EDITORIAL

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 20

HARMONY OF THE BOOK OF JUDE AND 2 PETER

Chul Hae Kim

Many parallel passages exist among the sixty-six books in the Bible.

There are many ways to approach the relationship of each of these

parallel passages. The basic principle that applies to any parallel

passages in the Bible is that every book of the Bible relates to each

other in a certain way. Some relate in the aspect to the time of writing

whether written earlier or later: the prior ones could possibly influence

the one written later. Others relate in the aspect of authorship as in the

case of the Pauline Epistles and Johannine Epistles. On the other hand,

we could get the same “smell” from some books even though authors

were different but were influenced by each other.

The relationship of some parallel passages could be explained

based on certain basic principles without any struggle. All the New

Testament books have their origin from Old Testament books. It is not

only the New Testament books that quote from the Old Testament; Old

Testament Books also quote from other books within the Old

Testament.

Some passages quote directly from the Old Testament

books, but some portions of the New Testament books relate indirectly

to the Old Testament. There are many ways of quoting from the Old

Testament besides direct quotation. Biblical writers use various kinds

of allusions: some related to verbal phrases, others in context (including

the canonical context), and the rest in main themes or topics.

The study of the relationship between parallel passages is worth

taking. Studying those relationships, whether direct quotations or

indirect allusions, will gives us very significant insights for the better

understanding of related books or passages.

Chul Hae Kim, Th.D., is Chaplain and Associate Professor of the New Testament

at Torch Trinity. Dr. Kim has more than 20 years of pastoral experience in the USA

and Korea. He is currently serving as pastor of Bethel International Church in Kwang

Joo City, Kyungki-Do. Dr. Kim also serves as Director of the Research Center for

Family Culture in The House of Love.

Milton S. Terry analyzes scripture quotations into four classes in his book,

Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments

(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing Company, n.d.); Old Testament quotes from

Old Testament; New Testament quotes from Old Testament; New Testament quotes

from New Testament; New Testament quotes from Apocryphal sources (500-510).

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 21

We can find many direct relationships in some parallel passages

that have almost exactly same portions verbatim. In this case, we have

the basic formula of the New Testament writers when they quote Old

Testament passages such as, “as it has been written,” or “in order that it

might be fulfilled.” Usually Old Testament passages quoted in the New

Testament show us how God has fulfilled the Old Testament

prophecies in the New. The prophecy-fulfillment relation makes it

easier to investigate without any ambiguity. There is the other case of

parallel passages that could be explained without any problem, i.e., the

case of connected books like the end of 2 Chronicles, the beginning of

the book of Ezra in the Old Testament, the end of the Gospel of Luke,

and the beginning of the book of Acts in the New Testament. They

repeat verbatim the exact same portion at the end of one book and in

the beginning of the other.

THE BOOK OF JUDE AND THE SECOND PETER

The parallel portions of the Synoptic Gospels are another case that

could be understood but not necessarily accepted with full consent.

Problem comes when we deal with the parallel passages found among

the books that seem to have no natural relationship at all.

The Parallel Portion of the Two Books

The issue of this paper is to find the right relationship of the

parallel passages of the books of Jude and of Second Peter. It is

obvious to all readers that the books of Jude and Second Peter have

large parallel portions. The parallel portions are largely between Jude

4-13, 16-18, and 2 Peter 2:1-18 and 3:1-3. Terrance Callan clarifies the

close relationship of the two books by counting the numbers in parallel

and its percentage in the passages. 2 Peter 2:1-3:3 consists with 426

words, and out of these 426 words, 87 words share with Jude 4-18,

which constitutes 20% of the total.

This topic is one of the largest in the New Testament Gospel studies. Concerning

this issue Robert H. Stein gives an excellent overview in his book, Studying the

Synoptic Gospels: Origin and Interpretation (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic,

2001). Another approach on the same topic is given by Sang-Bok Kim, The Sources of

the Synoptic Gospels--The Priority of Mark: Fact or Myth? (Seoul: Torch Publishers,

1993).

