Reflections: Jude Part 2

Part II: The Details

In verse 5, Jude digs into the details and begins to warn his listeners to avoid these teachers/leaders. First, he says that the presence of these false teachers is no surprise. (“Though you already know all this” – v.5). He presents two sets of Old Testament illustrations, with three historic examples in each set.

He begins with a set of examples where distinct groups rebelled against God and received divine justice.

First, verse 5 tells of God delivering Israel from bondage in Egypt, but that there were some who “did not believe” (the Israelites who rebelled and grumbled against God as the exodus unfolded) and were “destroyed;” in essence, receiving exactly what they wanted, and dying in the wilderness (see Numbers 14).

Second, in v.6, he references angels who sinned and rebelled against God and are being held in bondage until they will face God’s justice. While this second example could be a general reference to the angelic rebellion that occurred before the fall of Adam and Eve, where the rebelling angels were cast down to earth and became the devil and his evil angels (see Isaiah 14, Ezekiel 28, and Luke 10:18), it is more likely a reference to a story very familiar to Jude’s readers found in the short reference contained in Genesis 6:2, but was interpreted with much more detail in an extra-biblical source very popular among Jews in the first century, the first book of “Enoch” (more on that in just a bit) where the “sons of God” (angels, referred to in the text as “watchers”) are said to have intermarried with human daughters, meaning (according to this view) that angels had sexual relationships with human women. The offspring of those marriages are said to have been the Nephilim (Genesis 6:4).

Third, in v.7, Jude links the angel reference to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (see Genesis 19) where a lawless mob tried to forcibly have sex with the angelic messengers visiting Lot. The common theme in the second and third examples shows rebellion against God results in violence and sexual immorality — the rebels “gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion.” Jude concludes that these three stories “serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire” (The reference to “eternal fire” would be driven home to Jude’s readers in the wake Sodom’s destruction by burning sulphur falling from heaven — a graphic comparison to the eternal fires of hell). Of course, he is implying that this is precisely what the corrupt teachers infiltrating the church are also guilty of.

Staying in this mode, Jude offers another example related to these first three (sort of like the Ron Popiel infomercials from the 1980s — “Wait! There’s more! . . .”) which serves as the bridge to his second group of examples.

Verse 8 states “In the very same way, on the strength of their dreams, these ungodly people pollute their own bodies, reject authority and slander celestial beings.”

“Dreams” is a negative reference, meaning either these “ungodly” teachers were basing their heretical doctrines on their own dreams, visions, and personal revelations, or that they were so blinded by emotion and passion that they were out of touch with spiritual reality.

In this context, the “[pollution] of their own bodies” is a reference to the blatant sexual immorality of the angels of v. 6 and Sodom’s mob in v. 7. This word for “pollute” only occurs five times in the New Testament and literally means to be ritually unclean — it is used in John 18:28 to describe how the Jewish leaders refused to enter the palace of Pilate to avoid becoming ritually unclean, and therefore unable to eat the Passover meal. The implication is something that is not just offensive or sinful, but that will separate us from God. Paul uses it in Titus 1:15 to refer to unbelievers who are completely corrupt. The inference here would have been, or at least SHOULD have been shocking to Jude’s readers, as this type of overt, obvious immorality was paraded by the false teachers as if it were virtuous behavior.

Jude’s reference to how the ungodly “reject authority” is directly tied to this “pollution.” In 2 Peter 2:9 (a passage which discusses the exact same concepts as the book of Jude), Peter refers to God punishing the unrighteous on judgment day, and (in verse 10), notes that this especially applies to those “who follow the corrupt desire of the flesh and despise authority.” The debate over this concept can be like the “chicken or the egg” question. Does the rejection of the authority of Jesus, and the denial that He is God lead to people giving in to their passions and believing “wrong is right and right is wrong?” Or is it the other way around? I tend to see it more often as the latter. Because our base nature is sinful, when we find ourselves enjoying the sinful things that we do, it's so much easier to excuse it by saying that God doesn’t care, or that the Bible really isn’t true, or that Jesus isn’t the son of God, or (with something Christians can relate to), what I’m doing isn’t wrong, despite the fact that it's clear from the scriptures it is. When we give in to our base desires that violate God’s law, we can only justify our behavior if we find a way to justify it. The only way to justify it IS to reject God’s authority. That is why these false teachers were so horribly pernicious— they changed the rules and altered theology to justify their own behavior, and taught others to do the same, justifying it in their “dreams.”

