Jude 1 Commentary

Preface to the General Epistle of Jude In the preface to the Epistle of James several things have been said relative to Jude the brother of James, the supposed author of this epistle; and to that preface the reader is requested to refer. What is farther necessary to be said on the author and the authenticity of this epistle, I shall take the liberty to borrow principally from Michaelis. "If James and Jude, whom the evangelists call brothers of Jesus, were in fact only cousins or relations as some suppose, and were sons, not of Joseph, but of Alpheus, these two persons were the same as the two brothers James and Jude, who were apostles. And in this case Jude, the author of this epistle, was the same as the Apostle Jude, the brother of James who was son of Alpheus. On the other hand, if the James and the Jude, whom the evangelists call brothers of Jesus, were not the two brothers of this name who were apostles, but were the sons of Joseph, the reputed father of Jesus, we have then two different persons of the name of Jude, either of which might have written this epistle. And in this case we have to examine whether the epistle was written by an apostle of the name of Jude, or by Jude the brother-in-law of Christ. "The author of the epistle himself has assumed neither the title of apostle of Jesus Christ, nor of brother of Jesus Christ, but calls himself only 'Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.' Now, as the author distinguishes himself by the title 'brother of James,' and this was a common name among the Jews, he undoubtedly meant some eminent person of this name, who was well known at the time when he wrote, or the title 'brother of James' would have been no mark of distinction. We may infer, therefore, that the author of this epistle was the brother, either of the Apostle James the son of Alpheus, or of James, named the brother of Jesus, or of both, if they were one and the same person. "The first question, therefore, to be asked is, Was the author of this epistle the Apostle Jude? or was he brother of James, the son of Alpheus? Now, I have already observed, that this question must be answered in the affirmative if James and Jude who were called brothers of Jesus, were the same as the two brothers James and Jude who were apostles. And it may be answered in the affirmative, even if they were different persons, for Jude, the author of this epistle, had in either case a brother of the name of James, and therefore might in either case call himself Jude the brother of James. I say the question may be answered in the affirmative, even if the Apostle Jude was a different person from Jude, called the brother of James. But whether it ought in this case to be answered in the affirmative, is another matter; and I really believe that it ought not: for if the Jude who wrote this epistle had been himself an apostle, and brother of an apostle, he would hardly have called himself, in an epistle written to Christians, simply 'Jude, the brother of James' without adding the title apostle. It is true that the Apostle Jude, who was brother of James, is called by St. Luke Ιουδας Ιακωβου; but St. Luke gives him this title merely to distinguish him from another apostle of this name, who was called Iscariot. Now the author of this epistle could have no motive for distinguishing himself from Judas Iscariot, who had hanged himself many years before this epistle was written. The name of Jude was very common among the Jews; and therefore the author of this epistle wished to distinguish himself from other persons who were so called. But James was likewise a very common name, and therefore if the author had been an apostle he surely would have preferred an appellation which would have removed all doubts to an appellation which left it at least uncertain whether he was an apostle or not; I grant that the omission of this title does not necessarily prove that the author of this epistle was not an apostle, for Paul has omitted it in four of his epistles: in the Epistle to the Philippians, in both Epistles to the Thessalonians, and in that to Philemon. But St. Paul was sufficiently known without this title, whereas the author of the epistle in question felt the necessity of a distinguishing appellation, as appears from the very title which he has given himself of 'brother of James.' Besides, at the time when this epistle was written, only one apostle of the name of James was then alive; for the elder James, the son of Zebedee, had been beheaded many years before. If then the author of this epistle had only given to his brother James the title of apostle, he would thus likewise have clearly ascertained who he himself was. But since he has no more given to his brother than to himself the title of apostle, I think it highly probable that neither of them were apostles. "The next question to be asked, therefore, is, Was the Jude, who wrote this epistle, the same person as the Jude whom the evangelists call brother of Jesus? and who, according to the opinion which I think the most defensible, was in this sense brother of Jesus, that he was son of Joseph by a former wife, and therefore not his own brother, but only brother-in-law of Jesus. Now, that this epistle was written by a person of this description, appears to me highly probable; and on this supposition we may assign the reason why the author called himself 'brother of James;' for, if he was the brother-in-law of Jesus, his brother James was the person who, during so many years, had presided over the Church at Jerusalem, was well known both to Jews and Christians, and appears to have been more celebrated than either of the apostles called James. It will be objected, perhaps, that the very same reasons which I have alleged, to show that an apostle of the name of Jude would have assumed his proper title, will likewise show that a person who was called brother of Jesus would have done the same, and styled himself brother of Jesus. To this I answer, that if he was the son of Joseph, not by Mary but by a former wife, and Jude believed in the immaculate conception, he must have been sensible that though to all outward appearance he was brother-in-law to Jesus, since his own father was the husband of Jesus' mother, yet in reality he was no relation of Jesus. On the other hand, if Jude, called the brother of Jesus, was the son of Joseph, not by a former wife but by Mary, as Herder asserts, I do not see how the preceding objection can be answered; for if Jesus and Jude had the same mother, Jude might without the least impropriety, have styled himself 'brother of Jesus,' or 'brother of the Lord;' and this would have been a much more remarkable and distinguishing title than that of brother of James. A third question still remains to be asked on this subject. The apostle whom St. Luke calls Jude is called Thaddaeus by St. Matthew and St. Mark, as I have already observed. But the apostle of the Syrians, who first preached the Gospel at Edessa, and founded a Church there, was named Thaddaeus or Adaeus. It may be asked, therefore, whether the author of this epistle was Thaddaeus, the apostle of the Syrians? But the answer is decisive: the old Syriac version does not contain this epistle; consequently it is highly probable that Adai or Adaeus was not the author, for an epistle written by the great apostle of the Syrians would surely have been received into the canon of the Syrian Church." The most accurate critics have been unable to determine the time when, and the persons to whom, this epistle was written; so that much concerning these points, as well as the author of the epistle, must remain undecided. "I am really unable to determine," says Michaelis, "who the persons were to whom this epistle was sent; for no traces are to be discovered in it which enable us to form the least judgment on this subject; and the address with which this epistle commences is so indeterminate, that there is hardly any Christian community where Greek was spoken, which might not be denoted by it. Though this epistle has a very great similarity to the Second Epistle of Peter, it cannot have been sent to the same persons, namely, the Christians who resided in Pontus, etc., because no mention is made of them in this epistle. Nor can it have been sent to the Christians of Syria and Assyria, where Jude preached the Gospel, if he be the same person as the apostle of the Syrians; for in this case the epistle would not have been written in Greek, but in Syriac or Chaldee, and would certainly have been received into the old Syriac version. "With respect to the date of this epistle, all that I am able to assert is, that it was written after the Second Epistle of Peter; but how many years after, whether between 64 and 66, as Lardner supposes, or between 70 and 75, as Beausobre and L'Enfant believe; or, according to Dodwell and Cave, in 71 or 72, or so late as the year 90, as is the opinion of Mill, I confess I am unable to determine, at least from any certain data. The expression, 'in the last time,' which occurs Jde 1:18 , as well as in 2Pet 3:3 , is too indeterminate to warrant any conclusion respecting the date of this epistle; for though, on the one hand, it may refer to the approaching destruction of Jerusalem, it may, on the other hand, refer to a later period, and denote the close of the apostolic age; for in the First Epistle of St. John a similar expression occurs, which must be taken in this latter sense. The inference, therefore, that the Epistle of St. Jude was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, which some commentators have deduced from the above-mentioned expression, on the supposition that it alluded to that event then approaching, is very precarious, because it is drawn from premises which are themselves uncertain. However, there is some reason to believe, on other grounds, that this epistle was not written after the destruction of Jerusalem; for, as the author has mentioned, Jde 1:5-8 , several well known instances of God's justice in punishing sinners, which Peter had already quoted in his second epistle to the same purpose, he would probably, if Jerusalem had been already destroyed at the time he wrote, have not neglected to add to his other examples this most remarkable instance of Divine vengeance, especially as Christ himself had foretold it. "Lardner, indeed, though he admits the similarity of the two epistles, still thinks it a matter of doubt whether St. Jude had ever seen the Second Epistle of St. Peter; his reason is, that 'if St. Jude had formed a design of writing, and had met with an epistle of one of the apostles very suitable to his own thoughts and intentions, he would have forborne to write.' "To this argument I answer: - 1. If the Epistle of St. Jude was inspired by the Holy Ghost, as Lardner admits, the Holy Ghost certainly knew, while he was dictating the epistle to St. Jude, that an epistle of St. Peter, of a like import, already existed. And if the Holy Ghost, notwithstanding this knowledge, still thought that an epistle of St. Jude was not unnecessary; why shall we suppose that St. Jude himself would have been prevented writing by the same knowledge? "2. The Second Epistle of St. Peter was addressed to the inhabitants of some particular countries; but the address of St. Jude's is general: St. Jude therefore might think it necessary to repeat for general use what St. Peter had written only to certain communities. "3. The Epistle of St. Jude is not a bare copy of the Second Epistle of St. Peter, for in the former, not only several thoughts are more completely unravelled than in the latter, but several additions are made to what St. Peter had said; for instance Jde 1:4 , Jde 1:5 , Jde 1:9 , Jde 1:16 . "Eusebius, in his catalogue of the books of the New Testament, places the Epistle of St. Jude among the αντιλεγομενα, contradicted or apocryphal books, in company with the Epistle of St. James, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, and the Second and Third of John. "But Origen, who lived in the third century, though he speaks in dubious terms of the Second Epistle of St. Peter, has several times quoted the Epistle of St. Jude, and has spoken of it as an epistle on which he entertained no doubt. In his commentary on St. Matthew, when he comes to Mat 13:55 , where James, Joses, Simon, and Jude are mentioned; he says Jude wrote an epistle of few lines indeed, but full of the powerful words of the heavenly grace, who at the beginning says, 'Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.' This is a very clear and unequivocal declaration of Origen's opinion; and it is the more remarkable because he says nothing of the Epistle of St. James, though the passage, Mat 13:55 , afforded him as good an opportunity of speaking of this epistle, as it did of the Epistle of St. Jude. Nay, Origen carries his veneration for the Epistle of Jude so far that, in his treatise De Principiis, lib. iii. cap. 2, he quotes an apocryphal book, called the Assumption of Moses, as a work of authority; because a passage from this book had been quoted by St. Jude. In one instance, however, in his commentary on St. Matthew, Origen speaks in less positive terms, for there he says, 'If any one receive the Epistle of St. Jude,' etc. Tertullian, in whose works Lardner could discover no quotation from the Second Epistle of St. Peter, describes the Epistle of St. Jude as the work of an apostle; for in his treatise De cultu faeminarum, chap. 3, he says, 'Hence it is that Enoch is quoted by the Apostle Jude.' "Clement of Alexandria, in whose works likewise Lardner could find no quotation from the Second Epistle of St. Peter, has three times quoted the Epistle of St. Jude without expressing any doubt whatever. It appears, then, that the three ancient fathers, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, and Origen, as far as we may judge from their writings which are now extant, preferred the Epistle of St. Jude to the Second Epistle of St. Peter. However, I think it not impossible that if all the writings of these authors were now extant, passages might be found in them which would turn the scale in favor of the latter; and it may be owing to mere accident that in those parts of their works which have descended to us, more passages in which they speak decidedly of St. Jude are to be found, than such as are favorable to the Second Epistle of St. Peter. For I really cannot comprehend how any impartial man who has to choose between these two epistles, which are very similar to each other, can prefer the former to the latter, or receive the Epistle of St. Jude, the contents of which labor under great difficulties, and at the same time reject, or even consider as dubious, the Second Epistle of St. Peter, the contents of which labor under no such difficulties. "But it is much more difficult to explain Jde 1:9 , in which the Archangel Michael is said to have disputed with the devil about the body of Moses. The history of this dispute, which has the appearance of a Jewish fable, it is not at present very easy to discover; because the book from which it is supposed to have been taken by the author of this epistle is no longer extant; but I will here put together such scattered accounts of it as I have been able to collect. "Origen found in a Jewish Greek book called the Assumption of Moses, which was extant in his time, this very story related concerning the dispute of the Archangel Michael with the devil about the body of Moses. And from a comparison of the relation in his book with St. Jude's quotation, he was thoroughly persuaded that it was the book from which St. Jude quoted. This he asserts without the least hesitation; and in consequence of this persuasion he himself has quoted the Assumption of Moses as a work of authority, in proof of the temptation of Adam and Eve by the devil. But as he quoted it merely for this purpose, he has given us only an imperfect account of what this book contained, relative to the dispute about the body of Moses. One circumstance, however, he has mentioned, which is not found in the Epistle of St. Jude, viz., that Michael reproached the devil with having possessed the serpent that seduced Eve. In what manner this circumstance is connected with the dispute about the body of Moses, will appear from the following consideration: - "The Jews imagined the person of Moses was so holy that God could find no reason for permitting him to die; and that nothing but the sin committed by Adam and Eve in paradise, which brought death into the world, was the cause why Moses did not live for ever. The same notions they entertained of some other very holy persons; for instance, of Isaiah, who they say was delivered to the angel of death merely on account of the sins of our first parents, though he himself did not deserve to die. Now, in the dispute between Michael and the devil about Moses, the devil was the accuser, and demanded the death of Moses. Michael therefore replied to him that he himself was the cause of that sin, which alone could occasion the death of Moses. How very little such notions as these agree, either with the Christian theology, or with Moses' own writings, it is unnecessary for me to declare. Besides the account given by Origen, there is a passage in the works of Ecumenius, which likewise contains a part of the story related in the Assumption of Moses, and which explains the reason of the dispute which St. Jude has mentioned concerning Moses' body. According to this passage, Michael was employed in burying Moses; but the devil endeavored to prevent it by saying that he had murdered an Egyptian, and was therefore unworthy an honorable burial. Hence it appears that some modern writers are mistaken, who have imagined that in the ancient narrative the dispute was said to have arisen from an attempt of the devil to reveal to the Jews the burial place of Moses, and to incite them to an idolatrous worship of his body. "There is still extant a Jewish book, written in Hebrew, and intitled פטירת משה that is, 'The Death of Moses,' which some critics, especially De La Rue, supposed to be the same work as that which Origen saw in Greek. Now if it were this Hebrew book, intitled 'Phetirath Mosheh,' it would throw a great light on our present inquiry; but I have carefully examined it, and can assert that it is a modern work, and that its contents are not the same is those of the Greek book quoted by Origen. Of the Phetirath Mosheh we have two editions, which contain very different texts; the one was printed at Constantinople in 1518, and reprinted at Venice in 1544 and 1605, the other was published from a manuscript by Gilbert Gaulmyn, who added a translation of both texts, with notes." To show that neither St. Jude, nor any inspired writer, nor indeed any person in his sober senses, could quote or in any way accredit such stuff and nonsense, I shall give the substance of this most ridiculous legend as extracted by Michaelis; for as to the Phetirath Mosheh, I have never seen it. "Moses requests of God, under various pretences, either that he may not die at all, or at least that he may not die before he comes into Palestine. This request he makes in so froward and petulant a manner as is highly unbecoming, not only a great prophet, but even any man who has expectations of a better life after this. In short, Moses is here represented in the light of a despicable Jew begging for a continuance of life, and devoid both of Christian faith and heathen courage; and it is therefore not improbable that the inventor of this fable made himself the model after which he formed the character of Moses. God argues on the contrary with great patience and forbearance, and replies to what Moses had alleged relative to the merit of his own good works. Farther, it is God who says to Moses that he must die on account of the sin of Adam; to which Moses answers, that he ought to be excepted, because he was superior in merit to Adam, Abraham, Isaac, etc. In the meantime Samael, that is, the angel of death, whom the Jews describe as the chief of the devils rejoices at the approaching death of Moses: this is observed by Michael, who says to him, 'Thou wicked wretch, I grieve, and thou laughest.' Moses, after his request had been repeatedly refused, invokes heaven and earth, and all creatures around him to intercede in his behalf. Joshua attempts to pray for him, but the devil stops Joshua's mouth, and represents to him, really in scriptural style, the impropriety of such a prayer. The elders of the people, and with them all the children of Israel, then offered to intercede for Moses; but their mouths are likewise stopped by a million eight hundred and forty thousand devils, which, on a moderate calculation, make three devils to one man. After this, God commands the angel Gabriel to fetch the soul of Moses; but Gabriel excuses himself, saying, that Moses was too strong for him: Michael receives the same order, and excuses himself in the same manner, or, as other accounts say, under pretense that he had been the instructer of Moses, and therefore could not bear to see him die. But this latter excuse, according to the Phetirath Mosheh, was made by Zinghiel, the third angel who received this command. Samael, that is, the devil, then offers his services; but God asks him how he would take hold of Moses, whether by his mouth, or by his hands, or by his feet, saying, that every part of Moses was too holy for him to touch. The devil, however, insists on bringing the soul of Moses; yet he does not accuse him, for, on the contrary, he prizes him higher than Abraham, Isaac, or Jacob. The devil then approaches towards Moses, to execute this voluntary commission; but as soon as he sees the shining countenance of Moses, he is seized with a violent pain, like that of a woman in labor: Moses, instead of using the oriental salutation, 'Peace be with thee,' says to him, in the words of Isaiah, (for in this work Moses frequently quotes Isaiah and the Psalms), 'There is no peace to the wicked.' The devil replies that he was come, by the order of God, to fetch his soul; but Moses deters him from the attempt by representing his own strength and holiness; and saying, 'Go, thou wicked wretch, I will not give thee my soul,' he affrights the devil in such a manner that he immediately retires. The devil then returns to God, and relates what had passed, and receives an order to go a second time; the devil answers that he would go everywhere God commanded him, even into hell, and into fire, but not to Moses. This remonstrance is, however, of no avail, and he is obliged to go back again; but Moses, who sees him coming with a drawn sword, meets him with his miraculous rod, and gives him such a blow with it that the devil is glad to escape. Lastly, God himself comes; and Moses, having then no farther hopes, requests only that his soul may not be taken out of his body by the devil. This request is granted him; Zinghiel, Gabriel, and Michael then lay him on a bed, and the soul of Moses begins to dispute with God, and objects to its being taken out of a body which was so pure and holy that no fly dared to settle on it; but God kisses Moses, and with that kiss extracts his soul from his body. Upon this God utters a heavy lamentation; and thus the story in the Phetirath ends, without any mention of a dispute about the burial of Moses' body. This last scene, therefore, which was contained in the Greek book seen by Origen, is wanting in the Hebrew. But in both of these works Michael, as well as the devil, expresses the same sentiments in respect to Moses: in both works the same spirit prevails; and the concluding scene, which was contained in the Greek book, is nothing more than a continuation of the same story which is contained in the Hebrew." Had Jude quoted a work like the above, it would have argued no inspiration, and little common sense; and the man who could have quoted it must have done it with approbation, and in that case his own composition would have been of a similar stamp. But nothing can be more dissimilar than the Epistle of Jude and the Phetirath Mosheh: the former contains nothing but manly sense, expressed in pure, energetic, and often sublime language, and accompanied, most evidently, with the deepest reverence for God; while the latter is despicable in every point of view, even considered as the work of a filthy dreamer, or as the most superannuated of old wives' fables. "Lastly," says Michaelis, "besides the quotation which St. Jude has made in the 9th verse relative to the dispute between Michael and the devil, he has another quotation, Jde 1:14 , Jde 1:15 , likewise from an apocryphal book called the 'Prophecies of Enoch;' or, if not from any written book, from oral tradition. Now, should it be granted that Enoch was a prophet, though it is not certain that he was, yet as none of his prophecies are recorded in the Old Testament no one could possibly know what they were. It is manifest, therefore, that the book called the 'Prophecies of Enoch' was a mere Jewish forgery, and that too a very unfortunate one, since in all human probability the use of letters was unknown in the time of Enoch, and consequently he could not have left behind him any written prophecies. It is true that an inspired writer might have known, through the medium of Divine information, what Enoch had prophesied, without having recourse to any written work on this subject. But St. Jude, in the place where he speaks of Enoch's prophecies, does not speak of them as prophecies which had been made known to him by a particular revelation; on the contrary, he speaks of them in such a manner as implies that his readers were already acquainted with them." From all the evidence before him, Michaelis concludes that the canonical authority of this epistle is extremely dubious; that its author is either unknown, or very uncertain; and he has even doubts that it is a forgery in the name of the Apostle Jude. Others have spoken of it in strains of unqualified commendation and praise, and think that its genuineness is established by the matters contained in it, which in every respect are suitable to the character of an inspired apostle of Christ. What has led to its discredit with many is the hasty conclusion that St. Jude quotes such a work as the Phetirath Mosheh; than which nothing can be more improbable, and perhaps nothing more false. In almost all ages of the Church it has been assailed and defended; but it is at present generally received over the whole Christian world. It contains some very sublime and nervous passages, from the 10th to the 13th verse inclusive; the description of the false teachers is bold, happy, and energetic; the exhortation in Jde 1:20 and Jde 1:21 , is both forcible and affectionate; and the doxology, in Jde 1:24 and Jde 1:25 , is well adapted to the subject, and is peculiarly dignified and sublime. I have done what I could, time and circumstances considered, to present the whole epistle to the reader in the clearest point of view; and now must commend him to God and the word of his grace, which is able to build him up, and give him an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith in Jesus. The address and apostolical benediction, Jde 1:1 , Jde 1:2 . The reasons which induced Jude to write this epistle, to excite the Christians to contend for the true faith, and to beware of false teachers, lest, falling from their steadfastness, they should be destroyed after the example of backsliding Israel, the apostate angels, and the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, Jde 1:3-7 . Of the false teachers, Jde 1:8 . Of Michael disputing about the body of Moses, Jde 1:9 . The false teachers particularly described: they are like brute beasts, going the way of Cain, run after the error of Balaam, and shall perish, as did Korah in his gainsaying, Jde 1:10 , Jde 1:11 . Are impure, unsteady, fierce, shameless, etc., 12, 13. How Enoch prophesied of such, Jde 1:14 , Jde 1:15 . They are farther described as murmurers and complainers, Jde 1:16 . We should remember the cautions given unto us by the apostles who foretold of these men, Jde 1:17-19 . We should build up ourselves on our most holy faith, Jde 1:20 , Jde 1:21 . How the Church of Christ should treat such, Jde 1:22 , Jde 1:23 . The apostle's farewell, and his doxology to God, Jde 1:24 , Jde 1:25 . Verse 1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ - Probably Jude the apostle, who was surnamed Thaddeus and Lebbeus, was son to Alpheus, and brother to James the less, Joses, and Simon. See Mat 10:3 , and collate with Luk 6:16 ; Mat 13:55 . Brother of James - Supposed to be James the less, bishop of Jerusalem, mentioned here, because he was an eminent person in the Church. See the preface to St. James. To them that are sanctified by God - Instead of ἡγιασμενοις, to the sanctified, AB, several others, both the Syriac, Erpen's Arabic, Coptic, Sahidic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Vulgate, with several of the fathers, have ηγαπημενοις, to them that are beloved; and before εν τῳ Θεῳ, in God, some MSS., with the Syriac and Armenian, have εθνεσιν, to the Gentiles, in God the Father: but although the first is only a probable reading, this is much less so. St. Jude writes to all believers everywhere, and not to any particular Church; hence this epistle has been called a general epistle. Sanctified signifies here consecrated to God through faith in Christ. Preserved in (or by) Jesus Christ - Signifies those who continued unshaken in the Christian faith; and implies also, that none can be preserved in the faith that do not continue in union with Christ, by whose grace alone they can be preserved and called. This should be read consecutively with the other epithets, and should be rather, in a translation, read first than last, to the saints in God the Father, called and preserved by Christ Jesus. Saints is the same as Christians; to become such they were called to believe in Christ by the preaching of the Gospel, and having believed, were preserved by the grace of Christ in the life and practice of piety. Verse 2 Mercy unto you - For even the best have no merit, and must receive every blessing and grace in the way of mercy. Peace - With God and your consciences, love both to God and man, be multiplied - be unboundedly increased. Verse 3 When I gave all diligence - This phrase, πασαν σπουδην ποιουμενος, is a Grecism for being exceedingly intent upon a subject; taking it up seriously with determination to bring it to good effect. The meaning of the apostle seems to be this: "Beloved brethren, when I saw it necessary to write to you concerning the common salvation, my mind being deeply affected with the dangers to which the Church is exposed from the false teachers that are gone out into the world, I found it extremely necessary to write and exhort you to hold fast the truth which you had received, and strenuously to contend for that only faith which, by our Lord and his apostles, has been delivered to the Christians." Some think that St. Jude intimates that he had at first purposed to write to the Church at large, on the nature and design of the Gospel; but seeing the dangers to which the Churches were exposed, because of the false teachers, he changed his mind, and wrote pointedly against those false doctrines, exhorting them strenuously to contend for the faith. The common salvation - The Christian religion, and the salvation which it brings. This is called common because it equally belongs to Jews and Gentiles; it is the saving grace of God which has appeared to every man, and equally offers to every human being that redemption which is provided for the whole world. Verse 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares - Παρεισεδυσαν· They had got into the Church under specious pretences; and, when in, began to sow their bad seed. Before of old ordained - Οἱ παλαι προγεγραμμενοι Such as were long ago proscribed, and condemned in the most public manner; this is the import of the word προγραφειν in this place, and there are many examples of this use of it in the Greek writers. See Kypke. To this condemnation - To a similar punishment to that immediately about to be mentioned. In the sacred writings all such persons, false doctrines, and impure practices, have been most openly proscribed and condemned; and the apostle immediately produces several examples, viz., the disobedient Israelites, the unfaithful angels, and the impure inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha. This is most obviously the apostle's meaning, and it is as ridiculous as it is absurd to look into such words for a decree of eternal reprobation, etc., such a doctrine being as far from the apostle's mind as from that of Him in whose name he wrote. Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness - Making the grace and mercy of God a covering for crimes; intimating that men might sin safely who believe the Gospel, because in that Gospel grace abounds. But perhaps the goodness of God is here meant, for I cannot see how they could believe the Gospel in any way who denied the Lord Jesus Christ; unless, which is likely, their denial refers to this, that while they acknowledged Jesus as the promised Messiah, they denied him to be the only Lord, Sovereign, and Ruler of the Church and of the world. There are many in the present day who hold the same opinion. The only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ - Μονον Δεσποτην Θεον και Κυριον ἡμων Ιησουν Χριστον αρυουμενοι. These words may be translated, Denying the only sovereign God, even our Lord Jesus Christ. But Θεον God, is omitted by ABC, sixteen others, with Erpen's Arabic, the Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, and Vulgate, and by many of the fathers. It is very likely that it was originally inserted as a gloss, to ascertain to whom the title of τον μονον Δεσποτην, the only Sovereign, belonged; and thus make two persons where only one seems to be intended. The passage I believe belongs solely to Jesus Christ, and may be read thus: Denying the only sovereign Ruler, even our Lord Jesus Christ. The text is differently arranged in the Complutensian Polyglot, which contains the first edition of the Greek Testament: Και τον μονον Θεον και Δεσποτην, τον Κυριον ἡμων Ιησουν Χριστον αρνουμενοι· Denying the only God and Sovereign, our Lord Jesus Christ. This is a very remarkable position of the words, and doubtless existed in some of the MSS. from which these editors copied. The Simonians, Nicolaitans, and Gnostics, denied God to be the creator of the world; and Simon is said to have proclaimed himself as Father to the Samaritans, as Son to the Jews, and as the Holy Ghost to all other nations. All such most obviously denied both Father, Son, and Spirit. Verse 5 I will therefore put you in remembrance - That is, how such persons were proscribed, and condemned to bear the punishment due to such crimes. Though ye once knew this - The word ἁπαξ, here translated once, has greatly puzzled many interpreters. It has two meanings in the sacred writings, and indeed in the Greek writers also. 1. It signifies once, one time, as opposed to twice, or several times. 2. Altogether, entirely, perfectly, interpreted by Suidas αντι τον διολου, ὁλοσχερως· and of this meaning he produces a proof from Josephus; This appears to be the sense of the word in Heb 6:4 : τους ἁπαξ φωτισθεντας· those who were Fully enlightened. Heb 10:2 : ἁπαξ κεκαθαρμενους· Thoroughly cleansed. See also Heb 10:3 . Psa 62:11 : ἁπαξ ελαλησεν ὁ Θεος. God spoke Fully, completely, on the subject. St. Jude is to be understood as saying, I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye are Thoroughly instructed in this. Saved the people - Delivered them from the Egyptian bondage. Afterward destroyed them - Because they neither believed his word, nor were obedient to his commands. This is the first example of what was mentioned Jde 1:4 . Verse 6 The angels which kept not their first estate - Την ἑαυτων αρχην Their own principality. The words may be understood of their having invaded the office or dignity of some others, or of their having by some means forfeited their own. This is spoken of those generally termed the fallen angels; but from what they fell, or from what cause or for what crime, we know not. It is generally thought to have been pride; but this is mere conjecture. One thing is certain; the angels who fell must have been in a state of probation, capable of either standing or falling, as Adam was in paradise. They did not continue faithful, though they knew the law on which they stood; they are therefore produced as the second example. But left their own habitation - This seems to intimate that they had invaded the office and prerogatives of others, and attempted to seize on their place of residence and felicity. He hath reserved in everlasting chains - That is, in a state of confinement from which they cannot escape. Under darkness - Alluding probably to those dungeons or dark cells in prisons where the most flagitious culprits were confined. The judgment of the great day, - The final judgment, when both angels and men shall receive their eternal doom. See on 2Pet 2:4 (note). In Sohar Exod., fol. 8, c. 32: "Rabbi Isaac asked: Suppose God should punish any of his heavenly family, how would he act? R. Abba answered: He would send them into the flaming river, take away their dominion, and put others in their place." Some suppose that the saints are to occupy the places from which these angels, by transgression, fell. Verse 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha - What their sin and punishment were may be seen in Genesis 19, and the notes there. This is the third example to illustrate what is laid down Jde 1:4 . Are set forth for an example - Both of what God will do to such transgressors, and of the position laid down in Jde 1:4 , viz., that God has in the most open and positive manner declared that such and such sinners shall meet with the punishment due to their crimes. Suffering the vengeance of eternal fire - Subjected to such a punishment as an endless fire can inflict. Some apply this to the utter subversion of these cities, so that by the action of that fire which descended from heaven they were totally and eternally destroyed; for as to their being rebuilt, that is impossible, seeing the very ground on which they stood is burned up, and the whole plain is now the immense lake Asphaltites. See the notes on Genesis 19 (note). The first sense applies to the inhabitants of those wicked cities; the second, to the cities themselves: in either case the word πυρ αιωνιον signifies an eternally destructive fire; it has no end in the punishment of the wicked Sodomites, etc.; it has no end in the destruction of the cities; they were totally burnt up, and never were and never can be rebuilt. In either of these senses the word αιωνιος, eternal, has its grammatical and proper meaning. Verse 8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers - He means to say that these false teachers and their followers were as unbelieving and disobedient as the Israelites in the wilderness, as rebellious against the authority of God as the fallen angels, and as impure and unholy as the Sodomites; and that consequently they must expect similar punishment. Our translators, by rendering ενυπνιαζομενοι filthy dreamers, seem to have understood St. Jude to mean les pollutions nocturnes et voluntaires de ces hommes impurs, qui se livrent sans scrupule a toutes sortes des pensees; et salissant leur imagination pas la vue de toutes sortes d' objets, tombent ensuite dans les corsuptions honteuses et criminelles. See Calmet. In plain English, self-pollution, with all its train of curses and cursed effects on body, soul, and spirit. The idea of our translators seems to be confirmed by the words σαρκα μεν μιαινουσι, they indeed pollute the flesh. See what is said at the conclusion of the thirty-eighth chapter of Genesis. Despise dominion - Κυριοτητα δε αθετουσι· They set all government at nought - they will come under no restraints; they despise all law, and wish to live as they list. Speak evil of dignities - Δοξας δε βλασφημουσιν· They blaspheme or speak injuriously of supreme authority. (See 2Pet 2:10 , 2Pet 2:11 .) They treat governors and government with contempt, and calumniate and misrepresent all Divine and civil institutions. Verse 9 Yet Michael the archangel - Of this personage many things are spoken in the Jewish writings "Rabbi Judah Hakkodesh says: Wherever Michael is said to appear, the glory of the Divine Majesty is always to be understood." Shemoth Rabba, sec. ii., fol. 104, 3. So that it seems as if they considered Michael in some sort as we do the Messiah manifested in the flesh. Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Rev 12:7 , it is said: Michael and his angels fought against the Dragon and his angels. The word Michael מיכאל, seems to be compounded of מי mi, who, כ ke, like, and אל El, God; he who is like God; hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus. Disputed about the body of Moses - What this means I cannot tell; or from what source St. Jude drew it, unless from some tradition among his countrymen. There is something very like it in Debarim Rabba, sec. ii., fol. 263, 1: "Samael, that wicked one, the prince of the satans, carefully kept the soul of Moses, saying: When the time comes in which Michael shall lament, I shall have my mouth filled with laughter. Michael said to him: Wretch, I weep, and thou laughest. Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy, because I have fallen; for I shall rise again: when I sit in darkness, the Lord is my light; Mic 7:8 . By the words, because I have fallen, we must understand the death of Moses; by the words, I shall rise again, the government of Joshua, etc." See the preface. Another contention of Michael with Satan is mentioned in Yalcut Rubeni, fol. 43, 3: "At the time in which Isaac was bound there was a contention between Michael and Satan. Michael brought a ram, that Isaac might be liberated; but Satan endeavored to carry off the ram, that Isaac might be slain." The contention mentioned by Jude is not about the sacrifice of Isaac, nor the soul of Moses, but about the Body of Moses; but why or wherefore we know not. Some think the devil wished to show the Israelites where Moses was buried, knowing that they would then adore his body; and that Michael was sent to resist this discovery. Durst not bring against him a railing accusation - It was a Jewish maxim, as may be seen in Synopsis Sohar, page 92, note 6: "It is not lawful for man to prefer ignominious reproaches, even against wicked spirits." See Schoettgen. Dr. Macknight says: "In Dan 10:13 , Dan 10:21 ; Dan 12:1 , Michael is spoken of as one of the chief angels who took care of the Israelites as a nation; he may therefore have been the angel of the Lord before whom Joshua the high priest is said, Zac 3:1 , to have stood, Satan being at his right hand to resist him, namely, in his design of restoring the Jewish Church and state, called by Jude the body of Moses, just as the Christian Church is called by Paul the body of Christ. Zechariah adds, And the Lord, that is, the angel of the Lord, as is plain from Zac 3:1 , Zac 3:2 , said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan! even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem, rebuke thee!" This is the most likely interpretation which I have seen; and it will appear the more probable when it is considered that, among the Hebrews, גוף guph, Body, is often used for a thing itself. So, in Rom 7:24 , σωμα της ἁμαρτιας, the body of sin, signifies sin itself; so the body of Moses, גוף של משה guph shel Mosheh, may signify Moses himself; or that in which he was particularly concerned, viz., his institutes, religion, etc. It may be added, that the Jews consider Michael and Samael, one as the friend, the other as the enemy, of Israel. Samael is their accuser, Michael their advocate. "Michael and Samael stand before the Lord; Satan accuses, but Michael shows the merits of Israel. Satan endeavors to speak, but Michael silences him: Hold thy tongue, says he, and let us hear what the Judge determines; for it is written, He will speak peace to his people, and to his saints; Psa 85:8 ." Shemoth Rabba, sec. xviii. fol. 117, 3. Verse 10 Speak evil of those things which they know not - They do not understand the origin and utility of civil government; they revile that which ever protects their own persons and their property. This is true in most insurrections and seditions. But what they know naturally - They are destitute of reflection; their minds are uncultivated; they follow mere natural instinct, and are slaves to their animal propensities. As brute beasts - Ὡς τα αλογα ζωα· Like the irrational animals; but, in the indulgence of their animal propensities, they corrupt themselves, beyond the example of the brute beasts. A fearful description; and true of many in the present day. Verse 11 They have gone in the way of Cain - They are haters of their brethren, and they that are such are murderers; and by their false doctrine they corrupt and destroy the souls of the people. The error of Balaam - For the sake of gain they corrupt the word of God and refine away its meaning, and let it down so as to suit the passions of the profligate. This was literally true of the Nicolaitans, who taught most impure doctrines, and followed the most lascivious practices. Gainsaying of Core - See the account of the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, and their company, in Num. 22. It appears that these persons opposed the authority of the apostles of our Lord, as Korah and his associates did that of Moses and Aaron; and St. Jude predicts them a similar punishment. In this verse he accuses them of murder, covetousness, and rebellion against the authority of God. Verse 12 Spots in your feasts of charity - It appears that these persons, unholy and impure as they were, still continued to have outward fellowship with the Church! This is strange: but it is very likely that their power and influence in that place had swallowed up, or set aside, the power and authority of the real ministers of Christ; a very common case when worldly, time - serving men get into the Church. The feasts of charity, the αγαπαι or love feasts, of which the apostle speaks, were in use in the primitive Church till the middle of the fourth century, when, by the council of Laodicea, they were prohibited to be held in the Churches; and, having been abused, fell into disuse. In later days they have been revived, in all the purity and simplicity of the primitive institution, among the Moravians or Unitas Fratrum, and the people called Methodists. Among the ancients, the richer members of the Church made an occasional general feast, at which all the members attended, and the poor and the rich ate together. The fatherless, the widows, and the strangers were invited to these feasts, and their eating together was a proof of their love to each other; whence such entertainments were called love feasts. The love feasts were at first celebrated before the Lord's Supper; in process of time they appear to have been celebrated after it. But they were never considered as the Lord's Supper, nor any substitute for it. See, for farther information, Suicer, in his Thesaurus, under the word Αγαπη. Feeding themselves without fear - Eating, not to suffice nature, but to pamper appetite. It seems the provision was abundant, and they ate to gluttony and riot. It was this which brought the love feasts into disrepute in the Church, and was the means of their being at last wholly laid aside. This abuse is never likely to take place among the Methodists, as they only use bread and water; and of this the provision is not sufficient to afford the tenth part of a meal. Instead of αγαπαις, love feasts, απαταις, deceits, is the reading of the Codex Alexandrinus, and the Codex Ephrem, two MSS. of the highest antiquity; as also of those MSS. collated by Laurentius Valla, and of some of those in the Medicean library. This reading appears to have been introduced in order to avoid the conclusion that some might be led to draw concerning the state of the Church; it must be very corrupt, to have in its communion such corrupt men. Clouds - without water - The doctrine of God is compared to the rain, Deu 32:2 , and clouds are the instruments by which the rain is distilled upon the earth. In arid or parched countries the very appearance of a cloud is delightful, because it is a token of refreshing showers; but when sudden winds arise, and disperse these clouds, the hope of the husbandman and shepherd is cut off. These false teachers are represented as clouds; they have the form and office of the teachers of righteousness, and from such appearances pure doctrine may be naturally expected: but these are clouds without water - they distil no refreshing showers, because they have none; they are carried away and about by their passions, as those light fleecy clouds are carried by the winds. See the notes on 2Pet 2:17 . Trees whose fruit withereth - Δενδρα φθινοπωρινα· Galled or diseased trees; for φθινοπωρον is, according to Phavorinus, νοσος φθινουσα οπωρας, a disease (in trees) which causes their fruit to wither; for although there are blossoms, and the fruit shapes or is set, the galls in the trees prevent the proper circulation of the sap, and therefore the fruit never comes to perfection. Hence the apostle immediately adds, without fruit; i.e. the fruit never comes to maturity. This metaphor expresses the same thing as the preceding. They have the appearance of ministers of the Gospel, but they have no fruit. Twice dead - First, naturally and practically dead in sin, from which they had been revived by the preaching and grace of the Gospel. Secondly, dead by backsliding or apostasy from the true faith, by which they lost the grace they had before received; and now likely to continue in that death, because plucked up from the roots, their roots of faith and love being no longer fixed in Christ Jesus. Perhaps the aorist is taken here for the future: They Shall Be plucked up from the roots - God will exterminate them from the earth. Verse 13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame - The same metaphor as in Isa 57:20 : The wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters cast up mire and dirt. These are like the sea in a storm, where the swells are like mountains; the breakers lash the shore, and sound like thunder; and the great deep, stirred up from its very bottom, rolls its muddy, putrid sediment, and deposits it upon the beach. Such were those proud and arrogant boasters, those headstrong, unruly, and ferocious men, who swept into their own vortex the souls of the simple, and left nothing behind them that was not indicative of their folly, their turbulence, and their impurity. Wandering stars - Αστερες πλανηται· Not what we call planets; for although these differ from what are called the fixed stars, which never change their place, while the planets have their revolution round the sun; yet, properly speaking, there is no irregularity in their motions: for their appearance of advancing, stationary, and retrograde, are only in reference to an observer on the earth, viewing them in different parts of their orbits; for as to themselves, they ever continue a steady course through all their revolutions. But these are uncertain, anomalous meteors, ignes fatui, wills-o'-the-wisp; dancing about in the darkness which themselves have formed, and leading simple souls astray, who have ceased to walk in the light, and have no other guides but those oscillating and devious meteors which, if you run after them, will flee before you, and if you run from them will follow you. The blackness of darkness - They are such as are going headlong into that outer darkness where there is wailing, and weeping, and gnashing of teeth. The whole of this description appears to have been borrowed from 2 Peter 2, where the reader is requested to see the notes. Verse 14 Enoch also, the seventh from Adam - He was the seventh patriarch, and is distinguished thus from Enoch, son of Cain, who was but the third from Adam; this appears plainly from the genealogy, 1Chr 1:1 : Adams Seth, Enosh, Kenan, Mahalaleel, Jered, Henoch or Enoch, etc. Of the book of Enoch, from which this prophecy is thought to have been taken, much has been said; but as the work is apocryphal, and of no authority, I shall not burden my page with extracts. See the preface. Perhaps the word προεφητευσε, prophesied, means no more than preached, spoke, made declarations, etc., concerning these things and persons; for doubtless he reproved the ungodliness of his own times. It is certain that a book of Enoch was known in the earliest ages of the primitive Church, and is quoted by Origen and Tertullian; and is mentioned by St. Jerome in the Apostolical Constitutions, by Nicephorus, Athanasius, and probably by St. Augustine. See Suicer's Thesaurus, vol. i., col. 1131. Such a work is still extant among the Abyssinians. Ten thousand of his saints - This seems to be taken from Dan 7:10 . Verse 15 To execute judgment - This was originally spoken to the antediluvians; and the coming of the Lord to destroy that world was the thing spoken of in this prophecy or declaration. But as God had threatened this, it required no direct inspiration to foretell it. To execute judgment, etc. This is a very strange verse as to its composition, and is loaded with various readings; the MSS. and versions being at little agreement among themselves on its phraseology. Αυτων, which we translate among them, is omitted by the best MSS. and versions, and is, in all probability, spurious. Many also omit ασεβειας after ργων, ungodly deeds. Many insert λογων, words or speeches, after σκληρων, hard; and this word our translators have supplied. And instead of ἁμαρτωλοι, sinners, the Sahidic has ανθρωποι, men. There are others of less note; but the frequent recurrence of All and Ungodly makes the construction of the sentence very harsh. Dr. Macknight supposes that Enoch's prophecy was common among the Jews; for the first words in Hebrew are Maranatha, and these were used by them in that form of excommunication or cursing which they pronounced against irreclaimable offenders. The doctor forgets himself here; the words Maranatha are not Hebrew, but Syriac. In Hebrew the form of execration begins with ארור אתה arur attah, "cursed art thou;" or מחרם אתה mochoram attah: but the Syriac maran atha, is literally, our Lord is coming; see on 1Cor 16:22 (note); but here, in the Syriac, the words are atha moria, "the Lord cometh." So it is doubtful whether this fancied analogy exists. Verse 16 These are murmurers - Grudging and grumbling at all men, and at all things; complainers, μεμψιμοιροι, complainers of their fate or destiny - finding fault with God and all his providential dispensations, making and governing worlds in their own way; persons whom neither God nor man can please. Walking after their own lusts - Taking their wild, disorderly, and impure passions for the rule of their conduct, and not the writings of the prophets and apostles. Great swelling words - Ὑπερογκα. See the explanation of this term in 2Pet 2:18 . Having men's persons in admiration - Time-servers and flatterers; persons who pretend to be astonished at the greatness, goodness, sagacity, learning, wisdom; etc., of rich and great men, hoping thereby to acquire money, influence, power, friends, and the like. Because of advantage - Ωφελειας χαριν· For the sake of lucre. All the flatterers of the rich are of this kind; and especially those who profess to be ministers of the Gospel, and who, for the sake of a more advantageous settlement or living, will soothe the rich even in their sins. With such persons a rich man is every thing; and if he have but a grain of grace, his piety is extolled to the skies! I have known several ministers of this character, and wish them all to read the sixteenth verse of Jude. Verse 17 Remember - the words - Instead of following those teachers and their corrupt doctrine, remember what Christ and his apostles have said; for they foretold the coming of such false teachers and impostors. Verse 18 Mockers in the last time - See the notes on 1Tim 4:1 ; 2Tim 3:1 (note), etc.; and particularly 2Pet 3:2 , 2Pet 3:3 (note), etc., to which Jude seems to refer. The last time. - The conclusion of the Jewish polity. Verse 19 Who separate themselves - From the true Church, which they leave from an affectation of superior wisdom. Sensual - Ψυχικοι· Animal - living as brute beasts, guided simply by their own lusts and passions, their Bible being the manifold devices and covetousness of their own hearts; for they have not the Spirit - they are not spiritually minded; and have no Holy Ghost, no inspiration from God. Verse 20 Building up yourselves - Having the most holy faith - the Gospel of our Lord Jesus, and the writings of his apostles, for your foundation; founding all your expectations on these, and seeking from the Christ who is their sum and substance; all the grace and glory ye need. Praying in the Holy Ghost - Holding fast the Divine influence which ye have received, and under that influence making prayer and supplication to God. The prayer that is not sent up through the influence of the Holy Ghost is never likely to reach heaven. Verse 21 Keep yourselves in the love of God - By building up yourselves on your most holy faith, and praying in the Holy Ghost; for without this we shall soon lose the love of God. Looking for the mercy of our Lord - For although they were to build themselves up, and to pray in the Holy Ghost, and keep themselves in the love of God, yet this building, praying, and keeping, cannot merit heaven; for, after all their diligence, earnestness, self-denial, watching, obedience, etc., they must look for the Mercy of the Lord Jesus Christ, to bring them to Eternal Life. Verse 22 And of some have compassion, making a difference - The general meaning of this exhortation is supposed to be, "Ye are not to deal alike with all those who have been seduced by false teachers; ye are to make a difference between those who have been led away by weakness and imprudence, and those who, in the pride and arrogance of their hearts, and their unwillingness to submit to wholesome discipline, have separated themselves from the Church, and become its inveterate enemies." Instead of Και οὑς μεν ελεειτε διακρινομενοι, and of some have compassion, making a difference, many MSS., versions, and fathers have και οὑς μεν ελεγχετε διακρινομενους, and some rebuke, after having judged them; or, rebuke those that differ; or, some that are wavering convince; or whatever else the reader pleases: for this and the following verse are all confusion, both in the MSS. and versions; and it is extremely difficult to know what was the original text. Our own is as likely as any. Verse 23 And others save with fear - "Some of them snatch from the fire: but when they repent, have mercy upon them in fear." - Syriac. "And some of them rebuke for their sins; and on others have mercy when they are convicted; and others save from the fire and deliver them." - Erpen's Arabic. Mr. Wesley's note has probably hit the sense. "Meantime watch over others as well as yourselves; and give them such help as their various needs require. For instance, 1. Some that are wavering in judgment, staggered by others' or by their own evil reasoning, endeavor more deeply to convince of the truth as it is in Jesus. 2. Some snatch with a swift and strong hand out of the fire of sin and temptation. 3. On others show compassion, in a milder and gentler way; though still with a jealous fear, lest you yourselves be infected with the disease you endeavor to cure. See therefore that, while ye love the sinners, ye retain the utmost abhorrence of their sins, and of any, the least degree of or approach to them." Having even the garment spotted by the flesh - Fleeing from all appearance of evil. Dictum sumptum, ut apparet, a mulieribus sanguine menstruo pollutis, quarum vestes etiam pollutae censebantur: or there may be an allusion to a case of leprosy, for that infected the garments of the afflicted person, and these garments were capable of conveying the contagion to others. Verse 24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling - Who alone can preserve you from the contagion of sin, and preserve you from falling into any kind of error that might be prejudicial to the interests of your souls; and thus to present you faultless, or, as many others read, ασπιλους, without spot, alluding to the spotted garment mentioned above. Before the presence of his glory - Where nothing can stand that does not resemble himself, with exceeding great joy, in finding yourselves eternally out of the reach of the possibility of falling, and for having now arrived at an eternity of happiness. Verse 25 To the only wise God - Who alone can teach, who alone has declared the truth; that truth in which ye now stand. See on Rom 16:27 (note). Our Savior - Who has by his blood washed us from our sins, and made us kings and priests unto God the Father. Be glory - Be ascribed all light, excellence, and splendor. Majesty - All power, authority, and pre-eminence. Dominion - All rule and government in the world and in the Church, in earth and in heaven. And power - All energy and operation to every thing that is wise, great, good, holy, and excellent. Both now - In the present state of life and things. And ever - Εις παντας τους αιωνας· To the end of all states, places, dispensations, and worlds; and to a state which knows no termination, being that Eternity in which this glory, majesty, dominion, and power ineffably and incomprehensibly dwell. Amen - So let it be, so ought it to be, and so it shall be. After to the only wise God our Savior, many excellent MSS. versions, etc., add δια Ιησου Χριστου του Κυριου ἡμων, by Jesus Christ our Lord; and after dominion and power they add προ παντος του αιωνος, before all time; and both these readings Griesbach has received into the text. The text, therefore, may be read thus: To the only wise God our Savior, by Christ Jesus our Lord, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, before all time; and now, and through all futurity. Amen. Let the whole creation join in one chorus, issuing in one eternal Amen! Subscriptions to this epistle in the Versions: - The Epistle of Jude the apostle, whose intercession be ever with us, Amen. The end. - Syriac. The Epistle of Jude, the brother of James is finished: and glory be to God for ever and ever, Amen. - Aethiopic. Nothing in the Vulgate. Nothing in the Arabic. "This epistle was written a.d. 64, by the Apostle Jude, the brother of James; who is also called Lebbeus and Thaddeus; and who preached (the Gospel) to the Armenians and to the Persians." - This is found at the end of the Armenian Bible, printed in 1698. The Epistle of Jude the son of Joseph, and brother of James, is ended - A MS. copy of the Syriac. The end of the catholic Epistle of St. Jude. - Complutensian. The Epistle of Jude the apostle is ended. - Ibid. Latin text. In the Manuscripts: - Jude. - Codex Vaticanus, B. The Epistle of Jude. - Codex Alexandrinus. The catholic Epistle of Jude. - Codex Ephrem. The Epistle of the holy Apostle Jude. - Codex G, in Griesbach. Of how little authority such subscriptions are, we have already had occasion to observe in various cases. Very few of them are ancient; and none of them coeval with the works to which they are appended. They are, in general, the opinions of the scribes who wrote the copies; or of the Churches for whose use they were written. No stress therefore should be laid on them, as if proceeding from Divine authority. With the Epistle of Jude end all the apostolical epistles, and with it the canon of the New Testament, as to gospels and epistles; for the Apocalypse is a work sui generis, and can rank with neither. It is in general a collection of symbolic prophecies, which do not appear to be yet fully understood by the Christian world, and which can only be known when they are fulfilled. Finished for a new impression, January 4th, 1832. - A. C.

