The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (179 page)

¹³³
Compare Jude 1: “Jude, a slave of Jesus Christ and a brother of James” with Jas 1:1: “James, a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

¹³⁴
According to Gal 2:9, James, together with Peter and John, was one of the “pillars” of the Jerusalem church. James had a leading role in the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15:13; see 12:17; 21:18). Paul also mentioned that the resurrected Jesus had appeared to James (1 Cor 15:7) and called James “the Lord's brother” (Gal 1:19; see Acts 1:14; 1 Cor 9:5). Remarkably, James only called himself “a slave of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1:1).

¹³⁵
Kelly
(Epistles of Peter and of Jude
, 242) believed that Jude would have identified himself as “brother of the Lord” and that the designation “brother of James” points to pseudonymity. So H. Windisch,
Die katholischen Briefe
, HNT, 3d ed., rev. H. Preisker (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1951 [1911]), 38; but see the decisive response by Bauckham,
Jude, 2 Peter
, 24.

¹³⁶
This is a convincing argument against the pseudonymity of Jude. As Bauckham
(Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 176) observed, “The lack of reference to Jude's relationship to Jesus is much more easily explicable on the assumption of authenticity than on the assumption of pseudepigraphy.”

¹³⁷
On the phenomenon of pseudonymity, see the bibliographic references listed in footnote 4 above.

¹³⁸
So rightly Bauckham,
Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 175, with reference to Farrar, Weiss, Zahn, Moffat, Wohlenberg, Cranfield, Green, and Guthrie; cf. Bauckham, “Account of Research,” 3817—18. At times it is argued that the author of Jude was not Jude himself but rather a friend, student, or relative of Jude (B. Reicke,
The Epistles of James, Peter and Jude
, AB 37 [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964]; J. Michl,
Die katholischen Briefe
, RNT 8/2, 2d ed. [Regensburg: F. Pustet, 1968]; W. Grundmann,
Der Brief des Judas und der Zweite Brief des Petrus
, THNT 15 [Berlin: de Gruyter, 1974], 15—16) or that he belonged to a “circle of Judas” (G. Hollmann,
Der Brief Judas und der zweite Brief des Petrus
, in
Die Schriften des Neuen Testaments
, vol. 2, ed. J. Weiss [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1907], 572). The argument has also been advanced that the epithet “brother of James” served to lend authority to Jude's letter (W. Schrage,
Der Judasbrief
, in
Die “Katholischen” Briefe: Die Briefe des Jakobus, Petrus, Johannes und Judas
, 11th ed., ed. H. Balz and W. Schrage, NTD 10 [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1973], 220). Yet these theories are far less plausible than the simpler assumption that Jude, the brother of James, was himself the author of the letter.

¹³⁹
So many (if not most) contemporary commentators. Others, however, such as D. J. Moo
(2 Peter, Jude
, NIVAC [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996], 18), contended that Jude used parts of 2 Peter.

¹⁴⁰
Perhaps in order to compensate, Peter supplemented Jude's letter with the biblical examples of Noah (2 Pet 2:5) and Lot (2 Pet 2:7—9) and provided a more thorough presentation of Balaam (2 Pet 2:15—16).

¹⁴¹
See Bauckham,
Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 168—69, n. 237; id., “Account of Research,” 3812—15.

¹⁴²
Representatives of this theory include Windisch,
Katholischen Briefe;
and K. H. Schelkle,
Die Petrusbriefe, der Judasbrief
HTKNT 13/2 (Freiburg: Herder, 1961). But see
Bauckham, Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 158—60.

¹⁴³
J. D. G. Dunn,
Unity and Diversity in the New Testament
, 2d ed. (London/Philadelphia: Trinity Press International, 1990), 341-66.

¹⁴⁴
See esp. R. L. Webb, “The Eschatology of the Epistle of Jude and Its Rhetorical and Social Functions,”
BBR
6 (1996): 139-51.

¹⁴⁵
Bauckham,
Jude
,
2 Peter
, 13.