(This is the ultimate “catch 22” of modern philosophy. Back when I was in law school, a professor, who knew I was a bible-believing Christian, invited me to give a presentation to a law school class called “Religion and the Law,” which I had previously taken with him. I was called to speak about the reliability of the Bible as an historical document and its place in society as a foundation for civil law. It was a most interesting discussion. But I was surprised that a simple premise I offered to the class got such a positive reaction — I said that the primary reason most people had for denying the truth and reliability of the Bible was that to accept the truth of scripture meant they would have to change the way they behaved. I was astounded at the number of students who readily agreed with this, and more amazed that they accepted the notion that if the Bible was true, they were in a world of hurt and trouble!)

Jude’s final description and criticism of these corrupt teaches in v.8 is that they “slander celestial beings.” But before we dig into that, if you read on to verse 9, Jude describes what seems to be an historic reference connected to the exodus narrative involving the archangel Michael and the death of Moses. If you don’t recall ever reading about that in the Old Testament, you’re not crazy — it’s NOT part of the Old Testament. Jude is taking a page from another popular text of his day, the “Testament of Moses,” which, like the book of First Enoch we’ve already referenced, is not part of the Old Testament, and therefore not officially canonical. The “Testament of Moses” is a highly creative re-working of the final days of the life of Moses as portrayed in the book of Deuteronomy.

The part of the “Testament of Moses” Jude references is a story about the death of Moses, where the archangel Michael is involved in a struggle, trying to refute accusations Satan is making about Moses. Rather than continue a pointless argument, Michael decides to leave the final judgment to God alone.

This story makes no sense to us today, as the “Testament of Moses,” along with the book of First Enoch have been forgotten because they were not considered canonical. However, at  the time Jude was composing his letter (a time before the canon for the Old Testament was official), these examples all would have made sense to faithful Jews who grew up hearing these stories. It would have helped them understand the behavior of these corrupt teachers as having a basis in history, linking what was happening in their world to these familiar concepts of how God reacted to and passed judgment upon people who rebelled against God’s authority, engaged in sexual immorality, and rejected God’s messengers.

Before we move on, Jude’s final condemnation of these false teachers piqued my curiosity. What does it mean to “heap abuse upon celestial beings?” I am reading from the NIV. Other versions of the bible translate this phrase as “speak evil of dignities” (KJV), “insult the glorious ones” (NET), “revile angelic majesties” (NAS), “scoff at supernatural beings” (NLT), and “glory dragged in the mud” (Message).

The phrase “heap abuse upon” is a single word in the Greek (“blasphemeo,”), which obviously is the root of “blasphemy,” but is also translated elsewhere as “slander.” “Celestial beings” (“doxa”) is also a single Greek word which means “glory,” “splendor,” or “honor.” It is often used in describing something aesthetically beautiful, bright, majestic, brilliant or radiant. This is “very bright light.”

In the story taken from the “Testament of Moses,” Satan unjustifiably accuses Moses of murder and wants to claim Moses' body, but the archangel Michael disputes his claim. The setting evokes images of spiritual warfare — I imagine combatants with crossed swords, or a light saber duel from the Star Wars films. But instead of fighting back, as in using his authority and power to push back at Satan for his slanderous lies, Michael refers the matter to God, saying to Satan, ″The Lord rebuke you!″ The implication, Jude seems to argue, is that no one should say anything bad against angels, even ″fallen″ ones, or at least take care great when addressing these “celestial beings.”

But in pointing out that the false teachers have been insulting or reviling angels, Jude is making a point, being critical of how presumptuous and bold they are. They do what Michael the archangel didn't dare to do. These are matters they do not fully understand, though, ironically, they think they do (v. 10). After all, they claim to be spiritual people because they see visions (v. 9). Jude is clear that there is only one end for them: destruction (v. 10).

