Jude 1:12

οὖτοί εἰσιν [οἱ] ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις ὑμῶν σπιλάδες συνευωχούμενοι. Dr. Chase quotes Zechariah 1:10 f., Revelation 7:14, Enoch xlvi. 3, Secrets of Enoch, vii. 3 xviii. 3, xix. 3, etc., for the phrase οὗτοί εἰσιν, adding that it was probably adopted by St. Jude from apocalyptic writings, for which he clearly had a special liking. On the early history of the Agape, see my Appendix C to Clem. Al. Strom. vii. The parallel passage in 2 Peter (on which see n.) has two remarkable divergencies from the text here, reading ἀπάταις for ἀγάπαις and σπῖλοι for σπιλάδες. There has been much discussion as to the meaning of the latter word. It is agreed that it is generally used of a rock in or by the sea, and many of the lexicographers understand it of a hidden rock, ὕφαλος πέτρα, see Thomas Mag., σπιλάς, Ἀττικῶς · ὕφαλος πέτρα, Ἕλληνες, Etymol. [795]., σπιλάδες … αἱ ὑπὸ θάλασσαν κεκρυμμέναι πέτραι, ὅθεν καὶ ὕφαλος ἄνθρωπος λέγεται ὁ κεκρυμμένος καὶ πανοῦργος, ib. κατασπιλάζοντες, κατακρύπτοντες, ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν ὑφάλων πετρῶν, αἵτινες ὑπὸ ὕδατος καλυπτόμεναι τοῖς ἀπρούπτως προσπελάζουσι κίνδυνον ἐπιφέρουσι (both cited by Wetst.). The same explanation is given by the scholiast on Hom. Od. ver 401 405, καὶ δὴ δοῦπον ἄκουσε ποτὶ σπιλάδεσσι θαλάσσης … ἀλλʼ ἀκταὶ προβλῆτες ἔσαν σπιλάδες τε πάγοι τε. See Plut. Mor. 101 B, εὐδία σπιλάδος, which Wytt. translates “tranquillitas maris caecam rupem tegentis,” ib. 476 A, Oecumenius on this passage, αἱ σπιλάδες τοῖς πλέουσιν ὀλέθριοι, ἀπροσδοκήτως ἐπιγενόμεναι (? - νοις), and ἐξαίφνης, ὥσπερ σπιλάδες, ἐπάγοντες αὐτοῖς τὸν ὄλεθρον τῶν ψυχῶν. Wetst. also quotes Heliod. ver 31, θαλάσσῃ προσείκασας ἂν τοὺς ἄνδρας αἰφνιδίῳ σπιλάδι κατασεισθέντας. The compound κατασπιλάζω joined with the parallel case of ὕφαλος justifies, I think, this sense of σπιλάς, which is rejected by most of the later commentators. [796] Cf. also the use of ναυαγέω in 1 Timothy 1:19. Scopulus is used in a similar metaphoric sense, see Cic. in Pis. 41 where Piso and Gabinius are called “geminae voragines scopulique reipublicae”. Others take σπιλάδες in the very rare sense of “spots,” or “stains,” like σπίλοι in 2 Peter. The only example of this sense seems to be in Orph. Lith. 614, but Hesych. gives the interpretation σπιλάς, μεμιασμένοι. I agree with Bp. Wordsworth and Dr. Chase in thinking that the metaphor of the sunken rocks is more in harmony with the context.

[795] Codex Ruber (sæc. ix.), at the British Museum; it derives its name from the colour of the ink.

[796] Dr. Bigg denies this meaning on the strength mainly of two quotations, Hom. Od. iii. 298, ἀτὰρ νῆάς γε ποτὶ σπιλάδεσσιν ἔαξαν κύματα, where, he says, the σπιλάδες are identical with λισσὴ αἰπεῖά τε εἰς ἅλα πέτρη of 293; and Anthol. xi. 390, φασὶ δὲ καὶ νήεσσιν ἁλιπλανέεσσι χερείους τὰς ὑφάλους πέτρας τῶν φανερῶν σπιλάδων. In both of these I think the word refers to the breakers at the bottom of the cliffs: in the latter it is said that hidden rocks are more dangerous than visible reefs. Compare Diod. iii. 43, ὄρος δὲ ταύτῃ παράκειται κατὰ μὲν τὴν κορυφὴν πέτρας ἀποτομάδας ἔχον καὶ τοῖς ὕψεσι καταπληκτικάς, ὑπὸ δὲ τὰς ῥίζας σπιλάδας ὀξείας καὶ πυκνὰς ἐνθαλάττους.

