Jude 1:11

Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(11) Three examples of similar wickedness: Cain, Balaam, Korah.

Woe unto them!—An echo of Christ’s denunciations in the first three Gospels, whereby the description of these evil-doers takes for the moment a denunciatory form. The past tenses immediately following are owing to the writer’s placing himself in thought at the moment when these men reap the consequences of their sins: their punishment is so certain, that he regards it as having come.

In the way of Cain.—The first great criminal; the first to outrage the laws of nature. Explanations to the effect that these libertines followed Cain by murdering men’s souls by their corrupt doctrine, or by persecuting believers, and other suggestions still more curious, are needlessly far-fetched. John 8:44, and 1John 3:15, are not strictly apposite: these ungodly men may have hated and persecuted the righteous, but St. Jude does not tell us so. Sensuality is always selfish, but by no means always ill-natured or malignant.

Ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward.—The Greek for “ran greedily” literally means “they were poured out in streams;” the Greek for “error” may also mean “deception.” Hence three renderings are possible: (1) as the Authorised version; (2) “they ran greedily after the deception of Balaam’s reward;” (3) “they were undone by the deception of Balaam’s reward.” The first is best. “Reward” in the Greek is the genitive of price. Comp. “the rewards of divination” (Numbers 22:7); “they hired against thee Balaam” (Deuteronomy 23:4; Nehemiah 13:2). Here, again, far-fetched explanations may be avoided. The allusion lies on the surface—running counter to God’s will from interested motives. Possibly, there may also be some allusion to Balaam’s causing the Israelites to be seduced into licentiousness (Revelation 2:14).

Perished in the gainsaying of Core—i.e., through gainsaying like that of Korah; referring to his speaking against Moses in the revolutionary opposition which he headed. These libertines, like Korah; treated sacred ordinances with contempt.

The triplet in this verse, like that in Jude 1:8, is parallel to the three examples of God’s vengeance, Jude 1:5-7. Cain, like the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, outraged the laws of nature; Balaam, like the impure angels, despised the sovereignty of God; Korah, like those who disbelieved the report of the spies, spoke evil of dignities.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

1:8-16 False teachers are dreamers; they greatly defile and grievously wound the soul. These teachers are of a disturbed mind and a seditious spirit; forgetting that the powers that be, are ordained of God, Ro 13:1. As to the contest about the body of Moses, it appears that Satan wished to make the place of his burial known to the Israelites, in order to tempt them to worship him, but he was prevented, and vented his rage in desperate blasphemy. This should remind all who dispute never to bring railing charges. Also learn hence, that we ought to defend those whom God owns. It is hard, if not impossible, to find any enemies to the Christian religion, who did not, and do not, live in open or secret contradiction to the principles of natural religion. Such are here compared to brute beasts, though they often boast of themselves as the wisest of mankind. They corrupt themselves in the things most open and plain. The fault lies, not in their understandings, but in their depraved wills, and their disordered appetites and affections. It is a great reproach, though unjust to religion, when those who profess it are opposed to it in heart and life. The Lord will remedy this in his time and way; not in men's blind way of plucking up the wheat with the tares. It is sad when men begin in the Spirit, and end in the flesh. Twice dead; they had been once dead in their natural, fallen state; but now they are dead again by the evident proofs of their hypocrisy. Dead trees, why cumber they the ground! Away with them to the fire. Raging waves are a terror to sailing passengers; but when they get into port, the noise and terror are ended. False teachers are to expect the worst punishments in this world and in that to come. They glare like meteors, or falling stars, and then sink into the blackness of darkness for ever. We have no mention of the prophecy of Enoch in any other part or place of Scripture; yet one plain text of Scripture, proves any point we are to believe. We find from this, that Christ's coming to judge was prophesied of, as early as the times before the flood. The Lord cometh: what a glorious time will that be! Notice how often the word ungodly is repeated. Many now do not at all refer to the terms godly, or ungodly, unless it be to mock at even the words; but it is not so in the language taught us by the Holy Ghost. Hard speeches of one another, especially if ill-grounded, will certainly come into account at the day of judgment. These evil men and seducers are angry at every thing that happens, and never pleased with their own state and condition. Their will and their fancy, are their only rule and law. Those who please their sinful appetites, are most prone to yield to ungovernable passions. The men of God, from the beginning of the world, have declared the doom denounced on them. Such let us avoid. We are to follow men only as they follow Christ.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Woe unto them! - See Matthew 11:21.

For they have gone in the way of Cain - Genesis 4:5-12. That is, they have evinced disobedience and rebellion as he did; they have shown that they are proud, corrupt, and wicked. The apostle does not specify the points in which they had imitated the example of Cain, but it was probably in such things as these - pride, haughtiness, the hatred of religion, restlessness under the restraints of virtue, envy that others were more favored, and a spirit of hatred of the brethren (compare 1 John 3:15) which would lead to murder.

And ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward - The word rendered "ran greedily" - (ἐξεχύθησαν exechuthēsan,) from ἐκχέω ekcheō - means to pour out; and then, when spoken of persons, that they are "poured out," or that they "rush tumultuously" on an object, that is, that they give themselves up to anything. The idea here is, that all restraint was relaxed, and that they rushed on tumultuously to any course of life that promised gain. See the notes at 2 Peter 2:15.

And perished - They perish, or they will perish. The result is so certain, that the apostle speaks of it as if it were already done. The thought, seems to have lain in his mind in this manner: he thinks of them as having the same character as Korah, and then at once thinks of them as destroyed in the same manner, or as if it were already done. They are "identified" with him in their character and doom. The word rendered "perish" (ἀπόλλυμι apollumi) is often used to denote future punishment, Matthew 10:28, Matthew 10:39; Matthew 18:14; Mark 1:24; Luke 13:3, Luke 13:5; John 3:15-16; John 10:28; 2 Thessalonians 2:10; 2 Peter 3:9.

In the gainsaying of Core - Of Korah, Numbers 16:1-30. The word "gainsaying" here means properly contradiction, or speaking against; then controversy, question, strife; then contumely, reproach, or rebellion. The idea here seems to be, that they were guilty of insubordination; of possessing a restless and dissatisfied spirit; of a desire to rule, etc.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

11. Woe—See on [2668]2Pe 2:14, "cursed children."

Cain—the murderer: the root of whose sin was hatred and envy of the godly, as it is the sin of these seducers.

ran greedily—literally, "have been poured forth" like a torrent that has burst its banks. Reckless of what it costs, the loss of God's favor and heaven, on they rush after gain like Balaam.

perished in the gainsaying of Core—(compare Note, see on [2669]Jude 12). When we read of Korah perishing by gainsaying, we read virtually also of these perishing in like manner through the same: for the same seed bears the same harvest.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Woe unto them! This is either a lamenting the misery that was to come upon them, or a foretelling it come, not a wishing that it might: see Matthew 11:21 1 Corinthians 9:16.

For they have gone in the way of Cain; followed his manners, and fallen under his punishment. Their likeness to Cain, both as to their actions and the event of them, seems to be implied in this and the following clause, as well as it is plainly in the last. Cain hated his brother, and slew him; they hate their brethren, and by their pernicious doctrines and deceits, murder their souls, and probably stir up persecution against their persons.

And ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward; covetousness, to which being excessively addicted, or, as the Greek implies, poured out, they did for the sake of filthy lucre corrupt the doctrine of Christ: see 2 Peter 2:15.

And perished in the gainsaying of Core: Korah, (whom he here names alone, as being the ringleader of the rebellion, in which others joined with him, Numbers 16:1), affecting the priesthood, rose up seditiously against Moses and Aaron, and perished in the attempt. These imitate him in their rebellion against Christ himself, the state and order of whose church they seditiously disturb, as well as that of the civil state, in despising dominion, and speaking evil of dignities, and that to their own destruction.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Woe unto them,.... This may be considered as a commiseration of their case, or as a denunciation of deserved punishment, or as a prediction of what would befall them. The Arabic version prefaces these words with an address to the saints, "O my beloved": that what was about to be said might be attended to, as a caution and instruction to them,

For they have gone in the way of Cain; which was a way of envy, for Cain envied the acceptance of his brother's gift, and that notice which the Lord took of him; so these men envied the gifts bestowed on Christ's faithful ministers, and the success that attended their labours, and the honour that was put upon them by Christ, and that was given them by the churches; which shows, that they were destitute of grace, and particularly of the grace of charity, or love, which envies not, and that they were in an unregenerate estate, and upon the brink of ruin and destruction. Moreover, the way of Cain was a way of hatred, and murder of his brother, which his envy led him to; so these men hated the brethren, persecuted them unto death, as well as were guilty of the murder of the souls of men, by their false doctrine: to which may be added, as another of Cain's ways, in consequence of the former, absence from the presence of God, or the place of his worship; so these men separated themselves, and went out from the churches, forsook the assembling together with them, and so might expect Cain's punishment, to be driven from the face of God; yea, to be bid go as cursed into everlasting burnings:

and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward; Balaam's error, which he himself was guilty of, was covetousness, or an immoderate love of money, 2 Peter 2:15; which, as it is the root of all evil, is the bane of religion, and the source of heresy, and what the false teachers were greatly addicted to; and where it prevails, it is insatiable, and not to be checked and stopped, as in these men; and is a damnable sin, and excludes from the kingdom of heaven, as well as is dishonourable to religion; hence such particular notice is taken of it, lest it be found in a minister of the word: this character exactly agrees with the followers of Simon Magus. The error which Balaam led others into, was both idolatry and adultery, Revelation 2:14, which these false teachers were both guilty of themselves, and taught others, and indulged them therein; and which both teachers and people ran greedily after. Balaam is one of the four private persons, who, according to the Jews, shall have no part or portion in the world to come (w),

