There are seven men in the New Testament who bear the name of Jude: one of the physical ancestors of Jesus (Luke 3:30); the traitor of Jesus (Mark 3:19); the son or brother of James, also called Thaddaeus, one of the twelve apostles (Luke 6:16; John 14:22; Acts 1:13); an insurrectionist from Galilee (Acts 5:37); a native of Damascus in whose house Paul stayed and prayed after his conversion (Acts 9:11); an emissary of the Jerusalem church who, along with Silas, bore the results of the church council to Antioch (Acts 15:22, 27, 32); and the brother of James and the half-brother of Jesus (Mark 6:3). It is quite evident that the last-mentioned person wrote the book. He identified himself as: "Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James" (1). If he had been the apostle, Judas Thaddaeus, he would have used that official title. If he had been one of the other possibilities, he would have further identified himself (e.g., Barsabbas, or, of Damascus). Since he indicated his relationship to James, he must have referred to the half-brother of Jesus who was the author of the Book of James. He apparently did not consider himself to be a commissioned apostle (1, 17–18).

As one of the younger brothers of James, he did not believe in the messiahship of Jesus during the latter’s earthly ministry (Mark 6:3; John 7:3–8). Since he was associated with Mary, his brothers, and the apostles in the upper room after the ascension of Christ, he must have been converted during the forty days of Christ’s postresurrection ministry, perhaps through a personal appearance of the Savior (Acts 1:14). Later he had an itinerant preaching ministry during which he was accompanied by his wife (1 Cor. 9:5). Nothing certain is known about his death.

Several of the early Church Fathers viewed the book with much suspicion, probably because of its brevity, the lack of renown of the author, and the inclusion of quotations from noncanonical sources (9, 14–15). In spite of this, the book had stronger external attestation than Second Peter, a strange fact since Peter was better known than Jude. Both Athenagoras and Clement of Alexandria accepted its canonical status and ascribed it to Jude. The Muratorian Canon included it. These later writers embraced its authenticity: Didymas, Athanasius, Augustine, and Jerome.

There are obvious similarities between the major content of Jude (4–19) and the second chapter of Second Peter (2:1–3:3), but what is their connection? It is possible, but highly improbable, that they wrote on the same subject independent of each other. There just are too many similarities for that position to be held. A second view is that they both used a common source. This is conceivable, but there is no objective manuscript evidence of such a document. The most plausible view is that one writer, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, incorporated some material from the other’s book into his own Epistle. But who borrowed from whom? Did Peter write after Jude or did Jude use Second Peter? The second possibility is the more logical one. Jude indicated that his purpose in writing changed suddenly (3). The reading of Second Peter could have caused this change. Peter placed the advent of the false teachers into the future (2 Peter 2:1), whereas Jude saw them as already present (4). Jude’s reference to the apostolic warning about mockers (17–18) seems to refer to the counsel of Peter (2 Peter 3:2–4) and Paul (Acts 20:28–30; 2 Tim. 3:1–9). The fact that Jude quoted from other sources (9, 14–15) makes it more likely that he borrowed from Peter than vice versa. Since all Biblical truth is divinely revealed truth, it is the Spirit’s prerogative to direct two authors to write on the same subject for emphasis and/or to cause one to utilize another. In the final analysis, it is not one man copying another man’s work; rather, it is God copying God or God writing twice.

The historical, theological occasion for this Epistle can be seen in this key verse: "Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints" (3). Jude had originally planned to write a treatise on salvation (e.g., justification by faith) to his readers, probably Jewish Christians, quite possibly the same readers as mentioned in James and the Petrine Epistles. Unknown to him, false teachers had quietly invaded the local churches, repudiating the doctrines of grace, holiness, and the lordship of Christ (4). When the Epistle of Second Peter came into his hands, Jude saw that the predicted heretics were already on the scene. Concerned over the heretical threat to the spiritual welfare of his readers, Jude wrote this Epistle to warn them about the apostasy so that they would defend the faith in the face of moral and doctrinal attacks.

The time and place of writing cannot be determined with certainty. Since it was written after Second Peter, any date between a.d. 66 and 80 would be acceptable.