Terrance Callan, “Use of the Letter of Jude by the Second Letter of Peter,”

Biblica 85 (2004): 42-64.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 22

Possible Explanations

Many questions arose when we try to find the relation between

these two books. What causes them to use the parallel portions? What

is the procedure of having the parallel? Did they use the same

source(s)? Or, did one of them copy from the other? If this was the case,

who copied from whom? Dealing with the problem of parallel portions,

some methods that have been applied in the Synoptic problem could be

used here in Jude and 2 Peter. In the case of dealing with synoptic

problem, many scholars have tried to show the right relationship of the

first three Gospels in the New Testament since the effort of Tatian’s

Diatessaron.

The oral theory or original Gospel hypothesis fits less

for this study than the other theories. Considering similarities and

divergences in these parallels, document hypothesis and mutual

dependence hypothesis are the most probable theory that can be applied

here.

THREE POSSIBLE SUGGESTIONS

Considering the similar descriptions of these two

books, it draws us to the conclusion that one has used the

other. If this is the case, then two different theories of

dependence are possible: Jude is the basis of 2 Peter, or

2 Peter is the basis of Jude. The third possibility is that

both used the common source.

View One: Second Peter is dependent on Jude

The first view is that 2 Peter is dependent on Jude. This theory is

more popular today than the other. The first reason for this lies in the

brevity of Jude. The Book of Jude has only one chapter with 25 verses.

It is easier to make long using the short one by adding more words or

refine some words. In other words, as Dick Lucas and Christopher

Green note, “This option has the advantage of great neatness, because it

Concerning historical survey of synoptic problems, see Donald Guthrie, New

Testament Introduction (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1979). Guthrie

summarizes the following possible hypotheses for the solution: the original Gospel

hypothesis, the fragment theory, the oral theory, the mutual dependence hypothesis, the

document hypothesis, the form-historical method, and other forms of more developed

or modified form of theories (123-187).

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 23

simply requires Peter to insert Jude into a larger framework.”

Together with this brevity of Jude, the fact that the style of Jude is more

simple and direct than 2 Peter supports this view.

This view takes similar position in many ways to what the Marcan

Priority view takes on the synoptic problem. As a result, the weakness

of this view is almost the same as that of the Marcan Priority view.

There are many complicated elements to compare the parallel, i.e., the

existence of exceptions or the possibility of reverse relationship.

Some phrases of Jude are shorter than the parallel of 2 Peter, but there

are longer portions than the phrases of 2 Peter. Some appear more

crude, while others seem more neat in Jude as compared with 2 Peter.

Another reason for objecting this view is that Peter, who is one of the

core Apostles among the twelve, had no need to copy from Jude.

However, as Lucas and Green point out, that because of the Palestinian

background of Jude, Peter found the need to rearrange the writing in

order to make sense to a wider readership, thereby adding material to

give it a different coherence.

Another strong evidence for this view is Jude’s use of apocryphal

books which were absent in the book of 2 Peter.

The example of this

case is that Jude 9 refers to the archangel Michael, but 2 Peter (2:11)

omits and calls vaguely to “angels.” They interpret this fact as the

evidence of Peter’s changing Jude’s text because of its unorthodox

character. However, the other case is possible. Jude specifies Peter’s

general statement of angels, illustrated it, and named Michael.

Dick Lucas & Christopher Green, The Bible Speaks Today: The Message of 2

Peter & Jude: The Promise of His Coming (Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press,

236).

For example, the manners to approach the problems of false teachers are

different. Jude goes right into the subject without long introduction unlike what Peter

does.

For example, sometimes to make longer passage short is possible and even easier.

In a case where Jude is harsher than 2 Peter, it is possible that Peter made the

tone down or the other way round, depending on the need of the readers.

Lucas and Green, 237f.

Jude is the only New Testament book which quoted from a Jewish apocryphal

work. Jude quoted both from 1 Enoch and from the Assumption of Moses which is a

pseudepigrapon. See Guthrie, 917-919, for details.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 24

View Two: Jude is dependent on Second Peter

The second view is that Jude is dependent on 2 Peter. This view has

been the standard position among older scholars. Martin Luther who

devalues the book of Jude writes, “In it is nothing special except it

refers to the Second Epistle of Peter from which it has taken nearly all

its words, and on the whole it is nothing else than an epistle against our

clergy, bishops, priests and monks.”