And perished in the gainsaying of Core: the same with Korah, Numbers 16:1. The Septuagint there call him Core, and so does Philo the Jew (x), as the apostle does here, and by Josephus he is called (y) "Cores": now the gainsaying or contradiction of these men was like Korah's; as his was against Moses, the ruler of the people, so theirs was against magistracy, Jde 1:8; which was gainsaying God's own ordinance, and a contradiction of that which is for the good of men; the ground of which contradiction was love of liberty, and their own lusts; and, generally speaking, men perish in their factions and rebellions against good and lawful magistrates: also, as Korah gainsayed Aaron, the priest of the Lord, so these men contradicted and opposed the ministers of Christ, whom they would have thrust out in order to put in themselves, and whose persons they reviled, and contradicted their doctrines, which to do is of dangerous consequence; and they might be said to perish in his gainsaying, as a type and example of their destruction, which would be swift and sudden, as his was; and to denote the certainty of it. So the Jews (z) say of Korah and his company, that they shall never ascend, or rise up and stand in judgment, and that they shall have no part or portion in the world to come (a),

(w) Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 11. sect. 2.((x) De Profugis, p. 471. (y) Antiqu. l. 4. c. 2. sect. 2.((z) Misn. Sanhedrin, ib. sect. 2. Yalkut Simeoni, par. 2. fol. 89. 3. Sanhed. ib. sect. 3.((a) T. Hieros. Sanhedrin, fol. 29. 3.

Geneva Study Bible

{9} Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain, and ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.

(9) He foretells their destruction, because they resemble or proclaim Cain's shameless malice, Balaam's filthy covetousness, and to be short, Core's seditious and ambitious head.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Jude 1:11. The author interrupts his description of these ungodly men by a denunciation on them, which he grounds by characterizing them after the example of the ungodly in the O. T. (comp. 2 Peter 2:15 ff.).

οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς] The same denunciation frequently occurs in the discourses of Jesus: “at once a threatening and a strong disapproval” (de Wette). With this οὐαί Jude indicates the judgment into which the Antinomians have fallen; it refers back to Jude 1:5-7; Wiesinger incorrectly understands it only as a mere “exclamation of pain and abhorrence.”[30] This denunciation of woe does not occur with an apostle; frequently in the O. T.

ὅτι τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Κάϊν ἐπορεύθησαν] On the phrase: τῇ ὁδῷ τινος πορεύεσθαι, comp. Acts 14:16. (Acts 9:31 : πορ. τῷ φόβῳ τ. κυρίου.) τῇ ὁδῷ is to be understood locally (see Meyer on the above passages), not “instrumentally” (Schott), which does not suit ἐπορεύθησαν.

ἐπορεύθησαν; preterite (Luther and others translate it as the present), because Jude represents the judgment threatened in οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς as fulfilled (de Wette-Brückner). Schott incorrectly explains it: “they have set out, set forth.” Many expositors find the similarity with Cain to consist in this, that whereas he murdered his brother, these by seduction of the brethren are guilty of spiritual murder; so Oecumenius, Estius, Grotius (Cain fratri vitam caducam ademit; illi fratribus adimunt aeternam), Calovius, Hornejus, Schott, and others. But this conversion into the spiritual is arbitrary, especially as the desire of seduction in these men is not specially brought forward by Jude. Other expositors, adhering to the murder committed by Cain, think on the persecuting zeal of these false teachers against believers; so Nicolas de Lyra: sequuntur mores et studia latronis ex invidia et avaritia persequentes sincerioris theologiae studiosos. As the later Jews regarded Cain as a symbol of moral scepticism, so Schneckenburger supposes that Jude would here reproach his opponents with this scepticism; but there is also no indication of this in the context. De Wette stops at the idea that Cain is named as “the archetype of all wicked men;” so also Arnaud[31] and Hofmann; but this is too general. Brückner finds the point of resemblance in this, that as Cain out of envy, on account of the favour shown to Abel, resisting the commandment and warning of God, slew his brother, so these false teachers resisted God, and that from envy of the favour shown to believers. But in the context there is no indication of the definite statement “from envy.” It is more in correspondence with the context to find the tertium compar. in this, that Cain in spite of the warning of God followed his own wicked lusts; Fronmüller: “The point of comparison is acting on the selfish impulses of nature, in contempt of the warnings of God.”