This made me stop and think. My own roots go deep in the charismatic movement. There was a tremendous, fantastic wave of revival and spiritual renewal in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when I was coming of age. It was also integral to the founding of Spirit of God Fellowship. Together with a whole lot of other people, I was supernaturally born again and baptized in the Holy Spirit. The results varied in different people, but there was no denying the tremendous manifestations of the gifts of the Holy Spirit — prophecy, healing, words of wisdom, speaking in tongues, and all kinds of other miraculous concepts.

This also involved learning and experiencing the reality of spiritual warfare. Ephesians 6:12 declares that “our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” Empowered by the Spirit, we recognized the reality of Satan’s influence over the world around us, and we realized that, in the Spirit, we could confront and thwart that influence. The Bible taught us to rely on the authority of the name of Jesus, on the redemptive power of His blood, and using God’s word as a sword to confront evil (see Ephesians 6:17). We took Jesus at his word when he told us that whatever we bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever we loose on earth will be loosed in heaven (see Matthew 18:18). As people matured in the Lord, effective ministries grew to pray for people and confront the demonic strongholds in their lives, leading to healing and spiritual deliverance. Many truly became “spiritual warriors.”

And it carried with it (and still conjures up) the militaristic images I described earlier —swords and armor, light sabers and “Jedi”-like power, gun-belts and duels, spiritual boxing matches, and wrestling with demons. Massive, muscled angels wielding weapons of war. Christian pop culture in those days also encouraged this. Carman’s hit songs — “Satan, Bite the Dust,” and “The Champion.” Frank Peretti’s novel “This Present Darkness.” Tim LaHaye’s “Left Behind” books. Everything seemed to be about spiritual warfare — a fight that seemed quite often to be very much on the level of physical reality as much as what Ephesians 6 calls “spiritual realms.”

In no way do any of these observations diminish the importance or the truth of the scriptures I quoted about dealing with the forces of darkness, the power and authority of Jesus, or the ability to confront satanic forces in prayer. But I sometimes feel that American Christians, particularly those of us who have embraced the Charismatic/Pentecostal concepts of the manifestational gifts of the Holy Spirit, have come to take these concepts for granted. I sometimes wonder if I veer off too far into this militant mindset, and when I do, I default to the same kind of brash and arrogant presumption that Jude criticizes in the behavior of these false teachers. There’ve been times where the excitement or novelty of what is going on takes center stage, rather than a concern for the well-being of the person we’re praying for. Maybe I’ve looked for a particular result or some fantastic manifestation, rather than a heart change or repentance. For some, I sense that it all becomes routine — even when there is an atmosphere of spiritual fireworks, has it all just become blasé? Does functioning in spiritual gifts become, in a sense, liturgical? Like saying prayers by rote, the way a traditional Catholic says the rosary. I must admit that sometimes MY approach to interacting with spiritual realms takes on a certain rote function. Am I engaging angels and demons without really thinking through what I am doing? Do I take a “shoot first and ask questions later” position, where the “full court press” or “quarterback blitz” is where I start, before I even try to understand the situation? Can I be effective in declaring ANYTHING to celestial beings before I’ve even assessed what’s going on? I wonder sometimes if the demonic forces which I am constantly speaking at and binding with the force of my prayers become accustomed to my brash ineffectiveness.

Could this be my personal version of “heaping abuse on celestial beings?” Am I loading up my spiritual blunderbuss and firing away, when a quiet, meditative moment is what’s in order? It feels like modern day Christians sometimes simply adopt the “ways of the world” and rush into the war zone to “kick [tail] and take names,” where, perhaps, we should consider it might be a place where “angels fear to tread.”

In 2 Corinthians 10: 3-4, the Apostle Paul says “For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.” Many interpret this passage as a license to approach spiritual warfare in this hostile, “take no hostages” mindset. What could Paul possibly mean by referencing the “power to demolish” other than an aggressive posture?

However, we must consider exactly what Paul is saying. Verse 3 states, “We do not wage war as the world does” -- He is defining spiritual warfare as being different than what we have understood to be the way we are supposed to fight a war. He emphasizes this differentiation by describing the weapons we are to use to fight a spiritual war: “The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds” (v.4). Note that Paul is describing what these weapons have the power to do. He does not say that WE have divine power to demolish strongholds, but that the WEAPONS do.