The first evidence for this view is the interpretation of Jude 4 and

11. Verse four mentions condemnation that had already been

designated (oi palai progegrammenoi). This is understood to

refer to an earlier writing, which could be identified with 2 Peter who

wrote the same content in his book. Verse 11 of Jude mentions about

remembering the apostle’s predictions, an exact same phrase that can

be found verbatim in 2 Peter 3:3.

A strong evidence for this view is the future tense used in 2 Peter.

Verse one of the second chapter mentions the coming of false teachers

in the future tense (esontai yeudodidaskaloi). In verse three

of the third chapter, Peter warns that mockers “shall come”

(eleusontai). However, verse 4 of Jude uses the same concept in

the present tense (pareisedusan gar tineς anqrwpoi) and

states the entire situation happened already. The weakness of this view

is that Peter is not consistent in using future tense. He uses three

present tenses in the second chapter (vv 10, 17, 18) and once in the

third chapter (v. 5). Lenski explains that the inconsistency of the use of

the phrase, “decisive future tenses and the prophecy,” followed by

present tense words, are “perfectly natural way.”

Another strong evidence for this view is the logic that accounts

why an ‘apostolic’ writer should take over so much of the writings of

an obscure man like Jude. But, this evidence has some weak points.

The first weak point concerns whether or not the author is the Apostle

Peter. Another weak point points to the examples where Peter praises

Paul who was much lower in the position among the apostles. The

Martin Luther, Commentary on Peter & Jude (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel

Classics, 1990), 290 (Emphasis mine).

Guthrie introduces Zahn’s conclusion based on this verb, “we should conclude

that Jude knew and prized 2 Peter as an apostolic writing and made it the basis of parts

of his letter” (923).

R. C .H. Lenski, I and II Epistles of Peter, the Three Epistles of John, and the

Epistle of Jude (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1966), 597-598.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 25

Book of Galatians, for instance, offers Paul refutation of Peter (Gal

2:12f), while Peter mentions Paul’s letters in his writings (2Pet 3:15-

16). Besides, Peter himself declares that every Word of God was

spoken from God by the person who was carried along by the Holy

Spirit (2Pet 1:21). In this sense, it was not a matter at all about who

wrote the book of Jude as Peter quotes from it whenever necessary.

View Three: Both Used the Common Source

Many scholars like Robson, Reicke, and Green support that both

writers used common document(s) or fragments.

Norman Hiller

echoes this view arguing that “for while the same topics are touched

upon in the same sequence, the differences in the treatment are

palpable.”

Michael J. Gilmour even introduces the possibility that

both writers are depending on oral tradition.

However, this view has fewer advocates than the previous ones

because the situations in both Epistles seem too concrete for their own.

If they borrowed the same documents with editorial adaptation, the

problem comes for the Epistle of Jude because there is nothing new

except the salutation in the beginning and doxology at the end. Another

weakness of this view is that Jude refers back to earlier apostolic

teachings in verse 17.

One interesting view holds that both books were written by the

same author. This hypothesis is suggested by E. I. Robinson and

followed by others.

According to this view, the same author is

possibly Jude.

THE HARMONY OF THE TWO BOOKS

What could be the answer? Like many other literary problems of

the New Testament, there is no definite solution that satisfies all. The

Concerning their view, see Richard Bauckman, Word Biblical Commentary:

Jude, 2 Peter (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983), 141f.

New International Biblical Commentary: 1 and 2 Peter, Jude (Peabody, MA:

Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1992), 13f.

Michael J. Gilmour, The Significance of Parallels between 2 Peter and Other

Early Christian Literature, Society of Biblical Literature 10 (Netherlands: Brill, 2002),

90.

For more explanations on this view, see Bauckman (141) and Guthrie (925).

Everett F. Harrison introduces this view as the fourth possibility in his book,

Introduction to the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing

Company, 1971). Harrison notes that both books were written by a common author,

namely, Jude (141).