καὶ τῇ πλάνῃ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ μισθοῦ ἐξεχύθησαν] πλάνη, as a sinful moral error, denotes generally a vicious life averted from the truth; comp. Jam 5:20; 2 Peter 2:18 (Ezekiel 33:16, LXX. translation of פֶּשַׁע). ἐκχεῖσθαι in the middle, literally, to issue forth out of something, construed with εἴς τι; figuratively, to rush into something, to give oneself up with all his might to something (Clemens Alexandrinus, p. 491, 3; ΕἸς ἩΔΟΝῊΝ ἘΚΧΥΘΈΝΤΕς; several proof passages in Wahl, Elsner, Wetstein); it is less suitable to explain the verb according to Psalm 73:2, where the LXX. have ἘΞΕΧΎΘΗ as a translation of שֻׁפְּכוּ = to slip (Grotius: errare). The dative τῇ πλάνῃ is = εἰς τὴν πλάνην; Schott incorrectly explains it as dativus instrumentalis, since ἐξεχύθησαν requires a statement for the completion of the idea. The genitive μισθοῦ is, with Winer, p. 194 [E. T. 258], to be translated: for reward (see Grotius in loco); so that the meaning is: “they gave themselves up for a reward (i.e. for the sake of earthly advantage, thus from covetousness; Luther: ‘for the sake of enjoyment’) to the sin of Balaam;” thus most interpreters, also Brückner, Wiesinger, Hofmann. De Wette, on the contrary, after the example of Erasmus, Vatablus, and others, explains ΒΑΛΑΆΜ as a genitive dependent on ΤΟῦ ΜΙΣΘΟῦ; the dative Τῇ ΠΛΆΝῌ, as = by means of the error; and ἘΞΕΧΎΘΗΣΑΝ as an intransitive verb = “to commit excesses, to give vent to.” Accordingly, he translates the passage as follows: “By (by means of) the error (seduction) of the reward of Balaam, they have poured themselves out (in vice).” So also Hornejus: deceptione mercedis, qua deceptus fuit Balaam, effusi sunt.[32] But this construction is extremely harsh, the ideas πλάνη and ἘΞΕΧΎΘΗΣΑΝ are arbitrarily interpreted, and the whole sentence, so interpreted, would be withdrawn from the analogy of the other two with which it is co-ordinate.[33] Schott construes the genitive with ΠΛΆΝῌ, whilst he designates it “as an additional, and, as it were, a parenthetically added genitive for the sake of precision,” and for this he supplies a ΠΛΆΝῌ: “the error of Balaam, which was an error determined by gain.” This construction, it is true, affords a suitable sense, but it is not linguistically justified: it is entirely erroneous to take ΜΙΣΘΟῦ as in apposition to ΒΑΛΑΆΜ = Ὃς ΜΙΣΘῸΝ ἨΓΆΠΗΣΕΝ, 2 Peter 2:15 (Fronmüller, Steinfass).

De Wette, chiefly from Revelation 2:14, finds the point of resemblance in this, that “Balaam as a false prophet and a seducer to unchastity and idolatry, and contrary to the will of God, went to Balak, and that he is also particularly considered as covetous and mercenary.” But there is no indication that the men of whom Jude speaks enticed others to idolatry. Hofmann observes that this clause calls the sin of those described as “a devilish conduct against the people of God, the prospect of a rich reward being too alluring to Balaam to prevent him entering into the desires of Balak to destroy the people of God;” but in this explanation also a reference is introduced not indicated by the context. That Jude had primarily in view the covetousness of Balaam, ΜΙΣΘΟῦ shows; blinded by covetousness, Balaam resisted the will of God; his resistance was his ΠΛΆΝΗ, in which, and in the motive to it, the Antinomians resembled him (Brückner, Wiesinger); whether Jude had also in view the seduction to unchastity (comp. Numbers 31:16; Fronmüller), is at least doubtful; and it is still more doubtful to find the point of resemblance in this, that the Antinomians “had in view a material gain to be obtained by the ruin of the church of God” (Schott).