Preface To The Epistles Of Saint James And Saint Jude 1545 (1522) (1546 and 1522) Though this Epistle of St. James was rejected by the ancients, I praise it and hold it a good book, because it sets up no doctrine of men and lays great stress upon God’s law. But to state my own opinion about it, though without injury to anyone, I consider that it is not the writing of any apostle. My reasons are as follows. First: Flatly against St. Paul and all the rest of Scripture, it ascribes righteousness to works, and says that Abraham was justified by his works, in that he offered his son Isaac, though St. Paul, on the contrary, teaches, in Romans 4:2, that Abraham was justified without works, by faith alone, before he offered his son, and proves it by Moses in Genesis 15:6. Now although this Epistle might be helped and a gloss be found for this work-righteousness, it cannot be defended against applying to works the saying of Moses in Genesis 15:6, which speaks only of Abraham’s faith, and not of his works, as St. Paul shows in Romans 4. This fault, therefore, leads to the conclusion that it is not the work of any apostle. Second: Its purpose is to teach Christians, and in all this’ long teaching it does not once mention the Passion, the Resurrection, or the Spirit of Christ. He names Christ several times, but he teaches nothing about Him, and only speaks of common faith in God. For it is the duty of a true apostle to preach of the Passion and Resurrection and work of Christ, and thus lay the foundation of faith, as He Himself says, in John 15:27, “Ye shall bear witness of me.” All the genuine sacred books agree in this, that all of them preach Christ and deal with Him. That is the true test, by which to judge all books, when we see whether they deal with Christ or not, since all the Scriptures show us Christ ( Romans 3:21 ), and St. Paul will know nothing but Christ ( 1 Corinthians 15:2 ). What does not teach Christ is not apostolic, even though St. Peter or Paul taught it; again, what preaches Christ would be apostolic, even though Judas, Annas, Pilate and Herod did it. But this James does nothing more than drive to the law and its works; and he mixes the two up in such disorderly fashion that it seems to me he must have been some good, pious man, who took some sayings of the apostles’ disciples and threw them thus on paper; or perhaps they were written down by someone else from his preaching. He calls the law a “law of liberty,” though St. Paul calls it a law of slavery, ( of wrath, of death and of sin ( Galatians 3:23; Romans 7:11 ). Moreover, in James 5:20, he quotes the sayings of St. Peter, “Love covereth the multitude of sins” ( 1 Peter 4:8 ) and “Humble yourselves under the hand of God” ( 1 Peter 5:6 ), and of St. Paul ( Galatians 5:10 ), “The Spirit lusteth against hatred”; and yet, in point of time, St. James was put to death by Herod, in Jerusalem, before St. Peter. So it seems that he came long after Sts. Peter and Paul. In a word, he wants to guard against those who relied on faith without works, and is unequal to the task [in spirit, thought, and words, and rends the Scriptures and thereby resists Paul and all Scripture], and would accomplish by insisting on the Law what the apostles accomplish by inciting men to love. Therefore, I cannot put him among the chief books, though I would not thereby prevent anyone from putting him where he pleases and estimating him as he pleases; for there are many good sayings in him. Concerning the Epistle of St. Jude, no one can deny that it is an extract or copy from St. Peter’s second epistle, so very like it are all the words. He also speaks of the apostles as a disciple coming long after them, and quotes sayings and stories that are found nowhere in the Scriptures. This moved the ancient Fathers to throw this Epistle out of the main body of the Scriptures. Moreover, Jude, the Apostle, did not go to Greek-speaking lands, but to Persia, as it is said, so that he did not write Greek. Therefore, although I praise the book, it is an epistle that need not be counted among the chief books, which are to lay the foundation of faith.

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ - The highest glory which any, either angel or man, can aspire to. The word servant, under the old covenant, was adapted to the spirit of fear and bondage that clave to that dispensation. But when the time appointed of the Father was come, for the sending of his Son to redeem them that were under the law, the word servant (used by the apostles concerning themselves and all the children of God) signified one that, having the Spirit of adoption, is made free by the Son of God. His being a servant is the fruit and perfection of his being a son. And whenever the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in the new Jerusalem, then will it be indeed that "his servants shall serve him," Rev 22:3 . The brother of James - St. James was the more eminent, usually styled, "the brother of the Lord." To them that are beloved - The conclusion, Jude 1:21 , exactly answers the introduction. And preserved through Jesus Christ - So both the spring and the accomplishment of salvation are pointed out. This is premised, lest any of them should be discouraged by the terrible things which are afterwards mentioned. And called - To receive the whole blessing of God, in time and eternity.

THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE. INTRODUCTION. I. THE AUTHOR OF THIS EPISTLE. LITTLE is known of the author of this brief epistle. He styles himself ( Jude 1:1 ) "the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James;" but there has been some difference of opinion as to what James is meant. He does not call himself an apostle, but supposes that the terms which he uses would sufficiently identify him, and would be a sufficient reason for his addressing his brethren in the manner in which he does in this epistle. There were two of the name of James among the apostles, ( Lk 6:14,15 ) and it has been made a question of which of them he was the brother. There were also two of the name of Judas, or Jude; but there is no difficulty in determining which of them was the author of this epistle, for the other had the surname of Iscariot, and was the traitor. In the catalogue of the apostles given by Matthew Mt 10:3, the tenth place is given to an apostle who is there called "Lebbeus, whose surname was Thaddeus;" and as this name does not occur in the list given by Luke, Lk 7:15 and as the tenth place in the catalogue is occupied by "Simon, called Zelotes," and as he afterwards mentions "Judas the brother of James," it is supposed that Lebbeus and Judas were the same persons. It was not uncommon for persons to have two or more names. Comp. Robinson's Harmony of the Gospels, 40; Bacon's Lives of Apostles, p. 447; and Michaelis, iv., 365. The title which he assumes, "brother of James," was evidently chosen because the James referred to was well-known, and because the fact that he was his brother would be a sufficient designation of himself, and of his right to address Christians in this manner. The name of the elder James, who was slain by Herod, Acts 12:2, can hardly be supposed to be referred to, as he had been dead some time when this epistle is supposed to have been written; and as that James was the brother of John, who was then living, it would have been much more natural for him to have mentioned that he was the brother of that beloved disciple. The other James-- "James the Less," or "James the Just"-- was still living; was a prominent man in Jerusalem; and was, besides, known as" the brother of the Lord Jesus;" and the fact of relationship to that James would sufficiently designate the writer. There can be little doubt, therefore, that this is the James here intended. In regard to his character and influence, see Intro. to the Epistle of James, 1. If the author of this epistle was the brother of that James, it was sufficient to refer to that fact, without mentioning that he was an apostle, in order to give to his epistle authority, and to settle its canonical character. Of Jude little is known. His name is found in the list of the apostles, but, besides that, it is but once mentioned in the Gospels. The only thing that is preserved of him in the Evangelists, is a question which he put to the Saviour, on the eve of his crucifixion. The Saviour had said, in his parting address to his disciples, "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself unto him." In regard to the meaning of this remark, Judas is said to have asked the following question: "Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?" Jn 14:21,22. To this question the Saviour gave him a kind and satisfactory answer, and that is the last that is said of him in the Gospels. Of his subsequent life we know little. In Acts 15:22, he is mentioned as surnamed "Barsabas," and as being sent with Paul and Barnabas and Silas to Antioch. Paulinus says that he preached in Lybia, and that his body remained there. Jerome affirms, that after the ascension he was sent to Edessa, to king Abgarus; and the modern Greeks say that he preached in that city, and throughout Mesopotamia, and in Judea, Samaria, Idumea, Syria, and principally in Armenia and Persia.--Calmet's Diet. Nothing certainly can be known in reference to the field of his labours, or to the place and circumstances of his death. On the question whether the Thaddeus who first preached the gospel in Syria was the same person as Jude, see Michaelis, Introduction iv., 367--371. II---THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE EPISTLE. If this epistle was written by the apostle Jude, the brother of James and of our Lord, there can be no doubt of its canonical authority, and its claim to a place in the New Testament. It is true that he does not call himself art apostle, but simply mentions himself as "a servant of Jesus Christ, and a brother of James." By this appellation, however, he has practically made it known that he was one of the apostles, for all who had a catalogue of the apostles, would know "that Judas, the brother of James," was one of them. At the same time, as the relation of James to our Lord was well understood, Gal 1:19, his authority would be recognised as soon as he was known to be the author of the epistle. It may be asked, indeed, if he was an apostle, why he did not call himself such; and why he did not seek to give authority and currency to his epistle, by adverting to the fact that he was the "Lord's brother." To the first of these questions, it may be replied, that to have called himself "Judas, the apostle," would not have designated him so certainly, as to call himself" the brother of James;" and besides, the naked title, "Judas, the apostle," was one which he might not choose to see applied to himself. After the act of the traitor, and the reproach which he had brought upon that name, it is probable that he would prefer to designate himself by some other appellation than one which had such associations connected with it. It may be added, also, that in several of his epistles Paul himself does not make use of the name apostle, Php 1:1, 1Thes 1:1, 2Thes 1:1, Phm 1:1. To the second question, it may be replied, that modesty may have kept him from applying to himself the title, the" Lord's brother." Even James never uses it of himself; and we only know that he sustained this relation from an incidental remark of the apostle Paul, Gal 1:19. Great honour would be attached to that relationship, and it is possible that the reason why it was not referred to by James and Jude was an apprehension that it might produce jealousy, as if they claimed some special pre-eminence over their brethren. For the evidence of the canonical authority of this epistle, the reader is referred to Lardner, vol. vi., pp. 304--313, and to Michaelis, Intro. vol. iv., p. 374, seq. Michaelis, chiefly on the internal evidence, supposes that it is not an inspired production. There were indeed, at first, doubts about its being inspired, as there were respecting the epistle of James, and the second epistle of Peter, but those doubts were ultimately removed, and it was received as a canonical epistle. Clemens of Alexandria cites the epistle under Jude's name, as the production of a prophetic mind. Origen calls it a production full of heavenly grace. Eusebius says that his predecessors were divided in opinion respecting it, and that it was not ranked among the universally-acknowledged writings. It was not universally received among the Syrians, and is not found in the Peschite, the oldest Syriac version of the Scriptures. In the time of Jerome, however, it came to be ranked among the other sacred Scriptures as of Divine authority.--Hug, Introduction, 180. The principal grounds of doubt in regard to the canonical authority of the epistle, arose from the supposed fact that the author has quoted two apocryphal writings, Jud 1:9,14. The consideration of this objection will be more appropriate in the Notes on those verses, for it obviously depends much on the true interpretation of these passages. I shall, therefore, reserve what I have to say on that point to the exposition of those verses. Those who are disposed to examine it at length, may consult Hug, Intro., 183; Lardner, vi. 309-314, and Michaelis, Intro., iv., 378, seq. III. THE QUESTION WHEN THE EPISTLE WAS WRITTEN, TO WHOM AND ITS DESIGN NOTHING can be determined with entire certainty in regard to the persons to whom this epistle was written. Witsius supposed that it was addressed to Christians everywhere; Hammond, that it was addressed to Jewish Christians alone, who were scattered abroad, and that its design was to secure them against the errors of the Gnostics; Benson, that it was directed to Jewish believers, especially to those of the western dispersion; Lardner, that it was written to all, without distinction, who had embraced the gospel. The principal argument for supposing that it was addressed to Jewish converts is, that the apostle refers mainly for proof to Hebrew writings, but this might be sufficiently accounted tbr by the fact that the writer himself was of Jewish origin. The only way of determining anything on this point is from the epistle itself. The inscription is, "To them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called," Jude 1:1. From this it would appear evident that he had no particular classes of Christians in his eye, whether of Jewish or Gentile origin, but that he designed the epistle for the general use of all who had embraced the Christian religion. The errors which he combats in the epistle were evidently wide-spread, and were of such a nature that it was proper to warn all Christians against them. They might, it is true, be more prevalent in some quarters than in others, but still they were so common that Christians everywhere should be put on their guard against them. The design for which Jude wrote the epistle he has himself stated, Jude 1:3. It was with reference to the "common salvation"-- the doctrines pertaining to salvation which were held by all Christians, and to show them the reasons for "contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints." That faith was assailed. There were teachers of error abroad. They were insinuating and artful men--men who had crept in unawares, and who, while they professed to hold the Christian doctrine, were really undermining its faith, and spreading corruption through the church. The purpose, therefore, of the epistle is to put those to whom it was written on their guard against the corrupt teachings of these men, and to encourage them to stand up manfully for the great principles of Christian truth. Who these errorists were, it is not easy now to determine. The leading charge against them, both by Jude and Peter, ( 2Pet 2:1,) is, that they denied our Lord, ( Jude 1:4;) and yet it is said that they were numbered among Christians, and were found in their assemblies, 2Pet 2:13; Jude 1:12. By this denial, however, we are not to suppose that they literally and professedly denied that Jesus was the Christ, but that they held doctrines which amounted to a denial of him in fact. 2Pet 2:1. For the general characteristics of these teachers, see Intro. to 2 Pet. % 4. At this distance of time, and with our imperfect knowledge of the characteristics of the early erroneous sects in the church, it is difficult to determine precisely who they were. It has been a common opinion, that reference is had by Peter and Jude to the sect of the Nicolaitanes; and this Opinion, Hug remarks, is "neither improbable nor incompatible with the expressions of the two apostles, so far as we have any certain knowledge concerning this sect." "The statements of the ancients, in regard to their profligacy and their detestable course of life, are so consonant with each other and with the charges of the apostles, that the two epistles may be pertinently considered as referring to them."--Introduction, % 182. It is not possible to ascertain with certainty the time when the epistle was written. There are no marks of time in it by which that can be known, nor is there any account among the early Christian writers which determines this. Benson supposes that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem, a few weeks or months after the second epistle ofPeter; Mill, that it was written about A.D. 90; Dodwell and Cave, that it was written after the destruction of Jerusalem, in the year 71 or 72; L'Enfant and Beausobre, that it was between the year 70 and 75; Witsius and Estius, that it was in the apostle's old age; Lardner, that it was about the year 65 or 66; Michaelis, that it was before the destruction of Jerusalem; and Macknight, that it was in the latter part of the apostolic age, and not long before the death of Jude. All this, it is manifest, is mostly conjecture. There are only two things, it seems to me, in the epistle, which can be regarded as any indication of the time. One is the striking resemblance to the second epistle of Peter, referring clearly to the same kind of errors, and warning those whom he addressed against the arts of the same kind of teachers, thus showing that it was written at about the same time as that epistle; and the other is, that it seems to have been written before the destruction of Jerusalem, for, as Michaelis has well remarked, "As the author has mentioned ( Jude 1:5-8 ) several well-known instances of Divine justice in punishing sinners, he would probably, if Jerusalem had been already destroyed, not have neglected to add to his other examples this most remarkable instance of Divine vengeance, especially as Christ had himself foretold it."--Intro, iv. 372. As there is reason to suppose that the second epistle of Peter was written about A.D. 64 or 65, we shall not, probably, err in supposing that this was written not far from that time. IV.---THE RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN THIS EPISTLE AND THE SECOND CHAPTER OF THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER. ONE of the most remarkable things respecting this epistle, is its resemblance to the second chapter of the second epistle of Peter--a similarity so striking as to make it quite certaio that one of these writers had seen the epistle of the other, and copied from it; or rather, perhaps, adopted the language of the other as expressing his own views. It is evident, that substantially the same class of teachers is referred to by both; that they held the same errors, and were guilty of the same corrupt and dangerous practices and that the two apostles describing them, made use of the same expressions, and employed the same arguments against them. They refer to the same facts in history, and to the same arguments from tradition; and if either of them quoted an apocryphal book, both have done it. On the resemblance, compare the following place:--- Jude 1:8, with 2Pet 2:10; Jud 1:10, with 2Pet 2:12; Jude 1:16, with 2Pet 2:18; Jude 1:4 with 2Pet 1:2,3; Jude 1:7 with 2Pet 2:6; Jude 1:9 with 2Pet 2:11 The similarity between the two is so striking, both in the general structure of the argument and in the particular expressions, that it cannot have been accidental. It is not such a resemblance as would be likely to occur in two authors, if they had been writing in a wholly independent manner. In regard to this resemblance, there is but one of three ways in which it can be accounted for: either that the Holy Spirit inspired both of them to say the same thing, without the one having any knowledge of what the other said; or that they both copied from a common document, which is now lost; or that one copied from the other. As to the first of these solutions, that the Holy Spirit inspired them both to say the same thing, it may be observed that no one can deny that this is possible, but is by no means probable. No other instance of the kind occurs in the Bible, and the supposition would not be in accordance with what seems to have been a law in inspiration, that the sacred writers were allowed to express themselves according to the bent of their own genius. 1Cor 14:32. As to the second of these suppositions, that they both copied from a common document, which is now lost, it may be observed, that this is wholly without evidence. That such a thing was possible, there can be no doubt, but the supposition should not be adopted without necessity. If there had been such an original inspired document, it would probably have been preserved; or there would have been, in one or both of those who copied from it, some such allusion to it that it would have been possible to verify the supposition. The remaining way of accounting for the resemblance, therefore, is to suppose that one of them had seen the epistle of the other, and adopted the same line of argument, and many of the same expressions. This will account for all the facts in the case, and can be supposed to be true without doing violence to any just view of their inspiration. A question still arises, however, whether Peter or Jude is the original writer from which the other has copied. This question it is impossible to determine with ccrtainty, and it is of little importaace. If the common opinion which is stated above be correct, that Peter wrote his epistle first, of course that determines the matter. But that is not absolutely certain, nor is there any method by which it can be determined. Hug adopts the other opinion, and supposes that Jude was the original writer. His reasons for this opinion are substantially these: (1.) That there is little probability that Jude, in so brief an epistle as his, consisting of only twenty-five verses, would have made use of foreign aid. (2.) That the style and phraseology of Jude is simple, unlaboured, and without ornament; while that of Peter is artificial, and wears the appearance of embellishment and amplification; that the simple language of Jude seems to have been moulded by Peter into a more elegant form, and is embellished with participles, and even with rhetorical flourishes. (3.) That there is allusion in both epistles 2Pet 2:11, Jude 1:9 to a controversy beteen angels and fallen spirits; but that it is so alluded to by Peter, that it would not be understood without the more full statement of Jude; and that Peter evidently supposed that the letter of Jude was in the hands of those to whom he wrote, and that thus the allusion would be at once understood. It could not be supposed that every reader would be acquainted with the fact alluded to by Peter; it was not stated in the sacred books of the Jews, and it seems probable that there must have been some book to which they had access, where the information was more full. Jude, however, as the original writer, stated it more at length, and having done this, a bare allusion to it by Peter was all that was necessary. Jude states the matter definitely, and expressly mentions the dispute of Michael with the devil about the body of Moses. But the language of Peter is so general and indefinite, that we could not know what he meant unless we had Jude in our possession. See Hug's Intro., % 176. It must be admitted that these considerations have much weight, though they are not absolutely conclusive. It should be added, that whichever supposition is adopted, the fact that one has expressed substantially the same sentiments as the other, and in nearly the same language, is no reason for rejecting either, any more than the coincidence between the Gospels is a reason for concluding that only one of them can be an inspired document. There might have been good reasons why the same warnings and counsels should have proceeded from two inspired men. THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE. ANALYSIS OF THE EPISTLE. (1.) THE inscription and salutation, Jude 1:1,2. (2.) A statement of the reasons why the epistle was written, Jude 1:3,4. The author felt it to be necessary to write to them, because certain plausible errorists had crept in among them, and there was danger that their faith would be subverted. (3.) A reference to past facts, showing that men who embraced error, and who followed corrupt and licentious practices, would be punished, Jude 1:5-7. He refers particularly to the unbelieving Hebrews whom God had delivered out of Egypt; to the apostate angels; and to the corrupt inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah. The object in this is to warn them from following the examples of those who would certainly lead them to destruction. (4.) He describes particularly the characteristics of these persons, agreeing substantially in the description with the statement of Peter, Jude 1:8-16. For these characteristics, comp. Intro. to 2 Peter, & 4. In general, they were corrupt, sensual, lewd, proud, arrogant, disorganizing, covetous, murmurers, complainers, wordy, windy, spots in their feasts of love. They had been and were professors of religion; they were professed reformers; they made great pretensions to uncommon knowledge of religious things. In the course of this description, the apostle contrasts their spirit with that of the archangel Michael, Jude 1:9, and declares that it was with reference to such a class of men that Enoch long ago uttered a solemn prophecy, Jude 1:14,15. (5.) He calls to their remembrance the fact that it had been predicted that there would be such mockers in the last periods of the world; and the faith of true Christians, therefore, was not to be shaken, but rather confirmed by the fact of their appearance, Jude 1:17-19. (6.) In view of these facts and dangers, the apostle addresses to them two exhortations: (a.) to adhere steadfastlit to the truths which they had embraced, Jude 1:20,21; and (b.) to endeavour to recall and save those who were led astray --carefully guarding themselves from the same contamination while they sought to save others, Jude 1:22,23. (7.) The epistle closes with an appropriate ascription of praise to him who was able to keep them from falling, and to present them faultless before his throne, Jude 1:24,25. Verse 1. Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ. If the view taken in the Introduction to the epistle is correct Jude sustained a near relation to the Lord Jesus, being, as James was, "the Lord's brother," Gal 1:19. The reasons why he did not advert to this fact here, as an appellation which would serve to designate him, and as showing his authority to address others in the manner in which he proposed to do in this epistle, probably were, (1.) that the right to do this did not rest on his mere relationship to the Lord Jesus, but on the fact that he had called certain persons to be his apostles, and had authorized them to do it; and, (2.) that a reference to this relationship, as a ground of authority, might have created jealousies among the apostles themselves. We may learn from the fact that Jude merely calls himself "the servant of the Lord Jesus," that is, a Christian, (a.) that this is a distinction more to be desired than would be a mere natural relationship to the Saviour, and consequently (b.) that it is a higher honour than any distinction arising from birth or family. Comp. Mt 12:46-50. And brother of James. See Intro., & 1. To them that are sanctified by God the Father. To those who are holy, or who are saints. Rom 1:7, Php 1:1. Though this title is general, it can hardly be doubted that he had some particular saints in his view, to wit, those who were exposed to the dangers to which he refers in the epistle. See Intro., & 3. As the epistle was probably sent to Christians residing in a certain place, it was not necessary to designate them more particularly, though it was often done. The Syriac version adds here, "To the Gentiles who are called, beloved of God the Father," etc. And preserved in Jesus Christ. 1Pet 1:5. The meaning is, that they owed their preservation wholly to him; and if they were brought to everlasting life, it would be only by him. What the apostle here says of those to whom he wrote, is true of all Christians. They would all fall away and perish if it were not for the grace of God keeping them. And called. Called to be saints. Rom 1:7; Eph 4:1. (a) "Jude" Lk 6:16 (b) "are sanctified" Acts 20:32 (c) "preserved" 1Pet 1:5 (d) "called" Rom 8:30

