Hey Jude! (Jude 1: 1 - 25)

[paradox3]

Folks like chansen are not altogether wrong that The Bible is not always helpful when you try to do the right thing.

Agreed. Actually reading the Bible carefully can be quite eye opening.

 

[Luce NDs]

Agreed. Actually reading the Bible carefully can be quite eye opening.

Apocalyptic in some interpretations is a shocking event ... thus it strikes like a slither NG -ite -m ...

Many never get that you shouldn't say never because of the extent of the concept ... of extents that you can't see from here ... spatial thoughts are a huge domain ... mores to ruminate on than folk care to chew as tough fabric! Raw hide? Because of the naked virtue ... shame for what's denied ...

 

[paradox3]

Apocalyptic in some interpretations is a shocking event ...

Jesus said it was going to come like a thief in the night. His core teaching was to repent and be ready.

It feels to me like Jude has upped the ante quite a bit.

 

[Luce NDs]

Jesus said it was going to come like a thief in the night. His core teaching was to repent and be ready.

It feels to me like Jude has upped the ante quite a bit.

Prepare for Nacht Mares, Black Horses and such that could thunder through the open spots in the head ... disturbing your desires? Tou may not be able to see the black horse approaching in the night ... but it is there among the white, red and golden one ... one layer squeezed between the blue and green ... all going round in a brilliant flash! Clears the nebulous Ciel NG! The nuances drop into the veil or vale ... great cover there (shrine, chaple) like a stilled place of appreciation of whats nature being crammed into the unnatural ... that's headmon! That's my story even if you deny it ... in a tizzy it goes round ...

Under such conditions can one venture to say they have control of the future? Like the old tome ... I have doubts! Living with flawed humans is in sane ... the sane (healthy) are out there waiting ... on the fringe!

 

[paradox3]

Prepare for Nacht Mares, Black Horses and such that could thunder through the open spots in the head ...

Jude tells us that the "certain men" have defiled the flesh, rejected authority and insulted the glorious ones as a result of their dreams. (v. 8)

 

[jimkenney12]

I wonder if Jude was responding to a report by one person or several people. All we can be certain of are the accusations that were made by someone and his response to those accusations.

 

[jimkenney12]

How did they infiltrate the community? How did their behaviour succeed in becoming the problem it was? Is this a caution against being too inclusive or welcoming?

 

[paradox3]

Peter is just as convinced about false teachers in 2 Peter chapters 2 & 3.

The content is very similar to Jude. There has been speculation that one of the writers copied the other.

Peter offers:

They are illustrations of the true proverb: "A dog returns to its own vomit" and "A sow, after washing herself, wallows in the mire." (2 Peter: 2: 22)

 

[paradox3]

How did they infiltrate the community? How did their behaviour succeed in becoming the problem it was? Is this a caution against being too inclusive or welcoming?

Jude says they secretly slipped in. Peter says they arose among the people.

 

[jimkenney12]

Is this a problem in one community or is it a problem across the network of communities of followers of the way? The condemnation of behaviours is clear. The condemnation of denying Jesus is clear but I do not have a clear understanding of what that means. Was it a denial of his divinity or authority or legitimacy? Was it a denial of his existence? Was it a denial of his resurrection? If these men are so at odds to Jesus, how did they get in the community?

So many unanswerable questions.

 

[paradox3]

What meaning (if any) does Jude hold for the church today?

 

[Mystic]

I can find no reference in the Old testament or New Testament that we are to pray to the Holy Spirit...(possibly in Ezekiel 37:9) where the Holy Spirit is directly addressed.
We are to pray to the Father in the N.T. (only) and OT (primarily).

If you read my whole post, you'd realize that "praying in the Spirit" is not praying to the Spirit; rather it is Spirit-directed prayer in which the Spirit merges with your ego and prays through you. It is this bond with the Holy Spirit that makes praying in the Spirit so powerful and helps make Pentecostalism the fastest growing religious movement in the world.

 

[Mendalla]

Is this a problem in one community or is it a problem across the network of communities of followers of the way? The condemnation of behaviours is clear. The condemnation of denying Jesus is clear but I do not have a clear understanding of what that means. Was it a denial of his divinity or authority or legitimacy? Was it a denial of his existence? Was it a denial of his resurrection? If these men are so at odds to Jesus, how did they get in the community?

