Jude 1:8

Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(8-10) Application of these three instances to the libertines who are now provoking God.

(8) Likewise also.—Rather, Yet in like manner: i.e., in spite of these warnings. These ungodly men were like the unbelievers in the wilderness in denying Christ and scoffing at His promises; they were like the impure angels in leaving that “constitution which is in heaven” (Philippians 3:20) for the base pleasures of earth; they were like the people of Sodom in seeking even these base pleasures by unnatural courses.

These filthy dreamers.—We must add also. “Filthy” is not in the original Greek, nor in any previous English version, but is supplied from the next clause; not rightly, for “dreamers” goes with all three clauses, not with “defile the flesh” only. This being admitted, a number of painful interpretations are at once excluded. “These dreamers also” means these ungodly men, who are deep in the slumber of sin (see Note on Romans 13:11), as well as the three classes of sinners just mentioned. Excepting in Acts 2:17, which is a quotation from Joel 2:28, the word for “dreamer” occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, but is found in the LXX. version of Isaiah 56:10, of dogs that dream and make a noise in their sleep. St. Jude perhaps has this passage in his mind. (See below, second Note on Jude 1:12.) “Dreamers” may perhaps refer to the empty speculations of these men.

Defile the flesh.—Like the inhabitants of the cities of the plain. Some of the earliest forms of Gnosticism, on its antinomian as distinct from its ascetic side, exhibit the licentiousness inveighed against here; e.g., the Simonians, Nicolaitanes, Cainites, Carpocratians.

Despise dominion.—Like the impure angels. Insert “and” before “despise.” The “dominion,” or lordship, is that of Almighty God. Set aside, or reject (Mark 7:9; Luke 7:30; John 12:48), would be better than “despise,” to mark the difference between this and 2Peter 2:10.

Speak evil of dignities.—Like the murmurers in the wilderness. By “dignities,” or glories, are meant unseen powers worthy of reverence. The Greek word is rare in the New Testament; only here, 2Peter 2:10, and 1Peter 1:11. Earthly dignities, whether ecclesiastical or civil, are not included. (Comp. the doctrine of Menander, Irenæus, I. xxiii. 5.)

(9) Yet Michael the archangel.—These libertines allow themselves to use language against celestial beings which even an archangel did not venture to use against Satan. In the Old Testament Michael appears as the guardian angel of the people of Israel, Daniel 10:21; Daniel 12:1; in the New Testament he is mentioned only here and in Revelation 12:7. In the Book of Enoch his meekness is spoken of; he is “the merciful, the patient, the holy Michael,” Enoch 40:8.

He disputed about the body of Moses.—To be understood quite literally: to make “the body of Moses” into a metaphor for the people of Israel, or the Mosaic law, is most unnatural. This passage is the only evidence extant of any such incident or tradition. The nearest approach to it is the Targum of Jonathan on Deuteronomy 34:6, which says that Michael was the appointed guardian of Moses’ grave. According to Origen (De Princip. III. ii. 1) the source of it is a book called the Ascension, or Assumption of Moses. Evidently it is something supposed to be well known to those whom St. Jude is addressing, and it appears to be given as a fact which he believes, though we cannot be sure of this. In any case it does not follow that we are to believe in it as an historical fact. Reverent, and therefore cautious, theories of inspiration need not exclude the possibility of an unhistorical incident being cited as an illustration or a warning. St. Paul makes use of the Jewish legend of the rock following the Israelites in the wilderness as an illustration (1Corinthians 10:4). The strange question, “What did the devil want with the body of Moses?” has been asked, and answered in more ways than one:—(1) to make it an object of idolatry, as the Israelites would be very likely to worship it; (2) to keep it as his own, as that of a murderer, because Moses killed the Egyptian (Exodus 2:12).

Durst not . . .—Out of respect to Satan’s original angelic nature. (Comp. 1Corinthians 6:1.)

A railing accusation.—More literally, a sentence savouring of evil-speaking. Wiclif, “doom”; Tyndale and Cranmer, “sentence”; Rheims, “judgment.” Michael brought no sentence against the devil, but left all judgment to God.

The Lord rebuke thee.—The same rebuke is administered to Satan by the angel of Jehovah, when Satan appears as the adversary of Joshua the high priest, the restorer of the temple and of the daily sacrifice, and one of the Old Testament types of Christ (Zechariah 3:2). It is probable that the tradition here given by St. Jude is derived from this passage in Zechariah, or from a source common to both. We have another reminiscence of Zechariah 3:2 in Jude 1:23.

