Skip to main content

Jude on Judgment, in Canonical Context

The first thing that I think we need to look at in Jude is divine and human judgment. Divine judgment is a major theme of this short letter, and it also raises interesting questions related to human judgment.

The first thing that jumps out at us is that God judges sinners, and Jude brings up several examples. As we know from the Old Testament and 1 Enoch, Balaam, Cain, Korah, the wilderness generation, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the fallen angels are all judged by God. God will judge sinners, and not only does he judge all of these sinners, but when you read their stories in the OT (or 1 Enoch) they all receive at least some judgment here and now, prior to the final judgment.

While with some of the examples the judgment is blatantly obvious (e.g., Korah or Sodom and Gomorrah), for some you must know their story to see how God's judgments works out. If we did not know the story of Exodus-Numbers we might have thought of wilderness generation as a random nomadic people and would not have known that their extended sojourn in the wilderness that ended in the death of the entire generation was God's punishment. Thus, from the perspective of the outsider, God's judgment on someone may not always be obvious. Conversely, when we look at the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, many of the people probably had no clue what was happening to them as the God's wrath (literally) rained down on them. Thus, the people being judged by God may not even realize that God is judging them.

I would like to propose that the overall thrust of Scripture, including Jude and the OT examples he cites, suggest that God does judge sinners here and now on the earth. We may not always realize when others are punished, and they themselves may not realize it, but God's wrath towards sin and sinners continues to operate here and now, on this side of the second coming. Jude seems to imply that the coming of the cross does not usher in a new era when God only pours out love and mercy and never shows wrath.

What about human judgment? Clearly some judgment is allowed, because Jude does denounce the false teachers and their ways. However, we must note that in every OT case cited, God was the one who meted out punishment. The story of Cain is worthy of attention. Cain was worried that not only would he face the punishment of God, but that humans would mete out justice on him too by killing him. What does God do? He allays his fears and guarantees that no one will harm him. Carrying out punishment, in this story, belongs to God alone.

Like in the story of Cain that Jude cites, it's noteworthy that Jude does not direct the church to mete out any punishment on the false teachers and those who follow them. The emphasis is on restoration. It helps balance out a somewhat unbalanced reading of church discipline texts of some. Church discipline texts like Matthew 18:15-20 are not, 'the steps to excommunicate someone.' Rather, they are steps to hopefully restore someone to fellowship, with excommunication being a last resort, and even that being done with the hope that they will return repentant. Jude is all about mercy toward those who are straying, specifically a mercy that does not condone sin, but confronts it hoping to see repentance.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

More Calvinist than Calvin?

I'm working on a paper on the topic of divine sovereignty and human freedom. Occasionally on this topic (or the subtopic of election) you will hear people through out the barb at strong Calvinists that they're 'being more Calvinist than Calvin.' After having read Calvin carefully on the issue I don't think that there's any validity to that charge. I don't see a material difference here between Calvin and say John Piper. Here are several quotes from the Institutes to prove my point. 'All events are governed by God's secret plan.' I.xvi.2 'Governing heaven and earth by his providence, he also so regulates all things that nothing takes place without his deliberation.' I.xvi.3 'Nothing happens except what is knowingly and willingly decreed by him.' I.xvi.3 Calvin explicitly rejects a limited providence, 'one that by a general motion revolves and drives the system of the universe, with its several parts, but which does not specifc

Dating Galatians and Harmonization with Acts

We've gotten to the point where how we date Galatians and where we fit it into the narrative of Acts will affect our interpretation in a significant manner. The first question that we have to address is, which visit to Jerusalem is Paul recounting in Galatians 2:1-10 ? Is it the famine relief visit of Acts 11:27-30 or the Jerusalem council of Acts 15 ? First, I think it's worthwhile to point out that it's not all that obvious. Scholars are divided on this issue (even Evangelical scholars). In favor of the theory of Galatians 2:1-10 referring to the Acts 11 visit are the following: This visit clearly is prompted by a revelation by the Holy Spirit. The Acts 15 gathering seems to be a public gathering, where the one described in Galatians is private. Paul never alludes to a letter sent to the diaspora churches which could have definitively won the case for him. The issue of food laws was already decided by James. Why would men coming from him in Galatians 2:11-14 be advocat

Galatians 2:11-14: The circumcision group

11 When Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But when they arrived, he began to draw back and separate himself from the Gentiles because he was afraid of those who belonged to the circumcision group. 13 The other Jews joined him in his hypocrisy, so that by their hypocrisy even Barnabas was led astray. 14 When I saw that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas in front of them all, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs? (TNIV) There's an important issue that we need to wrestle with in this passage, and it's the question of whether or not the people from James and the circumcision group are the same group. I am not inclined to think that they are. The ensuing discussion is drawn from Longenecker's commentary pp 73-5