1986]). But it is manifestly the case that, at least with respect to letters (both biblical and nonbiblical), the name in the salutation was intended as a claim to authorship.
21. L. R. Donelson, Pseudepigraphy and Ethical Argument in the Pastoral Epistles, HUT 22 (Tübingen: Mohr-Siebeck, 1986), 11. We have good reason to think that the early Christians also condemned any kind of book that was pseudonymous; Green notes the strong reaction against The Gospel of Peter and The Acts of Paul and Thecla (see The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 32).
22. The connection between authorship and canonicity is the burden of the article by Stanley E. Porter, “Pauline Authorship and the Pastoral Epistles: Implications for Canon,” BBR 5 (1995): 105–23.
23. For a thorough rehearsal of these arguments, see Guthrie, Introduction, 805–42; Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 199–247.
24. The best biblical example of such a “testament” is Jacob’s address of his sons in Gen. 49:1–28. Several Jewish books during the intertestamental period used the same form, most notably The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.
25. Peter wrote his first letter from Rome (= “Babylon” in 1 Peter 5:12) shortly before this; and we know that he was martyred in Rome.
26. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 288–89. Scholars who think 2 Peter is pseudonymous also usually think the reference is to 1 Peter, the unknown author thereby lending a further note of authenticity to his production (see, e.g., Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 229).
27. See, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 123–24.
28. E.g., Zahn, Introduction, 2.194–209.
29. At least three other men named James appear in the New Testament: (1) James, the son of Zebedee, one of the Twelve (Mark 1:19, etc.); (2) James, the son of Alphaeus, another member of the Twelve (Mark 3:18 and parallels); and (3) James, the father of Judas (Luke 6:16). See, for discussion, Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James, TNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 19–20.
30. See Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 318; see also the discussion in Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 23–24.
31. Many scholars (e.g.,Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 233–34) think that Jude is pseudonymous, that is, that it was written by someone in the name of Jude. They argue that the historical setting of the letter makes it impossible to put it early enough for a brother of the Lord to have written it. But this objection, as we will see, is unfounded. And the idea that ancient authors would have written letters in the name of someone else has serious difficulties (see the discussion above, in the section on the author of 2 Peter).
Some Christians in the early church had problems with the idea that Jesus may have had brothers—particularly as the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary developed. The church father Jerome and others therefore suggested that James, Jude, and the others were not brothers of Jesus but cousins (this came to be known as the “Hieronymian” view). Still others thought that Jesus’ brothers may have been sons of Joseph and a wife before Mary (the “Epiphanian” view). But (1) the Greek word translated “brother” almost always means just that; and (2) no doctrinal problem exists with the notion that Joseph and Mary had other children after Jesus. The simplest explanation, therefore, is the “Helvidian”: James, Jude, and the others had the same “human” parents as Jesus: Joseph and Mary.
32. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 16.
1. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 248–49.
2. Ibid., 249.
3. See, for instance, Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 81. Those who think that 2 Peter is pseudonymous often argue that the author is comparing the faith of the original first-generation Christians and that of a later generation (see Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 296–97).
4. Along with, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 60; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 168.
5. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 296.
6. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 60; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 297; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 168.
7. See Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 327–28; Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 81.
8. See especially Murray J. Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992). The book offers convincing exegetical evidence that the New Testament authors call Jesus “God.”
9. The NIV translates “had no sin,” but the Greek verb is ginosko, “know.”
1. The Greek text of v. 3 begins with a conjunction, hos (“as”), which does not normally introduce a new paragraph. Some commentators therefore think that vv. 3–4 should be attached to vv. 1–2, with v. 5 initiating a new paragraph (Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 83).
2. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 300.
3. See, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 62–63; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 177.
4. The translation is my own, reflecting, I think, a more accurate interpretation of the verse than is suggested by the NIV rendering, which links “with power” with the verb “declared.”
5. Many commentators (e.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 177) think that the “divine power” is Jesus’ rather than God the Father’s.
6. E.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 300–301.
7. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 85; Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 253–54; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 178.
8. I agree, therefore, with Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 87; Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 255; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 64.
9. See, e.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 183.
10. See Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 88.
11. For further discussion on the idea of participating in the divine nature, see the “Bridging Contexts” and “Contemporary Significance” sections.
12. See also Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 185.
13. It is worth noting that the Greek word for “knowledge” here is gnosis, whereas Peter has used the compound form epignosis in vv. 2 and 3. While not clearly the case everywhere in the New Testament, Peter probably sees a distinction between them (see Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 186).
14. See especially Aristotle’s description of the self-control (enkrateia) in his Nicomachean Ethics 7.1–11. Philo, the Jewish Greek-influenced philosopher, also made a great deal of self-control. See, in general, W. Grundmann, “ἐγκράτεια, κτλ.,” TDNT, 2.339–42.
15. See, for instance, Richard C. Trench, Synonyms of the New Testament (reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1953), 41–44.
16. See, e.g., D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), 676–77.
17. See Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 93.
18. See Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 72–73. The verb occurs only here in the Greek Bible.
19. E.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 87.
20. Ibid., 87.
21. See also Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 73.
22. The relationship is especially clear in Greek, since a form of the word spoude is used in both places.
23. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 74.
24. The full title is Dave Barry Slept Here: A Sort of History of the United States (New York: Ballantine, 1989). Why my children would have given me such a frivolous book is another matter!
25. Extrabiblical examples occur in the intertestamental book Wisdom 6:17–20; the early Christian book Shepherd of Hermas, Mandates 5.2.4 and Visions 3.8.7; and the rabbinic Mishnaic tractate Sotah 9:5.
26. Allegorical Interpretation 1.38 (vol. 1 of Philo from the Loeb Classical Library, trans. F. H. Colson and G. H. Whitaker [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1949]).
27. See his book Peace Child (Glendale, Calif.: Gospel Light, 1974).
28. The Greek here, in fact, uses a noun rather than a verb: We are “participants,” “sharers in” (koinonoi) the divine nature.