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 26

only correct answer for their relationship is that only God knows.

However, inspite of this uncertainty regarding the relationship of the

parallel portion, one thing is sure that this problem does not affect the

authenticity problem of either Epistle.

Why Were These Two Books Written?

The key point to harmonize the parallel portions of the two books is

to focus on the purpose of writing of each book. Why were the two

books written? It is certain that Peter and Jude edit according to their

purposes regardless of their relationship. Even though there are debates

on authorship, this writer supports that the Apostle Peter is the author

of 2 Peter. The Petrine authorship of the 2 Peter is definite, considering

the existence of personal allusions in the Epistles.

The author of the

Book of Jude is Jude the brother of James, Jesus’ brother through

Mary.

Based upon this fact, both books were written much earlier

than the years that were considered by those who hold the two books as

pseudonymous and pseudepigraphic.

Based on this fact, both books possess different purposes of writing

and occasions similar to each Gospel Book that was written in a

different occasion for different readers. Even though many common

parallel portions exist, the role of the same portion is different in

application in both Epistles.

Who Were The Trouble Makers?

Constant Problem of Heresy in the Church

Jesus Christ Himself often warned His disciples of false teachers

during His earthly life. While sending His disciples to proclaim the

Kingdom of God, He warned them, “Watch out for false prophets.

They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious

wolves” (Matt. 7:15). The same warning was found in the writings of

his disciples including Peter and Jude. Paul warned the elders of the

The author uses the double name Simeon Peter (Συμεων Πετρος). 2 Peter 1:14

can be connected to John 21:18f; 2 Peter 1:16f can be related to the transformation

account in the Gospel. Guthrie provides a detailed discussion on this topic including its

alternative views (820-848). See also, Harrison, 416-426.

For a detailed discussion on the authorship of Jude, see Guthrie, 906-908. Lucas

and Green check all six Judases in the New Testament and conclude that Judas, the

brother of James, who is the brother of Jesus through Mary, is the author of this Epistle

(238f). See also, Baukman, 21-23.

Those who reject the Petrine authorship dates the epistle as early as the 2

century or later. In the case of Jude, they date it after the apostolic age.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 27

Ephesian church to watch out for false teachers: “I know that after I

leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the

flock. Even from your own number, men will arise and distort the truth

in order to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20: 29-30).

Same Problem with Different Identity

Every church needs to stand against these false teachers. In fact,

Paul gives this instruction at the conclusion of his ministry at the

Church of Ephesus. Without exception, it is crucial for every church to

watch out for those ferocious wolves. Nevertheless, in spite of the same

problem one might face, the identity of the problem is different from

church to another. In this sense, Peter’s approach differs from that of

Jude even though they use similar parallel passages in their texts.

‘Past History Approach’ of Jude

Denying God-Problem in the Jude

The problem of the community in the Epistle of Jude is that the

false teachers are denying the Trinitarian God. First, they deny Jesus

Christ. In the beginning, Jude identifies the troublemakers of the church

as those who “deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord (τον

μονον δεσποτην και κυριον ημων Ιησουν Χριστον αρνουμενοι)” (v.

4c).

Jude describes them in verse eight, “these dreamers pollute their

own bodies, reject authority, and slander celestial beings.” The

authority (κυριοτητα) referred to here is Jesus.

As the result of

denying Jesus Christ, they also deny God the Father in their behavior

and became the one “who change the grace of our God into a license

for immorality” (v. 4b). Licentiousness and denying Christ go together.

They are much similar to the false teachers or anti-Christ in the First

Epistle of John, where John identifies “Who is the liar? It is the man

who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist--he

denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the

Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also” (1 John

Jude uses a single definite article, referring Jesus to the only Sovereign and Lord,

which means only one person in view.

Norman Hillyer suggests in his NIB Commentary on 1 and 2 Peter, Jude

(Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1992) three possible interpretation of this

word: (1) Ecclesiastical or civil authority, (2) a class of angels (cf. Col 1:16), and (3)

the Lordship of God or the Lordship of Christ (2487-248). Lukas and Green support the

third view (189).

