JUDE: False Teachers

Before we get started in the book of Jude, it might be helpful to go back and review the letter of 2 Peter. The two are incredibly similar in their content and structure, and the student of the two would swear they were together as they penned their respective letters. The context of Jude is similar to that of 2 Peter in that Jude is concerned about the false teachers who are leading God’s people into horribly destructive practices. These pagan practices are leading God’s people to compromise in the areas of idolatry and sexual immorality because they want to advance in the Roman system, hungry after wealth, prestige, power, and influence. One might remember the guild systems we’ve spoken of before, where sexual immorality and idolatry ran rampant, and recall that if one is going to find financial peace and security in the Roman world, it’s going to come at a price. They will have to sell themselves to the idolatry of their culture.

Jude seems to be concerned.

Jude, a servant of Jesus Christ and a brother of James,

To those who have been called, who are loved in God the Father and kept for Jesus Christ:

Mercy, peace and love be yours in abundance.

Dear friends, although I was very eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt compelled to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to God’s holy people. For certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among you. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord.

There are apparently teachers within the movement who are using God’s grace and promise of free forgiveness to say it’s acceptable to engage this Roman culture of debauchery. They are saying compromise is the way of success, but Jude says they make a mockery of the way of God. He also claims this problem is nothing new; God’s been speaking to His people about this for some time. Jude’s now going to show that to be the case.

Though you already know all this, I want to remind you that the Lord at one time delivered his people out of Egypt, but later destroyed those who did not believe. And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.

Notice the three groups Jude points out, drawing off of Hebrew Text and midrash. He speaks of the destruction of the idolators who were destroyed at the Golden Calf. He draws off of the midrash of 1 Enoch (a pseudepigraphal work that shows up in ancient midrash all throughout Jewish literature) and speaks of the fallen angels — a reference to the “sons of God” in Genesis 6:1–4, where Enoch says they were punished for their disobedience. For those familiar with how this plays into Greek mythology (an explanation of which would be beyond the scope of this writing), you will realize this is a reference to wanting advancement through disobedient means.

Jude also references Sodom and Gomorrah, a story that is about our call to love and show hospitality to all people. It should be noted that this is the only biblical reference connecting Sodom and Gomorrah to sexual immorality (the handful of references throughout the Old Testament always link the idea to pride, wealth, and failing to take care of the poor; see Ezekiel 16:49 and context). The reason for linking this story to sexual immorality is the cultural context of Jude. His larger point is that they are neglecting their true calling (love and hospitality) and engaging instead in the sexual immorality of their Roman world.

My point is to help us notice how culturally perfect these references are.

In the very same way, on the strength of their dreams these ungodly people pollute their own bodies, reject authority and heap abuse on celestial beings. But even the archangel Michael, when he was disputing with the devil about the body of Moses, did not himself dare to condemn him for slander but said, “The Lord rebuke you!” Yet these people slander whatever they do not understand, and the very things they do understand by instinct—as irrational animals do—will destroy them.

In another reference to the midrash (this time to “the Testament of Moses,” another pseudepigraphal work), Jude talks about these false teachers who slandered true authority for the sake of advancement. One might also note the reference to the “beast nature” or sarx that we talked about in Romans, or the larger conversation we had years ago surrounding Adam and Eve.

Woe to them! They have taken the way of Cain; they have rushed for profit into Balaam’s error; they have been destroyed in Korah’s rebellion.

These people are blemishes at your love feasts, eating with you without the slightest qualm—shepherds who feed only themselves. They are clouds without rain, blown along by the wind; autumn trees, without fruit and uprooted—twice dead. They are wild waves of the sea, foaming up their shame; wandering stars, for whom blackest darkness has been reserved forever.

Notice again, the intentionality of the references. There is a reference to Cain, which you might remember is a story about wealth and acquiring (Cain’s name means “to acquire”). There is a reference to Balaam, who — according to the midrash — told Balak to destroy the Israelites by enticing them into sexual immorality (and idolatry) with the Moabite women. There is also a reference to the story of Korah, who rebelled against authority.

The same three themes — over and over again.