Some might argue this is a distinction without a difference. Any weapon, whether a pocketknife or an AK-47, only has power because a person is using it. (An argument reminiscent of when advocates for gun rights say “Guns don’t kill people . . .). But see the details. These weapons have “divine power.” The Greek word used for “divine” here as an adjective modifying “power” is a noun -- “theos,” the Greek word for “god,” conveying the concept of a transcendent being worthy of reverence and respect. The word for “power” means just that, but the structure of the sentence clearly ties the use of this power to the weapons themselves. As I see it, the implication is that we cannot wield these weapons ourselves; God is the one using the weapons as we wage war. “Demolish strongholds” was a phrase commonly used to describe an army besieging and destroying a fortified city, but in this context, Paul is explaining that we don’t “wage war” the way the world does. I feel I need to see this notion in a different light.

Paul goes on to refine this concept, showing us that as we engage in spiritual conflict, we cannot do it brazenly. Just like our own efforts cannot accomplish our salvation, we cannot wage war with Satan by our own strength or by our own power. Paul follows this picture of “demolishing strongholds” with verse 5: “We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.” It’s not about spiritual gun slinging or conquering territory — Paul clearly anchors the essence of spiritual warfare in the changing and renewing our minds! It’s about changing the way we think. It’s not about aggression — it’s about submission. It’s about humility. It’s about maturity, where a clear-eyed view can lead to us to wait on the Lord, rather than reflexively rushing in, binding demons without really knowing what’s going on, and figuratively swinging a spiritual light saber without a thought of who might actually suffer damage.

What about all that talk in Ephesians 6 about the “Armor of God,” that includes the bible represented as a two-edged sword? I would argue that this is also not about aggression. At least not the “wild-west” stereotype. Before Paul commands us to don this armor, he instructs us to “Be Strong in the Lord and in his mighty power.” (Ephesians 6:10). Just like in 2 Corinthians 10, where Paul presented the weapons of spiritual warfare as being something we need to allow God to handle, here, he is again clearly laying out that human effort in operating within the armor of God is completely inadequate. The admonition that our struggles are “not against flesh and blood” (v. 12) echoes the description that “we do not wage war as the world does.” This isn’t about disagreements with people, or a fight on the plain of reality. Plus, the armor is described as only being used in a defensive manner. We are instructed to “stand firm,” (v.14), not to “charge.”

I’ve always been taught that in this imagery, the “sword of the spirit” is the only offensive weapon we have. But the description of the “sword of the spirit” is at once followed with the command to “pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests.” (v.17).

Because of the nature of our “weapons,” we must be fighting in God’s strength, and our use of God’s word in these battles will be guided by Him through prayer. For me, I see all this leading to a place where my mindset about spiritual warfare needs to change. Rather than arrogance or aggression, I must be humble. I must submit myself to God, so he can guide me in the dismantling of the “arguments” and “pretensions” that inhibit my understanding of the things of God and hinder my ability to discern. I must discard these sci-fi and fantasy movie images of robed figures engaged in galactic swordfights and adopt God’s way of thinking. And, according to what Jude says here about “heaping abuse on celestial beings,” I must take greater care in the posture I adopt when “commanding angels” (see Matthew 4:6) or confronting “the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.” (Ephesians 6:12).

Who am I to tell an angel what to do? Or, worse yet, tell God what He is supposed to do? But please understand, I am not in any way maligning the concept of praying with authority or walking with God in confidence. However, this little one-chapter book at the tail end of the New Testament is part of the inspired Word if God, and I therefore must take it seriously. Jude places the concept of “slandering celestial beings” on a list of spiritual character deficiencies that define a person as “ungodly” (which, in the context of the false teachers he’s been complaining about, means dangerously evil people who are spiritual frauds). This “ungodliness” is manifest in their use of their “dreams” (presumably visions, prophecies, and fanciful interpretations of Scripture), how they live lives full of blatant, sexual immortality (while encouraging everyone else to follow suit), and ultimately rejecting the authority of Jesus in doing all this. At the end of this litany of sins is this concept of “slandering celestial beings.” If that’s the capstone to this list of horribles, and I don’t understand what it means, I certainly want to try and understand it the best I can.

Considering the story about Michael the Archangel’s struggle with Satan being the context for this, it seems obvious what kind of “celestial beings” are being slandered, and that the setting is “spiritual warfare.” Perhaps my complaints here are just the ranting of a tired, old man.