How are we to account for the gender in οἱ … σπιλάδες συνευωχούμενοι ? Are we to suppose the gender of σπιλάς was changed or forgotten in late Greek (cf. Winer, pp. 25, 38, 73, 76)? If so, the forgetfulness seems to have been confined to this author. Or is this a coustructio ad sensum, the feminine being changed to masculine because it is metaphorically used of men (Winer, pp. 171, 648, 660, 672), cf. Revelation 11:4, οὗτοί εἰσιν αἱ δύο λυχνίαι αἱ ἐνώπιον τοῦ κυρίου ἑστῶτες and B's reading παραφερόμενοι below? Or may we take σπιλάδες as expressing a complementary notion in apposition to συνευωχούμενοι ? The last seems the best explanation though I cannot recall any exact parallel. An easier remedy would be to omit the article (with [797] and many versions), as suggested by Dr. Chase in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, ii. p. 799 b, translating: “these are sunken rocks in your love-feasts while they feast with you”.

[797] Codex Mosquensis (sæc. ix.), edited by Matthæi in 1782.

συνευωχούμενοι. Is used in the parallel passage of 2 Peter with a dat. as in Luc. Philops 4, Jos. Ant. iv. 8, 7.

ἀφόβως ἑαυτοὺς ποιμαίνοντες. If we take σπιλάδες as complementary to συνευωχούμενοι, it is better to take ἀφόβως with ποιμ.: if we omit the article and take σπιλάδες to be the predicate, συνευωχούμενοι will be an epexegetic participle, which will require strengthening by ἀφόβως. Generally ἀφ. is used in a good sense, but we find it used, as here, of the want of a right fear in Proverbs 19:23, φόβος Κυρίου εἰς ζωὴν ἀνδρί, ὁ δὲ ἄφοβος κ. τ. λ., Proverbs 15:16, κρεῖσσον μικρὰ μερὶς μετὰ φόβου Κυρίου ἢ θησαυροὶ μεγάλοι μετὰ ἀφοβίας, Sir 5:5, περὶ ἐξιλασμοῦ μὴ ἄφοβος γίνου, προσθεῖναι ἁμαρτίαν ἐφʼ ἁμαρτίαις. The phrase ἑαυτοὺς ποιμ. recalls Ezekiel 34:8, ἑβόσκησαν οἱ ποιμένες ἑαυτοὺς, τὰ δὲ πρόβατά μου οὐκ ἐβόσκησαν, but there does not seem to be any reference to spiritual pastors in Jude; and ποιμαίνω has probably here the sense “to fatten, indulge,” as in Proverbs 28:7, ὃς δὲ ποιμαίνει ἀσωτίαν, ἀτιμάζει πατέρα, Proverbs 29:3, ὃς δὲ ποιμαίνει πόρνας, ἀπολεῖ πλοῦτον, Plut. Mor. 792 B, Ἄτταλον ὑπʼ ἀργίας μακρᾶς ἐκλυθέντα κομιδῇ φιλοποίμην ἐποίμαινεν ἀτεχνῶς πιαινόμενον. We may compare 1 Corinthians 11:27 f., James 5:5, 1 Timothy 5:6.