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 28

2:22-23).

Jude is pointing out that the problem of the false teachers is

not only their licentiousness but also their denial of the living God and

His Christ. Jude notes that they “follow mere natural instincts and do

not have the Spirit” (v. 19). In this way, they deny the Trinitarian God.

Specifically, they deny Jesus Christ and the living God, and they do not

have the Holy Spirit.

Historical Refutation in Jude

The way Jude approaches the false teachers (certain men, τινες

ανθρωποι in verse four)

is different from that of Paul. Even though

Jude is not refuting the false teachers with logic as much as Paul deals

with the Colossian heresy; instead, he approaches them with historical

illustrations. He emphasizes that their condemnation was written about

long ago (v. 4a), which illustrates the past examples of condemnation.

Starting with the deserting of the Israelites in the wilderness at the time

of Exodus (v. 5), Jude continues to portray those who had been blessed

by God but condemned later because of disobedience like the fallen

angels (v. 6), Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns (v. 7),

and the cases of Cain, Balaam, and Korah (v. 11). As the result of

denying the Trinitarian God, their moral culpability manifests in their

lives in various forms, e.g., moral pollution on their own bodies,

rebellion against authorities (v. 8), and acting worse than unreasoning

animals (v. 10). Their behavior also proves that they are double-dead (v.

12), and they are “grumblers and faultfinders” (v. 16).

Thus, Jude eagerly assures his readers and urges them “to contend

for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints” (v. 3). He

wants to reassure readers that the troublemakers have no place to stand

in the history of divine salvation. Only “blackest darkness” (v. 13) and

“judgment” have been reserved for them (v. 15).

The right response of the readers against false teachings and

polluted behaviors is to build themselves up in the “most holy faith and

pray in the Holy Spirit” (v. 20). Jude’s ultimate purpose for writing his

epistle is to warn believers against false teachers, to assure them of the

Guthrie identifies them as the ones who are “in line with such heresies as were

influencing the Colossian church” (912).

Richard J. Bauckham identifies these opponents in his Word Biblical

Commentary on Jude, 2 Peter (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983) as “a

group of itinerant charismatics” who takes the position of teaching and influences

others (11f).

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 29

last judgment awaiting the false teachers, and to urge them to stand

firm on the right faith that has been preached by the apostles.

Future-History-Approach of Peter

Emphasis on Divine Nature in Believers

The purpose of second Peter is different from that of Jude. Peter

starts with the emphasis on “the promised potential divine nature” in

believers (1:3, 4). Peter is contrasting the genuine truth with the false

teachings of the troublemakers (1:16a). However, before getting into

the discussion regarding false teachers, Peter emphasizes the divine

calling and election of believers. Accordingly, this is the shortest way

to stand firm against the false teachings: “Therefore, my brothers, be all

the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For if you do

these things, you will never fall, and you will receive a rich welcome

into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (1:11-12).

Integrity of the Truth

After having discussion on the divine nature, Peter is increasing the

pressure on the presence of the false teachers. The key issue of the

discussion is the integrity of the teaching. In contrast with the focus of

Jude on the condemnation of the false teachers as illustrated by

examples of past judgment, Peter stresses on the historicity and the

testimony of the Gospel, which are not found in the Book of Jude. Peter

writes, “We were eyewitnesses of his majesty “(v. 1:16b); “We

ourselves heard this voice that came from heaven when we were with

him on the sacred mountain” (1:18).

Divine Origin of the Prophecy

Peter moves into the divine origin of the prophecy (1:20, 21) in

contrast with the human origin of the false teachers. Chapter two

unfolds the fictitious characters of the destructive heresies. Their

crucial fault is to deny the redemptive work of God, “even denying the

sovereign Lord who bought them (kai ton agorasanta autouς δεσποτην

αρνουμενοι)” (2:1). The main difference of this phrase from the parallel

passage of Jude is that only Peter mentions about the false teachers who

deny the redemptive work of God.