Enoch, the seventh from Adam, prophesied about them: “See, the Lord is coming with thousands upon thousands of his holy ones to judge everyone, and to convict all of them of all the ungodly acts they have committed in their ungodliness, and of all the defiant words ungodly sinners have spoken against him.” These people are grumblers and faultfinders; they follow their own evil desires; they boast about themselves and flatter others for their own advantage.

Here Jude quotes directly from the book of 1 Enoch. Although this raises all sorts of good questions, it’s not the point we are making now. The point is that Jude is quoting from their context, to their context, to make an incredibly relevant point.

But, dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit.

But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

Be merciful to those who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh.

To him who is able to keep you from stumbling and to present you before his glorious presence without fault and with great joy—to the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.

Jude then reminds his readers to be faithful to the same three things we’ve been discussing the whole time. He calls them to purity and obedience. He calls them to respect the authority God places in their lives. He calls them to remain steadfast to the work of love and hospitality, committed to others, pure in their walk, respecting the teaching of the apostles — not giving in to the temptations and idolatry of their world.

2 PETER: The Other Side of the Conversation

In addition to 1 Peter, we have a second letter from Peter to what we would assume is the same region. While the first letter was written to almost all of the region of Asia and Asia Minor — which would have included a Jewish population of around 20% — it is my opinion that his next letter, while meant to be heard by both Jewish and Gentile audiences, is aimed more specifically at the struggles of these Gentile converts. I believe this because of Peter’s address:

Simon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who through the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

His divine power has given us everything we need for a godly life through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness. Through these he has given us his very great and precious promises, so that through them you may participate in the divine nature, having escaped the corruption in the world caused by evil desires.

For a Jewish teacher, righteousness is the idea of generosity and kindness. I read Peter’s address to say, because of the kindness and generosity of Jesus, the Gentiles have also received a faith just as precious as the Jewish faith. His next comments really define what he’ll spend his time arguing for. Peter tells them that they (the Gentiles) have God’s divine power helping them deal with escaping the temptations of their pagan world, and their sinful desires to indulge in those practices.

Peter is going to go on to make very Jewish, rabbinical arguments, which are even rooted in the midrash. Does this mean I’m wrong in my assumption of a Gentile audience? Does it mean a trained Gentile audience? Does it mean the Jewish audience is going to assist in the reading and learning of these teachings? Or does it simply show that Peter is trying to put God’s Text into context and let His words go to work?

Either way, Peter references some real “humdingers” of teachings. The bulk of his letter is a plea to the Gentiles not to give in to the teaching of false teachers. Now, in our typical evangelical world, we immediately start thinking in terms of orthodoxy, assuming there are teachers who are teaching incorrect doctrine and enticing them into wrong belief. But this is obviously not the case with a careful reading of the letter. These false teachers are leading them into wrong practice, and Peter’s main concern is orthopraxy.

Peter and Jude (to be studied later) are going to draw on the same stories from the Text and teachings in the midrash to make their case. I am going to draw these arguments out in detail when we study the book of Jude, but for now, I want the reader to examine the second chapter of Peter’s letter and realize that Peter is talking about these false teachers in the terms of their refusal to acknowledge 1) the ungodliness and idolatry of their culture, 2) their desire for prestige, power, wealth, and influence, and 3) the sexual immorality that is incongruent with the way of Jesus.

When viewed alongside Peter’s first letter, this becomes a great one-two punch addressing the struggle of the Greco-Asian church. You have to overcome the persecution and the suffering you endure in order to be different and tell a different story in the world. But you cannot give in to the ways of culture and lose your testimony, either. You have to remain committed to the mission of God.

If any of this sounds familiar, it’s because it is. We talked about this all the way back in the books of Joshua and Judges. We were shown what it looks like in the life and ministry of Jesus. And we are reminded of it again now.

God has always wanted a people at the crossroads of the earth — a kingdom of priests ready to show the world what God is like. But the temptation to give in to the ways of culture will be strong, and we must be sure we don’t have any pig bones. The mission of God has always been the same. It has always been one story, and God has always been looking for partners. At different points in history, God has sometimes found those partners and sometimes struggled.

What chapter of history will we be?