(10) But these . . .—In strong contrast to the scrupulous reverence of the archangel. “Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.”

Those things which they know not.—The “dignities” of Jude 1:8. This shows that unseen spiritual powers are there meant: these men would know earthly rulers. It is on the unseen that they show their irreverence.

What they know naturally.—The means of gratifying their desires. The two halves of the verse are in emphatic contrast. What they do not know, and cannot know, they abuse by gross irreverence: what they know, and cannot help knowing, they abuse by gross licentiousness. If this Epistle is prior to 2 Peter it is strange that the author of the latter should have neglected so telling an antithesis, and should (from a literary point of view) have so spoiled the passage by his mode of adaptation (2Peter 2:12). If 2 Peter is prior there is nothing strange in St. Jude improving upon the mode of expression. The word for “know” is not the same in both clauses. The word used in “which they know not” is the most general and common word of the kind in Greek, expressing mere perception, and occurring about three hundred times in the New Testament; that used in “what they know naturally” is more definite, and expresses practical experience productive of skill and science; it occurs fourteen times in the New Testament, mostly in the Acts. (Comp. “Paul I know,” Acts 19:15.)

They corrupt themselves.—Or, perhaps, they work their own ruin. Note the tense; not future, but present. The corruption, or ruin, is not a judgment hanging over them; it is already going on.

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

Likewise also - In the same way do these persons defile the flesh, or resemble the inhabitants of Sodom; that is, they practice the same kind of vices. What the apostle says is, that their character resembled that of the inhabitants of Sodom; the example which he adduces of the punishment which was brought on those sinners, leaves it to be clearly inferred that the persons of whom he was speaking would be punished in a similar manner.

These filthy dreamers - The word "filthy" has been supplied by our translators, but there is no good reason why it should have been introduced. The Greek word (ἐνυπνιάζω enupniazō) means to dream; and is applied to these persons as holding doctrines and opinions which sustained the same relation to truth which dreams do to good sense. Their doctrines were the fruits of mere imagination, foolish vagaries and fancies. The word occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, except in Acts 2:17, where it is applied to visions in dreams.

Defile the flesh - Pollute themselves; give indulgence to corrupt passions and appetites. See the notes at 2 Peter 2:10.

Despise dominion - The same Greek word is used here which occurs in 2 Peter 2:10. See the notes at that verse.

And speak evil of dignities - See the notes at 2 Peter 2:10.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

8. also—rather, "In like manner nevertheless" (notwithstanding these warning examples) [Alford].

these … dreamers—The Greek has not "filthy" of English Version. The clause, "these men dreaming" (that is, in their dreams), belongs to all the verbs, "defile," "despise," and "speak evil." All sinners are spiritually asleep, and their carnal activity is as it were a dream (1Th 5:6, 7). Their speaking evil of dignities is because they are dreaming, and know not what they are speaking evil of (Jude 10). "As a man dreaming seems to himself to be seeing and nearing many things, so the natural man's lusts are agitated by joy, distress, fear, and the other passions. But he is a stranger to self-command. Hence, though he bring into play all the powers of reason, he cannot conceive the true liberty which the sons of light, who are awake and in the daylight; enjoy" [Bengel].

defile the flesh—(Jude 7).

dominion—"lordship."

dignities—literally, "glories." Earthly and heavenly dignities.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

Likewise also; notwithstanding so many judgments of God upon others, which should have kept them from the like sins.

These filthy dreamers: either this may be taken properly, and joined to the next clause, defile the flesh; and then it may note the impurity of these wretches, who dreamed of what they loved, and acted over that filthiness in their sleep, to which they were so much addicted when awake: or metaphorically, and so they are called dreamers, as having the sense of their minds overcome and laid asleep by their sensual pleasures; or being like men in a dream, deluded by their absurd, though pleasing imaginations.

Defile the flesh: this notes all those lascivious practices, to which, like the Sodomites, they had given themselves over; and whereby they defiled themselves and others: the lust of uncleanness, as it is in Peter.

Despise dominion; in their minds, judgments, desires, they reject, make void, and abrogate civil government, as a thing not fit to be.

Dominion; not only governors, but government itself.