As a result, all the shameful

If the sovereign Lord refers to Jesus Christ here, then an exegetical question is in

order regarding whether or not the false teachers were believers before losing their

salvation. John Stott cites Wayne Grudem who understands this phrase as a quotation

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 30

disrepute appears. In application, Peter concludes that one need to be

careful to deal the prophecy: “be on your guard so that you may not be

carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure

position” (3:17).

Eschatological Prophecy of Peter

Then Peter illustrates the examples of judgment and condemnation

of the falsehood in the history of divine salvation as Jude does. Yet,

Peter includes Lot in his illustrations, which is not found in Jude. It is

because his focus is different. Peter emphasizes the influence of the

false teachings: many will follow their shameful ways (2:2a); these

teachers will exploit you (2:3); they seduce the unstable (2:14b); they

entice people who are just escaping from those who live in error (2:18).

Peter illustrates Lot as one who had been influenced by licentious

environment. It is a similar threat that the readers of his epistle are

facing: “righteous man, living among them day after day, was

tormented in his righteous soul by the lawless deeds he saw and heard”

(2:8). Of course, Lot had kept his righteousness in the end. The readers

of the epistle are expected to follow Lot’s example.

The problem of the false teachers is more than moral licentiousness

and exploitation. The specific difference of 2 Peter from Jude lies in its

view of God and the way of dealing with the Word of God. The

teachings of the false teachers are destructive heresies (αιρεσις

απωλειας 2:1). Peter describes the false teachers as ignorant and

unstable (3:16). They distort the Word of God. Their way of distorting

the truth of God comes not only from natural ignorance, but also from

deliberate ignorance (λανθανει . . . θελοντας). They deny what God has

done in creation and judgment (3:5, 6). The ultimate difference of the

false teachings of 2 Peter from those of Jude is a denial of the second

coming of Christ. In other words, the secret for the victory over false

teachings is to obtain the right doctrine of eschatology and the doctrine

of consummation: “the day of the Lord will come like a thief” (3:10a);

“looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of

righteousness” (3:13); “since you are looking forward to this” (3:14a).

Those who have this belief shall keep themselves “make every effort to

be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him” (3:14b). In this

from Deut. 32:6, asserting that the sovereign Lord refers to God the Father who bought

the Israelites out of the bondage of Egypt (88-90). See also Paul Gardner, Focus on the

Bible 2 Peter & Jude (Ross-shire, UK: Christian Focus Publications, 1998), 62-64.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 31

way, the believer’s participation in the divine nature and the second

coming of Christ make a pair to go together, which is lacking among

the false teachers.

CONCLUSION

This study explored the relationship between the parallel passages

in the Bible. It is obvious to all readers that the books of Jude and of 2

Peter have large portions in parallel. The parallel portions are largely

between Jude 4-13, 16-18 and 2 Peter 2:1-18; 3:1-3. Many explanations

are possible for the parallel portion in the Bible. Considering the

similar descriptions of these two books, it draws us to the conclusion

that one has used the other. If this is the case, two different theories of

dependence are possible: Jude is the basis of 2 Peter, or 2 Peter is the

basis of Jude. The third possibility is that both used a common source.

The first view is that 2 Peter is dependent on Jude, which is more

popular nowadays. Together with the brevity of Jude, and the fact that

the style of Jude is more simple and direct than 2 Peter, supports this

view. This view has a weakness as some portions are cruder but others

are neater in Jude when compared to 2 Peter. As one of the core

disciples among the Twelve, Peter has no need to copy from Jude.

Other evidence is Peter’s act of changing Jude’s text because of its

unorthodox character. However, the other case is possible. Jude might

specifies Peter’s general statement of angels, illustrated it, and named

Michael.

The second view is that Jude is dependent on 2 Peter. This view

had been the standard position of the older scholars. One supporting

evidence for this view is the interpretation of Jude 4 and 11. Verse four

mentions condemnation, which had already been designated.

Nevertheless, Jude used the same concept in the present tense and

stated all the situation happened already. Another strong evidence for

this view is the logic behind an “apostolic” writer who cited so much

from of the writings of an obscure man like Jude. The weakness of this

view is that Peter accepts the writings of the other apostles including

Paul who were lower in the apostolic position.