καὶ τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ τοῦ Κορὲ ἀπώλοντο] ἈΝΤΙΛΟΓΊΑ, contradiction; here, seditious resistance. ἀπώλοντο does not mean that “they lost themselves in the ἈΝΤΙΛ. of Korah,” but “that they perished;” accordingly, Τῇ ἈΝΤΙΛΟΓΊᾼ is the instrumental dative. The point of resemblance is not, with Nicolas de Lyra, to be sought in this, that the opponents of Jude formed propter ambitionem honoris et gloriae sectas erroneas; or, with Hornejus, that they assumed the munus Apostolorum ecclesiae doctorum; or, with Hofmann, that they, as Korah (“whose resistance consisted in his unwillingness to recognise as valid the law of the priesthood of Aaron, on which the whole religious constitution of Israel rested”), “desired to assert a liberty not restricted;” but it consists in the proud resistance to God and His ordinances, which the Antinomians despise. By Schott’s explanation: “that they opposed to the true holiness a holiness of their own invention, namely, the holiness alleged to be obtained by disorderly excess,” a foreign reference is introduced.[34] The gradation of the ideas ὁδός, πλάνη, ἀντιλογία, in respect of definiteness, is not to be denied; but there is also a gradation of thought, for although the point about which Cain, Balaam, and Korah are named is one and the same, namely, resistance to God, yet this appears in the most distinct manner in the case of Korah.

[30] Hofmann correctly observes: “οὐαί has evil in view, whether it be in the tone of compassion which bewails it (Matthew 23:15), or of indignation which imprecates it (Matthew 11:21).” As not the first but the second is the case here, Hofmann should not have rejected the explanation of de Wette.

[31] Arnaud: J. compare seulement, d’une manière très générale, ses adversaires à Cain, sous le rapport de la méchanceté.

[32] Calvin: dixit (Ap.), instar Bileam mercede fuisse deceptos, quia pietatis doctrinam turpis lucri gratia adulterant; sed metaphora, qua utitur, aliquanto plus exprimit; dixit enim effusos esse, quia scilicet instar aquae diffluentis projecta sit eorum intemperies.

[33] “The parallelism of the three clauses requires that τῇ πλάνῃ ἐξεχύθησυν should remain together, accordingly the genitive is equivalent to ἀντὶ μισθοῦ” (Stier).

[34] Ritschl finds the point of resemblance between the Antinomians and the three named in this, “that they, as these, undertook to worship God in a manner rejected by Him.” But it is erroneous that “the Korahites exhibited their assumption of the priesthood by the presentation of an offering rejected by God;” it is incorrect that by ὁδός is indicated “the religious conduct” of Cain; and it is incorrect that the utterance of the curse willed by Balaam is to be considered as a religious transaction. Moreover, in the description of the Antinomians there is no trace indicating that their view was directed to a particular kind of worship.

Expositor's Greek Testament

Jude 1:11. οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς, ὅτι τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Καὶν ἐπορεύθησαν. For the use of the aorist see note on Jude 1:4. παρεισεδύησαν: for the phrase cf. Blass, Gr. p. 119, and 2 Peter 2:15, ἐξακολουθήσαντες τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Βαλαάμ. The phrase οὐαί, so common in Enoch, especially in cc. 94 to 100, and in the Gospels and Apocalypse, occurs in the epistles only here and in 1 Corinthians 9:16. The woe is grounded on the fate which awaits those who walk in the steps of Cain, Balaam and Korah. In 2 Peter Balaam is the only one referred to of the three leaders of wickedness here named by Jude. Cain, with Philo, is the type of selfishness ([791]. 1 p. 206), πᾶς φίλαυτος ἐπίκλησιν Καὶν εὕρηκεν (quoted by Schneckenb. p. 221); he is named as a type of jealous hate in 1 John 3:2; 1 John 3:12. ἵνα ἀγαπῶμεν ἀλλήλους. οὐ καθὼς Καὶν ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἦν καὶ ἔσφαξεν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ· καὶ χάριν τίνος ἔσφαξεν αὐτὸν; ὅτι τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ πονηρὰ ἦν, τὰ δὲ τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ δίκαια, of unbelief in Hebrews 11:4, πίστει πλείονα θυσίαν Ἄβελ παρὰ Καὶν προσήνεγκεν τῷ Θεῷ, cf. Philo, De Agric. 1 M. 300 f., and Targ. Jer. on Genesis 4:7, cited by Schneckenburger, in which Cain is represented as saying “non est judicium, nec judex, nec est aliud saeculum, nee dabitur merces bona justis, nec ultio sumetur de improbis,” etc. There seems no reason why we should not regard Cain here as symbolising the absence both of faith and of love, cf. 1 John 3:23. Euthym. Zig. gives an allegorical explanation, καὶ αὐτοὶ ἀδελφοκτόνοι εἰσί, διʼ ὧν διδάσκουσι τὰς τῶν ἀπατωμένων ψυχὰς ἀποκτείνοντες. Cain and Korah are said to have been objects of special reverence with a section of the Ophite heresy, which appears to have been a development of the Nicolaitans (Epiphan. Pan. i. 3, 37, 1, οἱ Ὀφῖται τὰς προφάσεις εἰλήφασιν ἀπὸ τῆς Νικολάου καὶ Γνωστικῶν καὶ τῶν πρὸ τούτων αἱρέσεων). They held that the Creator was evil, that the serpent represented the divine Wisdom, that Cain and his successors were champions of right (Epiphan. ib. 38, 1, οἱ Καιανοί φασι τὸν Καὶν ἐκ τῆς ἰσχυροτέρας Δυνάμεως ὑπάρχειν καὶ τῆς ἄνωθεν αὐθεντίας, and boast themselves to be of kin to Cain, καὶ τῶν Σοδομιτῶν καὶ Ἠσαῦ καὶ Κορέ, see too Iren. i. 51, Clem. Str. vii. § 108.)