29. See the “Original Meaning” section.
30. Richard J. Foster, “Becoming Like Christ: What Is Supposed to Happen in the Christian Life,” Christianity Today (Feb. 5, 1996), 28.
1. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 195.
2. The Greek construction uses the future tense of mello with the infinitive hypomimneskein—literally, “I am about to remind.” A few commentators think that the construction might indicate preparedness (cf. ASV: “I shall be ready to …”), but this is unlikely (see ibid., 195).
3. The Greek word occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only in Acts 7:56, where it has a literal significance, referring to the desert “tabernacle” of the Israelites.
4. A few commentators (e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 79) think that the Greek word tachine might mean “sudden” rather than “soon” (as the NIV translates). But this is unlikely.
5. “Stretching out the hands” probably refers to the custom whereby condemned prisoners were forced to carry the horizontal piece of the cross to the place of execution (see D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991], 679).
6. Mayor (The Epistle of St. Jude and Second Epistle of St. Peter, 101–2) therefore thinks that Peter refers to an unknown saying.
7. See, on this, Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 199.
8. “Departure” translates the Greek word exodos, which Luke uses to describe Jesus’ death in his Transfiguration narrative (Luke 9:31). Since Peter goes on in this context to describe the Transfiguration, some think that he alludes to this text. But quite apart from the problem of dating, the word is too common to make the allusion probable (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 202).
9. The quotation is from Thoreau’s Journal, August 30, 1856. Schama’s book was published by Alfred A. Knopf (New York) in 1995.
10. See the brief survey in Murray J. Harris, From Grave to Glory: Resurrection in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990), 36–40.
11. The text usually thought to teach this view is 2 Cor. 5:1–10.
1. Jerome Neyrey has suggested that Epicurean philosophy may lie, at least indirectly, behind the eschatological skepticism in 2 Peter (see 2 Peter, Jude, 122–28).
2. See, e.g., Calvin, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 338.
3. Josephus, Antiquities 3.80.
4. See the survey of usage in A. Oepke, “παρουσία,” TDNT, 5.858–71.
5. See Philo, On the Account of the World’s Creation Given by Moses 1; Josephus, Antiquities 1.22.
6. See the discussion in Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 215–16.
7. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 319.
8. The NIV of the portions that Matthew and 2 Peter have in common is identical; in the Greek, however, there are several minor differences.
9. On the “Son of God” title in the New Testament, see especially I. Howard Marshall, The Origins of New Testament Christology (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1976), 111–25; and Martin Hengel, The Son of God (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976).
10. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 85.
11. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 221.
12. See Jerome Neyrey, “The Apologetic Use of the Transfiguration in 2 Peter 1:16–21,” CBQ 42 (1980): 509–14.
13. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 224–25.
14. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 179.
15. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 268.
16. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 323.
17. Admittedly, the past tense in the NIV rendering (“came about”) is a bit questionable. The Greek verb is in the present tense; and while Greek verbal tenses do not always indicate the time of an action, it is somewhat unusual to translate a Greek present indicative with an English past tense. But the choice of text does not significantly affect the meaning here.
18. Excellent detailed defenses of this interpretation can be found in Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 81–91; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 230–31.
19. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 112–14, 196–98.
20. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 269–70.
21. The Greek version is Aquila; for a summary of the evidence, see J. T. Curran, “The Teaching of 2 Peter I.20,” TS 4 (1943): 351–52.
22. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 270; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 325.
23. The words are from the late fourth-century theologian Epiphanius (Panarion 30.1.5).
24. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 91.
25. On the significance of the Transfiguration, see especially Walter L. Liefeld, “Theological Motifs in the Transfiguration Narrative,” in New Dimensions in New Testament Study, ed. Richard N. Longenecker and Merrill C. Tenney (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1974), 162–79.
26. Similar references are found in Isa. 11:11; 13:6, 9; 22:5; 34:8; Jer. 46:10; Ezek. 7:10; 13:5; 30:3; Amos 5:18–20; Obad. 15; Zeph. 1:7, 8, 14–18; Zech. 14:1.
27. On the “day of the Lord” in the Old Testament, see Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward an Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1978), 186–91.
28. In fact, the New Testament uses eighteen different variations of this basic expression.
29. It is possible, though less likely, that Peter is accusing the false teachers of basing their own deviant ideas on myths.
30. Aristotle, Metaph. 11.8.
31. David Fredrich Strauss was the key figure here; see his The Life of Jesus Critically Examined (London: SCM, 1973; the German original was published in 1835–36).
32. The Greek word here, theopneustos, has sometimes been taken in an active sense: Scripture as “breathing” out God’s own words. But the passive meaning is to be preferred: Scripture is the product of God having breathed into it. Similarly, some would view the word as an attributive adjective: “All God-breathed Scripture is….” But the predicative function of the adjective, reflected in the NIV translation, is better. On these issues, see, e.g., George W. Knight III, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, NIGTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992), 446–47.
33. E.g., Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology (3 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 2.210; Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994), 75.
34. See Migne, Patrologia Latine 75.517.
35. Paul K. Jewett, Man as Male and Female (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975), 112–47.
36. Frank Morrison, Who Moved the Stone? (London: Faber, 1930); J. N. D. Anderson, The Evidence for the Resurrection (London: InterVarsity, 1950).
37. See, for instance, John Frame, The Doctrine of the Knowledge of God (Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed, 1987).
1. Bauckham Jude, 2 Peter, 238.
2. Ibid.
3. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 93.
4. The Greek verb in 2 Peter is pareisago, while Paul uses an adjective (pareisaktos). The words do not always connote a secretive “bringing in,” but probably do in both these contexts (see BAGD).
5. See, e.g., Calvin, Hebrews and 1 & 2 Peter, 316.
6. Josephus uses the Greek word Peter uses here (plastos) to refer to “forgeries” (Life 177, 337).
7. For a brief, clear defense of this view of the Olivet Discourse, see D. A. Carson, “Matthew,” EBC, ed. F. Gaebelein (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984), 8:488–95.