Completed by John Billingsley . This epistle is styled (as are some few others) general or Catholic, because it is not immediately directed to any particular person, family, or church, but to the whole society of Christians of that time, lately converted to the faith of Christ, whether from Judaism or paganism: and it is, and will be, of standing, lasting, and special use in and to the church as long as Christianity, that is, as time, shall last. The general scope of it is much the same with that of the second chapter of the second epistle of Peter , which having been already explained, the less will need to be said on this. It is designed to warn us against seducers and their seduction, to inspire us with a warm love to, and a hearty concern for, truth (evident and important truth), and that in the closest conjunction with holiness, of which charity, or sincere unbiased brotherly-love, is a most essential character and inseparable branch. The truth we are to hold fast, and endeavour that others may be acquainted with and not depart from, has two special characters:—It is the truth as it is in Jesus ( Eph. iv. 21 ; and it is truth after (or which is according to) godliness, Tit. i. 1 . The gospel is the gospel of Christ. He has revealed it to us, and he is the main subject of it; and therefore we are indispensably bound to learn thence all we can of his person, natures, and offices: indifference as to this is inexcusable in any who call themselves Christians; and we know from what fountain we are wholly and solely to draw all necessary saving knowledge. Further, it is also a doctrine of godliness. Whatever doctrines favour the corrupt lusts of men cannot be of God, let the pleas and pretensions for them be what they will. Errors dangerous to the souls of men soon sprang up in the church. The servants slept and tares were sown. But such were the wisdom and kindness of Providence that they began sensibly to appear and show themselves, while some, at least, of the apostles were yet alive to confute them, and warn others against them. We are apt to think, If we had lived in their times, we should have been abundantly fenced against the attempts and artifices of seducers; but we have their testimony and their cautions, which is sufficient; and, if we will not believe their writings, neither should we have believed or regarded their sayings, if we had lived among them and conversed personally with them. We have here, I. An account of the penman of this epistle, a character of the church, the blessings and privileges of that happy society, ver. 1, 2 . II. The occasion of writing this epistle, ver. 3 . III. A character of evil and perverse men, who had already sprung up in that infant state of the church, and would be succeeded by others of the like evil spirit and temper in after-times, ver. 4 . IV. A caution against hearkening to and following after such, from the severity of God towards the unbelieving murmuring Israelites at their coming out of Egypt, the angels that fell, the sin and punishment of Sodom and Gomorrah, ver. 5-7 . V. To these the apostle likens the seducers against whom he was warning them, and describes them at large, ( ver. 8 to 13 , inclusive). VI. Then (as specially suitable to his argument) he cites an ancient prophecy of Enoch foretelling and describing the future judgment, ver. 14, 15 . VII. He enlarges on the seducers' character, and guards against the offence which honest minds might be apt to take at the so early permission of such things, by showing that it was foretold long before that so it must be, ver. 16-19 . VIII. Exhorts them to perseverance in the faith, fervency in prayer, watchfulness against falling from the love of God, and a lively hope of eternal life, ver. 20, 21 . IX. Directs them how to act towards the erroneous and scandalous, ver. 22, 23 . And, X. Closes with an admirable doxology in the last two verses . Apostolic Benediction. ( a. d. 66.) 1 Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called: 2 Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied. Here we have the preface or introduction, in which, I. We have an account of the penman of this epistle, Jude, or Judas, or Judah. He was name-sake to one of his ancestors, the patriarch—son of Jacob, the most eminent though not the first-born of his sons, out of whose loins (lineally, in a most direct succession) the Messiah came. This was a name of worth, eminency, and honour; yet 1. He had a wicked name-sake. There was one Judas (one of the twelve, surnamed Iscariot, from the place of his birth) who was a vile traitor, the betrayer of his and our Lord. The same names may be common to the best and worst persons. It may be instructive to be called after the names of eminently good men, but there can be no inference drawn thence as to what we shall prove, though we may even thence conclude what sort of persons our good parents or progenitors desired and hoped we should be. But, 2. Our Judas was quite another man. He was an apostle, so was Iscariot; but he was a sincere disciple and follower of Christ, so was not the other. He was a faithful servant of Jesus Christ, the other was his betrayer and murderer; therefore here the one is very carefully distinguished from the other. Dr. Manton's note upon this is, that God takes great care of the good name of his sincere and useful servants. Why then should we be prodigal of our own or one another's reputation and usefulness? Our apostle here calls himself a servant of Jesus Christ, esteeming that a most honourable title. It is more honourable to be a sincere and useful servant of Christ than to be an earthly king, how potent and prosperous soever. He might have claimed kindred to Christ according to the flesh, but he waives this, and rather glories in being his servant. Observe, (1.) It is really a greater honour to be a faithful servant of Jesus Christ than to be akin to him according to the flesh. Many of Christ's natural kindred, as well as of his progenitors, perished; not from want of natural affection in him as man, but from infidelity and obstinacy in themselves, which should make the descendants and near relatives of persons most eminent for sincere and exemplary piety jealous over themselves with a godly jealousy. A son of Noah may be saved in the ark from a flood of temporal destruction, and yet be overwhelmed at last in a deluge of divine wrath, and suffer the vengeance of eternal fire. Christ himself tells us that he that heareth his word and doeth it (that is, he only) is as his brother, and sister, and mother, that is, more honourably and advantageously related to him than the nearest and dearest of his natural relatives, considered merely as such. See Matt. xii. 48-50 . (2.) In that the apostle Jude styles himself a servant, though an apostle, a dignified officer in Christ's kingdom, it is a great honour to the meanest sincere minister (and it holds proportionably as to every upright Christian) that he is the servant of Christ Jesus. The apostles were servants before they were apostles, and they were but servants still. Away then with all pretensions in the ministers of Christ to lordly dominion either over one another or over the flocks committed to their charge. Let us ever have that of our dear Redeemer in actual view, It shall not be so among you, Matt. xx. 25, 26 . — And brother of James, to wit, of him whom the ancients style the first bishop of Jerusalem, of whose character and martyrdom Josephus makes mention, ascribing the horrible destruction of that city and nation to this wicked cruelty, as one of its principal causes. Of this James our Jude was brother, whether in the strictest or a larger (though very usual) acceptation I determine not. He however reckons it an honour to him that he was the brother of such a one. We ought to honour those who are above us in age, gifts, graces, station; not to envy them, yet neither to flatter them, nor be led merely by their example, when we have reason to think they act wrong. Thus the apostle Paul withstood his fellow-apostle Peter to the face, notwithstanding the high esteem he had for him and the affectionate love he bore to him, when he saw that he was to be blamed, that is, really blameworthy, Gal. ii. 11 , and following verses. II. We are here informed to whom this epistle is directed; namely, to all those who are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called. I begin with the last— called, that is, called Christians, in the judgment of charity, further than which we cannot, nor in justice ought to go, in the judgments or opinions we form or receive of one another; for what appears not is not, nor ought to come into account in all our dealings with and censures of one another, whatever abatements the divine goodness may see fit to make for an honest though misguided zeal. The church pretends not (I am sure it ought not) to judge of secret or hidden things (things drawn into the light before time), lest our rash and preposterous zeal do more harm than good, or I am afraid ever will do. The tares and wheat (if Christ may be Judge) must grow together till the harvest ( Matt. xiii. 28-30 ); and then he himself will, by proper instruments, take timely care to separate them. We ought to think the best we can of every man till the contrary appear; not being forward to receive or propagate, much less invent, disadvantageous characters of our brethren. This is the least we can make of the apostle's large and excellent description of charity ( 1 Cor. xiii. ), and this we ought to make conscience of acting up to, which till we do, the Christian churches will be (as, alas! they are at this day) filled with envying and strife, confusion and every evil work, Jam. iii. 16 . Or, the apostle may speak of their being called to be Christians, by the preaching of the word, which they gladly received, and professed cordially to believe, and so were received into the society and fellowship of the church—Christ the head, and believers the members; real believers really, professed believers visibly. Note, Christians are the called, called out of the world, the evil spirit and temper of it,—above the world, to higher and better things, heaven, things unseen and eternal,—called from sin to Christ, from vanity to seriousness, from uncleanness to holiness; and this in pursuance of divine purpose and grace; for whom he did predestinate those he also called, Rom. viii. 30 . Now those who are thus called, are, 1. Sanctified: Sanctified by God the Father. Sanctification is usually spoken of in scripture as the work of the Holy Spirit, yet here it is ascribed to God the Father, because the Spirit works it as the Spirit of the Father and the Son. Note, All who are effectually called are sanctified, made partakers of a divine nature ( 2 Pet. i. 4 ); for without holiness no man shall see the Lord, Heb. xii. 14 . Observe, Our sanctification is not our own work. If any are sanctified, they are so by God the Father, not excluding Son or Spirit, for they are one, one God. Our corruption and pollution are of ourselves; but our sanctification and renovation are of God and his grace; and therefore if we perish in our iniquity we must bear the blame, but if we be sanctified and glorified all the honour and glory must be ascribed to God, and to him alone. I own it is hard to give a clear and distinct account of this, but we must not deny nor disregard necessary truth because we cannot fully reconcile the several parts of it to each other; for, on that supposition, we might deny that any one of us could stir an inch from the place we are at present in, though we see the contrary every day and hour. 2. The called and sanctified are preserved in Christ Jesus. As it is God who begins the work of grace in the souls of men, so it is he who carries it on, and perfects it. Where he begins he will perfect; though we are fickle, he is constant. He will not forsake the work of his own hands, Ps. cxxxviii. 8 . Let us not therefore trust in ourselves, nor in our stock of grace already received, but in him, and in him alone, still endeavouring, by all proper and appointed means, to keep ourselves, as ever we would hope he should keep us. Note, (1.) Believers are preserved from the gates of hell, and to the glory of heaven. (2.) All who are preserved are preserved in Jesus Christ, in him as their citadel and stronghold, no longer than they abide in him, and solely by virtue of their union with him. III. We have the apostolical benediction: Mercy to you, &c. From the mercy, peace, and love of God all our comfort flows, all our real enjoyment in this life, all our hope of a better. 1. The mercy of God is the spring and fountain of all the good we have or hope for; mercy not only to the miserable, but to the guilty. 2. Next to mercy is peace, which we have from the sense of having obtained mercy. We can have no true and lasting peace but what flows from our reconciliation with God by Jesus Christ. 3. As from mercy springs peace, so from peace springs love, his love to us, our love to him, and our brotherly love (forgotten, wretchedly neglected, grace!) to one another. These the apostle prays may be multiplied, that Christians may not be content with scraps and narrow scantlings of them; but that souls and societies may be full of them. Note, God is ready to supply us with all grace, and a fulness in each grace. If we are straitened, we are not straitened in him, but in ourselves.

Mercy unto you, and peace, and love, be multiplied. This is not quite the form of salutaion used by the other apostles, but it is one equally expressive of an earnest desire for their welfare. These things are mentioned as the choicest blessings which could be conferred on them: mercy--in the pardon of all their sins and acceptance with God; peace--with God, with their fellow-men, in their own consciences, and in the prospect of death; and love--to God, to the brethren, to all the world. What blessings are there which these do not include?

When I gave all diligence to write to you of the common salvation - Designed for all, and enjoyed by all believers. Here the design of the epistle is expressed; the end of which exactly answers the beginning. It was needful to exhort you to contend earnestly - Yet humbly, meekly, and lovingly; otherwise your contention will only hurt your cause, if not destroy your soul. For the faith - All the fundamental truths. Once delivered - By God, to remain unvaried for ever.

Beloved. An expression of strong affection used by the apostles when addressing their brethren, Rom 1:7, 1Cor 4:14, 10:14 1Cor 15:58, 2Cor 7:1, 2Cor 7:9, 12:19, Php 2:12, Php 4:1; and often elsewhere. When I gave all diligence. When I applied my mind earnestly; implying that he had reflected on the subject, and thought particularly what it would be desirable to write to them. The state of mind referred to is that of one who was purposing to write a letter, and who thought over carefully what it would be proper to say. The mental process which led to writing the epistle seems to have been this: (a.) For some reasons--mainly from his strong affection for them--he purposed to write to them. (b.) The general subject on which he designed to write was, of course, something pertaining to the common salvation--for he and they were Christians. (c.) On reflecting what particular thing pertaining to this common salvation it was best for him to write on, he felt that, in view of their peculiar dangers, it ought to be an exhortation to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to them. Macknight renders this less correctly, "Making all haste to write to you," etc. But the idea is rather that he set himself diligently and earnestly to write to them of the great matter in which they had a common interest. To write unto you of the common salvation. The salvation common to Jews and Gentiles, and to all who bore the Christian name. The meaning is, that he did not think of writing on any subject pertaining to a particular class or party, but on some subject in which all who were Christians had a common interest. There are great matters of religion held in common by all Christians, and it is important for religious teachers to address their fellow Christians on those common topics. After all, they are more important than the things which we may hold as peculiar to our own party or sect, and should be more frequently dwelt upon. It was needful for me to write to you. "I reflected on the general subject, prompted by my affectionate regard to write to you of things pertaining to religion in general, and, on looking at the matter, I found there was a particular topic or aspect of the subject on which it was necessary to address you. I saw the danger in which you were from false teachers, and felt it not only necessary that I should write to you, but that I should make this the particular subject of my counsels." And exhort you. "That I should make my letter in fact an exhortation on a particular topic." That ye should earnestly contend. Comp. Gal 2:5. The word here rendered earnestly contend --επαγωνιζεσθαι--is one of those words used by the sacred writers which have allusion to the Grecian games. 1Cor 9:24, seq. This word does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament. It means to contend upon --i. e. for or about anything; and would be applicable to the earnest effort put forth in those games to obtain the prize. The reference here, of course, is only to contention by argument, by reasoning, by holding fast the principles of religion, and maintaining them against all opposers. It would not justify "contention" by arms, by violence, or by persecution; for (a.) that is contrary to the spirit of true religion, and to the requirements of the gospel elsewhere revealed; (b.) it is not demanded by the proper meaning of the word, all that that fairly implies being the effort to maintain truth by argument and by a steady life; (c.) it is not the most effectual way to keep up truth in the world to attempt to do it by force and arms. For the faith. The system of religion revealed in the gospel. It is called faith, because that is the cardinal virtue in the system, and because all depends on that. The rule here will require that we should contend in this manner for all truth. Once delivered unto the saints. The word here used (απαξ) may mean either once for all, in the sense that it was then complete, and would not be repeated; or formerly to wit, by the author of the system. Doddridge, Estius, and Beza, understand it in the former way; Macknight and others in the latter; Benson improperly supposes that it means fully or perfectly. Perhaps the more usual sense of the word would be, that it was done once in the sense that it is not to be done again, and therefore in the sense that it was then complete, and that nothing was to be added to it. There is indeed the idea that it was formerly done, but with this additional thought, that it was then complete. Compare, for this use of the Greek word rendered once, Heb 9:26-28, 10:2, 1Pet 3:18. The delivering of this faith to the saints here referred to is evidently that made by revelation, or the system of truth which God has made known in his word. Everything which He has revealed, we are to defend as true. We are to surrender no part of it whatever, for every part of that system is of value, to mankind. By a careful study of the Bible we are to ascertain what that system is, and then in all places, at all times, in all circumstances, and at every sacrifice, we are to maintain it. (e) "common salvation" Tit 1:4 (f) "contend" Gal 2:5 Verse 4. For t

