Skip to main content

How Jude Dealt with Division, in Canonical Context

For our last post on Jude (next up, Philemon) we will look at the issue of division within the church. It's very clear in Jude 19 that the community is being divided by the false teachers. Unfortunately, while Jude gives us a lot of information on the nature of the false teachers, we don't know much about the nature of the divisions that were occurring. At first glance, its also somewhat frustrating that he doesn't give any direction on what to do with the false teachers.

There could be a couple of reasons for that. Jude could be in a situation like that of Paul's in 2 Corinthians where his authority was so strongly challenged that he could not come on too strong, because the false teachers were too powerful. I think, though, that Jude wants to be careful to avoid pitting genuine believers against each other.

But Jude does contain language that seems to denigrate a specific group. He calls them 'certain people' and especially 'these people.' While he calls the faithful group, 'friends' and 'those who are loved in God.' Jude certainly does not think highly of the false teachers and the way that they live, and he does draw clear lines between those in God's favor and those outside of it. However, he never pits the two groups against one another. He defines each group on the basis of their relationship with God. The other issue is that it seems as if the false teachers had led some astray. Jude holds out hope for their rescue (Jude 22-23). If Jude gives a judgment of 'kick out the false teachers from among you', then he runs the risk of some ,who may have been on the fence and leaning towards following the false teachers, following them out the door, probably to their own destruction.

Jude's heart of love and compassion for the wavering shines through strongly in this letter. I think it helps provide us with balance. I think we're too quick sometimes to rush in and act like Paul in Galatians 1. This does not mean that we should be tolerant towards sin or false teaching, Jude condemned the false teachers sin in the strongest terms possible. There also is some danger in not acting swiftly when serious problems arise and sometimes it is right to immediately squash false teachers. What Jude provides us, is an instance where that was not done. Paul, in Galatians 1, and Jude, here, had the same goal. They were most concerned with the salvation of the members of the church and with the church's unity. When challenges to authority arise, the course of action adopted needs to be the one that will result in the combination of maximal unity and maximal preservation of the saints. Sometimes that's acting swiftly and kicking offending parties out of the church, but that's not always the right approach. Being too quick to judge can result in alienating the weaker members of the body, and that isn't a good thing.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Commentary Series Overview

When I write commentary reviews, one of my main goals is to assess how well the commentator hit the intended audience of the commentary and utilized the format of the commentary. This often necessitates cluttering up the post discussing issues of format. To eliminate that, I thought that I would make some general remarks about the format and audience of each of the series that appear in my reviews. Terms like liberal, conservative, etc. are not used pejoratively but simply as descriptors. Many of you are familiar with Jeremy Pierce's commentary series overview. If you don't see a particular series covered here, check out his post to see if it's reviewed there. I am making no attempt at covering every series, just the series that I use. Additionally, new series (such as the NCCS) have been started in the five years since he wrote his very helpful guide, so I thought that it might not be completely out of order to have another person tackle commentary series overviews. This…

Paul's Argument in Galatians 3:15-29

15 Brothers and sisters, let me take an example from everyday life. Just as no one can set aside or add to a human covenant that has been duly established, so it is in this case. 16 The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. 17 What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise. 18 For if the inheritance depends on the law, then it no longer depends on the promise; but God in his grace gave it to Abraham through a promise. 19 Why, then, was the law given at all? It was added because of transgressions until the Seed to whom the promise referred had come. The law was given through angels and entrusted to a mediator. 20 A mediator, however, implies more than one party; but God is one. 21 Is the law, therefore, opposed to the promises of God? Absolutely not! Fo…

Doctor Who: Rose Tyler - Traitor?

The end of season four was very, very controversial. When I first saw it, I felt cheated. I was angry. The more I think about it, the more I think I see what Russell Davies was doing. He is too good of a writer and the show is too carefully crafted for him to screw up Rose's character and the end of a four season storyline. So while the ending isn't strictly part of our series, it is tangentially related, and I've agonized over that scene in Bad Wolf Bay so much that I have to write about it. :)

To briefly set things up, near the end of the final episode of season four, there is a meta-crisis, that results in a part human. part Time Lord Doctor being generated. He has all of the Doctor's memories, and thinks and acts like the Doctor. However, importantly, he only has one heart and cannot regenerate. He only has one life to live. The meta-crisis Doctor brought full resolution to the battle fought against the Daleks, and in the process, wiped them out. Thus, the real Doc…