COLOSSIANS: Gnostic Heresy

Paul also pens a letter to the church in Colossae, a small city off the main road that runs through Hierapolis and Laodicea. I’ve always found the conversation that surrounds Colossae moving, because this church is the recipient of one of Paul’s letters, and yet the entire city doesn’t survive but a few decades after the establishment of the church. We have mentioned before the many earthquakes that decimated cities throughout the Roman empire. Many of these cities would be central to Roman infrastructure; unfortunately for the people of Colossae, their city did not make the list. The earthquakes of the AD 60s leveled the city, and it was never rebuilt. To this day, the tel of Colossae — a small hill in the Turkish countryside — sits unexcavated, if not nearly forgotten.

The unexcavated tel of Colossae

From a literary perspective, Colossians mirrors the structure of Ephesians point by point. Most scholars believe they were penned together. While Paul didn’t have the ability to use the “copy and paste” function, he definitely uses the same literary technique in the two letters. Here’s what I mean.

Ephesians is six chapters long and Colossians is a little shorter at four chapters. If you look at the first half of both letters, you will notice that Paul talks theology, or what I like to call ‘orthodoxy’ (removed form it’s cultural usage, the etymology of the term refers to “right belief”). The last half of each letter speaks very deliberately of ‘orthopraxy’ (“right practice or behavior”). If you compare Ephesians 4–6 to Colossians 3–4, you will see an identical pattern. Paul speaks about household behavior as it relates to husbands and wives, parents and children, and masters and servants.

It’s the first half of the letters that differ in content. This is because of the context of the recipients. I say that based on assumption because there is so much we don’t know about Colossae (since it lies unexcavated). What we do know comes from the few finds that were scattered along the fields of the local farmers and other things like currency. However, one of the things that seems apparent is the struggle in Colossae with the dangerous teachings of Gnosticism.

Now, the moment you begin talking about Gnosticism, you have entered into tricky waters, because the word can refer to so much and a student of philosophy and Greek belief has many strong opinions about the topic. I’m no expert, so I’ll quote one of my favorite excerpts on the issue from NT Wright. In Surprised by Hope (p. 88), Wright describes Gnosticism as it relates to biblical theology:

For Plato, the present world of space, time, and matter is a world of illusion, of flickering shadows in a cave, and the most appropriate human task is to get in touch with the true reality, which is beyond space, time, and matter. For Plato, this was the reality of eternal Forms.

To oversimplify once more, we may say that Plato’s picture was based on a rejection of the phenomena of matter and transience. The mess and muddle of the space-time-matter world was an offense to the tidy, clean, philosophical mind, which dwelt upon eternal realities. […]

The Platonic strain entered Christian thinking early on, not least with the phenomenon known as Gnosticism. Since the Gnostics have been making something of a comeback recently, a word about them is appropriate. The Gnostics believed, like Plato, that the material world was an inferior and dark place, evil in its very existence, but that within this world could be found certain people who were meant for something else. […] The Gnostic myth often suggests that the way out of our mess is to return to our primeval state, before the creation of the world. In this view creation itself is the fall, producing matter, which is the real evil. I hope it is clear both how closely this view parodies some aspects of Christianity and how deeply and thoroughly it diverges from it.

Wright will go on to explain how some Bible students will go to great lengths to show how some elements of this thought are preserved in the New Testament, but he will spend the rest of the chapter showing how dangerous this way of thinking is to biblical theology.

Paul seems to agree. His first half of the letter to the Colossians talks very directly about this false idea propped up by Gnosticism. Consider the following passage:

He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Notice the tense of the statement. Paul says not that God will deliver us, but that He has. The next verses continue even further into this.

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Paul makes sure to use the most inclusive language possible for the incarnation and reconciliation of all things. He speaks of all things and makes sure to clarify that these are from heaven and on earth, visible and invisible. He speaks of how all these things were created through him. He speaks of how all of creation is held together in him. And, for good measure, adds that the complete fullness of God dwelt in the Christ.

Paul will go to play with this idea in the second chapter, at times very tongue-in-cheek.