The Common Salvation; Monuments of Judgment. ( a. d. 66.) 3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. 4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. 5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not. 6 And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. 7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. We have here, I. The design of the apostle in writing this epistle to the lately converted Jews and Gentiles; namely, to establish them in the Christian faith, and a practice and conversation truly consonant and conformable thereunto, and in an open and bold profession thereof, especially in times of notorious opposition, whether by artful seduction or violent and inhuman persecution. But then we must see to it very carefully that it be really the Christian faith that we believe, profess, propagate, and contend for; not the discriminating badges of this or the other party, not any thing of later date than the inspired writings of the holy evangelists and apostles. Here observe, 1. The gospel salvation is a common salvation, that is, in a most sincere offer and tender of it to all mankind to whom the notice of it reaches: for so the commission runs ( Mark xvi. 15, 16 ), Go you into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature, &c. Surely God means as he speaks; he does not delude us with vain words, whatever men do; and therefore none are excluded from the benefit of these gracious offers and invitations, but those who obstinately, impenitently, finally exclude themselves. Whoever will may come and drink of the water of life freely, Rev. xxii. 17 . The application of it is made to all believers, and only to such; it is made to the weak as well as to the strong. Let none discourage themselves on the account of hidden decrees which they can know little of, and with which they have nothing to do. God's decrees are dark, his covenants are plain. "All good Christians meet in Christ the common head, are actuated by one and the same Spirit, are guided by one rule, meet here at one throne of grace, and hope shortly to meet in one common inheritance," a glorious one to be sure, but what or how glorious we cannot, nor at present need to know; but such it will be as vastly to exceed all our present hopes and expectations. 2. This common salvation is the subject-matter of the faith of all the saints. The doctrine of it is what they all most heartily consent to; they esteem it as a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, 1 Tim. i. 15 . It is the faith once, or at once, once for all, delivered to the saints, to which nothing can be added, from which nothing may be detracted, in which nothing more nor less should be altered. Here let us abide; here we are safe; if we stir a step further, we are in danger of being either entangled or seduced. 3. The apostles and evangelists all wrote to us of this common salvation. This cannot be doubted by those who have carefully read their writings. It is strange that any should think they wrote chiefly to maintain particular schemes and opinions, especially such as they never did nor could think of. It is enough that they have fully declared to us, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, all that is necessary for every one to believe and do, in order to obtain a personal interest in the common salvation. 4. Those who preach or write of the common salvation should give all diligence to do it well: they should not allow themselves to offer to God or his people that which costs them nothing, or next to nothing, little or no pains or thought, 2 Sam. xxiv. 24 . This were to treat God irreverently, and man unjustly. The apostle (though inspired) gave all diligence to write of the common salvation. What then will become of those who (though uninspired) give no diligence, or next to none, but say to the people (even in the name of God) quicquid in buccam venerit—whatever comes next, who, so that they use scripture-words, care not how they interpret or apply them? Those who speak of sacred things ought always to speak of them with the greatest reverence, care, and diligence. 5. Those who have received the doctrine of this common salvation must contend earnestly for it. Earnestly, not furiously. Those who strive for the Christian faith, or in the Christian course, must strive lawfully, or they lose their labour, and run great hazard of losing their crown, 2 Tim. ii. 5 . The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God, Jam. i. 20 . Lying for the truth is bad, and scolding for it is not much better. Observe, Those who have received the truth must contend for it. But how? As the apostles did; by suffering patiently and courageously for it, not by making others suffer if they will not presently embrace every notion that we are pleased (proved or unproved) to call faith, or fundamental. We must not suffer ourselves to be robbed of any essential article of Christian faith, by the cunning craftiness or specious plausible pretences of any who lie in wait to deceive, Eph. iv. 14 . The apostle Paul tells us he preached the gospel (mind it was the gospel) with much contention ( 1 Thess. ii. 2 ), that is (as I understand it), with earnestness, with a hearty zeal, and a great concern for the success of what he preached. But, if we will understand contention in the common acceptation of the word, we must impartially consider with whom the apostle contended, and how, the enlarging on which would not be proper for this place. II. The occasion the apostle had to write to this purport. As evil manners give rise to good laws, so dangerous errors often give just occasion to the proper defence of important truths. Here observe, 1. Ungodly men are the great enemies of the faith of Christ and the peace of the church. Those who deny or corrupt the one, and disturb the other, are here expressly styled ungodly men. We might have truth with peace (a most desirable thing) were there none (ministers or private Christians) in our particular churches and congregations but truly godly men—a blessing scarcely to be looked or hoped for on this side heaven. Ungodly men raise scruples, merely to advance and promote their own selfish, ambitious, and covetous ends. This has been the plague of the church in all past ages, and I am afraid no age is, or will be, wholly free from such men and such practices as long as time shall last. Observe, Nothing cuts us off from the church but that which cuts us off from Christ; namely, reigning infidelity and ungodliness. We must abhor the thought of branding particular parties or persons with this character, especially of doing it without the least proof, or, as it too often happens, the least shadow of it. Those are ungodly men who live without God in the world, who have no regard to God and conscience. Those are to be dreaded and consequently to be avoided, not only who are wicked by sins of commission, but also who are ungodly by sins of omission, who, for example, restrain prayer before God, who dare not reprove a rich man, when it is the duty of their place so to do, for fear of losing his favour and the advantage they promise themselves therefrom, who do the work of the Lord negligently, &c. 2. Those are the worst of ungodly men who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness, who take encouragement to sin more boldly because the grace of God has abounded, and still abounds, so wonderfully, who are hardened in their impieties by the extent and fulness of gospel grace, the design of which is to reduce men from sin, and bring them unto God. Thus therefore to wax wanton under so great grace, and turn it into an occasion of working all uncleanness with greediness, and hardening ourselves in such a course by that very grace which is the last and most forcible means to reclaim us from it, is to render ourselves the vilest, the worst, and most hopeless of sinners. 3. Those who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness do in effect deny the Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ; that is, they deny both natural and revealed religion. They strike at the foundation of natural religion, for they deny the only Lord God; and they overturn all the frame of revealed religion, for they deny the Lord Jesus Christ. Now his great design in establishing revealed religion in the world was to bring us unto God. To deny revealed religion is virtually to overturn natural religion, for they stand or fall together, and they mutually yield light and force to each other. Would to God our modern deists, who live in the midst of gospel light, would seriously consider this, and cautiously, diligently, and impartially examine what it is that hinders their receiving the gospel, while they profess themselves fully persuaded of all the principles and duties of natural religion! Never to tallies answered more exactly to each other than these do, so that it seems absurd to receive the one and reject the other. One would think it were the fairer way to receive both or reject both; though perhaps the more plausible method, especially in this age, is to act the part they do. 4. Those who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness are ordained unto condemnation. They sin against the last, the greatest, and most perfect remedy; and so are without excuse. Those who thus sin must needs die of their wounds, of their disease, are of old ordained to this condemnation, whatever that expression means. But what if our translators had thought fit to have rendered the words palai progegrammenoi — of old fore-written of, as persons who would through their own sin and folly become the proper subjects of this condemnation, where had the harm been? Plain Christians had not been troubled with dark, doubtful, and perplexing thoughts about reprobation, which the strongest heads cannot enter far into, can indeed bear but little of, without much loss and damage. Is it not enough that early notice was given by inspired writers that such seducers and wicked men should arise in later times, and that every one, being fore-warned of, should be fore-armed against them? 5. We ought to contend earnestly for the faith, in opposition to those who would corrupt or deprave it, such as have crept in unawares: a wretched character, to be sure, but often very ill applied by weak and ignorant people, and even by those who themselves creep in unawares, who think their ipse dixit should stand for a law to all their followers and admirers. Surely faithful humble ministers are helpers of their people's joy, peace, and comfort; not lords of their faith! Whoever may attempt to corrupt the faith, we ought to contend earnestly against them. The more busy and crafty the instruments and agents of Satan are, to rob us of the truth, the more solicitous should we be to hold it fast, always provided we be very sure that we fasten no wrong or injurious characters on persons, parties, or sentiments. III. The fair warning which the apostle, in Christ's name, gives to those who, having professed his holy religion, do afterwards desert and prove false to it, v. 5-7 . We have here a recital of the former judgments of God upon sinners, with design to awaken and terrify those to whom warning is given in this epistle. Observe, The judgments of God are often denounced and executed in terrorem—for warning to others, rather than from immediate or particular displeasure against the offenders themselves; not that God is not displeased with them, but perhaps not more with them than with others who, at least for the present, escape. I will put you in remembrance. What we already know we still need to be put in remembrance of. Therefore there will always be need and use of a standing stated ministry in the Christian church, though all the doctrines of faith, the essentials, are so plainly revealed in express words, or by the most near, plain, and immediate consequence, that he who runs may read and understand them. There wants no infallible interpreter, really or conceitedly such, for any such end or purpose. Some people (weakly enough) suggest, "If the scriptures do so plainly contain all that is necessary to salvation, what need or use can there be of a standing ministry? Why may we not content ourselves with staying at home, and reading our Bibles?" The inspired apostle has here fully, though not wholly, answered this objection. Preaching is not designed to teach us something new in every sermon, somewhat that we knew nothing of before; but to put us in remembrance, to call to mind things forgotten, to affect our passions, and engage and fix our resolutions, that our lives may be answerable to our faith. Though you know these things, yet you still need to know them better. There are many things which we have known which yet we have unhappily forgotten. Is it of no use or service to be put afresh in remembrance of them? Now what are these things which we Christians need to be put in remembrance of? 1. The destruction of the unbelieving Israelites in the wilderness, v. 5 . Paul puts the Corinthians in mind of this, 1 Cor. x . The first ten verses of that chapter (as the scripture is always the best commentary upon itself) are the best explication of the fifth verse of this epistle of Jude. None therefore ought to presume upon their privileges, since many who were brought out of Egypt by a series of amazing miracles, yet perished in the wilderness by reason of their unbelief. Let us not therefore be high-minded, but fear, Rom. xi. 20 . Let us fear lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it, Heb. iv. 1 . They had miracles in abundance: they were their daily bread; yet even they perished in unbelief. We have greater (much greater) advantages than they had; let their error (their so fatal error) be our awful warning. 2. We are here put in remembrance of the fall of the angels, v. 6 . There were a great number of the angels who left their own habitation; that is, who were not pleased with the posts and stations the supreme Monarch of the universe had assigned and allotted to them, but thought (like discontented ministers in our age, I might say in every age) they deserved better; they would, with the title of ministers, be sovereigns, and in effect their Sovereign should be their minister—do all, and only, what they would have him; thus was pride the main and immediate cause or occasion of their fall. Thus they quitted their post, and rebelled against God, their Creator and sovereign Lord. But God did not spare them (high and great as they were); he would not truckle to them; he threw them off, as a wise and good prince will a selfish and deceitful minister; and the great, the all-wise God, could not be ignorant, as the wisest and best of earthly princes often are, what designs they were hatching. After all, what became of them? They thought to have dared and outfaced Omnipotence itself; but God was too hard for them, he cast them down to hell. Those who would not be servants to their Maker and his will in their first state were made captives to his justice, and are reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness. Here see what the condition of fallen angels is: they are in chains, bound under the divine power and justice, bound over to the judgment of the great day; they are under darkness, though once angels of light; so horribly in the dark are they that they continue to fight against God, as if there were yet some small hope at least left them of prevailing and overcoming in the conflict. Dire infatuation! Light and liberty concur, chains and darkness how well do they agree and suit each other! The devils, once angels in the best sense, are reserved, &c. Observe, There is, undoubtedly there is, a judgment to come; the fallen angels are reserved to the judgment of the great day; and shall fallen men escape it? Surely not. Let every reader consider this in due time. Their chains are called everlasting, because it is impossible they should ever break loose from them, or make an escape; they are held fast and sure under them. The decree, the justice, the wrath of God, are the very chains under which fallen angels are held so fast. Hear and fear, O sinful mortals of mankind! 3. The apostle here calls to our remembrance the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, v. 7 . Even as, &c. It is in allusion to the destruction of Pentapolis, or the five cities, that the miseries of the damned are set forth by a lake that burneth with fire and brimstone; they were guilty of abominable wickedness, not to be named or thought of but with the utmost abhorrence and detestation; their ruin is a particular warning to all people to take heed of, and fly from, fleshly lusts that war against the soul, 1 Pet. ii. 11 . "These lusts consumed the Sodomites with fire from heaven, and they are now suffering the vengeance of eternal fire; therefore take heed, imitate not their sins, lest the same plagues overtake you as did them. God is the same holy, just, pure Being now as then; and can the beastly pleasures of a moment make amends for your suffering the vengeance of eternal fire? Stand in awe, therefore, and sin not, " Ps. iv. 4 .

There are certain men crept in, who were of old described before - Even as early as Enoch; of whom it was foretold, that by their wilful sins they would incur this condemnation. Turning the grace of God - Revealed in the gospel. Into lasciviousness - Into an occasion of more abandoned wickedness.

here are certain men crept in unawares. The apostle now gives a reason for thus defending the truth, to wit, that there were artful and wicked men who had crept into the church, pretending to be religious teachers, but whose doctrines tended to sap the very foundations of truth. The apostle Peter, describing these same persons, says, "who privily shall bring in damnable heresies." 2Pet 2:1. Substantially the same idea is expressed here by saying that they "had crept in unawares;" that is, they had come in by stealth; they had not come by a bold and open avowal of their real sentiments. They professed to teach the Christian religion, when in fact they denied some of its fundamental doctrines; they professed to be holy, when in fact they were living most scan- dalous lives. In all ages there have been men who were willing to do this for base purposes. Who were before of old ordained to this condemnation. That is, to the condemnation (κριμα) which he proceeds to specify. The statements in the subsequent part of the epistle show that by the word used here he refers to the wrath that shall come upon the ungodly in the future world. See Jude 1:5-7,15. The meaning clearly is, that the punishment which befell the unbelieving Israelites, ( Jude 1:5;) the rebel angels, ( Jude 1:6;) the inhabitants of Sodom, ( Jude 1:7;) and of which Enoch prophesied, ( Jude 1:15,) awaited those persons. The phrase of old --παλαι--means long ago, implying that a considerable time had elapsed, though without determining how much. It is used in the New Testament only in the following places: Mt 11:21, "they would have repented long ago;" Mk 15:44, "whether he had been any while dead;" Lk 10:13, they had a great while ago repented; Heb 1:1, "spake in time past unto the fathers;" 2Pet 1:9, "purged from his old sins;" and in the passage before us. So far as this word is concerned, the reference here may have been to any former remote period, whether in the time of the prophets, of Enoch, or in eternity. It does not necessarily imply that it was eternal, though it " might apply to that, if the thing referred to was, from other sources, certainly known to have been from eternity. It may be doubted, however, whether, if the thing referred to had occurred from eternity, this would have been the word used to express it, (comp. Eph 1:4;) and it is certain that it cannot be proved from the use of this word (παλαι) that the "ordination to condemnation" was eternal. Whatever may be referred to by that "ordaining to condemnation," this word will not prove that it was an eternal ordination. All that is fairly implied in it will be met by the supposition that it occurred in any remote period, say in the time of the prophets. The word here rendered " before ordained ": προγεγραμμενοι, from προγραφω--occurs in the New Testament only here and in the following places: Rom 15:4, twice, "Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning;" Gal 3:1, " Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth;" and Eph 3:3, "As I wrote afore in few words." Gal 3:1. In these places there is evidently no idea implied of ordaining, or preordaining, in the sense in which those words are now commonly understood. To that word there is usually attached the idea of designating or appointing as by an arbitrary decree; but no such meaning enters into the word here used. The Greek word properly means, to write before; then to have written before; and then, with reference to time future, to post up beforehand in writing; to announce by posting up on a written tablet, as of some ordinance, law, or requirement; as descriptive of what will be, or what should be. Comp. Rob. Lexicon. Burder (in Rosenmuller's Morgenland, in loc.) remarks that "the names of those who were to be tried were usually posted up in a public place, as was also their sentence after their condemnation, and that this was denoted by the same Greek word which the apostle uses here. Eisner," says he, "remarks that the Greek authors use the word as applicable to those who, among the Romans, were said to be proscribed; that is, those whose names were posted up in a public place, whereby they were appointed to death, and in reference to whom a reward was offered to any one who would kill them." The idea here clearly is that of some such designation beforehand as would occur if the persons had been publicly posted as appointed to death. Their names, indeed, were not mentioned, but there was such a description of them, or of their character, that it was clear who were meant. In regard to the question what the apostle means by such a designation or appointment beforehand, it is clear that he does not refer in this place to any arbitrary or eternal decree, but to such a designation as was made by the facts to which he immediately refers- that is, to the Divine prediction that there would be such persons, ( Jude 1:14,15,18;) and to the consideration that in the case of the unbelieving Israelites, the rebel angels, and the inhabitants of Sodom, there was as clear a proof that such persons would be punished as if their names had been posted up. All these instances bore on just such cases as these, and in these facts they might read their sentence as clearly as if their names had been written on the face of the sky. This interpretation seems to me to embrace all that the words fairly imply, and all that the exigence of the case demands; and if this be correct, then two things follow: (1.) that this passage should not be adduced to prove that God has from all eternity, by an arbitrary decree, ordained a certain portion of the race to destruction, what-ever may be true on that point; and, (2.) that all abandoned sinners now may see, in the facts which have occurred in the treatment of the wicked in past times, just as certain evidence of their destruction, if they do not repent, as if their names were written in letters of light, and if it were announced to the universe that they would be damned. Ungodly men. Men without piety or true religion, whatever may be their pretensions. Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness. Abusing the doctrines of grace so as to give indulgence to corrupt and carnal propensities. That is, probably, they gave this form to their teaching, as Antinomians have often done, that by the gospel they were released from the obligations of the law, and might give indulgence to their sinful passions in order that grace might abound. Antinomianism began early in the world, and has always had a wide prevalence. The liability of the doctrines of grace to be thus abused was foreseen by Paul, and against such abuse he earnestly sought to guard the Christians of his time, Rom 6:1, seq. And denying the only Lord God, and our Saviour Jesus Christ. 2Pet 2:1. That is, the doctrines which they held were in fact a denial of the only true God, and of the Redeemer of men. It cannot be supposed that they openly and formally did this, for then they could have made no pretensions to the name Christian, or even to religion of any kind; but the meaning must be, that in fact the doctrines which they held amounted to a denial of the true God, and of the Saviour in his proper nature and work. Some have proposed to read this, "denying the only Lord God, even (και) our Lord Jesus Christ;" but the Greek does not demand this construetion even if it would admit it, and it is most in accordance with Scripture usage to retain the common translation. It may be added, also, that the common translation expresses all that the exigence of the passage requires. Their doctrines and practice tended as really to the denial of the true God as they did to the denial of the Lord Jesus. Peter in his second epistle, ( 2Pet 2:1,) has adverted only to one aspect of their doetrine--that it denied the Saviour; Jude adds, if the common reading be correct, that it tended also to a denial of the true God. The word God (θεον) is wanting in many manuscripts, and in the Vulgate and Coptic versions, and Mill, Hammond, and Bengel suppose it should be omitted. It is also wanting in the editions of Tittman, Griesbach, and Rahn. The amount of authority seems to be against it. The word rendered Lord, in the phrase "Lord God," is δεσποτης, despotes, and means here Sovereign, or Ruler, but it is a word which may be appropriately applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. It is the same word which is used in the parallel passage in 2Pet 2:1. See it explained 2Pet 2:1. If the word "God" is to be omitted in this place, the passage would be wholly applicable, beyond question, to the Lord Jesus, and would mean, "denying our only Sovereign and Lord, Jesus Christ." It is perhaps impossible now to determine with certainty the true reading of the text; nor is it very material. Whichever of the readings is correct; whether the word (θεον) God is to be retained or not, the sentiment expressed would be true, that their doctrines amounted to a practical denial of the only true God; and equally so that they were a denial of the only Sovereign and Lord of the true Christian. (a) "unawares" 2Pet 2:1 (b) "who" Rom 9:22 (c) "turning" Tit 1:15,16 (*) "Lord God" "The only Sovereign"Verse 5. I will therefore put you in remembrance. "To show you wha

t must be the doom of such men, I will call certain facts to your recollection, with which you are familiar, respecting the Divine treatment of the wicked in times past." Though ye once knew this. That is, you were formerly made acquainted with these things, though they may not be now fresh in your recollection. On the different significations affixed to the word once in this place, see Bloomfield, Crit. Digest, in loc. The thing which seems to have been in the mind of the apostle was an intention to call to their recollection, as bearing on the case before him, facts with which they had formerly been familiar, and about which there was no doubt. It was the thing which we often endeavour to do in argument--to remind a person of some fact which he once knew very well, and which bears directly on the case. How that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt. 1Cor 10:6-12. The bearing of this fact on the case, before the mind of Jude, seems to have been this--that, as those who had been delivered from Egypt were afterward destroyed for their unbelief, or as the mere fact of their being rescued did not prevent destruction from coming on them, so the fact that these persons seemed to be delivered from sin, and had become professed followers of God, would not prevent their being destroyed if they led wicked lives. It might rather be inferred from the example of the Israelites that they would be. Afterward. τοδευτερον the second; that is, the second thing in order, or again. The expression is unusual in this sense, but the apostle seems to have fixed his mind on this event as a second great and important fact in regard to them. The first was that they were delivered; the second, that they were destroyed. Destroyed them that believed not. That is, on account of their unbelief. They were not permitted to enter the promised land, but were cut off in the wilderness. Heb 3:16-19. (a) "Lord" 1Cor 10:5-12 (b) "destroyed" Nu 14:29,37, Heb 3:16-19 Verse 6. And the angels which kept not their first estate. A second case den

He afterwards destroyed - The far greater part of that very people whom he had once saved. Let none therefore presume upon past mercies, as if he was now out of danger.

And the angels, who kept not their first dignity - Once assigned them under the Son of God. But voluntarily left their own habitation - Then properly their own, by the free gift of God. He reserved - Delivered to be kept. In everlasting chains under darkness - O how unlike their own habitation! When these fallen angels came out of the hands of God, they were holy; else God made that which was evil: and being holy, they were beloved of God; else he hated the image of his own spotless purity. But now he loves them no more; they are doomed to endless destruction. (for if he loved them still, he would love what is sinful:) and both his former love, and his present righteous and eternal displeasure towards the same work of his own hands, are because he changeth not; because he invariably loveth righteousness, and hateth iniquity. 2Pet 2:4 .

oting that the wicked would be punished. 2Pet 2:4. The word rendered estate (αρχην) is, in the margin, principality. The word properly means, beginning, commencement; and then that which surpasses others, which is first, etc., in point of rank and honour; or pre-eminence, priority, precedence, princedom. Here it refers to the rank and dignity which the angels had in heaven. That rank or pre-eminence they did not keep, but fell from it. On the word used here, comp. Eph 1:2, 3:10, Col 2:10, as applied to angels; 1Cor 15:24 Eph 6:12, Col 2:15, as applied to demons. But left their own habitation. To wit, according to the common interpretation, in heaven. The word rendered habitation (οικητηριον) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means here that heaven was their native abode or dwelling-place. They left it by sin; but the expression here would seem possibly to mean that they became dissatisfied with their abode, and voluntarily preferred to change it for another. If they did become thus dissatisfied, the cause is wholly unknown, and conjecture is useless. Some of the later Jews supposed that they relinquished heaven out of love for the daughters of men.-- Robinson. He hath reserved in everlasting chains. 2Pet 2:4. Peter says, "chains of darkness;" that is, the darkness encompasses them as chains. Jude says that those chains are "everlasting," (δεσμοιςαιδιοις) Compare Rom 1:20, "his eternal power and Godhead." The word does not elsewhere occur. It is an appropriate word to denote that which is eternal; and no one can doubt that if a Greek wished to express that idea, this would be a proper word to use. The sense is, that that deep darkness always endures; there is no intermission; no light; it will exist for ever. This passage in itself does not prove that the punishment of the rebel angels will be eternal, but merely that they are kept in a dark prison in which there is no light, and which is to exist for ever, with reference to the final trial. The punishment of the rebel angels after the judgment is represented as an everlasting fire, which has been prepared for them and their followers, Mt 25:41. (c) "angels" Jn 8:44 (1) "habitation" "principality" (d) "everlasting chains" 2Pet 2:4 (e) "judgment" Rev 20:10 Verse 7. Even as Sodom and Gomorrha. 2Pet 2:6.