νεφέλαι ἄνυδροι ὑπὸ ἀνέμων παραφερόμεναι. The character of the innovators is illustrated by figures drawn from the four elements, air, earth, sea, heaven (αἰθήρ). Spitta points out the resemblance to a passage in Enoch (Chapter s ii. v.), which follows immediately on the words quoted below, Jude 1:14-15. The regular order of nature is there contrasted with the disorder and lawlessness of sinners. “I observed everything that took place in the heaven, how the luminaries … do not deviate from their orbits, how they all rise and set in order, each in its season, and transgress not against their appointed order.… I observed and saw how in winter all the trees seem as though they were withered and shed all their leaves.… And again I observed the days of summer … how the trees cover themselves with green leaves and bear fruit.… And behold how the seas and the rivers accomplish their task. But as for you, ye have not continued steadfast; and the law of the Lord ye have not fulfilled … and have slanderously spoken proud and hard words (below Jude 1:15, περὶ πάντων τῶν σκληρῶν ὦν ἐλάλησαν κατʼ αὐτοῦ) with your impure mouths against his greatness.“For the metaphor cf. Ephesians 4:14. In the parallel passage of 2 Peter the first figure is broken into two, πηγαὶ ἄνυδροι, ὁμίχλαι ὑπὸ λαίλαπος ἐλαυνόμεναι. Perhaps the writer may have thought that there was an undue multiplication of causes; if the clouds were waterless, it was needless to add that they were driven past by the wind. We find the same comparison in Proverbs 25:14 : “As clouds and wind without rain, so is he that boasteth himself of his gifts falsely”. [The LXX is less like our text, suggesting that Jude was acquainted with the original Hebrew. C [798]] For the use of ὑπό with ἀνέμων see my note on James 3:4.

[798]. Codex Ephraemi (sæc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.

δένδρα φθινοπωρινὰ ἄκαρπα. φθινοπωρινός is an adjective derived from τὸ φθινόπωρον, which is itself, I think, best explained as a compound of φθίνουσα ὀπώρα (cf. φθίνοντος μηνός), meaning the concluding portion of the ὀπώρα. This latter word is, according to Curtius, compounded of ὀπ -, connected with ὀπίσω, ὄπισθεν, and ὥρα = “the later prime”. We find ὥρα used by itself both for the spring with its flowers and, more rarely, for the summer with its fruits, as in Thuc. ii. 52, ὥρα ἔτους. Perhaps from this double use of the word may have come the ambiguity in the application of ὀπώρα, of which Ideler says that “it originally indicated, not a season separate from and following after the summer, but the hottest part of the summer itself, so that Sirius, whose heliacal rising took place (in the age of Homer) about the middle of July, is described as ἀστὴρ ὀπωρινός Il. Jude 1:5). In early times it would seem that the Greeks, like the Germans (Tac. Germ. 26), recognised only three seasons winter, spring, summer, and that the last was indifferently named θέρος or ὀπώρα : compare Arist. Aves 709, πρῶτα μὲν ὥρας φαίνομεν ἡμεῖς ἦρος, χειμῶνος, ὀπώρας, with Aesch. Prom. 453, ἦν δʼ οὐδὲν αὐτοῖς οὔτε χείματος τέκμαρ οὔτʼ ἀνθεμώδους ἦρος οὔτε χείματος τέκμαρ οὔτʼ ἀνθεμώδους ἦρος οὔτε καρπίμου θέρους βέβαιον. But though ὀπώρα was thus used strictly for the dog-days, when the fruit ripened, it was also vaguely used for the unnamed period which ensued up to the commencement of winter. Thus Hesiod (Op. 674) μηδὲ μένειν οἷνόν τε νέον καὶ ὀπωρινὸν ὄμεβρον καὶ χειμῶνʼ ἐπιόντα : and ὀπώρα appears as a definite season by the side of the others in a line ot Euripides, qnoted by Plutarch (Mor. 1028 F), from which it appears that he assigned four months each to summer and winter, and two to spring and ὀπώρα :

φίλης τʼ ὀπώρας διπτύχους ἦρος τʼ ἴσους

(where the epithet φίλης deserves notice). It is said that the author of the treatise De Diaeta (c. 420 B.C.), which goes under the name of Hippocrates, was the first to introduce a definite term (φθινόπωρον or μετόπωρον) for the new season, the word ὀπώρα being reserved for the late summer, according to the definition of Eustath. on Il. Jude 1:5, ὀπώρα ὥρα μεταξὺ κειμένη θέρους καὶ τοῦ μετʼ αὑτὴν μετοπώρου. And so we find it used by Aristotle (Meteor. ii. 5), αἱ χάλαζαι γίνονται ἔαρος μὲν καὶ μετοπώρου μάλιστα, εἶτα τῆς ὀπώρας χειμῶνος δὲ ὀλιγάκις, and by Theophrastus (περὶ Σημείων, 44), ἐὰν τὸ ἔαρ καὶ τὸ θέρος ψυχρὰ γίνηται, ἡ ὀπώρα γίνεται καὶ τὸ μετόπωρον πνιγηρόν.