It certainly behooves the Church today to consider the words of Wright above, that these Gnostic ideas “deeply and thoroughly diverges from” the teachings of the Apostles. The truth is that far too much Gnosticism has crept into Christian theology. The idea that we are spirits trapped in prisons of flesh, walking in a world that is doomed to destruction, just waiting for “some glad morning,” is not the mission God called us to and is not congruent with the teachings of Jesus, let alone Paul and the New Testament.

The Kingdom of God is here — deeply engaged with this world of flesh and blood, soil and spirit.

ROMANS: According to the Spirit

“For it is not through a standard of morality or a system of rules that we will ever experience freedom from the struggle Paul describes, a struggle you and I know all too well. No, it is only through trusting in the promises of God, following in the example of the Christ, and displaying the faith of Jesus that we find a unique kind of victory and freedom — a life where this ongoing struggle does not lead to condemnation.

“Wouldn’t that be nice? Wouldn’t it be great if this struggle with our sarx didn’t always end with our own guilt and shame and the weight of the cry of rescue from our wretched selves?”

These were the closing words of our last conversation. And in fact, not only would it be nice, but according to Paul, it’s actually the way it really is. Paul tells us this struggle does not lead to condemnation, because if the promises of God — which we looked at earlier — are true, then there isn’t anything to hang over our heads.

There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit.

This is actually the very promise we trust in when we trust the story. By witnessing the life of Jesus, we see the unadulterated love of God made flesh. His life showed us many things about the flesh: It showed us how to live with victory over the flesh; it showed us what really matters in God’s economy and what doesn’t. And his life even showed us an awful lot about God. It showed us God is not angry, full of wrath and judgment; instead, this God is full of love and recklessly pursues the outsider, the unloved, and the screwed up.

If we believe this to be true — if we have faith and trust in these promises — then we are set free from any cloud of condemnation (self-imposed or otherwise). This freedom allows us to see things and call things what they are and walk in truth.

For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

It’s what we set our minds on that seems to make all the difference in the world. If we set our minds on the things of our sarx (our animal appetites and our beast-like nature), then we reap that paycheck of death. However, if we set our minds on the things that are most true about us, it sets us free to lay down our lives for others. Our lives become a practice of self-sacrifice instead of self-preservation. It is this self-sacrifice that pleases God, not because of His system of rules, but because it’s who He is.

You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him. But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

It is this very truth of Christ that gives life to our mortal bodies, which seem to be driven by the sarx. It is the power of the resurrected Christ that takes something which seems so dead and breathes so much life into it.

So then, brothers, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live according to the flesh. For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live. 

Paul says that because of this truth we are debtors; by this term he speaks primarily of being bound up in relationship. In our culture, we see debt through the lens of bondage and slavery. While this was true in some ways in the world of Rome, debt created much more of a covenantal and relational connection. Paul is saying we are all bound up in a relationship as a debtor. And yet he also wants it to be clear, it is not a relationship of harsh slavery.

For all who are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, “Abba! Father!” The Spirit himself bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with him in order that we may also be glorified with him.

Paul says God would not have given this Spirit for the purpose of slavery, but the purpose of sonship. It is this relationship with the Father, this debtor-patriarch relationship, that paves the way for our adoption. I think of how we spoke in Galatians about being adopted into the family of God as children of Abraham. Paul says it is this Spirit of God, this way of love and forgiveness, this free gift of grace that allows us to be adopted into the family as daughters and sons. (While in Galatians we were speaking of Gentiles, here in Romans I think he speaks of Jew and Gentile alike.)

But Paul also speaks of suffering being a necessity in our walk with the LORD... 

ROMANS: the Struggle

And now we come to one of those famous passages we often use to explain some of those assumptions we’ve been questioning throughout this series. Many will go to this passage — the “struggle with sin” Paul describes in Romans 7 — and use it to argue against some of my suggestions about the essence of mankind and our “sinful nature.” But before we jump to too many conclusions, let’s take this passage chunk by chunk and see what we hear from Paul.

What then shall we say? That the law is sin? By no means! Yet if it had not been for the law, I would not have known sin. For I would not have known what it is to covet if the law had not said, “You shall not covet.”