But I’ve never before thoughtfully considered this concept of “heaping abuse on celestial beings.” It seems that Jude is warning us that, as we engage in spiritual warfare, we need to be sensitive to the Holy Spirit and discerning about others. Does a sense of “spiritual might” equal what is “spiritually right?” There seems to me to be a fine line between me as a knowledgeable, confident spiritual warrior and me as being careless, flippant, and arrogant, as I use the Bible, and the tools I’ve been taught to use in spiritual warfare, to unwittingly display my own self-importance.

It's easy for virtue to morph into ambition. It’s easy for me to confuse my own haughty presumption for authority. Jude’s cautionary words to avoid slandering angels AND demons is a very sobering concept. I pray for eyes to see and ears to hear.

Jude then takes us from his first 3 examples and uses the “Testament of Moses” reference to bridge into his second trio of Old Testament examples and lays them out all in v. 11. These three stories are all examples of how rebellious people not only turned from God, but then corrupted others as well. He first references Cain, who murdered his brother, and later built a city that was the essence of violence (see Genesis 4). Next is Baalam, who was effectively a sorcerer for hire, and, after he was frustrated by not being able to fulfill his contract to curse the Israelites, lured God’s people into idolatry and sexual misconduct (see 2 Peter 2:15). Then he cites to Korah, who organized a rebellion against Moses that convinced hundreds of the elders of Israel — 250 “well known community leaders who had been appointed to the council” (Numbers 16:2)— that Moses had “gone too far,” ultimately resulting in their destruction (Jude 11). Cain’s story stands for how selfishness and greed become motivation for hatred and murder. Baalam’s sole motivation is greed, intimating that the deceiving teachers must have been bilking the naïve recipients of Jude’s letter out of their money. Korah’s example shows these false teachers were leading the church into rebellion against God’s appointed authority.

Verses 12 and 13 take even more Old Testament metaphors and hit the moral deficiencies of the false teachers in rapid-fire succession: They are like the corrupt, selfish shepherds of Ezekiel 34:2; the clouds that cannot produce rain in Proverbs 25:14; or the wild sea waves of Isaiah 57:10. He intersperses these with other common allusions from Hebrew culture, such as the reference to “blemishes” in v.12 (literally a “reef” or a “rock” along a seashore — appearing to serve as an anchor, but actually resulting in the ship being wrecked); “autumn trees” (meaning harvest time) that lack fruit; and “wandering stars,” connecting to the nautical imagery of the “reef/rock”— the stars were used as to guide ships at sea. Here, the corrupt teachers are guiding the church into darkness and spiritual shipwreck.

Jude finishes his criticisms of the false teachers by referencing two more sets of scripturally themed warnings. In the context of the time when Jude wrote his letter, the first set of warnings was ancient, the second set was contemporary. The first warning goes back to the extra-biblical text referenced earlier, First Enoch, which purports to be the writings of Enoch, a direct descendant of Adam through his son Seth (see Genesis 5:18-24 — this is not the Enoch from Genesis 4:17, who is a descendant of Adam through Cain). However, there is no evidence that connects First Enoch back to the time of Genesis — it first appears about 100 years before the birth of Christ. This would technically make First Enoch more like an historical novel or a contemporary commentary about scriptural concepts. Whatever First Enoch’s origins, Jude uses the fact that is was so well known and (in verse 14-16) quotes from that book’s references to general concepts that come from all over the Old Testament (see Deuteronomy 33:2, Zechariah 14:5, and Isaiah 66:15-16) about the coming “day of the Lord,” when God will pass judgment on rebelliousness, selfishness, and evil.

Then, in verses 17-19, he cross references that with similar contemporary warnings from the apostles (who were for the most part then still living). Peter (2 Peter 2:1-3), John (1 John 4:1-3) and Paul (2 Timothy 3:2-9) all predicted that false teachers would infiltrate the church and twist the gospel’s truth. These apostolic warnings mirrored the same prediction Jesus himself made (Matthew 7:15-19). Jude concludes by saying “these are the people who divide you” (v. 19). Obviously, the church needs to deal with this problem.

In the next three verses, Jude encourages them to do just that.