So many unanswerable questions.

It's one of the problems with using it as a source for anything. We are missing the original context and likely have no way to recover it. The fact that a similar passage appears in 2 Peter just means that these problems were likely coming in multiple places, which is hardly surprising given the fluid nature of the early Christian movement. Doctrine was far from solidified, too, so were they expressing "heretical" opinions or ones that would actually become doctrine a couple centuries later? In the early period, the line between doctrine and heresy seems to have been as much a matter of opinion as anything solid, at least from some of what I have read and watched dealing with that era.

The scene in Monty Python's The Life of Brian where various groups of Brian followers start arguing about following his "gourd" or his "shoe" comes to mind:

 

[Mystic]

And 7 specifically cites sexual immorality and specifically Sodom and Gomorrah, which the conservative crowd always tend to assume means "gay sex", though other interpretations have been suggested.

Not "gay sex"--heterosexual rape intended to humiliate strangers, a common practice in antiquity.

 

[Mendalla]

Not "gay sex"--heterosexual rape intended to humiliate strangers, a common practice in antiquity.

Which is what I was referring to by other interpretations. Sadly, not everyone accepts this interpretation as we do. "Sodomy" is still a crime in some jurisdictions, explicitly tying anal sex to the sins of Sodom.

 

[paradox3]

Pinning down doctrine into creeds has proven rather difficult over the centuries. Our denomination's latest stab at it (the Song of Faith) is a rambling mess but I am going to revisit it soon. My minister recommended it to me so I guess she's a fan.

Some of us jokingly called it the Long of Faith on the first WC.

I like A New Creed. It leaves a lot open to interpretation. How exactly does Jesus "reconcile and make new" for example?

 

[Mystic]

Is this a problem in one community or is it a problem across the network of communities of followers of the way? The condemnation of behaviours is clear. The condemnation of denying Jesus is clear but I do not have a clear understanding of what that means. Was it a denial of his divinity or authority or legitimacy? Was it a denial of his existence? Was it a denial of his resurrection? If these men are so at odds to Jesus, how did they get in the community?

So many unanswerable questions.

The early Church Fathers rail against the sex orgies of libertine Gnostics og the 2nd century. Most Gnostics, though, were ascetics. Libertine Gnostics imagined that they were living out a grace-based, nonlegalistic lifestyle. as hard as that is to believe.

 

[paradox3]

Why does this thread keep returning to questions of sexuality?

Can we talk about mercy?

Does Jude have anything to say to the church today or does his letter just serve as a prelude to Revelation?

 

[Mendalla]

Pinning down doctrine into creeds has proven rather difficult over the centuries. Our denomination's latest stab at it (the Song of Faith) is a rambling mess but I am going to revisit it soon. My minister recommended it to me so I guess she's a fan.

Some of us jokingly called it the Long of Faith on the first WC.

I like A New Creed. It leaves a lot open to interpretation. How exactly does Jesus "reconcile and make new" for example?

Oh Lord, the Song of Faith is more like a book than a creed. I read it when I found out about its existence (it postdates me leaving the UCCan) and, yeah, rambling doesn't do it justice. The New Creed is wonderfully tight by comparison. Which, to be fair, is true of some of the old creeds, too. I can admire the form without having to accept the content.

The Nicene by way of example:

We believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
begotten from the Father before all ages,
God from God,
Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made;
of the same essence as the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven;
he became incarnate by the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and was made human.
He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered and was buried.
The third day he rose again, according to the Scriptures.
He ascended to heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again with glory
to judge the living and the dead.
His kingdom will never end.

And we believe in the Holy Spirit,
the Lord, the giver of life.
He proceeds from the Father and the Son,
and with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified.
He spoke through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic church.
We affirm one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look forward to the resurrection of the dead,
and to life in the world to come. Amen.

But the question is, was "Song of Faith" ever really meant as a "creed" or is it meant as a broader statement of faith? The latter would explain the form.

 

[paradox3]

But the question is, was "Song of Faith" ever really meant as a "creed" or is it meant as a broader statement of faith? The latter would explain the form.

Well it's officially doctrine now. Maybe creed is the wrong word.