Jude - Introduction

Jude is a very short book, just one chapter. You will often find commentaries on Jude tied together with 2 Peter, this is because a part of 2 Peter contains material that is similar to a large section of Jude. There is debate on who borrowed from whom, or whether they were both using a separate source. There are also key differences, mainly that Jude refers to non-Biblical sources quite freely. The commentary on 2 Peter by Michael Green also covers Jude, and that is part of the inspiration for what I will write here, along with the other usual sources (study Bible, Bible dictionary etc).

The name Jude is a variant of Judah or Judas. There are various possibilities for who Jude is, it is possible that he is the disciple Judas (not the traitor, the other one, Lk 6:16), but the generally favoured option is that he is Judas the brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3). The reasons for favouring the latter suggestion are that he does not refer to himself as an apostle, whereas he does refer to being the brother of James.

References to the letter of Jude are found in very early Christian writings such as Clement of Rome (AD 96), Clement of Alexandria (155-215), Tertullian (150-222) etc. It is found in many early collections of New Testament writings. However, it was in the “questioned books”, the primary reason for this is that Jude freely quoted from non-Biblical sources. The church eventually came to accept the canonicity of the book.

The date of the letter depends upon whether one assumes it came before or after 2 Peter. So the date is sometime between AD 65 and 80. The recipients are identified in only the most general manner. Like 2 Peter, Jude is dealing with false teaching, but that does not necessarily mean it is directed at the same recipients as 2 Peter. Indeed, one might say the letter was rather pointless if it did go to the same people.

The false teaching was essentially saying that because we are saved by grace we can do what we like. This sort of approach has been around for an awful long time! The present hyper-grace movement contains much erroneous teaching. It is vital that we understand grace properly, both from the negative point of view that it most certainly does not mean that we can do what we like, and from the positive point of view that it most certainly does not mean that should not put every effort into living lives pleasing to God.