And the cities about them. Admah and Zeboim, Gen 14:2, De 29:23; Hoss 11:8. There may have been other towns, also, that perished at the same time, but these are particularly mentioned. They seem to have partaken of the same general characteristics, as neighbouring towns and cities generally do. In like manner. "In a manner like to these," (τονομοιοντουτοιςτροπον) The Greek word these is in the plural number. There has been much diversity in interpreting this clause. Some refer it to the angels, as if it meant that the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah committed sin in a way similar to the angels; some suppose that it refers to the wicked teachers about whom Jude was discoursing, meaning that Sodom and Gomorrah committed the same kind of sins which they did; some that the meaning is, that "the cities round about Sodom and Gomorrah" sinned in the same way as those cities; and some that they were punished in the same manner, and were set forth like them as an example. I see no evidence that it refers to the angels; and if it did, it would not prove, as some have supposed, that their sin was of the same kind as that of Sodom, since there might have been a resemblance in some respects, though not in all. I see no reason to believe, as Macknight holds, that it refers to false teachers, since that would be to suppose that the inhabitants of Sodom copied their example long before the example was set. It seems to me, therefore, that the reference is to the cities round about Sodom; and that the sense is, that they committed iniquity in the same manner as the inhabitants of Sodom did, and were set forth in the same way as an example. Going after strange flesh, Marg., other. The reference seems to be to the peculiar sin which, from the name Sodom, has been called sodomy. Comp. Rom 1:27. The meaning of the phrase going after is, that they were greatly addicted to this vice. The word strange, or other, refers to that which is contrary to nature. Doddridge, however, explains it, "going after strange and detestable gratifications of their pampered and indulged flesh." Are set forth for an example. They furnish a warning against all such conduct, and a demonstration that punishment shall come upon the ungodly. The condemnation of any sinner, or of any class of sinners, always furnishes such a warning. 2Pet 2:6. Suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. The word rendered suffering (υπεχουσαι) means, properly, holding under --as, for example, the hand; then to hold towards any one, as the ear--to give attention; then it is used as denoting to hold a discourse towards or with any one, or to hold satisfaction to any one, to make atonement; and then as undergoing, paying, or suffering punishment, when united, as it is here, with the word δικην, ( punishment, or vengeance.) See Rob. Lex. Here it expresses the idea of undergoing punishment. The word properly agrees in the construction with cities, (πολεις,) referring to Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them; but the things affirmed relate to the inhabitants of those cities. The word vengeance means punishment; that is, such vengeance as the Lord takes on the guilty; not vengeance for the gratification of private and personal feeling, but like that which a magistrate appoints for the maintenance of the laws; such as justice demands. The phrase "eternal fire" is one that is often used to denote future punishment--as expressing the severity and intensity of the suffering. Mt 25:41. As here used, it cannot mean that the fires which consumed Sodom and Gomorrah were literally eternal, or were kept always burning, for that was not true. The expression seems to denote, in this connexion, two things: (1.) That the destruction of the cities of the plain, with their inhabitants, was as entire and perpetual as if the fires had been always burning --the consumption was absolute and enduring--the sinners were wholly cut off, and the cities for ever rendered desolate; and (2.) that, in its nature and duration, this was a striking emblem of the destruction which will come upon the ungodly. I do not see that the apostle here means to affirm that those particular sinners who dwelt in Sodom would be punished for ever, for his expressions do not directly affirm that, and his argument does not demand it; but still the image in his mind, in the destruction of those cities, was clearly that of the utter desolation and ruin of which this was the emblem; of the perpetual destruction of the wicked, like that of the cities of the plain. If this had not been the case, there was no reason why he should have used the word eternal --meaning here perpetual --since, if in his mind there was no image of future punishment, all that the argument would have demanded was the simple statement that they were cut off by fire. The passage, then, cannot be used to prove that the particular dwellers in Sodom will be punished for ever--whatever may be the truth on that point; but that there is a place of eternal punishment, of which that was a striking emblem. The meaning is, that the case was one which furnished a demonstration of the fact that God will punish sin; that this was an example of the punishment which God sometimes inflicts on sinners in this world, and a type of that eternal punishment which will be inflicted in the next.Verse 8. Likewise also. In the same way do these persons defile the flesh, or resemble the inhabitants of Sodom; that is, they practise the same ki

The cities which gave themselves over to fornication - The word here means, unnatural lusts. Are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire - That is, the vengeance which they suffered is an example or a type of eternal fire.

Contumacious Professors. ( a. d. 66.) 8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities. 9 Yet Michael the archangel, when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee. 10 But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves. 11 Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core. 12 These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; 13 Raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own shame; wandering stars, to whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. 14 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, The apostle here exhibits a charge against deceivers who were now seducing the disciples of Christ from the profession and practice of his holy religion. He calls them filthy dreamers, forasmuch as delusion is a dream, and the beginning of, and inlet to, all manner of filthiness. Note, Sin is filthiness; it renders men odious and vile in the sight of the most holy God, and makes them (sooner or later, as penitent or as punished to extremity and without resource) vile in their own eyes, and in a while they become vile in the eyes of all about them. These filthy dreamers dream themselves into a fool's paradise on earth, and into a real hell at last: let their character, course, and end, be our seasonable and sufficient warning; like sins will produce like punishments and miseries. Here, I. The character of these deceivers is described. 1. They defile the flesh. The flesh or body is the immediate seat, and often the irritating occasion, of many horrid pollutions; yet these, though done in and against the body, do greatly defile and grievously maim and wound the soul. Fleshly lusts do war against the soul, 1 Pet. ii. 11 ; and in 2 Cor. vii. 1 we read of filthiness of flesh and spirit, each of which, though of different kinds, defiles the whole man. 2. They despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities, are of a disturbed mind and a seditious spirit, forgetting that the powers that be are ordained of God, Rom. xiii. 1 . God requires us to speak evil of no man ( Tit. iii. 2 .); but it is a great aggravation of the sin of evil-speaking when what we say is pointed at magistrates, men whom God has set in authority over us, by blaspheming or speaking evil of whom we blaspheme God himself. Or if we understand it, as some do, with respect to religion, which ought to have the dominion in this lower world, such evil-speakers despise the dominion of conscience, make a jest of it, and would banish it out of the world; and as for the word of God, the rule of conscience, they despise it. The revelations of the divine will go for little with them; they are a rule of faith and manners, but not till they have explained them, and imposed their sense of them upon all about them. Or, as others account for the sense of this passage, the people of God, truly and specially so, are the dignities here spoken of or referred to, according to that of the psalmist, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm, Ps. cv. 15 . They speak evil, &c. Religion and its serious professors have been always and every where evil spoken of. Though there is nothing in religion but what is very good, and deserves our highest regards, both as it is perfective of our natures and as it is subservient to our truest and highest interests; yet this sect, as its enemies are pleased to call it, is every where spoken against, Acts xxviii. 22 . On this occasion the apostle brings in Michael the archangel, &c., v. 9 . Interpreters are at a loss what is here meant by the body of Moses. Some think that the devil contended that Moses might have a public and honourable funeral, that the place where he was interred might be generally known, hoping thereby to draw the Jews, so naturally prone thereto, to a new and fresh instance of idolatry. Dr. Scott thinks that by the body of Moses we are to understand the Jewish church, whose destruction the devil strove and contended for, as the Christian church is called the body of Christ in the New-Testament style. Others bring other interpretations, which I will not here trouble the reader with. Though this contest was mightily eager and earnest, and Michael was victorious in the issue, yet he would not bring a railing accusation against the devil himself; he knew a good cause needed no such weapons to be employed in its defence. It is said, he durst not bring, &c. Why durst he not? Not that he was afraid of the devil, but he believed God would be offended if, in such a dispute, he went that way to work; he thought it below him to engage in a trial of skill with the great enemy of God and man which of them should out-scold or out-rail the other: a memorandum to all disputants, never to bring railing accusations into their disputes. Truth needs no supports from falsehood or scurrility. Some say, Michael would not bring a railing accusation against the devil as knowing beforehand that he would be too hard for him at that weapon. Some think the apostle refers here to the remarkable passage we have, Num. xx. 7-14 . Satan would have represented Moses under disadvantageous colours, which he, good man, had at that time, and upon that occasion, given but too much handle for. Now Michael, according to this account, stands up in defence of Moses, and, in the zeal of an upright and bold spirit, says to Satan, The Lord rebuke thee. He would not stand disputing with the devil, nor enter into a particular debate about the merits of that special cause. He knew Moses was his fellow-servant, a favourite of God, and he would not patiently suffer him to be insulted, no, not by the prince of devils; but in a just indignation cries out, The Lord rebuke thee: like that of our Lord himself ( Matt. iv. 10 ), Get thee hence, Satan. Moses was a dignity, a magistrate, one beloved and preferred by the great God; and the archangel thought it insufferable that such a one should be so treated by a vile apostate spirit, of how high an order soever. So the lesson hence is that we ought to stand up in defence of those whom God owns, how severe soever Satan and his instruments may be in their censures of them and their conduct. Those who censure (in particular) upright magistrates, upon every slip in their behaviour, may expect to hear, The Lord rebuke thee; and divine rebukes are harder to be borne than careless sinners now think for. 3. They speak evil of the things which they know not, &c., v. 10 . Observe, Those who speak evil of religion and godliness speak evil of the things which they know not; for, if they had known them, they would have spoken well of them, for nothing but good and excellent can be truly said of religion, and it is sad that any thing different or opposite should ever be justly said of any of its professors. A religious life is the most safe, happy, comfortable, and honourable life that is. Observe, further, Men are most apt to speak evil of those persons and things that they know least of. How many had never suffered by slanderous tongues if they had been better known! On the other hand, retirement screens some even from just censure. But what they know naturally, &c. It is hard, if not impossible, to find any obstinate enemies to the Christian religion, who do not in their stated course live in open or secret contradiction to the very principles of natural religion: this many think hard and uncharitable; but I am afraid it will appear too true in the day of the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. The apostle likens such to brute beasts, though they often think and boast themselves, if not as the wisest, yet at least as the wittiest part of mankind. In those things they corrupt themselves; that is, in the plainest and most natural and necessary things, things that lie most open and obvious to natural reason and conscience; even in those things they corrupt, debase, and defile themselves: the fault, whatever it is, lies not in their understanding or apprehensions, but in their depraved wills and disordered appetites and affections; they could and might have acted better, but then they must have offered violence to those vile affections which they obstinately chose rather to gratify than to mortify. 4. In v. 11 the apostle represents them as followers of Cain, and in v. 12, 13 , as atheistical and profane people, who thought little, and perhaps believed not much, of God or a future world—as greedy and covetous, who, so they could but gain present worldly advantages, cared not what came next—rebels against God and man, who, like Core, ran into attempts in which they must assuredly perish, as he did. Of such the apostle further says, (1.) These are spots in your feasts of charity —the agapai or love-feasts, so much spoken of by the ancients. They happened, by whatever means or mischance, to be admitted among them, but were spots in them, defiled and defiling. Observe, It is a great reproach, though unjust and accidental, to religion, when those who profess it, and join in the most solemn institution of it, are in heart and life unsuitable and even contrary to it: These are spots. Yet how common in all Christian societies here on earth, the very best not excepted, are such blemishes! The more is the pity. The Lord remedy it in his due time and way, not in men's blind and rigorous way of plucking up the wheat with the tares. But in the heaven we are waiting, hoping, and preparing for, there is none of this mad work, there are none of these disorderly doings. (2.) When they feast with you, they feed themselves without fear. Arrant gluttons, no doubt, there were; such as minded only the gratifying of their appetites with the daintiness and abundance of their fare; they had no regard to Solomon's caution, Prov. xxiii. 2 . Note, In common eating and drinking a holy fear is necessary, much more in feasting, though we may sometimes be more easily and insensibly overcome at a common meal than at a feast; for, in the case supposed, we are less upon our guard, and sometimes, at least to some persons, the plenty of a feast is its own antidote, as to others it may prove a dangerous snare. (3.) Clouds they are without water, which promise rain in time of drought, but perform nothing of what they promise. Such is the case of formal professors, who at first setting out promise much, like early-blossoming trees in a forward spring, but in conclusion bring forth little or no fruit.— Carried about of winds, light and empty, easily driven about this way or that, as the wind happens to set; such are empty, ungrounded professors, and easy prey to every seducer. It is amazing to hear many talk so confidently of so many things of which they know little or nothing, and yet have not the wisdom and humility to discern and be sensible how little they know. How happy would our world be if men either knew more or practically knew how little they know. (4.) Trees whose fruit withereth, &c. Trees they are, for they are planted in the Lord's vineyard, yet fruitless ones. Observe, Those whose fruit withereth may be justly said to be without fruit. As good never a whit as never the better. It is a sad thing when men seem to begin in the Spirit and end in the flesh, which is almost as common a case as it is an awful one. The text speaks of such as were twice dead. One would think to be once dead were enough; we none of us, till grace renew us to a higher degree than ordinary, love to think of dying once, though this is appointed for us all. What then is the meaning of this being twice dead? They had been once dead in their natural, fallen, lapsed state; but they seemed to recover, and, as a man in a swoon, to be brought to life again, when they took upon them the profession of the Christian religion. But now they are dead again by the evident proofs they have given of their hypocrisy: whatever they seemed, they had nothing truly vital in them.— Plucked up by the roots, as we commonly serve dead trees, from which we expect no more fruit. They are dead, dead, dead; why cumber they the ground? Away with them to the fire. (5.) Raging waves of the sea, boisterous, noisy, and clamorous; full of talk and turbulency, but with little (if any) sense or meaning: Foaming out their own shame, creating much uneasiness to men of better sense and calmer tempers, which yet will in the end turn to their own greater shame and just reproach. The psalmist's prayer ought always to be that of every honest and good man, " Let integrity and uprightness preserve me ( Ps. xxv. 21 ), and, if it will not, let me be unpreserved." If honesty signify little now, knavery will signify much less, and that in a very little while. Raging waves are a terror to sailing passengers; but, when they have got to port, the waves are forgotten as if no longer in being: their noise and terror are for ever ended. (6.) Wandering stars, planets that are erratic in their motions, keep not that steady regular course which the fixed ones do, but shift their stations, that one has sometimes much ado to know where to find them. This allusion carries in it a very lively emblem of false teachers, who are sometimes here and sometimes there, so that one knows not where nor how to fix them. In the main things, at least, one would think something should be fixed and steady; and this might be without infallibility, or any pretensions to it in us poor mortals. In religion and politics, the great subjects of present debate, surely there are certain stamina in which wise and good, honest and disinterested, men might agree, without throwing the populace into the utmost anguish and distress of mind, or blowing up their passions into rage and fury, without letting them know what they say or whereof they affirm. II. The doom of this wicked people is declared: To whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. False teachers are to expect the worst of punishments in this and a future world: not every one who teaches by mistake any thing that is not exactly true (for who then, in any public assembly, durst open a Bible to teach others, unless he thought himself equal or superior to the angels of God in heaven?) but every one who prevaricates, dissembles, would lead others into by-paths and side-ways, that he may have opportunity to make a gain or prey of them, or (in the apostle's phrase) to make merchandize of them, 2 Pet. ii. 3 . But enough of this. As for the blackness of darkness for ever, I shall only say that this terrible expression, with all the horror it imports, belongs to false teachers, truly, not slanderously so called, who corrupt the word of God, and betray the souls of men. If this will not make both ministers and people cautious, I know not what will. Of the prophecy of Enoch, ( v. 14, 15 ) we have no mention made in any other part or place of scripture; yet now it is scripture that there was such prophecy. One plain text of scripture is proof enough of any one point that we are required to believe, especially when relating to a matter of fact; but in matters of faith, necessary saving faith, God has not seen fit (blessed be his holy name he has not) to try us so far. There is no fundamental article of the Christian religion, truly so called, which is not inculcated over and over in the New Testament, by which we may know on what the Holy Ghost does, and consequently on what we ought, to lay the greatest stress. Some say that this prophecy of Enoch was preserved by tradition in the Jewish church; others that the apostle Jude was immediately inspired with the notice of it: be this as it may, it is certain that there was such a prophecy of ancient date, of long standing, and universally received in the Old-Testament church; and it is a main point of our New-Testament creed. Observe, 1. Christ's coming to judgment was prophesied of as early as the middle of the patriarchal age, and was therefore even then a received and acknowledged truth.— The Lord cometh with his holy myriads, including both angels and the spirits of just men made perfect. What a glorious time will that be, when Christ shall come with ten thousand of these! And we are told for what great and awful ends and purposes he will come so accompanied and attended, namely, to execute judgment upon all. 2. It was spoken of then, so long ago, as a thing just at hand: " Behold, the Lord cometh; he is just a coming, he will be upon you before you are aware, and, unless you be very cautious and diligent, before you are provided to meet him comfortably." He cometh, (1.) To execute judgment upon the wicked. (2.) To convince them. Observe, Christ will condemn none without precedent, trial, and conviction, such conviction as shall at least silence themselves. They shall have no excuse or apology to make that they either can or dare then stand by. Then every mouth shall be stopped, the Judge and his sentence shall be (by all the impartial) approved and applauded, and even the guilty condemned criminals shall be speechless, though at present they want not bold and specious pleas, which they vent with all assurance and confidence; and yet it is certain that the mock-trials of prisoners in the jail among themselves and the real trial at the bar before the proper judge soon appear to be very different things. I cannot pass v. 15 without taking notice how often, and how emphatically, the word ungodly is repeated in it, no fewer than four times: ungodly men, ungodly sinners, ungodly deeds, and, as to the manner, ungodly committed. Godly or ungodly signifies little with men now-a-days, unless it be to scoff at and deride even the very expressions; but it is not so in the language of the Holy Ghost. Note, Omissions, as well as commissions, must be accounted for in the day of judgment. Note, further, Hard speeches of one another, especially if ill-grounded, will most certainly come into account at the judgment of the great day. Let us all take care in time. "If thou," says one of our good old puritans, "smite (a miscalled heretic, or) a schismatic, and God find a real saint bleeding, look thou to it, how thou wilt answer it." It may be too late to say before the angel that it was an error, Eccl. v. 6 . I only here allude to that expression of the divinely inspired writer.

nd of vices. What the apostle says is, that their character resembled that of the inhabitants of Sodom; the example which he adduces of the punishment which was brought on those sinners, leaves it to be clearly inferred that the persons of whom he was speaking would be punished in a similar manner. These filthy dreamers. The word filthy has been supplied by our translators, but there is no good reason why it should have been introduced. The Greek word (ενυπνιαζω) means to dream; and is applied to these persons as holding doctrines and opinions which sustained the same relation to truth which dreams do to good sense. Their doctrines were the fruits of mere imagination, foolish vagaries and fancies. The word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in Acts 2:17, where it is applied to visions in dreams. Defile the flesh. Pollute themselves; give indulgence to corrupt passions and appetites. 2Pet 2:10. Despise dominion. The same Greek word is used here which occurs in 2Pet 2:10. 2Pet 2:10. And speak evil of dignities. 2Pet 2:10. (a) "defile" 2Pet 2:10,11 Verse 9. Yet Michael the archangel, etc. This verse has given more perplexity to expositors than any other part of the epistle; and in fact the difficulties

In like manner these dreamers - Sleeping and dreaming all their lives. Despise authority - Those that are invested with it by Christ, and made by him the overseers of his flock. Rail at dignities - The apostle does not seem to speak of worldly dignities. These they had "in admiration for the sake of gain," Jude 1:16 ; but those holy men, who for the purity of their lives, the soundness of their doctrine, and the greatness of their labours in the work of the ministry, were truly honourable before God and all good men; and who were grossly vilified by those who turned the grace of God into lasciviousness. Probably they were the impure followers of Simon Magus, the same with the Gnostics and Nicolaitans, Rev 2:15 . 2Pet 2:10 .