And speak evil of dignities; either spiritual governors, or rather, civil, called dignities, because of the honourable titles given them, and gifts bestowed on them: see 2 Peter 2:10.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh,.... Which may be literally understood, either of the Jewish doctors, who pretended to be interpreters of dreams, as R. Akiba, R. Lazar, and others (n); or of the false teachers in the apostle's time, and of their filthy dreams, and nocturnal pollutions in them; which sense the Arabic and Ethiopic versions confirm; the former rendering the words thus, "so these retiring in the time of sleep, defile their own flesh"; and the latter thus, "and likewise these, who in their own sleep, pollute their own flesh"; as also of their pretensions to divine assistance and intelligence by dreams; and likewise may be figuratively understood of them; for false doctrines are dreams, and the teachers of them dreamers, Jeremiah 23:25, as are all those doctrines of men that oppose the trinity of persons in the Godhead; that contradict the deity and sonship of Christ; that depreciate any of his offices; that lessen the glory of the person and grace of the Spirit; that cry up the purity, power, and righteousness of human nature, and are contrary to the free grace of God. These arise from the darkness of the understanding, and a spirit of slumber upon them; are the fictions of their own brain, and of their roving imagination; are illusory and deceitful, and are in themselves vanities, and like dreams pass away. And the dreamers of these dreams may be said to "defile the flesh"; since they appear to follow and walk after the dictates of corrupt nature; and because by their unclean practices, mentioned in the preceding verse, they defile the flesh, that is, the body: all sin is of a defiling nature, and all men are defiled with it; but these were notoriously so; and often so it is, that unclean practices follow upon erroneous principles,

Despise dominion; either the government of the world by God, denying or speaking evil of his providence; the Ethiopic version renders it, "they deny their own God", either his being, or rather his providence; or the dominion and kingly power of Christ, to which they cared not to be subject; or rather civil magistracy, which they despised, as supposing it to be inconsistent with their Christian liberty, and rejected it as being a restraint on their lusts; choosing rather anarchy and confusion, that they might do as they pleased, though magistracy is God's ordinance, and magistrates are God's representatives:

and speak evil of dignities; or "glories"; the Arabic version reads, "the God of glory": this is to be understood either of angels, those glorious creatures, called thrones, dominions, &c. or ecclesiastical governors, who are set in the first and highest place in the church, and are the glory of the churches; or else civil magistrates, as before, who are the higher powers, and sit in high places of honour and grandeur. False teachers are injurious to themselves, disturbers of churches, and pernicious to civil government,

(n) T. Hieros. Maaser Sheni, fol. 55. 2, 3.

Geneva Study Bible

Likewise also these {i} filthy dreamers defile the flesh, {6} despise {k} dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

{i} Who are so stupid and void of reason as if all their fears and wits were asleep.

(6) Another most destructive doctrine of theirs, in that they take away the authority of the government and slander them.

(k) It is a greater matter to despise government than the governors, that is to say, the matter itself than the persons.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Meyer's NT Commentary

Jude 1:8. Description of the sins of the false teachers; comp. 2 Peter 2:10.

ὁμοίως] i.e. similarly as Sodom and Gomorrha, etc.

μέντοι] expresses here no contrast (so earlier in this commentary: “notwithstanding the judgment which has come on those cities on account of such sins”), but it serves, as Hofmann correctly observes, appealing to Kühner’s Gramm. II. p. 694, “simply for the strengthening of the expression, putting the emphasis on ὁμοίως; those men, says Jude, actually do the same thing as the Sodomites.”

καὶ οὗτοι] refers back to τινες ἄνθρωποι, Jude 1:4.

ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι] only here and in Acts 2:17, where it is used of prophetical dreams, according to Joel 3:1. This meaning does not here suit, for Bretschneider’s explanation: “falsis oraculis decepti vel falsa oracula edentes,” is wholly arbitrary. Most expositors unite it closely with the following σάρκα μιαίνουσι, and understand it either: de somniis, in quibus corpus polluitur (Vorstius), or of voluptuous dreams, appealing to Isaiah 56:10 (LXX. ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι κοίτην, an inaccurate translation of the Hebrew חֹזִים שֹׁכְבִים), or of unnatural cohabiting (Oecumenius). Jachmann (with whom Brückner agrees) understands it generally = “sunk in sleep, i.e. hurried along in the tumult of the senses,” appealing to the parallel passage, 2 Peter 2:10 (ἐν ἐπιθυμίᾳ). Similarly Calvin: est metaphorica loquutio, qua significat, ipsos tam esse habetes, ut sine ulla verecundia ad omnem turpitudinem se prostituant. But in all these explanations the expression is only referred to the first clause of the following sentence; but this is opposed to the construction: it refers to both clauses,—else it would have been put directly with μιαίνουσι,—and denotes the condition in which and out of which they do those things which are expressed in the following clauses. It is unsatisfactory to keep in view only the negative point of ἐνυπνιάζεσθαι, the want of a clear consciousness (Hornejus: tam insipientes sunt, ut quasi lethargo sopiti non tantum impure vivant, etc.; Arnaud: qui agissent sans savoir ce qu’ils font); the positive point is chiefly to be observed, which consists in living in the arbitrary fancies of their own perverted sense, which renders them deaf to the truths and warnings of the divine word (so in essentials, Stier, Fronmüller, Wiesinger, Schott, Brückner, Hofmann[25]). The reference to Isaiah 29:10, LXX.: πεπότικεν ὑμᾶς κύριος κατανύξεως, is unsuitable (against Beza, Carpzov, and others), as here the discourse is not about a punitive decree of God.

