Jud_1:1-2. The superscription is in form similar to that of the Epistles of Paul and Peter:
Ἰούδας
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστοῦ
δοῦλος
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.]
δοῦλος
, as its position and Rom_1:1, Php_1:1, Jam_1:1 (see also Tit_1:1), show, denotes not the general service of believers to Christ (Schott), but the special service of those appointed to the gospel ministry. The more definite statement of office is here wanting; as the author is not the Apostle Jude (see Introd. sec. 1), so that his position in the Christian church is to be regarded as similar to that which a Barnabas, an Apollos, and others occupied, who, without being apostles in the narrower sense of the term, yet exercised a ministry similar to the apostolic.
With the first appellation the second
ἀδελφὸς
Ἰακώβου
is connected by
δέ
(see Tit_1:1), which, although not precisely a contrast (Schott), yet marks a distinction. This appellation serves not only to indicate who this Jude is (Arnaud), but likewise to justify his writing. Jude does not call himself “the brother of the Lord,” because his bodily relation to Christ stepped behind his spiritual, perhaps also because that surname already specially belonged to James.
τοῖς
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρὶ
ἠγαπημένοις
[
ἡγιασμένοις
]
καὶ
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] According to the reading
ἡγιασμένοις
,
ἐν
expresses not the mere instrument of holiness, but holiness as consisting in fellowship with God. The participle is either substantive, co-ordinate to the following
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστῷ
τετηρημένοις
κλητοῖς
, or adjective, which is more probable on account of the similar participial form,
τετηρημένοις
.
According to the reading
ἠγαπημένοις
,
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρί
may denote the sphere within which the readers are
ἠγαπημένοι
, namely, by the writer. Against the opinion of de Wette, “that in this objective designation the subjectivity of the author cannot be mixed,” Col_1:2 might be appealed to, where Paul names the readers of his Epistle
ἀδελφοί
, that is, the brethren of himself and Timotheus (see also 2Jn_1:1 and 3Jn_1:1); but in relation to what follows:
καὶ
Ἰησ
.
Χρ
.
τετηρημένοις
, this view is correct.
In the Vulgate,
τοῖς
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρί
is taken as an idea by itself: his qui sunt in Deo Patre, etc.; and then to this idea the two attributes are added:
ἠγαπημένοις
and
Ἰησ
.
Χρ
.
τετηρ
.
κλητοῖς
. Apart from its harshness, not only is it opposed to this construction that by it the parallelism (incorrectly denied by Schott) of the two members of the clause—which is strongly indicated both by the form of the sentence and also by
ἐν
τῷ
πατρί
in reference to the following
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστῷ
—is destroyed, but also
ἠγαπημένοις
would then be without any proximate statement. The same is also the case when it is assumed, with Rampf and Schott, that the participles
ἠγαπημένοις
and
Ἰ
.
Χ
.
τετηρημένοις
are equally subordinate to
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρί
, and explained as expressing “the living ground on which the called possess that which is expressed in the two participles” (Schott). The supplying of
ὑπὸ
Θεοῦ
or
παρὰ
Θεῷ
, necessary for this view, is at all events arbitrary; moreover, the juxtaposition of
τοῖς
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρὶ
Ἰησ
.
Χριστῷ
τετηρημένοις
is extremely harsh.
It is incorrect to take
ἐν
as equivalent to
ὑπό
(Hensler);
ἐν
is rather to be retained in its proper signification, in which it is entirely suitable to the idea
ἀγαπᾶσθαι
, as the love which proceeds from any person dwells in him, the
κλητοί
as they are loved by God so are they loved in God. Hofmann incorrectly explains it: “who have been accepted in love by God;” for
ἀγαπᾷν
never has this meaning, not even in the passages cited by Hofmann: 1Th_1:4; 2Th_2:13; Col_3:12.
God is called
πατρί
in His relation to Christ, not to men: see Php_2:11; Gal_1:1; and Meyer on the latter passage.
καὶ
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστῷ
τετηρημένοις
κλητοῖς
] The dative
Ἰησ
.
Χριστῷ
is not dependent on an
ἐν
to be supplied from
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρί
(Luther: preserved in Jesus Christ). Hofmann indeed appeals for this supplement to Kühner, Gr. II. p. 477; but incorrectly, as this is rendered impossible by
ἠγαπημένοις
intervening. What Kühner says could only be the case were it written:
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρὶ
καὶ
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστῷ
ἠγαπημένοις
. Also
Ἰησοῦ
Χριστῷ
is not the causative dative with the passive, instead of
ὑπό
with the genitive, but the dative commodi: for Christ (Bengel, de Wette, Wiesinger, Schott, and others). The participle
τετηρημένοις
is used neither instead of the present participle, as Grotius thinks, nor is it here to be understood of the act completed before God (de Wette, Wiesinger); but it simply denotes that which has taken place up to the time when the Epistle was written; thus: “to the called, who have been kept for Christ;” namely, in order to belong to Him in time and in eternity (so also Schott).[7] The idea
τετηρ
. is completely explained from the falling away from Christ which had taken place among so many; see Jud_1:4; comp. also Joh_17:11; 1Pe_1:5.
Although
ἐν
Θεῷ
πατρί
cannot be grammatically connected with
τετηρημένοις
, and although it primarily belongs to
ἠγαπημένοις
, yet it indicates by whom the preservation has taken place; Hornejus: quos Deus Pater … Christo … donavit et asservavit huc usque, ne ab impostoribus seducerentur et perirent.
κλητοῖς
] a designation in the Pauline sense of those who have not only heard the gospel, but have embraced it by faith; see Meyer on 1Co_1:24. Jud_1:2.
ἔλεος
κ
.
τ
.
λ
.] The word
ἔλεος
is used in the formula of salutation only here and in the Pastoral Epistles. The addition
καὶ
ἀγάπη
is peculiar to Jude. The relation of the three terms is thus to be understood:
ἔλεος
is the demeanour of God toward the
κλητοί
;
εἰρήνη
their condition founded upon it; and
ἀγάπη
their demeanour proceeding from it as the effect of God’s grace. Accordingly
ἀγάπη
is used here as in Eph_6:23 (see Meyer in loco); only here the love is to be limited neither specially to the brethren (Grotius), nor to God (Calov, Wiesinger). Still
ἀγάπη
may also be the love of God to the
κλητοῖς
; comp. Jud_1:21 and 2Co_13:13 [14] (so Hornejus, Grotius, Bengel, de Wette-Brückner, Schott, and others). No ground of decision can be derived from
πληθυνθείη
. With the reading
ἠγαπημένοις
the second explanation merits the preference, although the position of this expression after
εἰρήνη
is somewhat strange. On
πληθυνθείη
, see 1Pe_1:2; this form is apparently derived from Dan. 3:31.
[7] Arnauld incorrectly explains it: aux appelés gardés par J. Chr., c’est-à-dire: à ceux qui ont été appelés à J. Chr. par la prédication de l’Evangile et que J. Chr. garde fidèles.