in regard to it have been so great that some have been led to regard the epistle as spurious. The difficulty has arisen from these two circumstances: (1.) Ignorance of the origin of what is said here of Michael the archangel, nothing of this kind being found in the Old Testament; and (2.) the improbability of the story itself, which looks like a mere Jewish fable. Peter in his second epistle, chap. 2Pet 2:2, made a general reference to angels as not bringing railing accusations against others before the Lord; but Jude refers to a particular case--the case of Michael when contending about the body of Moses. The methods proposed of reconciling the passage with the proper ideas of inspiration have been various, though perhaps no one of them relieves it of all difficulty. It would be inconsistent with the design of these Notes to go into an extended examination of this passage. Those who wish to see a full investigation of it may consult Michaelis' Introduction to the New Testament, vol, iv. pp. 378--393; Lardner, vol. vi. p. 312, seq.; Hug, Intro. & 183; Benson, in loc.; Rosenmuller's Morgenland, iii. pp. 196, 197; and Wetstein, in loc. The principal methods of relieving the difficulty have been the following: I. Some have supposed that the reference is to the passage in Zechariah, Zech 3:1, seq. "And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the Lord, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the Lord said unto Satan, the Lord rebuke thee, O Satan," etc. The opinion that Jude refers to this passage was held by Lardner. But the objections to this are very obvious: (1.) There is no similarity between the two, except the expression, "the Lord rebuke thee." (2.) The name Michael does not occur at all in the passage in Zechariah. (3.) There is no mention made of the "body of Moses" there, and no allusion to it whatever. (4.) There is no intimation that there was any such contention about his body. There is a mere mention that Satan resisted the angel of the Lord, as seen in the vision, but no intimation that the controversy had any reference to Moses in any way. (5.) The reason of the resistance which Satan offered to the angel in the vision as seen by Zechariah is stated. It was in regard to the consecration of Joshua to the office of high priest implying a return of prosperity to Jerusalem, and the restoration of the worship of God there in its purity, see Zech 3:2. To this Satan was of course opposed, and the vision represents him as resisting the angel in his purpose thus to set him apart to that office. These reasons seem to me to make it clear that Jude did not refer to the passage in Zechariah, nor is there any other place in the Old Testament to which it can be supposed he had reference. II. Hug supposes that the reference here, as well as that in Jude 1:14, to the prophecy of Enoch, is derived from some apocryphal books existing in the time of Jude; and that though those books contained mere fables, the apostle appealed to them, not as conceding what was said to be true, but in order to refute and rebuke those against whom he wrote, out of books which they admitted to be of authority. Intro. & 183. Arguments and confutations, he says, drawn from the sacred Scriptures, would have been of no avail in reasoning with them, for these they evaded, ( 2Pet 3:16,) and there were no surer means of influencing them than those writings which they themselves valued as the sources of their peculiar views. According to this, the apostle did not mean to vouch for the truth of the story, but merely to make use of it in argument. The objection to this is, that the apostle does in fact seem to refer to the contest between Michael and the devil as true. He speaks of it in the same way in which he would have done if he had spoken of the death of Moses, or of his smiting the rock, or of his leading the children of Israel across the Red Sea, or of any other fact in history. If he regarded it as a mere fable, though it would have been honest and consistent with all proper views of inspiration for him to have said to those against whom he argued, that on their own principles such and such things were true, yet it would not be honest to speak of it as a fact which he admitted to be true. Besides, it should be remembered that he is not arguing with them, in which case it might be admissible to reason in this way, but was making statements to others about them, and showing that they manifested a spirit entirely different from that which the angels evinced even when contending in a just cause against the prince of all evil. III. It has been supposed that the apostle quotes an apocryphal book existing in his time, containing this account, and that he means to admit that the account is true. Origen mentions such a book, called "the Assumption of Moses," (αναληψιςτουμωσεως,) as extant in his time, containing this very account of the contest between Michael and the devil about the body of Moses. That was a Jewish Greek book, and Origen supposed that this was the source of the account here. That book is now lost. There is still extant a book in Hebrew, called --"the Death of Moses," which some have supposed to be the book referred to by Origen. That books contains many fabulous stories about the death of Moses, and is evidently the work of some Jew drawing wholly upon his imagination. An account of it may be seen in Michaelis, Intro. iv. p. 381, seq. There is no reason to suppose that this is the same book referred to by Origen under the name of "the Assumption of Moses;" and there is a moral certainty that an inspired writer could not have quoted it as of authority. Further, there can be no reasonable doubt that such a book as Origen refers to, under the title of" the Assumption of Moses," was extant in his time, but that does not prove by any means that it was extant in the time of Jude, or that he quoted it. There is, indeed, no positive proof that it was not extant in the time of Jude, but there is none that it was, and all the facts in the case will be met by the supposition that it was written afterwards, and that the tradition on the subject here referred to by Jude was incorporated into it. IV. The remaining supposition is, that Jude here refers to a prevalent tradition among the Jews, and that he has adopted it as containing an important truth, and one which bore on the subject under discussion. In support of this, it may be observed, (a.) that it is well known that there were many traditions of this nature among the Jews. Mt 15:2. (b.) That though many of these traditions were puerile and false, yet there is no reason to doubt that some of them might have been founded in truth. (c.) That an inspired writer might select those which were true, for the illustration of his subject, with as much propriety as he might select what was written; since if what was thus handed down by tradition was true, it was as proper to use it as to use a fact made known in any other way. (d.) That in fact such traditions were adopted by the inspired writers when they would serve to illustrate a subject which they were discussing. Thus Paul refers to the tradition about Jannes and Jambres as true history. 2Ti 3:8. (e.) If, therefore, what is here said was true, there was no impropriety in its being referred to by Jude as an illustration of his subject. The only material question then is, whether it is true. And who can prove that it is not? What evidence is there that it is not? How is it possible to demonstrate that it is not? There are many allusions in the Bible to angels; there is express mention of such an angel as Michael, ( Dan 12:1;) there is frequent mention of the devil; and there are numerous affirmations that both bad and good angels are employed in important transactions on the earth. Who can prove that such spirits never meet, never come in conflict, never encounter each other in executing their purposes? Good men meet bad men, and why is it any more absurd to suppose that good angels may encounter bad ones? It should be remembered, further, that there is no need of supposing that the subject of the dispute was about burying the body of Moses; or that Michael sought to bury it, and the devil endeavoured to prevent it--the one in order that it might not be worshipped by the Israelites, and the other that it might be. This indeed became incorporated into the tradition in the apocryphal books which were afterwards written; but Jude says not one word of this, and is in no way responsible for it. All that he says is, that there was a contention or dispute (διακρινομενοςδιελεγετο) respecting his body. But when it was, or what was the occasion, or how it was conducted, he does not state, and we have no right to ascribe to him sentiments which he has not expressed. If ever such a controversy of any kind existed respecting that body, it is all that Jude affirms, and is all for which he should be held responsible. The sum of the matter, then, it seems to me is, that Jude has, as Paul did on another occasion, adopted a tradition which was prevalent in his time; that there is nothing necessarily absurd or impossible in the fact affirmed by the tradition, and that no one can possibly demonstrate that it is not true. The archangel. The word archangel occurs only in one other place in the Scriptures. 1Thes 4:16. It means ruling or chief angel--the chief among the hosts of heaven. It is nowhere else applied to Michael, though his name is several times mentioned, Dan 10:13,21, 12:1, Rev 12:7. When contending. This word (διακρινομενος) refers here to a contention or strife with words-- a disputation. Nothing farther is necessarily implied, for it is so used in this sense in the New Testament, Acts 11:2,12 (Greek.) He disputed. διελεγετο. This word also would denote merely a controversy or contention of words, Mk 9:34, Acts 17:2,17, 18:4,19; Acts 24:12. About the body of Moses. The nature of this controversy is wholly unknown, and conjecture is useless. It is not said, however, that there was a strife which should get the body, or a contention about burying it, or any physical contention about it whatever. That there may have been, no one indeed can disprove; but all that the apostle says would be met by a supposition that there was any debate of any kind respecting that body, in which Michael, though provoked by the opposition of the worst being in the universe, still restrained himself from any outbreaking of passion, and used only the language of mild but firm rebuke. Durst not. ουκετολμησε " Did not dare." It is not said that he did not dare to do it because he feared Satan; but all that the word implies is met by supposing that he did not dare to do it because he feared the Lord, or because in any circumstances it would be wrong. A railing accusation. The Greek word is blasphemy. The meaning is, he did not indulge in the language of mere reproach; and it is implied here that such language would be wrong anywhere. If it would be right to bring a railing accusation against any one, it would be against the devil. But said, The Lord rebuke thee. The word here used (επιτιμαω) means, properly, to put honour upon; and then to adjudge or confirm. Then it came to be used in the sense of commanding or restraining --as, e.g., the winds and waves, Mt 8:26, Mk 4:39. Then it is used in the sense of admonishing strongly; of enjoining upon one, with the idea of censure, Mt 18:18, Mk 1:25 Lk 23:35,41. This is the idea here--the expression of a wish that the Lord would take the matter of the dispute to himself, and that he would properly restrain and control Satan, with the implied idea that his conduct was wrong. The language is the same as that recorded in Zech 3:2, as used by "the angel" respecting Satan. But, as before observed, there is no reason to suppose that the apostle referred to that. The fact, however, that the angel is said to have used the language on that occasion may be allowed to give confirmation to what is said here, since it shows that it is the language which angelic beings naturally employ. (a) "Michael" Dan 12:1 (c) "Moses" De 34:4 (d) "durst" Ex 22:28 (e) "Lord rebuke" Zech 3:2 Verse 10. But these speak evil of those things which they know not. These false and corrupt teachers employ reproachful language of those things which lie wholly beyond the reach of their vision.

Yet Michael - It does not appear whether St. Jude learned this by any revelation or from ancient tradition. It suffices, that these things were not only true, but acknowledged as such by them to whom he wrote. The archangel - This word occurs but once more in the sacred writings, 1Thess 4:16 . So that whether there be one archangel only, or more, it is not possible for us to determine. When he disputed with the devil - At what time we know not. Concerning the body of Moses - Possibly the devil would have discovered the place where it was buried, which God for wise reasons had concealed. Durst not bring even against him a railing accusation - Though so far beneath him in every respect. But simply said, (so great was his modesty!) The Lord rebuke thee - I leave thee to the Judge of all.

2Pet 2:12. But what they know naturally. As mere men; as animals; that is, in things pertaining to their physical nature, or in which they are on a level with the brute creation. The reference is to the natural instincts, the impulses of appetite, and passion, and sensual pleasure. The idea of the apostle seems to be, that their knowledge was confined to those things. They did not rise above them to the intelligent contemplation of those higher things, against which they used only the language of reproach. There are multitudes of such men in the world. Towards high and holy objects they use only the language of reproach. They do not understand them, but they can rail at them. Their knowledge is confined to the subjects of sensual indulgence, and all their intelligence in that respect is employed only to corrupt and destroy themselves. As brute beasts. Animals without intelligence. 2Pet 2:12. In those things they corrupt themselves. They live only for sensual indulgence, and sink deeper and deeper in sensual gratifications.Verse 11. Woe unto them! See Mt 11:21. For they have gone in the way of Cain. Gen 4:5-12. That is, they have evinced disobedience and

But these - Without all shame. Rail at the things of God which they know not - Neither can know, having no spiritual senses. And the natural things, which they know - By their natural senses, they abuse into occasions of sin.

Woe unto them - Of all the apostles St. Jude alone, and that in this single place, denounces a woe. St. Peter, to the same effect, pronounces them "cursed children." For they have gone in the way of Cain - The murderer. And ran greedily - Literally, have been poured out, like a torrent without banks. After the error of Balaam - The covetous false prophet. And perished in the gainsaying of Korah - Vengeance has overtaken them as it did Korah, rising up against those whom God had sent.

rebellion as he did; they have shown that they are proud, corrupt, and wicked. The apostle does not specify the points in which they had imitated the example of Cain, but it was probably in such things as these--pride, haughtiness, the hatred of religion, restlessness under the restraints of virtue, envy that others were more favoured, and a spirit of hatred of the brethren (comp. 1Jn 3:15 ) which would lead to murder. And ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward. The word rendered ran greedily --εξεχυθησαν, from εκχεω--means to pour out; and then, when spoken of persons, that they are poured out, or that they rush tumultuously on an object, that is, that they give themselves up to anything. The idea here is, that all restraint was relaxed, and that they rushed on tumultuously to any course of life that promised gain. 2Pet 2:15. And perished. They perish, or they will perish. The result is so certain that the apostle, speaks of it as if it were already done. The thought seems to have lain in his mind in this manner: he thinks of them as having the same character as Korah, and then at once thinks of them as destroyed in the same manner, or as if it were already done. They are identified with him in their character and doom. The word rendered perish (απολλυμι) is often used to denote future punishment, Mt 10:28,39, 18:14, Mk 1:24, Lk 13:3,5, Jn 3:15,16 Jn 10:28, 2Thes 2:10, 2Pet 3:9. In the gainsaying of Core. Of Korah, Nu 16:1-30. The word gainsaying here means properly contradiction, or speaking against; then controversy, question, strife; then contumely, reproach, or rebellion. The idea here seems to be, that they were guilty of insubordination; of possessing a restless and dissatisfied spirit; of a desire to rule, etc. (a) "Cain" Gen 4:5 (b) "Balaam" Nu 22:7,21 (c) "Core" Nu 16:1 Verse 12. These are spots. 2Pet 2:13. The word used by Peter, however, is not exactly the same as that used here. Peter uses the word σπιλοι-- spiloi; Jude, σπιλαδες-- spilades. The word us

These are spots - Blemishes. In your feasts of love - Anciently observed in all the churches. Feeding themselves without fear - Without any fear of God, or jealousy over themselves. Twice dead - In sin, first by nature, and afterwards by apostasy. Plucked up by the roots - And so incapable of ever reviving.

ed by Jude means, properly, a rock by or in the sea; a cliff, etc. It may either be a rock by the sea, against which vessels may be wrecked, or a hidden rock in the sea, on which they may be stranded at an unexpected moment. See Hesychius and Pollux, as quoted by Wetstein, in loc. The idea here seems to be, not that they were spots and blemishes in their sacred feasts, but that they were like hidden rocks to the mariner. As those rocks were the cause of shipwreck, so these false teachers caused others to make shipwreck of their faith. They were as dangerous in the church as hidden rocks are in the ocean. In your feasts of charity. Your feasts of love. The reference is probably to the Lord's Supper, called a feast or festival of love, because (1.) it revealed the love of Christ to the world; (2.) because it was the means of strengthening the mutual love of the disciples: a festival which love originated, and where love reigned. It has been supposed by many, that the reference here is to festivals which were subsequently called Agapae, and which are now known as love-feasts --meaning a festival immediately preceding the celebration of the Lord's Supper. But there are strong objections to the supposition that there is reference here to such a festival. (1.) There is no evidence, unless it be found in this passage, that such celebrations had the sanction of the apostles. They are nowhere else mentioned in the New Testament, or alluded to, unless it is in 1Cor 11:17-34, an instance which is mentioned only to reprove it, and to show that such appendages to the Lord's Supper were wholly unauthorized by the original institution, and were liable to gross abuse. (2.) The supposition that they existed, and that they are referred to here, is not necessary in order to a proper explanation of this passage. All that it fairly means will be met by the supposition that the reference is to the Lord's Supper. That was in every sense a festival of love or charity. The words will appropriately apply to that, and there is no necessity of supposing anything else in order to meet their full signification. (3.) There can be no doubt that such a custom early existed in the Christian church, and extensively prevailed; but it can readily be accounted for without supposing that it had the sanction of the apostles, or that it existed in their time. (a.) Festivals prevailed among the Jews, and it would not be unnatural to introduce them into the Christian church. (b.) The custom prevailed among the heathen of having a "feast upon a sacrifice," or in connexion with a sacrifice; and as the Lord's Supper commemorated the great sacrifice for sin, it was not unnatural, in imitation of the heathen, to append a feast or festival to that ordinance, either before or after its celebration. (c.) This very passage in Jude, with perhaps some others in the New Testament, (comp. 1Cor 11:26, Acts 2:46, 6:2,) might be so construed as to seem to lend countenance to the custom. For these reasons it seems clear to me that the passage before us does not refer to love-feasts; and, therefore, that they are not authorized in the New Testament. See, however, Coleman's Antiquities of the Christian church, chap. xvi., & 13. When they feast with you. Showing that they were professors of religion. 2Pet 2:13. Feeding themselves without fear. That is, without any proper reverence or respect for the ordinance; attending on the Lord's Supper as if it were an ordinary feast, and making it an occasion of riot and gluttony. See 1Cor 11:20-22. Clouds they are, etc. 2Pet 2:17. Comp. Eph 4:14. Trees whose fruit withereth. The idea here is substantially the same as that expressed by Peter, when he says that they were "wells without water;" and by him and Jude, when they say that they are like clouds driven about by the winds, that shed down no refreshing rain upon the earth. Such wells and clouds only disappoint expectations. So a tree that should promise fruit, but whose fruit should always wither, would be useless. The word rendered withereth (φθινοπωρινα) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means, properly, autumnal; and the expression here denotes trees of autumn; that is, trees stripped of leaves and verdure; trees on which there is no fruit.--Robinson's Lex. The sense, in the use of this word, therefore, is not exactly that which is expressed in our translation, that the fruit has withered, but rather that they are like the trees of autumn, which are stripped and bare. So the Vulgate, arbores autumnales. The idea of their being without fruit is expressed in the next word. The image which seems to have been before the mind of Jude in this expression, is that of the naked trees of autumn as contrasted with the bloom of spring and the dense foliage of summer. Without fruit. That is, they produce no fruit. Either they are wholly barren, like the barren fig-tree, or the fruit which was set never ripens, but falls off. They are, therefore, useless as religious instructors--as much so as a tree is which produces no fruit. Twice dead. That is, either meaning that they are seen to be dead in two successive seasons, showing that there is no hope that they will revive and be valuable; or, using the word twice to denote emphasis, meaning that they are absolutely or altogether dead. Perhaps the idea is, that successive summers and winters have passed over them, and that no signs of life appear. Plucked up by the roots. The wind blows them down, or they are removed by the husbandman as only cumbering the ground. They are not cut down--leaving a stump that might sprout again--but they are extirpated root and branch; that is, they are wholly worthless. There is a regular ascent in this climax, first, the apostle sees a tree apparently of autumn, stripped and leafless; then he sees it to be a tree that bears no fruit; then he sees it to be a tree over which successive winters and summers pass and no signs of life appear; then as wholly extirpated. So he says it is with these men. They produce no fruits of holiness; months and years show that there is no vitality in them; they are fit only to be extirpated and cast away. Alas! how many professors of religion are there, and how many religious teachers, who answer to this description! (a) "clouds" Prov 25:14 (b) "carried" Eph 4:14 (c) "fruit" Jn 15:4-6 (d) "twice dead" Heb 6:4-6 (e) "plucked" Mt 15:13 Verse 13. Raging waves of the sea. Comp. 2Pet 2:18. They are like the wild and restless waves of the ocean. The image here seems to be, that they were noisy and bold in their professions, and were as wild and ungovernable in their passions as

Wandering stars - Literally, planets, which shine for a time, but have no light in themselves, and will be soon cast into utter darkness. Thus the apostle illustrates their desperate wickedness by comparisons drawn from the air, earth, sea, and heavens.

the billows of the sea. Foaming out their own shame. The waves are lashed into foam, and break and dash on the shore. They seem to produce nothing but foam, and to proclaim their own shame, that after all their wild roaring and agitation they should effect no more. So with these noisy and vaunting teachers. What they impart is as unsubstantial and valueless as the foam of the ocean waves, and the result is in fact a proclamation of their own shame, Men with so loud professions should produce much more. Wandering stars. The word rendered wandering (πλανηται) is that from which we have derived the word planet. It properly means one who wanders about; a wanderer; and was given by the ancients to planets because they seemed to wander about the heavens, now forward and now backward among the other stars, without any fixed law.--Pliny, Nat. Hist. ii. 6. Cicero, however, who saw that they were governed by certain established laws, says that the name seemed to be given to them without reason.--De Nat. Deo. ii. 20. So far as the words used are concerned, the reference may be either to the planets, properly so called, or to comets, or to ignes fatui, or meteors. The proper idea is that of stars that have no regular motions, or that do not move in fixed and regular orbits. The laws of the planetary motions were not then understood, and their movements seemed to be irregular and capricious; and hence, if the reference is to them, they might be regarded as not an unapt illustration of these teachers. The sense seems to be, that the aid which we derive from the stars, as in navigation, is in the fact that they are regular in their places and movements, and thus the mariner can determine his position. If they had no regular places and movements, they would be useless to the seaman. So with false religious teachers. No dependence can be placed on them. It is not uncommon to compare a religious teacher to a star, Rev 1:16, 2:1. Comp. Rev 22:16. To whom is reserved the blackness of darkness for ever. Not to the stars, but to the teachers. The language here is the same as in 2Pet 2:17. 2Pet 2:17 (f) "waves" Isa 57:20 (g) "wandering" Rev 8:10,11 Verse 14. And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam. The seventh in the direct line of descent from Adam. The line of descent is Adam, Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahaleel, Jared, Enoch, see Gen 5:3, seq. On the character of Enoch,

And of these also - As well as the antediluvian sinners Enoch - So early was the prophecy referred to, Jude 1:4 . The seventh from Adam - There were only five of the fathers between Adam and Enoch, 1Chron 1:1 - 3. The first coming of Christ was revealed to Adam; his second, glorious coming, to Enoch; and the seventh from Adam foretold the things which will conclude the seventh age of the world. St. Jude might know this either from some ancient book, or tradition, or immediate revelation. Behold - As if it were already done, the Lord cometh!

Heb 11:6. Prophesied of these. Uttered prophecies applicable to these men, or respecting just such men as these. It is not necessarily meant that he had these men specifically in his eye; but all that is fairly implied is, that his predictions were descriptive of them. There is no mention made in the writings of Moses of the fact that Enoch was a prophet; but no- thing is more probable in itself, and there is no absurdity in supposing that a true prophecy, though unrecorded, might be handed down by tradition. 2Ti 3:8; Jude 1:9. The source from which Jude derived this passage respecting the prophecy of Enoch is unknown. Amidst the multitude of traditions, however, handed down by the Jews from a remote antiquity, though many of them were false, and many of a trifling character, it is reasonable to presume that some of them were true and were of importance. No man can prove that the one before us is not of that character; no one can show that an inspired writer might not be led to make the selection of a true prophecy from a mass of traditions; and as the prophecy before us is one that would be every way worthy of a prophet, and worthy to be preserved, its quotation furnishes no argument against the inspiration of Jude. There is no clear evidence that he quoted it from any book extant in his time. There is, indeed, now an apocryphal writing called "the Book of Enoch," containing a prediction strongly resembling this, but there is no certain proof that it existed so early as the time of Jude, nor, if it did, is it absolutely certain that he quoted from it. Both Jude and the author of that book may have quoted a common tradition of their time, for there can be no doubt that the passage referred to was handed down by tradition. The passage as found in "the Book of Enoch" is in these words: "Behold he comes with ten thousand of his saints, to execute judgment upon them, and destroy the wicked, and reprove all the carnal, for everything which the sinful and ungodly have done and committed against him," chap. ii. Bib. Repository, vol. xv. p. 86. If the Book of Enoch was written after the time of Jude, it is natural to suppose that the prophecy referred to by him, and handed down by tradition, would be inserted in it. This book was discovered in an Ethiopic version, and was published with a translation by Dr. Laurence of Oxford, in 1821, and republished in 1832. A full account of it and its contents may be seen in an article by Prof. Stuart in the Bib. Repository for January 1840, pp. 86-137. The Lord cometh. That is, the Lord will come. 1Cor 16:22. It would seem from this to have been an early doctrine that the Lord would descend to the earth for judgment. With ten thousand of his saints. Or, of his holy ones. The word saints we now apply commonly to redeemed saints, or to Christians. The original word is, however, applicable to all who are holy, angels as well as men. The common representation in the Scriptures is, that he would come attended by the angels, ( Mt 25:31,) and there is doubtless allusion here to such beings. It is a common representation in the Old Testament also that God, when he manifests himself, is accompanied by great numbers of heavenly beings. See Ps 68:17, De 33:2. (h) "Lord" Zech 14:5 Verse 15. To execute judgment upon all. That is, he shall come to judge all the dwellers upon the earth, good and bad. And to convince all. The word convince we now use commonly in a somewhat limited sense, as meaning to satisfy a man's own mind either of the truth

of some proposition, or of the fact that he has done wrong, as being in this latter sense synonymous with the word convict. This conviction is commonly produced by argument or truth, and is not necessarily followed by any sentence of disapprobation, or by any judicial condemnation. But this is clearly not the sense in which the word is used here. The purpose of the coming of the Lord will not be to convince men in that sense, though it is undoubtedly true that the wicked will see that their lives have been wrong; but it will be to pronounce a sentence on them as the result of the evidence of their guilt. The Greek word which is here used occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. All that are ungodly among them. All that are not pious; all that have no religion. Of all their ungodly deeds, etc. Of their wicked actions and words. This is the common doctrine of the Bible, that all the wicked actions and words of men will be called into judgment. In regard to this passage, thus quoted from an ancient prophecy, we may remark, (1.) that the style bears the marks of its being a quotation, or of its being preserved by Jude in the language in which it had been handed down by tradition. It is not the style of Jude. It is not so terse, pointed, energetic. (2.) It has every probable mark of its having been actually delivered by Enoch. The age in which he lived was corrupt. The world was ripening for the deluge. He was himself a good man, and, as would seem perhaps, almost the only good man of his generation. Nothing would be more natural than that he should be reproached by hard words and speeches, and nothing more natural than that he should have pointed the men of his own age to the future judgment. (3.) The doctrine of the final judgment, if this was uttered by Enoch, was an early doctrine in the world. It was held even in the first generations of the race. It was one of those great truths early communicated to man to restrain him from sin, and to lead him to prepare for the great events which are to occur on the earth. The same doctrine has been transmitted from age to age, and is now one of the most important and the most affecting that refers to the final destiny of men. (a) "judgment upon all" Rev 20:13 (*) "convince" "convict" (b) "speeches" Ps 73:9 Verse 16. These are murmurers. The word here used does not elsewhere occur, though the word murmur is frequent, Mt 20:11, Lk 5:30; Jn 6:41,43,61, 8:32, 1Cor 10:10. Comp.