σάρκα μὲν μιαίνουσι] not their flesh, but generally the flesh, both their own and that of others: the thought refers back to Jude 1:7 : ἐκπορνεύσασαι, etc.

κυριότητα δὲ ἀθετοῦσι, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν] announces a new side of their sinful nature. As this verse is in evident connection of thought with Jude 1:10, where the words ὅσα δὲ φυσικῶς … φθείρονται refer back to σάρκα μὲν μιαίν., so κυριότης and δόξαι can only be here such things as suit the words ὅσα οὐκ οἴδασιν. It is thus incorrect to understand them of political powers (Erasmus, Calvin, Grotius, Wolf, Semler, Stier, and others), or of ecclesiastical rulers (Oecumenius[26]), or of human authorities generally, the two words being either taken as designations of concrete persons, or one of them as a pure abstraction: Arnaud: par ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗΤΑ il faut entendre l’autorité en général et par ΔΌΞΑς les dignités quelconques, les hommes méritant, par leur position, le respect et la considération.

Both expressions are to be understood as a designation of supermundane powers. Almost all recent expositors agree in this, although they differ widely in the more definite statement. These different explanations are as follows:—(1) ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς is taken as a designation of God or Christ, and ΔΌΞΑΙ as a designation of the good angels (Ritschl); (2) the good angels are understood in both expressions (Brückner); (3) ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς is understood in the first explanation, but ΔΌΞΑΙ is explained of the evil angels (Wiesinger); (4) both expressions are understood as a designation of the evil angels (Schott). In order first correctly to determine the idea ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς, the relation of Jude 1:8 to what goes before is to be observed. The judgments which have befallen the people (Jude 1:5), the angels (Jude 1:6), and the cities (Jude 1:7), are by Jude adduced as a testimony against the Antinomians (ΟὟΤΟΙ, Jude 1:8) mentioned in Jude 1:4, evidently because these persons are guilty of the same sins on account of which those judgments occurred. Since ΣΆΡΚΑ ΜΙΑΊΝΟΥΣΙ evidently points back to ἘΚΠΟΡΝΕΎΣΑΣΑΙ, Jude 1:7, and further to ἈΣΈΛΓΕΙΑΝ, Jude 1:4, it is most natural to refer ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗΤΑ ἈΘΕΤΟῦΣΙΝ to ΜῊ ΠΙΣΤΕΎΟΝΤΑς, Jude 1:5, and, further, to ΤῸΝ ΜΌΝΟΝ ΔΕΣΠΌΤΗΝ … ἈΡΝΟΎΜΕΝΟΙ, Jude 1:4. Consequently, by ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς—if one takes ΤῸΝ ΜΌΝΟΝ ΔΕΣΠΌΤΗΝ as a designation of God—is to be understood the Godhead; or, if one understands τ. μ. δ. as a predicate to ἸΗΣ. ΧΡ., Christ. If, now, it is assumed that δόξαι is an idea corresponding to ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς, and to be taken along with it, then by it the good angels are to be understood. But it must not be overlooked that the clause ΔΌΞΑς ΔῈ ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΟῦΣΙΝ is separated from the preceding clause by ΔΈ; and that Jude 1:9 leads to a different understanding of ΔΌΞΑΙ. When in Jude 1:9 it is said of the archangel Michael that he dared not ΚΡΊΣΙΝ ἘΠΕΝΕΓΚΕῖΝ ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΊΑς against the devil, this βλασφημίας evidently refers back to ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΟῦΣΙΝ, Jude 1:8, consequently the two ideas ΔΌΞΑς and ΔΙΆΒΟΛΟς are brought together, so that from this the preference must be given to the explanation which understands by ΔΌΞΑς the diabolical powers, or the evil angels. That not only δόξαι, but also ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς, is a designation of evil powers, Schott incorrectly appeals to the fact that in 2 Peter 2:10, and also here, the unchaste, carnal life of the false teachers is connected with their despising or rejection of ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς; for although it is presupposed that the recognition of the reverence for ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς might restrain these men from the abuse of their fleshly nature, yet it does not follow from this that only evil spirits can be meant, since also the recognition of the reverence for the divine power restrains from the abuse of the corporeal senses which were created by God. To the identification of ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗς and ΔΌΞΑΙ—whether good or evil angels are to be understood—not only is the form of the expression opposed, Jude not uniting the two clauses by ΚΑΊ, but, as already remarked, separating them by ΔΈ,[27] but also the difference of the conduct of the Antinomians, whilst they despise (ἀθετοῦσιν; 2 Pet.: καταφρονοῦσιν) the κυριότης, but blaspheme the δόξαι. The clearer this separation and distinction are kept in view, the less reason is there against deriving the exact meaning of δόξαι from Jude 1:9 (2 Peter 2:10 from Jude 1:11), and consequently against understanding by it evil angels (comp. Hofmann); only it must not be affirmed that Jude has used the expression δόξαι as a name for the evil angels as such, but only that, whilst so naming angels generally, he here means the evil angels, as is evident from Jude 1:9. That these may be understood by this designation cannot be denied, especially, as Wiesinger points out, as Paul in Ephesians 6:12 names them αἱ ἀρχαί, αἱ ἐξουσίαι, οἱ κοσμοκράτορες, and says of them that they are ἐν τοῖς ἐπουρανίοις.