8. F. Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: Univ. of Minnesota Press, 1984).
9. Kevin J. Vanhoozer, “Exploring the World; Following the Word: The Credibility of Evangelical Theology in an Incredulous Age,” TrinJ 16 (1995): 7.
10. David F. Wells, No Place for Truth; or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 173.
1. E.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 245, who notes the shift from the future tenses of vv. 1–3a to the present tenses in v. 3b. See also Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 196.
2. E.g., Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 348.
3. Many scholars doubt that Peter is referring to this tradition here (see esp. Wayne Grudem, The First Epistle of Peter: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988], 157–62, 203–39). But we think that the case in favor of this interpretation is strong (see, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 152–57; J. Ramsay Michaels, 1 Peter, WBC [Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988], 205–11).
4. For further discussion of Peter’s use of Jewish traditions in this paragraph, see the “Bridging Contexts” section.
5. “Tartarus” does appear as a name for hell in the Septuagint (Job 40:20; 41:24; Prov. 30:16) and in a few Jewish writings (1 Enoch 20:2; Sibylline Oracles 4.186; Philo, Moses 2.433; Rewards and Punishments 152). This is another example of Peter’s penchant for using Hellenistic terminology (see the “Bridging Contexts” section of 1:3–11).
6. The phrase “ancient world” may suggest that Peter is thinking here of a universal flood that submerged the entire globe. But in the latter part of the verse, Peter uses the word we translate “world” again (kosmos), but this time he qualifies it as “the world of ungodly people” (NIV does not translate this second kosmos). As often in the Bible, “world” refers to human beings rather than to the earth itself. Whether the Flood was universal or not is a matter that will have to be decided on the basis of other texts.
7. See, for example, Josephus, Antiquities 1.74; Sibylline Oracles 1.148–98, esp. 1.129, and others.
8. Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 379.
9. Philo, Moses 2.56 (quoted from Philo, vol. 6, ed. F. H. Colson, LCL [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1935], 477).
10. Greek dikaios. See especially Wisdom 10:6; 19:17. In other Jewish traditions, however, Lot is portrayed as a notorious sinner.
11. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 277; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 335.
12. See, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 102; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 253.
13. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 253.
14. The ambiguity in the Greek lies in the participle kolazomenous, “being punished,” which modifies terein, “to keep.” The NIV understands the participle to be denoting action taking place at the same time as the verb it modifies: “keep while punishing.” The KJV, however, assumes that the participle has a future reference: “keep to be punished.“
15. E.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 254; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 103.
16. For this interpretation, see also Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 324.
17. The NIV often translates the Greek word sarx, “flesh,” with “sinful nature.” This may be a somewhat helpful paraphrase in some places. But here the rendering misses the specific sexual associations that the word “flesh” would better convey in English.
18. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 103.
19. The word Peter uses (kyriotes) may support this view. It is rare, occurring only four times in the New Testament: here, in Jude 8 (which is closely parallel), and twice in Paul, where it refers to angelic beings (Eph. 1:21; Col. 1:16). See Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 127.
20. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 103–4.
21. See TEV, “those … who despise God’s authority”; NJB, “those … who have no respect for the Lord’s authority.” For commentators, see, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 279; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 336; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 255.
22. A brief, though seminal, introduction to this approach can be found in Richard B. Hays, Echoes of Scripture in the Letters of Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 14–33.
23. See 9:6–9; 10:7–15; 12:4–6; 13:1–2; 14:4–7; 15:3–7; 16:3; 19:1; 54:7–55:2; 64:1–69:25. Other intertestamental writings that refer to this tradition are: Jubilees 5:1; 10:1–6; Josephus, Antiquities 1.73; Philo, On the Giants 6; Questions on Genesis 1.92; see also the Damascus Document (CD) 2:18. The quotation from 1 Enoch comes from James H. Charlesworth, ed., The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 15.
24. See, e.g., C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch (3 vols. in one; reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, n.d.), 127–34.
25. See, e.g., Claus Westermann, Genesis I-II: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1984), 371–72.
26. See G. J. Wenham, “Genesis,” in The New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition, ed. D. A. Carson, R. T. France, J. A. Motyer, and G. J. Wenham (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1994), 65. Wenham goes on to suggest that the text may refer to sacred prostitution.
27. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 100.
28. The Greek preposition Peter uses in v. 9 is ek, which often has the meaning “out from the midst of.”
29. See, e.g., Kenneth Copeland, The Laws of Prosperity (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Publications, 1974); idem, Prosperity: The Choice Is Yours (Fort Worth: Kenneth Copeland Publications, 1992); Kenneth E. Hagin, Obedience in Finances (Tulsa: RHEMA Bible Church, 1983).
30. J. I. Packer, God’s Words: Studies of Key Bible Themes (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1981), 85–86.
31. Chicago Tribune, June 7, 1996, sec. 1, p. 1.
32. See especially Robert N. Bellah, et al., Habits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1985).
1. The phrase is Bauckham’s (Jude, 2 Peter, 262).
2. The syntax here would also allow the translation “they do not stand in awe of angels, blaspheming”; see TEV: they “show no respect for the glorious beings above; instead, they insult them.”
3. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 279–80; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 104–5. Calvin (Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 351) thought that civil leaders might be meant.
4. The main problem with this view is linguistic: The Old Testament never calls angels “glories.” But some Jewish texts link angels with glory (see, e.g., Ex. 15:11 in the Septuagint; Philo, Special Laws 1.45; Testament of Levi 18:5; Testament of Judah 25:2; see the survey in “δόξα,” TDNT, 2.251). And we have a few texts that use the term to denote angels (1QH 10:8; 2 Enoch 22:7, 10; Ascension of Isaiah 9:32).
5. J. Neyrey is an exception among recent commentators. He thinks that “the glorious ones” are good angels (Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 213–14); and Mayor thought that angels of any kind were intended (Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 129).
6. For more detail on this tradition, see the commentary on Jude 9.
7. See, e.g., William Barclay, The Letters of James and Peter (Edinburgh: Saint Andrew, 1958), 390.
8. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 262.