To execute judgment - Enoch herein looked beyond the flood. Upon all - Sinners, in general. And to convict all the ungodly, in particular, of all the grievous things which ungodly sinners (a sinner is bad; but the ungodly who sin without fear are worse) have spoken against him, Jude 1:8 ,10, though they might not think, all those speeches were against him.

Exhortation to the Faithful; Conclusion. ( a. d. 66.) 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him. 16 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. 17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; 18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. 19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit. 20 But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith, praying in the Holy Ghost, 21 Keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life. 22 And of some have compassion, making a difference: 23 And others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire; hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. 24 Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, 25 To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen. Here, I. The apostle enlarges further on the character of these evil men and seducers: they are murmurers, complainers, &c., v. 16 . Observe, A murmuring complaining temper, indulged and expressed, lays men under a very bad character; such are very weak at least, and for the most part very wicked. They murmur against God and his providence, against men and their conduct; they are angry at every thing that happens, and never pleased with their own state and condition in the world, as not thinking it good enough for them. Such walk after their own lusts; their will, their appetite, their fancy, are their only rule and law. Note, Those who please their sinful appetites are most prone to yield to their ungovernable passions. II. He proceeds to caution and exhort those to whom he is writing, v. 17-23 . Here, 1. He calls them to remember how they have been forewarned: But, beloved, remember, &c., v. 17 . " Remember, take heed that you think it not strange (so as to stumble and be offended, and have your faith staggered by it) that such people as the seducers before described and warned against should arise (and that early) in the Christian church, seeing all this was foretold by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, and consequently the accomplishment of it in the event is a confirmation of your faith, instead of being in the least an occasion of shaking and unsettling you therein." Note, (1.) Those who would persuade must make it evident that they sincerely love those whom they would persuade. Bitter words and hard usage never did nor ever will convince, much less persuade any body. (2.) The words which inspired persons have spoken (or written), duly remembered and reflected on, are the best preservative against dangerous errors; this will always be so, till men have learnt to speak better than God himself. (3.) We ought not to be offended if errors and persecutions arise and prevail in the Christian church; this was foretold, and therefore we should not think worse of Christ's person, doctrine, or cross, when we see it fulfilled. See 1 Tim. iv. 1, and 2 Tim. iii. 1, and 2 Pet. iii. 3 . We must not think it strange, but comfort ourselves with this, that in the midst of all this confusion Christ will maintain his church, and make good his promise, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, Matt. xvi. 18 . (4.) The more religion is ridiculed and persecuted the faster hold we should take and keep of it; being forewarned, we should show that we are fore-armed; under such trials we should stand firm, and not be soon shaken in mind, 2 Thess. ii. 2 . 2. He guards them against seducers by a further description of their odious character: These are those who separate, &c., v. 19 . Observe, (1.) Sensualists are the worst separatists. They separate themselves from God, and Christ, and his church, to the devil, the world, and the flesh, by their ungodly courses and vicious practices; and this is a great deal worse than separation from any particular branch of the visible church on account of opinions or modes and circumstances of external government or worship, though many can patiently bear with the former, while they are plentifully and almost perpetually railing at the latter, as if no sin were damnable but what they are pleased to call schism. (2.) Sensual men have not the Spirit, that is, of God and Christ, the Spirit of holiness, which whoever has not, is none of Christ's, does not belong to him, Rom. viii. 9 . (3.) The worse others are the better should we endeavour and approve ourselves to be; the more busy Satan and his instruments are to pervert others, in judgment or practice, the more tenacious should we be of sound doctrine and a good conversation, holding fast the faithful word, as we have been (divinely) taught, holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience, Tit. i. 9 ; 1 Tim. iii. 9 . 3. He exhorts them to persevering constancy in truth and holiness. (1.) Building up yourselves in your most holy faith, v. 20 . Observe, The way to hold fast our profession is to hold on in it. Having laid our foundation well in a sound faith, and a sincere upright heart, we must build upon it, make further progress continually; and we should take care with what materials we carry on our building, namely, gold, silver, precious stones, not wood, hay, stubble, 1 Cor. iii. 12 . Right principles and a regular conversation will stand the test even of the fiery trial; but, whatever we mix of baser alloy, though we be in the main sincere, we shall suffer loss by it, and though our persons be saved all that part of our work shall be consumed; and, if we ourselves escape, it will be with great danger and difficulty, as from a house on fire on every side. (2.) Praying in the Holy Ghost. Observe, [1.] Prayer is the nurse of faith; the way to build up ourselves in our most holy faith is to continue instant in prayer, Rom. xii. 12 . [2.] Our prayers are then most likely to prevail when we pray in the Holy Ghost, that is, under his guidance and influence, according to the rule of his word, with faith, fervency, and constant persevering importunity; this is praying in the Holy Ghost, whether it be done by or without a set prescribed form. (3.) Keep yourselves in the love of God, v. 21 . [1.] "Keep up the grace of love to God in its lively vigorous actings and exercises in your souls." [2.] "Take heed of throwing yourselves out of the love of God to you, or its delightful, cheering, strengthening manifestations; keep yourselves in the way of God, if you would continue in his love." (4.) Looking for the mercy, &c. [1.] Eternal life is to be looked for only through mercy; mercy is our only plea, not merit; or if merit, not our own, but another's, who has merited for us what otherwise we could have laid no claim to, nor have entertained any well-grounded hope of. [2.] It is said, not only through the mercy of God as our Creator, but through the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ as Redeemer; all who come to heaven must come thither through our Lord Jesus Christ; for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved, but that of the Lord Jesus only, Acts iv. 12 compared with v. 10 . [3.] A believing expectation of eternal life will arm us against the snares of sin ( 2 Pet. iii. 14 ); a lively faith of the blessed hope will help us to mortify our cursed lusts. 4. He directs them how to behave towards erring brethren: And of some have compassion, &c., v. 22, 23 . Observe, (1.) We ought to do all we can to rescue others out of the snares of the devil, that they may be saved from (or recovered, when entangled therein, out of) dangerous errors, or pernicious practices. We are not only (under God) our own keepers, but every man ought to be, as much as in him lies, his brother's keeper; none but a wicked Cain will contradict this, Gen. iv. 9 . We must watch over one another, must faithfully, yet prudently, reprove each other, and set a good example to all about us. (2.) This must be done with compassion, making a difference. How is that? We must distinguish between the weak and the wilful. [1.] Of some we must have compassion, treat them with all tenderness, restore them in the spirit of meekness, not be needlessly harsh and severe in our censures of them and their actions, nor proud and haughty in our conduct towards them; not implacable, nor averse to reconciliation with them, or admitting them to the friendship they formerly had with us, when they give evident or even strongly hopeful tokens of a sincere repentance: if God has forgiven them, why should not we? We infinitely more need his forgiveness than they do, or can do, ours, though perhaps neither they nor we are justly or sufficiently sensible of this. [2.] Others save with fear, urging upon them the terrors of the Lord; "Endeavour to frighten them out of their sins; preach hell and damnation to them." But what if prudence and caution in administering even the most just and severe reproofs be what are primarily and chiefly here intimated—(I do but offer it for consideration); as if he had said, "Fear lest you frustrate your own good intentions and honest designs by rash and imprudent management, that you do not harden, instead of reclaiming, even where greater degrees of severity are requisite than in the immediately foregoing instance." We are often apt to over-do, when we are sure we mean honestly, and think we are right in the main; yet the very worst are not needlessly, nor rashly, nor to extremity, to be provoked, lest they be thereby further hardened through our default.—" Hating even the garment spotted with the flesh, that is, keeping yourselves at the utmost distance from what is or appears evil, and designing and endeavouring that others may do so too. Avoid all that leads to sin or that looks like sin," 1 Thess. v. 22 . III. The apostle concludes this epistle with a solemn ascription of glory to the great God, v. 24, 25 . Note, 1. Whatever is the subject or argument we have been treating of, ascribing glory to God is fittest for us to conclude with. 2. God is able, and he is as willing as able, to keep us from falling, and to present us faultless before the presence of his glory; not as those who never have been faulty (for what has once been done can never be rendered undone, even by Omnipotence itself, for that implies a contradiction), but as those whose faults shall not be imputed, to their ruin, which, but for God's mercy and a Saviour's merits, they might most justly have been.— Before the presence of his glory. Observe, (1.) The glory of the Lord will shortly be present. We now look upon it as distant, and too many look upon it as uncertain, but it will come, and it will be manifest and apparent. Every eye shall see him, Rev. i. 7 . This is now the object of our faith, but hereafter (and surely it cannot now be long) it will be the object of our sense; whom we now believe in, him we shall shortly see, to our unspeakable joy and comfort or inexpressible terror and consternation. See 1 Pet. i. 8 . (2.) All real sincere believers shall be presented, and the Lord Redeemer's appearance and coming, by him their glorious head, to the Father, in order to his approbation, acceptance, and reward. They were given to him of the Father, and of all that were so given to him he has lost none, nor will lose any one, not an individual, a single soul, but will present them all perfectly holy and happy, when he shall surrender his mediatorial kingdom to his God and our God, his Father and our Father, John vi. 39 , with ch. xvii. 12 , 1 Cor. xv. 24 . (3.) When believers shall be presented faultless it will be with exceeding joy. Alas! now our faults fill us with fears, doubts, and sorrows. But be of good cheer; if we be sincere, we shall be, our dear Redeemer has undertaken for it, we shall be presented faultless; where there is no sin there will be no sorrow; where there is the perfection of holiness, there will be the perfection of joy. Surely, the God who can and will do this is worthy to have glory, majesty, dominion, and power, ascribed to him, both now and for ever! And to this we may well, with the apostle, affix our hearty Amen.

These are murmurers - Against men. Complainers - Literally, complainers of their fate, against God. Walking - With regard to themselves. After their own foolish and mischievous desires. Having men's persons in admiration for the sake of gain - Admiring and commending them only for what they can get.

Jn 7:12, Acts 6:1, Php 2:14; 1Pet 4:9. The sense is that of repining or complaining under the allotments of Providence, or finding fault with God's plans, and purposes, and doings. Complainers. Literally, finding fault with one's own lot (μεμψιμοιροι.) The word does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament; the thing often occurs in this world. Nothing is more common than for men to complain of their lot; to think that it is hard; to com- pare theirs with that of others, and to blame God for not having made their circumstances different. The poor complain that they are not rich like others; the sick that they are not well; the enslaved that they are not free; the bereaved that they are deprived of friends; the ugly that they are not beautiful; those in humble life that their lot was not east among the great and the gay. The virtue that is opposed to this is contentment --a virtue of inestimable value. Php 4:11. Walking after their own lusts. Giving unlimited indulgence to their appetites and passions. 2Pet 3:3. And their mouth speaketh great swelling words. 2Pet 2:18. Having men's persons in admiration. Showing great respect to certain persons, particularly the rich and the great. The idea is, that they were not just in the esteem which they had for others, or that they did not appreciate them according to their real worth, but paid special attention to one class in order to promote their selfish ends. Because of advantage. Because they hoped to derive some benefit to themselves. (+) "advantage" "For gain's sake"Verses 17, 18. But, beloved, remember ye, etc. There is a striking similarity between these two verses and 2Pet 3:1-3. It occurs in the same connexion, following the description of the false and dangerous teachers against whom the apostle would guard them, and

couched almost in the same words. See it explained in Notes on the similar passage in Peter. When Jude ( Jude 1:17 ) entreats them to remember the words which were spoken by the apostles, it is not necessarily to be inferred that he was not himself an apostle, for he is speaking of what was past, and there might have been a special reason why he should refer to something that they would distinctly remember which had been spoken by the other apostles on this point. Or it might be that he meant also to include himself among them, and to speak of the apostles collectively, without particularly specifying himself. Mockers. The word rendered mockers here is the same which in the parallel place in 2Pet 3:3 is rendered scoffers. Peter has stated more fully what was the particular subject on which they scoffed, and has shown that there was no occasion for it, 2Pet 3:4, seq.Verse 18. Jude 1:17. (c) "told you" 1Timm 4:1 Verse 19. These be they who separate themselves. That is, from their brethren, and from the work of benevolence and truth. Comp.

By the apostles - He does not exempt himself from the number of apostles. For in the next verse he says, they told you, not us.

Rom 16:17, Jud 5:16,23. Sensual. Under the influence of gross passions and appetites.

These are they who separate themselves, sensual, not having the Spirit - Having natural senses and understanding only, not the Spirit of God; otherwise they could not separate. For that it is a sin, and a very heinous one, "to separate from the church," is out of all question. But then it should be observed, That by the church is meant a body of living Christians, who are "an habitation of God through the Spirit:" That by separating is understood, renouncing all religious intercourse with them; no longer joining with them in solemn prayer, or the other public offices of religion: and, That we have no more authority from scripture to call even this schism, than to call it murder.

Having not the Spirit. The Holy Spirit, or the spirit of true religion. (d) "separate" Heb 10:25 Verse 20. But ye, beloved, building up yourselves on your most holy faith. Comp. Jude 1:3. On the word building, 1Cor 3:9, seq. Eph 2:20

But ye, beloved, not separating, but building yourselves up in your most holy faith - Than which none can be more holy in itself, or more conducive to the most refined and exalted holiness. Praying through the Holy Spirit - Who alone is able to build you up, as he alone laid the foundation. In this and the following verse St. Jude mentions the Father, Son, and Spirit, together with faith, love, and hope.

. It is said here that they were to "build up themselves;" that is, they were to act as moral and responsible agents in this, or were to put forth their own proper exertions to do it. Dependent as we are, and as all persons with correct views will feel themselves to be, yet it is proper to endeavour to do the work of religion as if we had ample power of ourselves. Php 2:12. The phrase "most holy faith" here refers to the system of religion which was founded on faith; and the meaning is, that they should seek to establish themselves most firmly in the belief of the doctrines, and in the practice of the duties of that system of religion. Praying in the Holy Ghost. Eph 6:18. (e) "building up" Col 2:7 (f) "praying" Eph 6:18 (++) "Ghost" "By the Holy Spirit"Verse 21. Keep yourselves in the love of God. Still adverting to their own agency. On the duty here enjoined, Jn 15:9, The phrase "the love of God" may mean either God's love to us, or our love to him. The latter appears, however, to be the

sense here, because it is not a subject which could be enjoined, that we should keep up God's love to us. That is a point over which we can have no control, except so far as it may be the result of our obedience; but we may be commanded to love him, and to keep ourselves in that love. Looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ. Particularly when he shall come to receive his people to himself. Tit 2:13; 2Pet 3:12; 2Ti 4:8. (g) "yourselves" Jn 15:2,10 Verse 22. And of some have compassion. This cannot be intended to teach that they were not to have compassion for all men, or to regard the salvation of all with solicitude, but that they were to have special and peculiar compassion for a certain class of persons, or were to approach them with feelings

By these means, through his grace, keep yourselves in the love of God, and in the confident expectation of that eternal life which is purchased for you, and conferred upon you, through the mere mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ.

appropriate to their condition. The idea is, that the peculiar feeling to be manifested towards a certain class of persons in seeking their salvation was tender affection and kindness. They were to approach them in the gentlest manner, appealing to them by such words as love would prompt. Others were to be approached in a different manner, indicated by the phrase, "save with fear," The class here referred to, to whom pity (ελεειτε) was to be shown, and in whose conversion and salvation tender compassion was to be employed, appear to have been the timid, the gentle, the unwary; those who had not yet fallen into dangerous errors, but who might be exposed to them; those, for there are such, who would be more likely to be influenced by kind words and a gentle manner than by denunciation. The direction then amounts to this, that while we are to seek to save all, we are to adapt ourselves wisely to the character and circumstances of those whom we seek to save. 1Cor 9:19, seq. Making a difference. Making a distinction between them, not in regard to your desires for their salvation, or your efforts to save them, but to the manner in which it is done. To be able to do this is one of the highest qualifications to be sought by one who endeavours to save souls, and is indispensable for a good minister of the gospel. The young, the tender, the delicate, the refined, need a different kind of treatment from the rough, the uncultivated, the hardened. This wisdom was shown by the Saviour in all his preaching; it was eminent in the preaching of Paul.Verse 23. And others. Another class; those who were of such a character, or in such circumstances, that a more bold, earnest, and determined manner would be better adapted to them. Save with fear. That is, by appeals adapted to produce fear. The idea seems to be that the arguments on which

Meantime watch over others, as well as yourselves, and give them such help as their various needs require. For instance, Some, that are wavering in judgment, staggered by others' or by their own evil reasoning, endeavour more deeply to convince of the whole truth as it is in Jesus. Some snatch, with a swift and strong hand, out of the fire of sin and temptation. On others show compassion in a milder and gentler way; though still with a jealous fear, lest yourselves be infected with the disease you endeavour to cure.See, therefore, that while you love the sinners, ye retain the utmost abhorrence of their sins, and of any the least degree of, or approach to, them.

they relied were to be drawn from the dangers of the persons referred to, or from the dread of future wrath. It is undoubtedly true, that while there is a class of persons who can be won to embrace religion by mild and gentle persuasion, there is another class who can be aroused only by the terrors of the law. Every method is to be employed, in its proper place, that we "by all means may save some." Pulling them out of the fire. As you would snatch persons out of the fire; or as you would seize on a person that was walking into a volcano. Then, a man would not use the mild and gentle language of persuasion, but by word and gesture show that he was deeply in earnest. Hating even the garment spotted by the flesh. The allusion here is not quite certain, though the idea which the apostle meant to convey is not difficult to be understood. By "the garment spotted by the flesh" there may be an allusion to a garment worn by one who had the plague, or some offensive disease which might be communicated to others by touching even the clothing which they had worn. Or there may be an allusion to the ceremonial law of Moses, by which all those who came in contact with dead bodies were regarded as unclean, Lev 21:11, Nu 6:6, 9:6, 19:11. Or there may be an allusion to the case mentioned in Lev 15:4,10,17; or perhaps to a case of leprosy. In all such instances, there would be the idea that the thing referred to by which the garment had been spotted was polluting, contagious, or loathsome, and that it was proper not even to touch such a garment, or to come in contact with it in any way. To something of this kind the apostle compares the sins of the persons here referred to. While the utmost effort was to be made to save them, they were in no way to partake of their sins; their conduct was to be regarded as loathsome and contagious; and those who attempted to save them were to take every precaution to preserve their own purity. There is much wisdom in this counsel. While we endeavour to save the sinner, we cannot too deeply loathe his sins; and in approaching some classes of sinners there is need of as much care to avoid being defiled by them, as there would be to escape the plague if we had any transaction with one who had it. Not a few have been deeply corrupted in their attempts to reform the polluted. There never could be, for example, too much circumspection and prayer for personal safety from pollution, in attempting to reform licentious and abandoned females. (b) "fear" Zech 3:2-5 (c) "garment" Rev 3:4,18 (*) "pulling" "snatching"Verse 24. Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling. This ascription to one who was able to keep them from failing is made in view of the facts adverted to in the epistle--the dangers of being led away by the arts and the example of these teachers of error. Comp. Jude 1:3

Now to him who alone is able to keep them from falling - Into any of these errors or sins. And to present them faultless in the presence of his glory - That is, in his own presence, when he shall be revealed in all his glory.

. On the ascription itself, comp. Rom 16:26-27. The phrase "to keep from falling" means here to preserve from falling into sin, from yielding to temptation, and dishonouring their religion. The word used (απταιστους) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means properly, not stumbling, as of a horse; then without falling into sin, blameless. It is God only who, amidst the temptations of the world, can keep us from falling; but, blessed be his name, he can do it, and if we trust in him he will. And to present you faultless. The word here rendered faultless is the same which is rendered unblamable in Col 1:22. See the sentiment here expressed explained in the Notes on that passage. Before the presence of his glory. In his own glorious presence; before himself encompassed with glory in heaven. The saints are to be presented there as redeemed and sanctified, and as made worthy by grace to dwell there for ever. With exceeding joy. With the abounding joy that they are redeemed; that they are rescued from sorrow, sin, and death, and that heaven is to be their eternal home. Who now can form an adequate idea of the happiness of that hour? (d) "him" Rom 16:25-27 (e) "keep" 2Ti 4:18 (f) "present" Col 1:22 Verse 25. To the only wise God. Rom 16:27; 1Timm 1:17. Our Saviour. The word Saviour may be appropriately applied to God as such, because he is the great Author of salvation, t

hough it is commonly applied to the Lord Jesus Christ. That it may have been designed that it should be applied here to the Lord Jesus no one can certainly deny, nor can it be demonstrated that it was; and in these circumstances, as all that is fairly implied in the language may be applied to God as such, it is most natural to give the phrase that interpretation. Be glory and majesty. 1Timm 1:17; Rom 16:17. Dominion and power, etc. See Mt 6:13. It is common in the Scriptures to ascribe power, dominion, and glory to God, expressing the feeling that all that is great and good belongs to him, and the desire of the heart that he may reign in heaven and on earth. Comp. Rev 4:11; Rev 19:1. With the expression of such a desire it was not inappropriate that this epistle should be closed--and it is not inappropriate that this volume should be closed with the utterance of the same wish. In all our affections and aspirations, may God be supreme; in all the sin and woe which prevail here below, may we look forward with strong desire to the time when his dominion shall be set up over all the earth; in all our own sins and sorrows, be it ours to look onward to the time when in a purer and happier world his reign may be set up over our own souls, and when we may cast every crown at his feet and say, "Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.--Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God," Rev 4:11, 19:1. (g) "To" 1Timm 1:17