The third view is that both writers used common document(s) or

fragments. The problem comes for the Epistle of Jude, which has

nothing new except the salutation in the beginning and the doxology at

the end. Also, Jude refers back to earlier apostolic teachings in verse 17.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 32

As in the case of other literary problems in the New Testament,

there is no definite satisfying solution. The correct answer for the

relationship of the parallels under is that only God knows. However, in

spite of this uncertainty in the relationship of the parallel portion, one

thing is sure that this problem does not affect the authenticity factor of

both Epistles. The key point that will harmonize the parallel portions of

the two books is to focus on the purpose of writing each book. Both

books have different purposes of writing as well as written on different

occasions.

The problem of the community in the Epistle of Jude is that the

false teachers deny the Trinitarian God. False teachers deny Jesus

Christ, the living God, and they do not have the Holy Spirit. Apparently,

Jude’s ultimate purpose for writing his epistle is to warn believers

against the false teachers, to assure them of the last judgment of the

false teachers, and to urge them to stand firm in their faith. In this way,

Jude tries to refute the false teachers based on principles of history.

On the other hand, after an insightful discussion on the believers’

participation in the divine nature, Peter confronts the false teachers.

The key issue of the discussion of 2 Peter is the integrity of the

teaching. In contrast with the way Jude depicts the condemnation of the

false teachers as illustrated by the examples of past judgment, Peter

focuses on the historicity and the testimony of the Gospel. Then he

moves into the divine origin of the prophecy in contradistinction with

the human origin of the false teachers. Peter illustrates the examples of

judgment and condemnation of false teachers by appealing to the

history of divine salvation as Jude does. But, he includes Lot. Peter

describes the false teachers as ignorant and unstable. The ultimate

difference of the false teachings of 2 Peter from those of Jude is a

denial of the second coming of Christ. Contrary to Jude’s focus on

history, Peter stresses on the secret of victory over false teachings by

having the right doctrines of eschatology and consummation. Thus, in

spite of the existence of similarities in the parallel portions, Jude and 2

Peter use these passages in different contexts. This is the need and

value of the existence of the two books in the New Testament.

WORKS CITED

Bauckham, Richard J. Word Biblical Commentary: Jude, 2 Peter.

Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983.

HARMONY OF JUDE & 2 PETER 33

Callan, Terrance. “Use of the Letter of Jude by the Second Letter of

Peter.” Biblica 85 (2004): 42-64.

Gardener, Paul Focus on the Bible: 2 Peter & Jude. Ross-shire, UK:

Christian Focus Publications, 1998.

Gilmour, Michael J. The Significance of Parallels between 2 Peter and

Other Early Christian Literature. Society of Biblical Literature 10.

Netherlands: Brill, 2002.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. Downers Grove, IL:

InterVarsity Press, 1970.

Harrison, Everett F. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids,

MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1971.

Hillyer, Norman. New International Biblical Commentary: 1 and 2

Peter, Jude. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1994.

Luther Martin. Commentary on Peter & Jude. Grand Rapids, MI:

Kregel Classics, 1990.

Manton Thomas. The Crossway Classic Commentary: Jude. Wheaton,

IL: Crossway Books, 1999.

Lenski, R. C. H. I and II Epistles of Peter, the three Epistles of John,

and the Epistle of Jude. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing

House, 1966.

Lucas, Dick & Green, Christopher. The Bible Speaks Today: The

Message of 2 Peter & Jude- The Promise of His Coming. Leicester,

England/Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1995.

Perkins, Pheme. Peter: Apostle for the Whole Church. Minneapolis,

MN: Fortress Press, 2000.

Stein, Robert H. Studying the Synoptic Gospels: Origin and

Interpretation. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2001.

Terry, Milton S. Biblical Hermeneutics: A Treatise on the

Interpretation of the Old and New Testaments. Grand Rapids, MI:

Academic Books, n.d.

Wuest, Keneth S. In These Last Days: II Peter, I, II, III John, and Jude

in the Greek New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: William B.

Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1954.