9. For a different opinion, see Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 108, who thinks that the blasphemy here is directed against Christian morality.
10. The construction here would then be a cognate dative (also called “Semitic,” because it is common in Hebrew and Aramaic); see Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 108.
11. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 264.
12. See also Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 131; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 339.
13. The Greek word zoa, “animals,” is the closest antecedent to the pronoun auton.
14. Peter’s description may be based on a popular ancient proverb, which held that a shameless man did not have koras (a pun—the word can mean both “pupils” and “maidens”) in his eyes, but pornas (“prostitutes”); cf. Plutarch, Moralia 528E.
15. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 267–68.
16. See, for instance, Philo, Moses 1.266–68.
17. NIV “madness.” The Greek word is paraphronian and is found only here; Paul uses the cognate verb in 2 Cor. 11:23. Scholars speculate that Peter may have used this word to create a verbal play with the word paranomias, “wrongdoing,” earlier in the verse.
18. For the donkey’s rebuke of Balaam, see several of the Targums (Aramaic paraphrases of the Old Testament); see the discussion in Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 211–12. For Balaam’s “madness,” see Philo, Moses 1.193.
19. The NIV renders “Azazel” as “scapegoat”; see, however, the footnote. In Isa. 34:14, there is debate about the meaning of the Hebrew word, some versions (cf. NIV) taking the term to refer to an animal rather than to a demon.
20. Among other works on the angels, the summary of Wayne Grudem (Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994], 397–436) is helpful.
21. Rev. 12:9, referring to “Satan and his angels” is the clearest. See also Rom. 8:38; 1 Cor. 6:3. In 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6, the word “angel” is used because the authors are viewing them from the standpoint of their original status.
22. I have argued that Peter refers to this myth when he speaks of the “angels who sinned” (v. 4).
23. This selection is from a tract of Ryle’s, quoted by J. I. Packer, God’s Words: Studies of Key Bible Themes (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1981), 41–42.
1. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 217–18, notes how these verses echo many of the words and themes from earlier in the chapter.
2. The abruptness arises from the lack of any connecting conjunction or particle in Greek (a somewhat unusual phenomenon called “asyndeton”). The Greek for “these men” is houtoi. Peter has addressed the false teachers this way already (v. 12); but he does not consistently use the word—as Jude does—as a transitional marker.
3. The Greek word, homichle, is rare, found only here in the Bible. The understanding of the word given above is based especially on a description in Aristotle (Meteor. 1.346B).
4. Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 355.
5. I am giving the participle phthengomenoi an instrumental force. As to the word “entice,” Peter reuses a word that translates the same Greek word as “seduce” in verse 14.
6. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 285.
7. See also ibid., 287.
8. The Greek word here is oligos, “a little measure.” It is not clear whether it has a temporal meaning (“for a little while, recently”) or a general quantitative meaning (“to a slight extent”). The difference in meaning is slight.
9. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 275–76; Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 223.
10. This is the most popular view among the commentators; see, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 286; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 346; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 117.
11. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 117.
12. E.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 347.
13. For this view, see Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 287; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 247–48.
14. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 141–42; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 118; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 277.
15. The word is found only here in biblical Greek but is closely related to the word Peter has used in v. 10, miasmos (NIV “corrupt”).
16. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 277.
17. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 118–19.
18. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 273. He notes as parallels to v. 21 Mark 9:42 and 14:21.
19. Cf. Jesus’ command: “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs” (Matt. 7:6).
20. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 287.
21. On this reading of the proverb, it might stema from a popular seventh- or sixth-century B.C. book of sayings called Ahiqar; in the Arabic version, 8:8 reads “My son, you have been to me like the pig who went into the hot bath with people of quality, and when it came out of the hot bath, it saw a filthy hole and it went down and wallowed in it.” See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 279.
22. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 122–28. See the introduction for a more general discussion of the false teaching.
23. Diogenes Laertius, a third century A.D. Epicurean (10.139). Cited in Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 123.
24. For a brief overview of Epicurean thought, see R. W. Vunderink, “Epicureans,” in ISBE, rev. ed., 2:121–22.
25. Lactantius, Inst. 3.17; the quotation is taken from Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 123–24.
26. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 120.
27. Edwin A. Blum, “2 Peter,” in EBC, 12:282.
28. D. A. Carson, “Reflections on Assurance,” in The Grace of God and the Bondage of the Will: Historical and Theological Perspectives on Calvinism, ed. Thomas R. Schreiner and Bruce A. Ware (2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995), 2:396.
29. Paul puts this verb in the aorist tense, and I think it is past-referring here. The believer’s glorification has already been determined by the Lord.
30. The best general exegetical/theological study of the warning passages from an Arminian perspective is I. H. Marshall, Kept by the Power of God: A Study of Perseverance and Falling Away (Minneapolis: Bethany Fellowship, 1969).
31. Carson, “Reflections on Assurance,” 399–405.
32. For example, Tertullian, Justin, Clement of Alexandria.
33. See The Shepherd of Hermas, Visions 5.7; Mandates 4.3.16.
1. On the idea of memory, see the “Contemporary Significance” section on 1:12–15.
2. See Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 288: “St. Peter has used philosophic words caught up in conversation and not quite accurately understood.” Bigg is wrong, however, to accuse Peter of “inaccuracy” here. The process of taking language from one field and applying it to another goes on all the time. There is no question of inaccuracy, but of shift in focus due to the new context.
3. Those who think that an unknown person wrote 2 Peter in Peter’s name usually see the reference as an attempt to lend authenticity to 2 Peter; see, e.g., Horst Balz and Wolfgang Schrage, Die “katholischen” Briefe: Die Briefe des Jakobus, Petrus, Johannes, und Judas, 147; Henning Paulsen, Der zweite Petrusbrief und der Judasbrief, 150. But commentators who think that Peter wrote 2 Peter also make the identification (see, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 288–89).
4. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 123–24.
5. The Greek word hemon (“of us”) is supported by only one rather late uncial and some minuscules, whereas the word hymon (“of you”) finds support in many of the best and earliest manuscripts.
6. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 289–90.
7. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 146.
8. See, e.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 287.
9. As, for instance, Bauckham, ibid., 288, argues.
10. The NIV “following” translates a Greek verb that means simply “going” (poreuomenoi).
11. The Greek word here is koimaomai, “sleep” (see NASB). “Die” may be a legitimate translation, but it is debated. See our comments in the “Bridging Contexts” section.
12. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 290–92; see also Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 148–49; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 355–56. Advocates of this interpretation usually argue that this is also the meaning of “fathers” in two early Christian texts that closely resemble 2 Peter 3:4: 1 Clement 23:3: “Wretched are the double-minded, which doubt in their soul and say, ‘These things we did hear in the days of our Fathers also, and behold we have grown old, and none of these things hath befallen us’ ”; also 2 Clement 11:2.
13. See, for example, the fifteen occurrences of “fathers” in Stephen’s speech in Acts 7. The word probably refers to the patriarchs particularly in several of those verses; and it clearly does in Rom. 9:5; 11:28; 15:8.
14. The NIV “our fathers” is potentially misleading. There is no possessive pronoun in the Greek.
15. For this interpretation, see Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 291; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 129.
16. The Greek is lanthanei autous touto thelontas. The last word comes from the verb thelo, which has here the meaning “maintain [contrary to the true state of affairs]” (see BAGD, 355).The question is whether the participle of this verb, thelontas, modifies lanthanei (“forget in a ‘willful’ way” [NIV]) or stands by itself (“it escapes their notice, as they stubbornly maintain” [REB]).
17. See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 356–57; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 297; against, for instance, Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 292.
18. For this interpretation, see especially Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 357–58. Its chief syntactical difficulty is the feminine form of the participle synestesa, which implies that it modifies only ge, “earth.” But participles will sometimes take the form of only one of words they modify.
19. The NIV translates literally, since the Greek word here is plural (ouranoi). But the word is plural because the Hebrew word for heaven is a “stylistic” plural; the idea is singular.
20. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 293. He refers to the teaching of Thales.
21. Ibid., 293; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 130.
22. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 151–52.
23. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 234.
24. See particularly Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 293–94; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 359–60; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 130–31.
25. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 359; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 298–99. They refer to 1 Enoch 83:3–5; Philo, Life of Moses 2.63–65.
26. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 294; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 131.
27. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 132.
28. Quoted by Green, ibid., 133.
29. See, e.g., Green, ibid., 129.
30. See, e.g., 1 Kings 2:10; 11:43; 22:40; and the comments of Ernest Best, A Commentary on the First and Second Epistles to the Thessalonians, HNTC (New York: Harper & Row, 1972), 185. Evidence that “sleep” was this kind of “dead” metaphor comes from passages such as this one as well as from the Roman writer Catullus (5.4–6): “The sun can set and rise again, but once our brief light sets, there is one unending night to be slept through.”
31. The “saints” resurrected at Jesus’ death (Matt. 27:52); Lazarus (John 11:11–12); Stephen (Acts 7:60); David (Acts 13:36); Christians, destined for resurrection (1 Cor. 7:39; 11:30; 15:6, 18, 20, 51; 1 Thess. 4:13–14, 15). See on this point with respect to Paul, Murray J. Harris, Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 134–35.
32. Stephen H. Travis, Christian Hope and the Future (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1980), 14.
33. Martin Luther, “How Christians Should Regard the Law of Moses,” in Luther’s Works, ed. E. Theodore Bachmann (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1960), 162.
34. For detailed defense and critique of each of the major evangelical viewpoints on this question, see especially Wayne Strickland, ed., The Law, the Gospel, and the Modern Christian (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1993).
35. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 130.
1. My own literal rendering of the Greek, which captures the contrast between autous (“them”) in v. 5 and hymas (“you”) in this verse.
2. E.g., Justin, Dialogue 81; Epistle of Barnabas 15.4; Irenaeus, Against Heresies 5.23.2; 5.28.3.
3. The fact that Peter shows no consciousness of this meaning of the verse may suggest an early date for 2 Peter, since these ideas were popular in the second century. See Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 295–96; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 134–35; idem, 2 Peter Reconsidered (London: Tyndale, 1961), 19.
4. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 296.
5. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 362.
6. We find here again possible allusion to Hellenistic debates about God’s providence and judgment; Plutarch says, “God’s slowness [to judge] undermines our belief in providence” (Moralia 549b).
7. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 362.
8. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 296.
9. Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 364.
10. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 312.
11. This is why many English versions, like the NIV, put a paragraph break between vv. 9 and 10.
12. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 364.
13. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 243.
14. Most commentators; see, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 297; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 364.
15. See also Isa. 13:10; Ezek. 32:7–8; Joel 2:10; Matt. 24:29; Mark 13:24–25; Rev. 6:13. See particularly Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 316.
16. The NASB rendering assumes the reading katakaesetai, found in the uncial A and several other manuscripts. The TEV translation is based on the word aphanisthesetai, read by one manuscript.
17. In addition to being “the most difficult reading,” this word also has the strongest manuscript support, being found in two of the most important uncials and in several other manuscripts.
18. Although they accept the reading heurethesetai as the best available, the editors of the United Bible Societies Greek New Testament also note that the reading “seems devoid of meaning in the context” (Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament [New York: United Bible Societies, 1971], 706).
19. See esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 319–20. We may mention here two other interpretations that adopt this same reading. Kelly treats the word as a question: “Will it be found?” e.g., “Will the earth be found after God’s judgment is through with it?” (Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 365–66). And Al Wolters thinks that the word is shorthand for the idea “be found genuine (see 1 Peter 1:7); Peter is not speaking here of world annihilation but of world purification” (“World View and Textual Criticism in 2 Peter 3:10,” WTJ 49 [1987]: 405–13).
20. See esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 319–21.
21. Tim LaHaye, “Twelve Reasons Why This Could Be the Terminal Generation,” in When the Trumpet Sounds: Today’s Foremost Authorities Speak Out on End-Time Controversies, ed. Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House, 1995), 429.