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

τῇ πλάνῃ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ μισθοῦ ἐξεχύθησαν. Every word in this clause is open to question. The passive of ἐκχέω, to “pour out,” is used to express either the onward sweeping movement of a great crowd, or the surrender to an overpowering motive on the part of an individual = effusi sunt,[792] as in Sir 37:29, μὴ ἐκχυθῇς ἐπʼ ἐδεσμάτων, Test. Reub. 1, πορνεία ἐν ᾖ ἐξεχύθην, Clem. Al. Str. ii. p. 491, εἰς ἡδονήν, τράγων δικήν, ἐκχυθέντες καθηδυπαθοῦσιν, Plut. V. Ant. 21, εἰς τὸν ἡδυπαθῆ καὶ ἀκόλαστον βίον ἐκκεχυμένος. Such an interpretation seems not quite consistent with μισθοῦ, which implies cool self-interest. That covetousness, αἰσχροκέρδεια, was a common motive with false teachers is often implied or asserted by St. Paul and St. Peter in the passages quoted below: and this, we know, was the case with Balaam; but would it be correct to say either of him or of his followers, here condemned by St. Jude, that they ran greedily into (or “in”) error for reward? Perhaps we should understand it rather of a headstrong will breaking down all obstacles, refusing to listen to reason or expostulation, as Balaam holds to his purpose in spite of the divine opposition manifested in such diverse ways. Then comes the difficulty, how are we to understand the dative πλάνῃ, and what is the reference in the word? Should we take πλάνῃ as equivalent to εἰς πλάνην (Winer, p. 268)? This is the interpretation given by Lucifer p. 219, “vae illis quoniam in seductionem B. mercede effusi sunt,” but it is a rare use of the dative, and it seems more natural to explain πλάνῃ by the preceding ὁδῷ (dative of the means or manner), which is used in the same collocation in 2 Peter 2:15. What then are we to understand by “they were hurried along on the line of Balaam’s error”? What was his error? From Numbers 22:1-41; Numbers 25:1-3; Numbers 31:16, Nehemiah 13:2, Μωαβῖται ἐμισθώσαντο ἐπʼ αὐτὸν τὸν Βαλαὰμ καταράσασθαι, Jos. Ant. iv. 6, 6, we learn that B[793] was induced by Balak’s bribe to act against his own convictions and eventually to tempt Israel to fornication. This then is the error or seduction by which he leads them astray.[794] In rabbinical literature Balaam is a sort of type of false teachers (Pirke Aboth, Jude 1:19, with Taylor’s n.). Some suppose the name Nicolaitan (Revelation 2:6) to be formed from the Greek equivalent to Balaam = “corrupter of the people”; see however the passages quoted from Clem. Al. in the Introduction on Early Heresies. In Revelation 2:14 we read of some in Pergamum that held the teaching of Balaam, ὃς ἐδίδασκεν τῷ Βαλὰκ βαλεῖν σκάνδαλον ἐνώπιον τῶν υἱῶν Ἰσραήλ, φαγεῖν εἰδωλόθυτα καὶ πορνεῦσαι. There is no hint to suggest that the innovators, of whom Jude speaks, favoured idolatry, but they may have prided themselves on their enlightenment in disregarding the rule of the Apostolic Council as to the use of meats offered to idols (cf. 1 Corinthians 8), and perhaps in burning incense in honour of the Emperor, see Ramsay, Expositor for 1904, p. 409, and July, pp. 43–60. On the other hand, Jude continually charges them with moral laxity, and we may suppose that this was combined with claims to prophetic power, and with the covetousness which is often ascribed to the false teachers of the early Church, as in 1 Thessalonians 2:3 f., where Paul asserts of his own ministry that it was οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ … οὔτε γὰρ ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν, οὔτε ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας, οὔτε ζητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων δόξαν, 1 Timothy 3:8-9. διακόνους μὴ διλόγους, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας, μὴ αἰσχροκερδεῖς, ἔχοντας τὸ μυστήριον τῆς πίστεως ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει, Titus 1:7; Titus 1:11 διδάσκοντες ἃ μὴ δεῖ κέρδους χάριν, 1 Peter 5:2. For the gen. μισθοῦ cf. Winer, p. 258, Plat. Rep. ix. 575 B, μισθοῦ ἐπικουροῦσιν, 1 Corinthians 7:23, τιμὴς ἠγοράσθητε.