¹⁴⁶
Schlatter,
Theology of the Apostles
, 103—8, esp. p. 103 with the heading, “The Gnostic Threat.” Cf. W. G. Kümmel,
Introduction to the New Testament
, rev. ed., trans. H. C. Kee (Nashville: Abingdon, 1975), 426, 432; and E. Käsemann, “An Apologia for Primitive Christian Eschatology,” in
Essays on New Testament Themes
(Naperville: Allenson, 1964), 171—72.

¹⁴⁷
At times Jude 17 is cited in support of a late date, since this passage appears to view the apostolic period as a thing of the past. But more likely Jude's reference is to the missionary activity of the apostles that led to the establishment of the church. See Bauckham,
Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 170—71.

¹⁴⁸
Robinson
(Redating
, 197) proposed that if James had already died by the time of the writing of Jude, Jude would most likely have referred to him as “the blessed,” “the good,” or “the righteous.” Since he did not do so, James must still have been alive. James died a martyr's death in the year 62, so Robinson suggested that Jude was written before then.

¹⁴⁹
If Jude's letter does reveal anti-gnostic tendencies, then 1 Tim 6:21 provides further confirmation that proto-gnostic elements were already at work in Asia Minor in the early 60s (on the assumption of Paul's authorship of the Pastorals).

¹⁵⁰
Bauckham,
Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 155, 161; D. A. Hagner, “Jewish Christianity,” in
Dictionary of the Later New Testament and its Developments
, 582.

¹⁵¹
Bauckham, Jude and the Relatives of Jesus
, 161.

¹⁵²
See the interesting parallels cited in Schlatter,
Theology of the Apostles
, 103—6.

¹⁵³
See Bauckham,
Jude
,
2 Peter
, 26; F. Spitta,
Der zweite Brief des Petrus undder Brief des Judas: Eine geschichtliche Untersuchung
(Halle: Verlag der Buchhandlung des Waisenhauses, 1885), 301: “If Judas appeals to the authority of James, it seems likely that the readers were such for whom James in fact constituted an authority” (our translation).

¹⁵⁴
See the survey by Bauckham, “Account of Research,” 3809—12; the thorough treatment by G. Sellin, “Die Häretiker des Judasbriefes,”
ZNW 76—77
(1985—86): 206—25; and Werdermann,
Irrlehrer
, who identified the heretics as libertine proto-Gnostics and dated Jude's letter to c. 80.

¹⁵⁵
See G. Theissen,
The First Followers of Jesus
(London: SCM, 1978).

¹⁵⁶
Possibly they considered themselves fatalistically as slaves of their own destiny and shifted the responsibility for their own licentious conduct to others. So R. P. Martin,
The Theology of Jude, 1 Peter, and 2 Peter
, in
The Theology of the Letters of James, Peter, and Jude
by A. Chester and R. P. Martin (Cambridge: University Press, 1994), 71.

¹⁵⁷
See C. A. Evans, “Midrash,” in
Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels
, ed. J. B. Green, S. McKnight, and I. H. Marshall (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1992), 544-48.

¹⁵⁸
Bauckham,
Jude, 2 Peter
, 1; D. F. Watson, “Letter, Letter Form,” in
Dictionary of the Later New Testament and Its Developments
, 653.

¹⁵⁹
J. D. Charles, “Jude's Use of Pseudepigraphical Source-Material as Part of a Literary Strategy,”
NTS
37 (1991): 130-45.

¹⁶⁰
So Webb, “Jude,” 612.

¹⁶¹
Origen,
Comm. Matt. 10.17; GCS
10.22; cited in J. H. Neyrey
(2 Peter, Jude, AB
37C [New York: Doubleday, 1993], 27), who provided further details.

¹⁶²
For an extended list of triplets in Jude, see Charles, “Literary Artifice,” 122—23. Regarding the rhetorical effect of triplets as “amplification by accumulation,” see Watson,
Invention, Arrangement, and Style;
E. von Dobschütz, “Zwei-und Dreigliedrige Formeln,”
JBL
50 (1931): 118-32.