22. Ibid., 442–43.
1. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 161; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 366.
2. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 366–67.
3. Ibid., 367.
4. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 325, for a helpful list and discussion of the Jewish texts.
5. Ibid., 325.
6. We take up this issue briefly in the “Bridging Contexts” section.
7. Literally, Peter says, “in which righteousness dwells.”
8. We discuss some of these in the “Contemporary Significance” section.
9. See F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts, NICNT, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 84–85.
10. See, e.g., I. Howard Marshall, The Acts of the Apostles: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980), 93–94. He points to the cognate word in 1:6.
11. I am greatly indebted throughout this section to Murray Harris, Raised Immortal: Resurrection and Immortality in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983), 168–70.
12. Barbara W. Tuchman, The First Salute (New York: Alfred Knopf, 1988), 300.
13. John Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 365.
14. C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillan, 1961), 132.
1. The NIV singular “this” translates a plural Greek word tauta, “these things,” designating the various components of the Day of God as Peter has outlined them in the previous verses.
2. The Greek in 2 Peter 3:14 is aspiloi kai amometoi; in 1 Peter 1:19 it is amomou kai aspilou. The Greek words amomos and amometos are variants of the same term.
3. See Calvin, Hebrews and 1 and 2 Peter, 366.
4. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 143–44.
5. Verse 15 begins with a kai, “and,” untranslated in the NIV.
6. The NIV obscures the relationship between v. 9 and v. 15 by using two different verbs (“understand” and “bear in mind”), but the verb is the same in the Greek (hegeomai, “consider”).
7. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 370; against, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 299.
8. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 165, insists that the “just as” must refer only to v. 15a. But such a restriction is without basis, since vv. 14 and 15a are so closely related.
9. For an example of this argument, see Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 370. He argues that the language used here is similar to late first-and early second-century descriptions of the apostles (e.g., 1 Clement 5:3–7; Ignatius, To the Romans 4.3).
10. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 327.
11. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 164.
12. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 328.
13. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 372.
14. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 330.
15. Various scholars have proposed all kinds of scenarios based on the hints that Peter gives here. Mayor, for instance, thinks that 3:15 must refer to Romans, because it speaks so prominently of God’s patience as leading to repentance (2:5) (The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 164). But, as we have seen, Peter is thinking about more than just v. 15a in his reference to Paul.
16. The Greek actually uses a passive construction; as NASB translates, “the wisdom given him.” But the verb dotheisan is almost certainly a “divine” passive, with God as the implied agent of the action. The NIV is an acceptable paraphrase.
17. E.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 165.
18. See esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 331.
19. A few scholars have suggested that the phrase might not mean this; that Peter might be saying only that people distort the letters of Paul as they do the Scriptures (this interpretation is suggested, though not clearly adopted, by Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 301–2, and Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 147–48). But this interpretation simply does not do justice to the word “other.”
20. E.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 333.
21. See also 2 Clement 2.4; Epistle of Barnabas 4.14; Polycarp, Philippians 2.1. Critics of Petrine authorship, of course, respond that 1 Timothy is also pseudonymous, written by someone in Paul’s name long after his death. See further discussion of this in the “Bridging Contexts” section.
22. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 374.
23. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 337.
24. Ibid., 337.
25. The word here is the simple gnosis, which Peter uses elsewhere in the letter to depict our own “knowledge” (1:5–6). When Peter refers to our knowledge directed to Christ, he uses the compound epignosis (1:2–3, 8; 2:20). See Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 303–4; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 150–51.
26. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 170; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 375; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 337–38.
27. Most controversial is James 4:5, because we have nothing in the context that represents an actual quotation from the Old Testament. Many scholars think, therefore, that the reference is to an apocryphal tradition. But James is more likely referring to the Old Testament teaching about the jealousy of God (see Douglas J. Moo, The Letter of James: An Introduction and Commentary, TNTC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985], 146).
28. For a good recent argument for this conclusion, see Roger Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the Christian Church and its Background in Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985).
29. The Jewish historian Josephus, who wrote in the years A.D. 75–95, enunciates a similar canon of authoritative books (Against Apion 1.37–43).
30. Roman Catholics, of course, would appeal at this point to the authority of the church’s teaching, focused on the Pope.
31. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 143.
32. For some great ideas along these lines from a passionate preacher, see John Piper, “Preaching as Worship: Meditations on Expository Exultation,” TrinJ 16 (1995): 29–45.
1. Note that James does not use the title “brother of the Lord” in his letter either.
2. This rendering assumes that the two participles, agapemenois (“loved”) and teteremenois (“kept”), modify tois … kletois (“the called”).
3. The Greek here uses the preposition en, which can have a local meaning (“in”) or an instrumental meaning (“by”). The KJV translation “sanctified by God the Father,” rests on a variant reading in the Greek text.
4. For this view, see esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 26. Bigg suggests a variation, taking “in God the Father” with both participles: “… called, who in God the Father are beloved and kept unto Jesus Christ” (Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 324).
5. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 243.
6. The Greek word for “loved” is in the perfect tense, suggesting a continuing state.
7. See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 324; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 243.
8. The participle (teteremenois) is again in the perfect tense, implying that “being kept” is a continuing state that believers are placed in through their faith in Christ.
9. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 244, against Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 158.
10. See I. Howard Marshall, The Epistles of John, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 252.
1. As John White suggests, these verses correspond to the typical epistolary “body opening” (The Form and Function of the Body of the Greek Letter, SBLDS 21 [Missoula, Mont.: Univ. of Montana Press, 1972], 18).
2. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 26.
3. Why the difference in translation? Neither the word “while” or “although” is in the Greek text; each is an interpretation of the force of the participial construction (poioumenos, “making every effort”). Scholars cite some good arguments in favor of “while,” but the repetition of the verb “write” favors “although” (see, e.g., Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 29; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 245–46).