[792] I do not think the marginal reading in the R.V., “cast themselves away,” is tenable.

[793]. Codex Vaticanus (sæc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.

[794] Zahn understand πλάνη in an active, not a passive sense, as the ruling principle of the πλάνος Balaam, not as the error into which others fell through his seductions. I do not think Jude discriminated between these meanings: πλάνη covers both.

On the whole I understand the passage thus: Balaam went wrong because he allowed himself to hanker after gain and so lost his communion with God. He not only went wrong himself, but he abused his great influence and his reputation as a prophet, to lead astray the Israelites by drawing them away from the holy worship of Jehovah to the impure worship of Baal Peor. So these false teachers use their prophetical gifts for purposes of self-aggrandisement, and endeavour to make their services attractive by excluding from religion all that is strenuous and difficult, and opening the door to every kind of indulgence. See the notes and comments on the parallel passages of 2 Peter in my edition of that Epistle.

τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ τοῦ Κορὲ ἀπώλοντο. For Rorah’s sin see Numbers 16:1 f. and compare, for the same rebellious spirit in the Christian Church, 3 John 1:9-10 (of Diotrephes), Titus 1:10-11. εἰσὶ πολλοὶ ἀνυπότακτοι … οὓς δεῖ ἐπιστομίζειν, Titus 1:16; Titus 3:10-11, 1 Timothy 1:20 (among those who have made shipwreck of the faith mention is made of Hymenaeus and Alexander) οὓς παρέδωκα τῷ Σατανᾷ ἵνα παιδευθῶσιν μὴ βλασφημεῖν, 1 Timothy 6:3-6; 2 Timothy 2:16-18, ὁ λόγος αὐτῶν ὡς γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει, ὧν ἐστιν Ὑμέναιος καὶ φίλητος, οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν, 2 Timothy 2:25; 2 Timothy 4:14, where the opposition of Alexander the coppersmith is noted; but especially 2 Timothy 3:1-9, which presents a close parallel to our passage, referring to a similar resistance to Moses in the case of the apocryphal Jannes and Jambres. For ἀντιλογία see Hebrews 12:3, ἀναλογίσασθε τὸν τοιαύτην ὑπομεμενηκότα ὑπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἀντιλογίαν It is used as a translation of Meribah in Numbers 20:13 al. and (in relation to Korah) in Protev. Jac. 9. μνήσθητι ὅσα ἐποίησεν ὁ Θεὸς τοῖς Δαθάν, Κωρέ, καὶ Ἀβειράμ, πῶς ἐδιχάσθη ἡ γῆ καὶ κατέπιεν αὐτοὺς διὰ τὴν ἀντιλογίαν αὐτῶν.

Rampf draws attention to the climax contained in these examples. The sin of Cain is marked by the words ἐπορεύθησαν ὁδῷ, that of Balaam the gentile prophet by ἐξεχύθησαν πλάνῃ, that of the Levite Korah by ἀπώλοντο ἀντιλογίᾳ.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

11. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain …] We ask naturally what was the point of comparison. Probably in the case of those who were in the writer’s thoughts, as in most others, “lust” was “hard by hate,” and the false teachers were murderous and malignant, as well as sensual. The reference to Cain in 1 John 3:12 indicates that his name was used to point a moral as to the issue of the “evil works” in the spirit of hatred and of murder. Possibly, however, here also the writer may have had in his thoughts some of the Rabbinic legends which represented Cain as the offspring, not of Adam, but of Sammael, the Evil Spirit, and Eve, and as the parent of other evil spirits (Eisenmenger’s Entdeckt. Judenthum, i. 832, ii. 428), and therefore as connected with the idea of foul and unnatural impurity.

ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward] See notes on 2 Peter 2:15. Here, as there, the main thought connected with the name of Balaam is that of the sin of uncleanness into which the Israelites were led by him.

and perished in the gainsaying of Core] i.e. by a gainsaying which was in its nature identical with that of Korah in Numbers 16. Completing the parallel thus suggested it is obvious that as the false teachers answer to Korah and his company, so the true apostles and prophets of the Church of Christ are thought of as occupying a position like that of Aaron or Moses. The Greek word for “gainsaying” is the LXX. equivalent for the “Meribah” of Numbers 20:13; Numbers 20:24. A strange Rabbinic legend, while it placed the souls of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram in Gehenna, represented them as not tormented there (Eisenmenger, Entdeckt. Judenthum, ii. 342).