¹⁶³
An excellent survey of Jude's sources is found in Bauckham, “Account of Research,” 3793—3800; cf. Rowston, “Most Neglected Book,” 557—59; Charles, “Literary Strategy,” 130—45. On Jude's use of
1 Enoch
1:9 in Jude 14—15, see M. Black, “The Maranatha Invocation and Jude 14,15 (1 Enoch 1:9),” in
Christ and Spirit in the New Testament. Fs. C. F. D. Moule
, ed. B. Lindars and S. S. Smalley (Cambridge: University Press, 1973), 189—96; and C. D. Osburn, “The Christological Use of 1 Enoch 1:9 in Jude 14,15,”
NTS
23 (1976-77): 334-41.

¹⁶⁴
See Charles, “'Those' and 'These': The Use of the Old Testament in the Epistle of
Jude,”JSNT 38
(1990): 109-24; T. R. Wolthuis, “Jude and Jewish Traditions,”
CTJ 22
(1987): 21—41; and Bauckham,
Jude, 2 Peter
, passim.

¹⁶⁵
So rightly Rowston, “Most Neglected Book,” 563: “It is much easier to assume that Jude is the original.” Among those proposing a common source for Jude and 2 Peter are Reicke,
James, Peter, Jude
, 189—90; and M. Green,
2 Peter and Jude
, TNTC, rev. ed. (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1987), 58—64.

¹⁶⁶
A slightly different chiastic structure is proposed by Bauckham
(Jude, 2 Peter
, 5—6), and Webb (“Jude,” 612), who followed Bauckham:

^A
Appeal: need to contend for the faith (v. 3)

^B
Occasion for appeal: false teachers identified and condemned (v. 4)

^B´
Occasion for appeal: false teachers identified and condemned (vv. 5—19)

^A´
Appeal: how to contend for the faith (vv. 20—23).

On the structure of Jude, see the survey in Bauckham, “Account of Research,” 3800—04.

¹⁶⁷
Bauckham,
Jude, 2 Peter
, 4.

¹⁶⁸
E. E. Ellis, “Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Jude,” in
Prophecy and Hermeneutic in Early Christianity: New Testament Essays
, WUNT 18 (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1978), 221-36.

¹⁶⁹
Bauckham,
Jude, 2 Peter
, 5.

CHAPTER 19

CORE KNOWLEDGE

Basic Knowledge:
Students should know the key facts of 1, 2, and 3 John. With regard to history, students should be able to identify each book's author, date, provenance, destination, and purpose. With regard to literature, they should be able to provide a basic outline of each book and identify core elements of each book's content found in the Unit-by-Unit Discussion. With regard to theology, students should be able to identify the major theological themes in 1, 2, and 3 John.

Intermediate Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge above, students should be able to present the arguments for historical, literary, and theological conclusions. With regard to history, students should be able to discuss the evidence for Johannine authorship, date, provenance, destination, and purpose. With regard to literature, they should be able to provide a detailed outline of the book. With regard to theology, students should be able to discuss the major theological themes in the Johannine Epistles and the ways in which they uniquely contribute to the NT canon.

Advanced Knowledge:
In addition to mastery of the core content identified in Basic Knowledge and beyond the Intermediate Knowledge noted above, students should be able to interact cogently with modern critics who jettison the opinion of the ancient church's
Part 4 The General Epistles and Revelation

adherence to John's authorship of 1—3 John. They should also be able to discuss the identity of the “elect lady” in 2 John 1, explain the genre of 1 John, and discuss the various structural proposals for 1 John.

Map 19.1: Provenance and Destination of 1-3 John

INTRODUCTION

I
N HIS LECTURES on 1 John, Martin Luther declared, “I have never read a book written in simpler words than this one, and yet the words are inexpressible.”
¹
His fellow Reformer John Calvin remarked about the author, “At one time he admonishes us in general to a godly and holy life; and at another he gives express directions about love. Yet he does none of this systematically, but varies teaching with exhortation.”
²