4. A few commentators think that the “we” in the phrase “the salvation we share” refers to Jews and Gentiles. Certainly the sharing of Jew and Gentile in the messianic salvation is a major note in the New Testament; see our comments on 2 Peter 1:1 (“a faith as precious as ours”). But Jude makes no allusion in the letter to the Jew/Gentile division; and the phrase more naturally means “the salvation that you [the readers] and I [the writer] share.” See Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 246.
5. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 31–32.
6. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 248.
7. The verb is pareisdyno, used only here in the New Testament. The verb Peter uses to describe the false teachers in 2 Peter 2:1 is similar in meaning.
8. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 326.
9. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 24.
10. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 250.
11. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 35–36.
12. Ibid., 38.
13. The main arguments in favor of this rendering are that despotes (“sovereign”) refers to God in all but one (2 Peter 2:1) of its New Testament occurrences, and that “only Lord” is standard Jewish phraseology for God (see Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 26–27; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 252).
14. The main argument in favor of this rendering is the single article that governs both despoten (“sovereign”) and kyrion hemon (“our Lord”). See Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 327; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 39.
15. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 27; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 252–53.
16. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 40.
17. The classic work demonstrating this thesis is Martin Hengel, Judaism and Hellenism. Studies in Their Encounter During the Early Hellenistic Period, 2 vols. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980).
18. F. Duane Watson, Invention, Arrangement, and Style.
19. Ibid., 46.
20. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 325.
21. David Wells, No Place for Truth or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993).
1. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 48.
2. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 28.
3. A. R. C. Leaney, The Letters of Peter and Jude, CBC (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967), 88; cf. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 61–62.
4. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 49.
5. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 28–29; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 255.
6. There is some debate about this translation, since the word deuteran means, literally, “a second time.” Some commentators therefore think Jude is referring to the dying off of the desert generation as a “second” destruction after the first, accomplished in Egypt (Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 252). Green thinks the reference may be to the second coming of Christ (The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 164). But it is simplest to think that deuteran, following hapax, means something like “in a second experience after that first one.” See, e.g., Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 328; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 50.
7. For more details on this tradition, see the “Bridging Contexts” section on 2 Peter 2:4–10a.
8. So almost all recent commentators. For details on the 1 Enoch stories and the interpretation of Gen. 6, see again the “Bridging Contexts” section on 2 Peter 2:4–10a.
9. The quotation is taken from The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, ed. James H. Charlesworth (Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983), 17.
10. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 32.
11. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 258–59; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 54.
12. See, e.g., Philo, Moses 2.56; see the notes on 2 Peter 2:7.
13. Watson, Invention, Arrangement, and Style, 53–54. Bauckham, on the other hand, thinks that the Sodomites come last because their sin corresponds most closely to that of the false teachers (Jude, 2 Peter, 55).
14. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 55.
15. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 33.
16. Some commentators think that the Lordship of God is meant (Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 34); others of Christ (Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 168; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 56–57); still others of both God and Christ (Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 262–63). Since the phrase is so general, the distinction does not much matter.
17. See the “Original Meaning” section on 2 Peter 2:10b for the use of the word “glories” (doxai) with this meaning.
18. Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 66.
19. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 57–58.
20. See, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 168–69.
21. Sometimes there are four chief angels, sometimes seven (see Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 60).
22. There is considerable controversy over the existence and relationship of these two books and which one Jude may have referred to. An up-to-date survey of the situation can be found in Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 65–76.
23. Here the NIV creates a word play in English that is not evident in the Greek; the first “understand” in the verse translates the Greek word oida; the second a different Greek word, epistemi.
24. J. Daryl Charles, Literary Strategy in the Epistle of Jude, 108–16.
25. See Roger Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the Christian Church and Its Background in Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), 401–5; A. Plummer, The General Epistles of St. James and St. Jude (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1891), 424.
26. J. D. G. Dunn, Romans 1–8, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1988), 65–66.
27. J. Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance and Homosexuality (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago, 1980), 341–52.
28. See esp. David F. Wright, “Homosexuals or Prostitutes? The Meaning of Arsenokoitai (1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:10),” Vigiliae Christianae 38 (1984): 125–53.
29. See, for instance, Robin Scroggs, The New Testament and Homosexuality (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983).
30. D. F. Wright, “Homosexuality,” in Dictionary of Paul and his Letters, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne and Ralph P. Martin (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1993), 414.
31. Leo Tolstoy, Resurrection (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1994), 164–65.
1. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 172.
2. Antiquities 1.61 (the quotation is from Josephus: Jewish Antiquities, Books I-IV, trans. by H. St. J. Thackeray, LCL [Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1957], 29). See also Philo, The Posterity and Exile of Cain 38–39. See esp. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 79, for this line of interpretation.
3. See, in the New Testament, Rev. 2:14; for the Jewish tradition, see especially the Targum on Num. 22–24; Philo, Moses 1.266–68; Migration 114. For more detail, see the notes on 2 Peter 2:15–16.
4. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 83. See, e.g., the Targum; Josephus, Antiquities 16.1.
5. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 173.
6. The past-referring tense Jude uses here (apolonto, an aorist) may be “timeless,” or it may be reminiscent of the Hebrew “prophetic perfect,” in which a prophecy was uttered with a past-referring tense to emphasize the certainty of its completion (Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 84).
7. Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 333; Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 74–75.
8. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 40–41; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 270–71; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 85.
9. Jude may have in mind here another passage from 1 Enoch (80:2–3; quotation is from The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, vol. 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, ed. James H. Charlesworth [Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1983], 58):
In respect to their days, the sinners and the winter are cut short. Their seed shall lag behind in their lands and in their fertile fields, and in all their activities upon the earth. He will turn and appear in their time, and withhold rain; and the sky shall stand still at that time. Then the vegetable shall slacken and not grow in its season, and the fruit shall not be born in its proper season.
10. Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 42–43; Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 175–76.
11. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 273; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 88.
12. James also uses the restless sea as an image of spiritual inconstancy (James 1:6).
13. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 274; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 89. Other commentators think that Jude may be referring to shooting stars, which fall into the darkness of the earth (Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 176).