ἀθετοῦσιν … βλασφημοῦσιν] The first expression is negative, the second positive; the Antinomians manifested the despising of κυριότης by the carnal licentiousness of their lives, whilst they fancied themselves exempt by χάρις (Jude 1:4) from the duty of obedience to the will of God (or Christ) as the κύριος requiring a holy life; but their blasphemy of the δόξαι consisted in this, that on the reproach of having in their immorality fallen under diabolical powers, they mocked at them as entirely impotent beings.

[25] “Those here spoken of are wakeful dreamers, so that they, when they should perceive with their wakeful senses, have only dreams, and what they dream they esteem as the perception of the wakeful spirit.”

[26] Oecumenius, however, wavers, thinking that by κυριότης may also be understood ἡ τοῦ κατὰ Χριστὸν μυστηρίου τελετή, and by δόξαι also ἡ παλαία διαθήκη καὶ ἡ νέα; on 2 Peter 2:10 he observes: δόξας, ἤτοι τὰς θείας φησὶ δυνάμεις, ἢ καὶ τὰς ἐκκλησιαστικὰς ἀρχάς.

[27] Also in 2 Peter 2:10, δόξας οὐ τρέμουσιν βλασφημοῦντες is separated from κυριότητος καταφρονοῦντας by the intervening τολμηταὶ αὐθάδεις.

REMARK.

According to Ritschl’s opinion, the actions which Jude here asserts of the Antinomians represent directly only the guilt of their forerunners (namely, the Israelites, Jude 1:5; the angels, Jude 1:6; and the Sodomites, Jude 1:7), and his expressions can therefore only be understood in an indirect and metaphorical sense. To this conclusion Ritschl arrives (1) by explaining the second clause of Jude 1:10, that the Antinomians understood relations to be understood spiritually φυσικῶς ὡς τὰ ἄλογα ζῶα, i.e. that they considered the blessings promised in the kingdom of heaven as the blessings of sensual enjoyment; (2) by so understanding the relation of Jude 1:8 to the preceding, that δόξας βλασφ. is to be referred back to Jude 1:7, κυριότ. ἀθετ. to Jude 1:6, and σαρκὰ μιαίν. to Jude 1:5. According to his view, Jude finds the guilt of the Sodomites (

Expositor's Greek Testament

Jude 1:8. ὁμοίως μέντοι καὶ οὗτοι. Notwithstanding these warnings the libertines go on in similar courses.

ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι σάρκα μιαίνουσιν Compare Acts 2:17 (a quotation from Joel 2:28), οἱ πρεσβύτεροι ὑμῶν ἐνυπνίοις ἐνυπνιασθήσονται, of those that see visions: and so Spitta (holding that Jude copied from 2 Peter), would render it here, prefixing the article to make it correspond with the ψευδοπροφῆται and ψευδοδιδάσκαλοι of 2 Peter 2:1. Those who take the opposite view (viz. that 2 Peter was copied from Jude) will see nothing to justify the article. The word is used by Isaiah 56:10 in connexion with the words οὐκ ἔγνωσαν, οὐκ εἰδότες (see Jude 1:10 below), ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι κοίτην φιλοῦντες νυστάξαι, which Delitsch explains “instead of watching and praying to see divine revelations for the benefit of the people, they are lovers of ease talkers in their sleep.