There is a good deal of inconsistency about the exact limits of the seasons, as is natural enough when we remember that they were first distinguished for purposes of agriculture and navigation, as we see in Hesiod's Works and Days. Each season brings its own proper work, and the farmer or merchant is reminded of the return of the season by various signs, the rising and setting of stars, especially of the Pleiades and Arcturus, the sun's passage through the signs of the zodiac, the reappearance of the birds, etc. A more strictly accurate division was made by the astronomers, who distinguished between the various kinds of rising and setting of the stars, and divided the year into four equal parts by the solstices and equinoxes. In the year 46 B.C. Julius Caesar introduced his revised calendar, which assigned definite dates to the different seasons. Thus spring begins a.d. vii. id. Feb. (Feb. 7), summer a.d. vii. id. Mai. (May 9), autumn a.d. iii. id. Sext. (Aug. 11), winter a.d. iv. id. Nov. (Nov. 10).

To turn now to the commentators, I may take Trench as representing their view in his Authorised Version, p. 186, Exodus 2, where he says, “The φθινόπωρον is the late autumn … which succeeds the ὀπώρα (or the autumn contemplated as the time of the ripened fruits of the earth) and which has its name παρὰ τὸ φθίνεσθαι τὴν ὀπώραν, from the waning away of the autumn and the autumn fruits.… The deceivers of whom St. Jude speaks are likened to trees as they show in late autumn, when foliage and fruit alike are gone.”

I have stated above what I hold to be the origin of the word φθινόπωρον. Trench's explanation is ambiguous and unsuited to the facts of the case, as will be seen from the criticisms in Lightfoot's Fresh Revision, p. 135: “In the phrase ‘autumn-trees without fruit' there appears to be a reference to the parable of the fig-tree.… At all events the mention of the season when fruit might be expected is significant.” He adds in a note, “Strange to say, the earliest versions all rendered φθινοπωρινά correctly. [799] Tyndale's instinct led him to give what I cannot but think the right turn to the expression, ‘Trees with out frute at gadringe (gathering) time,' i.e. at the season when fruit was looked for. I cannot agree with Archbishop Trench, who maintains that ‘Tyndale was feeling after, though he has not grasped, the right translation,' and himself explains φθινοπωρινὰ ἄκαρπα as ‘mutually completing one another, without leaves, without fruit '. Tyndale was followed by Coverdale and the Great Bible. Similarly Wycliffe has ‘hervest trees without fruyt,' and the Rheims version ‘trees of autumne unfruiteful'. The earliest offender is the Geneva Testament, which gives ‘corrupt trees and without frute'.… The Bishops' Bible strangely combines both renderings, ‘trees withered (φθίνειν) at fruite gathering (ὀπώρα) and without fruite,' which is explained in the margin, ‘Trees withered in autumne when the fruite harvest is, and so the Greke woord importeth'.”

[799] This agreement is probably owing to their dependence on the Vulgate “ arbores auctumnales infructuosae ”.

The correctness of the interpretation, given by Lightfoot alone among modern commentators, is confirmed by a consideration of the context. The writer has just been comparing the innovators, who have crept into other Churches, to waterless clouds driven past by the wind. Just as these disappoint the hope of the husbandman, so do fruitless trees in the proper season of fruit. If φθινοπωρινά were equivalent to χειμερινά, denoting the season when the trees are necessarily bare both of leaves and fruit, how could a tree be blamed for being ἄκαρπον ? It is because it might have been, and ought to have been a fruit-bearing tree, that it is rooted up.

δὶς ἀποθανόντα ἐκριζωθεντα. Schneckenburger explains, “He who is not born again is dead in his sins (Colossians 2:13), he who has apostatised is twice dead,” cf. Revelation 21:8; Hebrews 6:4-8; 2 Peter 2:20-22. So the trees may be called doubly dead, when they are not only sapless, but are torn up by the root, which would have caused the death even of a living tree.