The purposes reflect the occasion. Jude wanted to urge his readers to contend for the faith (3), to warn them against the insidious tactics of the apostates (4), to describe the characteristics of the false teachers and their subsequent judgment (5–16), to remind them of past apostolic predictions about the rise of the apostasy (17–19), to stimulate them to spiritual growth and soul winning (20–23), and to assure them of God’s protection (24–25).

Jude gained notoriety through his inclusion of concepts gleaned from apocryphal literature. He quoted or alluded to the Assumption of Moses (9) and the Book of Enoch (14–15), both noncanonical volumes. This practice, however, was not unique. Paul orally quoted Aratus, a pagan poet, in Athens, and the condensed record of that sermon was incorporated by Luke into the Book of Acts (Acts 17:28). Paul later referred to a pagan Cretan poet (Titus 1:12) and doubtless used a noninspired source for the names of Moses’ opponents, Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim. 3:8). Mere quotation of an apocryphal piece of literature in an inspired book does not mean that the apocryphal book was inspired nor does it mean that the Biblical author approved of everything written in the apocryphal book. It simply means that the Biblical author, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, selected the quotation because it was true (cf. Titus 1:13). Truth is truth no matter where it is found. However, when that true statement was penned into an inspired book, it then became the inspired, authoritative basis of faith and practice. The Bible does record the lies and errors of men accurately, but there is no indication that these two quotations contain historical or doctrinal error.

The book contains a classic description of the apostasy. Jude employed the wilderness generation of Israel, the angels, the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah, Cain, Balaam, and Korah as historical examples and precedents for the apostates’ sins. The sin of Israel was unbelief (5); the angels manifested rebellion toward the revealed will of God (6); the cities were judged for their sexual perversion; Cain was known for his bloodless sacrifice and self-righteousness; Balaam ministered for money; and Korah presumed to usurp authority that belonged only to God’s appointed leader, Moses. Just as all six were punished for their sins in past ages, so Jude assured his readers that the apostates would be divinely judged in the future.

Jude’s literary style shows an affinity for triads. He described himself in three ways: as Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and the brother of James (1). He saw his readers as sanctified, preserved, and called (1). His blessing included mercy, peace, and love (2). He claimed that the apostate dreamers defiled the flesh, despised dominion, and spoke evil of dignities (8). He cited three men as examples of past apostasy: Cain, Balaam, Korah (11). The three Persons of the Trinity have a part in the protection of the believer (20–21).

Salutation (1, 2)

In opening his book Jude assured his readers that their spiritual position was eternally secure and that God’s abundant provision for daily living was available (1). He ended the letter by assuring them of God’s ability to preserve their daily practice and orthodoxy (24).

He then informed them of his change of purpose in writing. Instead of writing on the general topic of salvation, he deemed it necessary to exhort them to contend for the faith. The phrases "the faith" and "once delivered" show that the doctrinal limits of orthodoxy had already been defined. Jude did not expect any further revelation on that subject; rather, he wanted his readers to defend that which was already given. He then notified them of the presence of false teachers who used sneaky tactics, who were ungodly, and who denied the concepts of divine grace and the deity of Christ.

Three historical examples of personal, moral, and doctrinal apostasy were listed to show the certainty of divine judgment upon those who practiced such sins. Note the phrases of judgment: "destroyed" (5); "hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day" (6); and "vengeance of eternal fire" (7).

Jude described the character of the apostates: evil speakers, ignorant, beastly, corrupt (10), spotted, fearless, hypocritical, twice dead (12), unstable (13), ungodly (15), murmuring and proud (16). Their sermons manifested arrogance in an attempt to impress their listeners (8, 9, 10, 15, 16). Their judgment will be finalized at the second advent of Christ (14–15).

Jude outlined the proper defense of the believers in the face of such evil apostates. They were to remember the warning of past inscripturated revelation about the rise of the apostasy and the spiritual condition of the apostates (17–19). In relationship to themselves, they were to do four things: to fortify themselves in doctrinal orthodoxy; to pray in the Spirit; to keep themselves in the love of God; and to look for Christ’s coming (20–21). They were to make a distinction between committed apostates and deceived apostates, seeking to win the victimized subjects of the false teaching (22–23). Finally, they were to commit themselves to God who alone could keep them from moral and doctrinal error. In themselves they could not do it. In all of their defense, they were to bring glory to God.