14. The quotation is from The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, ed. Charlesworth, 23.
15. See v. 7b, “punishment of eternal fire”; v. 10b, “destroy them”; v. 11c, “destroyed.”
16. See, e.g., Joachim Jeremias, “γεέννα,” TDNT, 1.657–58.
17. A recent defense of this view is John F. Walvoord, “The Literal View,” in Four Views of Hell, ed. William Crockett (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 11–28, esp. 28.
18. The quotations are from The Rule of the Community (1QS) 2:8 and 4:13 (quoted from The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in English, ed. Florentino García Martínez, 2d ed. [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996], 4, 7).
19. A good recent defense of this view is William V. Crockett, “The Metaphorical View,” in Four Views of Hell, 43–76.
20. See, for a summary of these arguments, Clark H. Pinnock, “The Conditional View,” in Four Views of Hell, 135–66 (Pinnock actually defends a variety of annihilationism, called “conditional immortality”).
21. Quotation taken from Crockett, “The Metaphorical View,” 48.
1. The “Enoch” mentioned in Gen. 4:17–18 as the son of Cain is a different man.
2. These books are therefore what we call pseudepigraphical, which means anonymous works ascribed to well-known historical figures.
3. For the former, see Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 336; for the latter, most of the commentators, including, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 276.
4. This translation is based on the Ethiopic language version of 1 Enoch. The book is also extant in Greek, and fragments of it have been discovered in Aramaic and Latin. Scholars debate about which of the versions Jude might be quoting from; most think that, whatever version he knew, he was doing his own paraphrase in Greek. See especially Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 94–96.
5. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 278; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 98.
6. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 278.
7. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 279; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 99. These commentators support their view by suggesting that Jude may here be alluding to The Assumption of Moses, where a similar idea occurs. But while Jude alludes to this book in v. 9, the reference here is not so clear.
8. The Greek, literally, means “wondering at the face.” It reflects the Greek translation of a Hebrew idiom, “lifting, or having regard for, the face,” that occurs in the Old Testament to refer to partiality (see Gen. 19:21; Lev. 19:15; Deut. 10:17; Prov. 24:23; Amos 5:12). James uses a similar expression (see James 2:1).
9. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 99–100. He refers to Mal. 2:9.
10. Clement of Alexandria, Eccl. Proph. 3; Tertullian, De cultu fem. 1.3; De Idol. 15.6; cf. The Epistle of Barnabas 16.5.
11. Jerome reports these doubts; cf. De vir. ill. 4.
12. See his City of God 15.23.
13. See the Apostolic Constitutions 6.16.3 (c. A.D. 380).
14. This is called an ad hominem argument.
15. Charles, Literary Strategy in the Epistle of Jude, 160–61.
16. On this issue, see especially David G. Dunbar, “The Biblical Canon,” in Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon, ed. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), 299–360, 424–46.
1. Jude uses the nominative personal pronoun hymeis, usually a sign of emphasis.
2. Bauckham stresses this parallel, arguing that vv. 17–19 therefore continue the denunciation of vv. 5–16 (Jude, 2 Peter, 102–3). There is truth in this suggestion, as we have seen; but the contrast with what has come before stands out as even more important (see, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 281; Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 84–85).
3. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 281.
4. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 103.
5. The Greek word “ungodly” (asebeion) comes last in the verse, in an emphatic position. The word is in the genitive; and the NIV, along with most modern versions, interprets it as a descriptive genitive (cf. also Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 182). But it could also be subjective genitive—“desires that spring from ungodly motives” (Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 47)—or the objective genitive—“desires for ungodly things” (Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 283; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 337).
6. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 284–85.
7. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 105.
8. The construction in Greek is a dative, which can have this instrumental meaning (see Bigg, The Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude, 340).
9. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 285–86.
10. The verb in Greek for “pray” is a participle.
11. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 113.
12. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 184.
13. See, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 287.
14. The translation is from Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 108, who adopts this reading; cf. also Neyrey, 2 Peter, Jude, 85–86. The Greek text on which this translation is based in found in the Papyrus manuscript, p72.
15. The text for this translation is found in some of the later uncial manuscripts, K, L, P, S.
16. The underlying text is found in the important uncial Vaticanus (B); it is supported by, e.g., Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 287–88.
17. The significant uncial Sinaiticus (
) attests this text. It is the text adopted in the two most widely used Greek New Testaments (the Nestle-Aland Novum Testamentum Graece [27th ed.; Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1993] and the United Bible Societies’ The Greek New Testament [4th ed.; New York: United Bible Societies, 1993]). It receives solid defense in two articles: Sakae Kubo, “Jude 22–23: Two Division Form or Three?” in New Testament Criticism: Its Significance for Exegesis. Essays in Honour of Bruce M. Metzger, ed. E. J. Epp and Gordon D. Fee (Oxford: Clarendon, 1981), 239–53; Carroll D. Osburn, “Discourse Analysis and Jewish Apocalyptic in the Epistle of Jude,” in Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Discourse Analysis, ed. David Alan Black (Nashville: Broadman, 1992), 292 (he reverses here his earlier preference for the two-clause text).
18. The textual basis for this rendering is the uncial Alexandrinus (A); cf. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 186–87.
19. For discussion of the larger issue of textual criticism in the New Testament, see “Bridging Contexts.”
20. See, e.g., Mayor, The Epistle of St. Jude and the Second Epistle of St. Peter, 50; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 115. Their decision to translate “dispute” reflects to some extent, however, their choice of a different text here.
21. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 289; Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 116.
22. See Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 188.
23. Readers who want to pursue New Testament textual criticism further should consult one of the standard handbooks: Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 3d ed. (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1992); Kurt and Barbara Aland, The Text of the New Testament: An Introduction to the Critical Editions and to the Theory and Practice of Modern Textual Criticism, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989).
24. Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 97.
1. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 291.
2. Against Kelly, ibid., 291–92.
3. See Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 119; Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude, 293.
4. See, e.g., Green, The Second Epistle General of Peter and the General Epistle of Jude, 192.