Bengel explains “Hominum mere naturalium indoles graphice admodum descripta est. Somnians multa videre, audire, etc. sibi videtur.” And so Chase “they live in an unreal world of their own inflated imaginations,” comparing the conjectural reading of Colossians 2:18, ἀέρα κενεμβατεύων. This accords with Jude 1:10 : in their delusion and their blindness they take the real for the unreal, and the unreal for the real. The verb is used both in the active and middle by Aristotle, Somm. i. 1, πότερον συμβαίνει ἀεὶ τοῖς καθεύδουσιν ἐνυπνιάζειν, ἀλλ οὐ μνημονεύουσιν; Probl. 30, 14, 2, οἱ ἐν τῷ καθεύδειν ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι ἱσταμένης τῆς διανοίας, καὶ καθʼ ὅσον ἠρεμεῖ, ὀνειρώττουσιν, cf. Artem. Oneir, i. 1. Some interpret of polluting dreams (cf. Leviticus 15); but the word ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι is evidently intended to have a larger scope, covering not merely μιαίνουσιν but ἀθετοῦσιν and βλασφημοῦσιν. We must also interpret μιαίνω here by the ἀσέλγειαν of Jude 1:4, the ἐκπορνεύσασαι and σαρκὸς ἑτέρας of Jude 1:7. This wide sense appears in Titus 1:15, τοῖς μεμιασμένοις οὐδὲν καθαρόν, ἀλλὰ μεμίανται αὐτῶν καὶ ὁ νοῦς καὶ ἡ συνείδησις.

κυριότητα δὲ ἀθετοῦσιν, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν. On first reading one is inclined to take the words κυριότης and δόξαι simply as abstractions. The result of indulgence in degrading lusts is the loss of reverence, the inability to recognise true greatness and due degrees of honour. This would agree with the description of the libertines as sharing in the ἀντιλογία of Korah, as κύματα ἄγρια θαλάσσης, as γογγυσταί uttering hard speeches against God. When we examine however the use of the word κυριότης and the patristic comments, and when we consider the reference to the archangel’s behaviour towards Satan, and the further explanation in Jude 1:10, where the σάρκα of Jude 1:8 is represented by ὅσα φυσικῶς ἐπίστανται, and the phrase κυριότητα ἀθετοῦσιν, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν by ὅσα οὐκ οἴδασιν βλασφημοῦσιν, we seem to require a more pointed and definite meaning, not simply “majesty,” but “the divine majesty,” not simply “dignities,” but “the angelic orders”. Cf. 2 Peter 2:10, Ephesians 1:21 (having raised him from the dead and set him on his right hand) ὑπεράνω πάσης ἀρχῆς καὶ ἐξουσίας καὶ δυνάμεως καὶ κυριότητος, Colossians 1:16, ἐν αὐτῷ ἐκτίσθη τὰ πάντα ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς καὶ ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, τὰ ὁρατὰ καὶ τὰ ἀόρατα, εἴτε θρόνοι εἴτε κυριότητες εἴτε ἀρχαὶ εἴτε ἐξουσίαι, where Lightfoot considers that the words are intended to be taken in their widest sense, including bad and good angels, as well as earthly dignities. In our text, however, it would seem that the word should be understood as expressing the attribute of the true κύριος, cf. Didache, iv. 1 (honour him who speaks the word of God), ὡς κύριον, ὅθεν γὰρ ἡ κυριότης λαλεῖται, ἐκεῖ κύριός ἐστιν, Herm. Sim, Jude 1:6; Jude 1:1, εἰς δούλου τρόπον οὐ κεῖται ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ Θεοῦ, ἀλλʼ εἰς ἐξουσίαν μεγάλην κεῖται καὶ κυριότητα. The verb ἀθετέω has God or Christ for its object in Luke 10:16, John 12:48, 1 Thessalonians 4:8, etc. We have then to consider how it can be said that the libertines (οὗτοι) “despise authority” in like manner to the above-mentioned offenders. For the former we may refer to Jude 1:4, τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν ἀρνούμενοι, for the latter to the contempt shown by the Israelites towards the commandments of God. So the desertion of their appointed station and abode by the angels showed their disregard for the divine ordinance, and the behaviour of the men of Sodom combined with the vilest lusts an impious irreverence towards God’s representatives, the angels (Genesis 19:5). Cf. Joseph. Ant. i. 11. 2, εἰς ἀνθρώπους ἦσαν ὑβρισταὶ καὶ πρὸς τὸ θεῖον ἀσεβεῖς, and Test. Aser. 7, where the sin of Sodom is expressly stated to have been their behaviour towards the angels, μὴ γίνεσθε ὡς Σόδομα ἥτις ἠγνόησε τοὺς ἀγγέλους Κυρίου καὶ ἀπώλετο ἕως αἰῶνος.

δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν. Cf. 2 Peter 2:10, τολμηταὶ αὐθάδεις δόξας οὐ τρέμουσιν βλασφημοῦντες. The only other passage in the N.T. in which the plural occurs is 1 Peter 1:11, where the sense is different. Dr. Bigg compares Exodus 15:11, τίς ὅμοιός σοι ἐν θεοῖς, Κύριε; τίς ὁμοιός σοι; δεδοξασμένος ἐν ἁγίοις, θαυμαστὸς ἐν δόξαις. Clement’s interpretation of this and the preceding clause is as follows: (Adumbr. 1008) “dominationem spernunt, hoc est solum dominum qui vere dominus noster est, Jesus Christus … majestatem blasphemant, hoc est angelos”. The word δόξα in the singular is used for the Shekinah, see my note on Jam 2:1. This suggests that Clement may be right in supposing the plural to be used for the angels, who are, as it were, separate rays of that glory. Compare Philo’s use of the name λόγοι for the angels as contrasted with the divine Λόγος. In Philo, Monarch, ii. p. 18 the divine δόξα, is said to consist of the host of angels, δόξαν δὲ σὴν εἶναι νομίζω τάς σε δορυφορούσας δυνάμεις. See Test. Jude 1:25, Κύριος εὐλόγησε τὸν Λευί, ὁ ἄγγελος τοῦ προσώπου ἐμέ, αἱ δυνάμεις τῆς δοξης τὸν Συμεών, also Luke 9:26, where it is said that “the Son of Man will come in His own glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels”.[790] Ewald, Hist. Isr. tr. vol. viii. p. 142, explains ἡ κυριότης of the true Deity, whom they practically deny by their dual God; αἱ δόξαι as the angels, whom they blaspheme by supposing that they had created the world in opposition to the will of the true God, whereas Michael himself submitted everything to Him. This last clause would then be an appendage to the preceding, with special reference to the case of the Sodomites (cf. John 13:20). There may also be some allusion to the teaching or practice of the libertines. If we compare the mysterious reference in 1 Corinthians 11:10, διὰ τοῦτο ὀφείλει ἡ γυνὴ ἐξουσίαν ἔχειν ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς διὰ τοὺς ἀγγέλους, which is explained by Tertullian (De Virg. Vel. 7) as spoken of the fallen angels mentioned by Jude, “propter angelos, scilicet quos legimus a Deo et caelo excidisse ob concupiscentiam feminarum,” we might suppose the βλασφημία, of which the libertines were guilty, to consist in a denial or non-recognition of the presence of good angels in their worship, or of the possibility of their own becoming κοινωνοὶ δαιμονίων; or they may have scoffed at the warnings against the assaults of the devil, or even at the very idea of “spiritual wickedness in high places”. So understood, it prepares us for the strange story of the next verse.

[790] There is much said of the glory of the angels in Asc. Isaiae, pp. 47, 49 f ad. Charles.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

8. Likewise also these filthy dreamers …] More accurately, these men dreaming defile the flesh. The English version follows many commentators in suggesting the thought that the words describe the kind of sensual dreams which lead to the pollution described in Leviticus 15:16-17. This meaning, however, does not lie in the word itself, and as the participle is, by the construction of the sentence, equally connected with all of the three verbs that follow, it is better to see in it a simple description of the dreaming, visionary character of the false teachers. They lived, as it were, in a dream (perhaps exulted in their clairvoyant visions), and the result was seen in impurity like that of the cities of the plain, in “despising dominion” and “speaking evil of dignities.” On the questions presented by the two last clauses, see notes on 2 Peter 2:10.