Bengel's Gnomen

Jude 1:11. Οὐαὶ, woe!) Jude alone of the apostles, and he in this passage only, threatens a woe, from a threefold reason, which follows immediately. To the same purport, Peter calls them accursed children![4]—ΤΟῦ ΚΆΪΝ, of Cain) the murderer of his brother.—τοῦ Βαλαὰμ, of Balaam) the false prophet.—μισθοῦ) for reward.—ἐξεχύθησαν) they have been poured forth, like a torrent without a bank.—ἀντιλογίᾳ, in the gain saying) מריבה, Septuagint, ἈΝΤΙΛΟΓΊΑ.—ΤΟῦ ΚΟΡῈ, of Korah) thrusting himself into the priesthood.

[4] Accursed children—literally, sons of cursing, maledictionis filios.—T.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 11. - As in 2 Peter 2:15, the darkest passages in the Old Testament history are again appealed to. While Peter, however, refers only to a single instance, Jude introduces three, and prefaces the whole by a Woe! such as the Gospels repeatedly attribute to Christ himself. Woe unto them! for they have gone in the way of Cain; rather, they went in the way of Cain. The phrase is the familiar one for a habitual course of conduct (Psalm 1:1; Acts 9:31; Acts 14:16, etc.). But what is the point of the comparison? Cain is supposed to be introduced as the type of murderous envy, of the persecuting spirit, or of those who live by the impulse of nature, regardless of God or man. In John 3:12 he is the type of all that is opposed to the sense of brotherhood, the murderer of the brother whose righteous works are an offence to him; but in the present passage he is introduced rather as the first and, in some respects, the most pronounced example of wickedness which the Old Testament offers - a wickedness defying God and destroying man. And ran greedily after the error of Balaam for reward. The "error" in view is a life diverted from righteousness and truth. The verb rendered "ran greedily," or "ran riotously," is a very strong one, meaning they "were poured out," and expressing, therefore, the baneful absoluteness of their surrender to the error in question. Otherwise the construction of the sentence is so far from obvious that various renderings are proposed: e.g., "They gave themselves wholly up to the error of Balaam for the sake of a reward;" "By the seduction of Balaam's reward they committed excess of wickedness;" "They went to excess by Balaam's error, which was one determined by gain." The first of these is adopted, with some modification, by the Revised Version, and comes nearest the idea, which is that of men losing themselves in riotous excess for the sake of worldly advantage. The point of the analogy between Balaam and them, therefore, is, not his enticing Israel to idolatry or to immorality, as some understand it, but the covetous spirit which the Old Testament and the New alike attribute to the prophet of Pethor, to which also the Book of Numbers carries back the entire debasement of his character and perversion of his gifts. And perished in the gainsaying of Core. The term which is very fitly rendered "gainsaying" by the English Version here ("contradiction" in the Rhemish Version; "treason" in Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Genevan) denotes properly an opposition expressing itself in words. It is, therefore, aptly applied to the rebellion of Korah and his company, who "gathered themselves together against Moses and against Aaron, and said unto them, Ye take too much upon you," etc. (Numbers 16:3). The analogy between the two cases, consequently, is limited by some to the assertion of an unregulated liberty, the assumption of a self-invented holiness, or the adoption of a worship which was alien to God. It lies in the broader idea of a contemptuous and determined assertion of self against divinely appointed ordinances. Jude 1:11

Vincent's Word Studies

Woe (οὐαὶ)

Often used by our Lord, but never elsewhere except here and in the Apocalypse. The expression in 1 Corinthians 9:16 is different. There the word is not used as an imprecation, but almost as a noun: "Woe is unto me." So Hosea 9:12 (Sept.).

Ran greedily (ἐξεχύθησαν)

Lit., were poured out. Rev., ran riotously. A strong expression, indicating a reckless, abandoned devotion of the energies, like the Latin effundi. So Tacitus says of Maecenas, "he was given up to love for Bathyllus;" lit., poured out into love.

After

Better, as Rev., in; as, "in the way of Cain." The error was their sphere of action. Similarly,

In the gainsaying (τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ)

In the practice of gain-saying like Korah's. Ἀντιλογία is from ἀντί, against, and λέγω, to speak. Hence, literally, contradiction. Gainsay is a literal translation, being compounded of the Anglo-Saxon gegn, which reappears in the German gegen, against, and say.

Korah

Who spake against Moses (Numbers 16:3). The water which Moses brought from the rock at Kadesh was called the water of Meribah (Strife), or, in Septuagint, ὕδωρ ἀντιλογίας, the water of contradiction.