We pick up in this passage with Paul talking about one of the nagging questions we’ve been dealing with in the New Testament. Isn’t Paul arguing that the Law of Moses has died, and that we have thrown it out into the refuse pile and exchanged it for a better truth? I have been arguing adamantly for a more historically appropriate understanding of the “works of the Law” or the miqsat ma’asay haTorah. And here is one place where we see Paul communicating the same concept he’s talked about in the book of Galatians and earlier in Romans. The Law is not problematic; the Law is not done away with. On the contrary, without the Law, we would never have been able to learn and appreciate an understanding of righteousness and sin — the way of life and the way of death. It is the Law which gave God’s people a place to begin the conversation of what it means to partner with God.

But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me. So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and righteous and good.

However, once this knowledge is possessed by the student of Torah, there is this “beast-nature” in him (that we learned about in Genesis 2–3). This part of Paul (and all of us) goes to work and begins to tempt the follower of God toward the trespass. Paul reiterates this is not the fault of the Law, for the commandment itself is holy and good. It is the part of us that needs to be mastered which begins to rear up and kick in rebellion.

But someone might say that even though the Law was good, it still brought about the sin we struggle with, so God never should have given it in the first place! Paul has anticipated our thoughts once again:

Did that which is good, then, bring death to me? By no means! It was sin, producing death in me through what is good, in order that sin might be shown to be sin, and through the commandment might become sinful beyond measure. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin.

Paul very clearly says it is not the Law and the knowledge of the Law that is the problem. It is an intruder that does not belong in us. It is the sin in us (something Paul will reiterate in just a moment). Please notice the way Paul talks about “sin.” It is in us and doing a work in us, but it is an intruder — it is not the truest true of who we are.

Paul says the Law is “of the spirit” — it is good and holy — but we are “of the flesh.” This is not some form of Gnostic dualism (something the whole book of Colossians will speak against), but a reference to two different natures that are in a struggle. While the Law is of God, we are “sold under sin” and find ourselves subject to the “flesh” (some translations will read “carnal”). The word being used in many of these conversations in the New Testament comes from the Greek root word sarx.

Sarx is a word that refers to our “beast-like nature” or our “animal appetites.” Many translations will often render the word as “sinful nature,” which is not at all what the word is trying to communicate — at least not as we understand the idea. Our “sinful nature” is not the result of original sin or the state of our depravity. Simply translated, the sarx is the animal appetites we were told about all the way back in the beginning of the story. In Genesis, we talked about what it meant to be made in the “image of God” and how the rabbis spoke of the fact that we are more than animals. What makes us different from the beasts is our ability to “know when to say enough.” Adam was warned, Eve was warned, and Cain was directly told that his task would be to master this part of himself — what we would later call in Greek, the sarx.

Listen to Paul describe this very battle:

For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.

As we listen to Paul, notice that his words do not describe what we teach in the theology of depravity or original sin. Paul says he does not do what he wants to do, but he does the very thing he hates. If Paul is depraved or full of original sin, then he should NOT want to do those things. But in fact, he does. Why? Because that is his true self. He will go on to say, “if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.”

Sin is the intruder, the part of us that is not true to who we really are. We are children of God, made in His image; we are so much more than mere beasts. And we are more than just tainted pieces of filth totally given to our selfishness and sinfulness. The sin is in us, but it is not us.

And yet, the battle is so very real! This is what it means to be human, to be running after God and letting Him teach us what it means to be fully human, full image-bearers, able to join God in His redemptive work by choosing when to say enough.

So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.

And so again, we find Paul is not teaching some form of dualism — as if he longs to be rescued from his physical body. Again, he speaks of his sarx. He longs to be rescued from the struggle within his whole self. He serves God with his mind and will, but his “beast-nature” is still at work within him, serving the law of sin. But Paul rejoices that the life and death of Jesus has shown him a better way.

For it is not through a standard of morality or a system of rules that we will ever experience freedom from the struggle Paul describes, a struggle you and I know all too well. No, it is only through trusting in the promises of God, following in the example of the Christ, and displaying the faith of Jesus that we find a unique kind of victory and freedom — a life where this ongoing struggle does not lead to condemnation.

Wouldn’t that be nice? Wouldn’t it be great if this struggle with our sarx didn’t always end with our own guilt and shame and the weight of the cry of rescue from our wretched selves? We pick up with this very hope in Romans 8.