Bengel's Gnomen

Jude 1:8. Μέντοι, indeed) A particle setting forth and comparing the impurity of such ungodly men with Sodom, whence the resemblance of punishment mentioned in Jude 1:7 is plainly seen.—ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι) disturbed with impure and confused dreams, and from their dreams conjecturing the future. The words, they know not, Jude 1:10, are equivalent: Isaiah 56:10-11, Septuagint, οὐκ ἔγνωσαν—ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι κοίτην.—οὐκ εἰδότες σύνεσιν, πάντες ταῖς ὁδοῖς αὐτῶν ἐξηκολούθησαν· They are ignorant—sleeping, lying down—they cannot understand—they all look to their own way.[2]—ΚΥΡΙΌΤΗΤΑ, dignities) See 2 Peter 2:10, note.

[2] By the one word ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι the character of mere natural men is very graphically described. A man in dreaming seems to himself to be seeing and hearing many things, etc. His lusts are agitated by joy, distress, fear, and the other passions. But he is a stranger to self-control in such a state: but as is an image (phantom) arising out of an image, such is the condition of such men. Hence, though they bring into play all the sinews of reason, they cannot conceive that the sons of light. who are awake and in the daylight, enjoy true liberty.—V. g.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 8. - Having set in the forefront of his warnings these terrible instances of gross sin and overwhelming penalty, the writer proceeds to deal with the real character of the insidious troublers and corrupters of the Churches of his time. He describes them as filthy dreamers; or better, as the Revised Version puts it, men in their dreamings - an expression pointing to the foul and perverted fancies in the service of which they lived. He charges them with the particular sins of defiling the flesh, despising dominion, and railing at dignities. He further declares of them that, in practicing such sins, they run a course like that of the cities of the plain, and run it in defiance, too, of the warning held forth to them by the case of Sodom and Gomorrah. For such seems the point of the terms connecting this paragraph with the preceding, which are best rendered "nevertheless in like manner," or "yet in like manner" (Revised Version). The difficulty lies, however, in the description of their offences. What is intended by the charge that they defile the flesh is obvious. But what is referred to in the other clauses, and set at naught dominion (or, lordship), and rail at dignities (or, glories), is far from clear. It has been supposed that a lawlessness is meant which expressed itself in contempt for all earthly authority, whether political or ecclesiastical. The whole scope of the passage, however, and the analogy of 2 Peter 2:10, etc., seem to point so decidedly to higher dignities than the earthly institutions of Church and State, that most interpreters now think that celestial lordship of some kind is in view. But of what kind? That of God and that of good angels, say some. That of Christ and that of angels, say others. Both clauses, say a third class of interpreters, refer to angels, both to good angels and to evil, or to good angels alone, or to evil angels alone, as the allusions are variously understood. Pointing to the particular word which is used here for "dominion" or "lordship," some contend that there is a definite reference to the dominion of Christ, the Lord distinctively so called. But the same word is used elsewhere (cf. Ephesians 1:21; Colossians 1:16) of angels, while the term translated "dignities," or "glories," occurs again only in 2 Peter 2:10. If, therefore, any single kind of lordship is in view, we should conclude in favour of angelic dignities, and the authority of good angels in particular. But it may be that Jude uses the terms here in a general sense to cover all kinds of authority, especially celestial authority. This is favoured by the undefined expressions which meet us in the Petrine parallel (2 Peter 2:10, etc.). It is supported, too, by the consideration that in leveling three separate charges against the men, Jude has probably in view the three separate cases which he has just cited in verses 5-7. In which case the parallel between these latter and the men now described can naturally be only of a general kind. It is remarked by Professor Plumptre that the passage in 2 Peter 2:10, etc. (see his Commentary), taken in connection with this one in Jude, suggests that "the undue worshipping of angels in the Judaizing Gnosticism which had developed out of the teaching of the Essenes (Colossians 2:18), had been met by its most extreme opponents with coarse and railing mockery as to all angels, whether good or evil, and that the apostle felt it necessary to rebuke this license of speech as well as that which paid no respect to human authority." Jude 1:8

Vincent's Word Studies

Yet (μέντοι)

Not rendered by A. V., but expressing that though they have these fearful examples before them, yet they persist in their sin.

Dominion - dignities (κυριότητα - δόξας)

It is not easy to determine the exact meaning of these two terms. Κυριότης, dominion, occurs in three other passages, Ephesians 1:21; Colossians 1:16; 2 Peter 2:10. In the first two, and probably in the third, the reference is to angelic dignities. Some explain this passage and the one in Peter, of evil angels. In Colossians the term is used with thrones, principalities, and powers, with reference to the orders of the celestial hierarchy as conceived by Gnostic teachers, and with a view to exalt Christ above all these. Glories or dignities is used in this concrete sense only here and at 2 Peter 2:10.