A Few First Principles of Common Sense

Addressed to those who possess this sense common only to the few.

God is power. All power in the universe emanates from Him. Two kinds of power may be said to operate all its diversified effects — physical and moral. Physical force of power splits rocks, overturns mountains, engulfs cities, etc, and is always subordinate to, and executive of, moral or legislative power.

All power exercised by men is vested, and administered only by the permission of God. The fact that God permits a thing to be done is no proof that He approves it. Thus He permits men to legislate, but does not approve their legislation. The original, underived right of giving laws to mankind is the sole and absolute prerogative of Jehovah. Moses and Jesus are the only two persons in whom He has vested the authority of promulgating codes of law; all other lawgivers, “sacred and profane” are rebels, traitors, and usurpers of the rights of these two. Hence no man, though permitted, has any right to introduce a single law, custom or regulation into society in general, much less into the church of Jesus Christ in particular.

God, being omnipotent, can impart as much power, and to whom, as He pleases. No community of men can of right exercise, or impart to others, more authority than is vested in themselves. No exercise of authority is just or right, which is not sanctioned by God.

The commands of Jesus are authentic, and ought to be obeyed, because they are attested by God; and so ought those of the Apostles for the same reason. The decrees of Popes, Councils, Archbishops, Patriarchs, General Assemblies, Synods, Presbyteries, or Associations of any kind; — or those of Reverends of whatever title, ought not to be obeyed, because they are not attested by God. They are all apostate and antichristian.

All legitimate power or authority is vested in the congregation of the true believers. “The Church is the pillar and the support of the truth.” It has been transmitted, not by clerical succession, but from Jehovah to Jesus, from Jesus to the Apostles, from the Apostles to the faithful, who have retained it to this day.

Though vested with Divine Authority, the faithful can only of right exercise it in conformity with the letter and spirit of the written word. Before an assembly of believers can spiritually or legitimately administer the affairs of the body, the many must individually understand the scriptures concerning those affairs. If the persons, who compose the many, or majority, of a church be ignorant of what the scriptures teach concerning the government of the congregation, their proceeding will be unwarrantable, and therefore not binding on the few who may be enlightened.

As the power, or authority, is vested in the whole church, no individual can of right do anything in said congregation unless called upon so to act by those in whom the power resides; that is, by the many. If every member knew the will of God and would do it, all appointments would necessarily be unanimous. The cause of differences is two-fold; first, ignorance, and secondly, an indisposition to obey the truth when known. Unity of practice is sure to ensue from a knowledge of, and disposition to obey the truth. The means, therefore, that ought to be adopted to attain this desirable end, is to study the scriptures diligently with an honest determination to do whatever they require to be done. The truth is ascertained by testimony. All honest men who think can judge of testimony: if then, two adverse propositions be maintained, the one by this side, the other by that, that should be received, which is sustained by the most testimony — evidence, not votes, should decide; for by two or three witnesses, not by votes, shall every thing be established.

A vote is a voice, affirmatively or negatively given. To decide by vote is to decide by the numbers for or against a proposition. Numeration cannot determine truth; it can determine the strength of parties. To rule by numbers is to substitute the authority of men for that of God. It is the stratagem of the Anti-christ — a scheme of the devil to supersede the wholesome and efficient monarchy of Jesus. A vote may convey authority, but it cannot administer laws — it may make them, but in no instance can it apply them.

The Mediatorial Institution is a Kingdom. Its laws and ordinances were appointed by the Monarch. Nothing remains now but to administer them. No assembly of believers can of right say, that these laws shall not be enforced; no vote of a majority can of right impede their administration. To introduce republican maxims and principles into a monarchial institution, and especially that of the Kingdom of Jesus, is to set up rebellion against the authority of the King. Monarchism and Republicanism are incompatible — one or other must succumb.

Seeing that the many, or majority, cannot en masse administer the laws, and knowing from precepts and examples that some must, upon the principle that a body without discipline cannot long exist, certain of that body must be invested with administrative authority. This authority can only legitimately be conveyed by the many, appointing persons answering to the apostolic description as near as can be, to the offices ordained of God through the apostles of Christ. Persons appointed to the deaconship have a right to all authority necessary for the discharge of the functions thereof; and so in respect to those who are chosen to the administration of the laws.

To entrust power or authority to others, is to surrender to them the right of doing all that the many could of right do; always reserving to itself the privilege of its resumption. Power delegated, or entrusted to others, can no longer be independently exercised by the many, until it be by them resumed. This power when entrusted to a plurality of persons, can only be legally exercised by or with the consent of the majority of those to whom it is conveyed. When the majority of the elders of a church do an act in the presence of the congregation, according to scripture, precedent or rule, it is the majority of said church that acts; for the majority of all assemblies acts through its constituted authorities.

No eldership or executive, can have power enough, that does not possess sufficient to acquit itself of the responsibilities imposed upon it by the Legislative organ. In a congregation of Christians, the elders do not possess as much power as the scriptures entitle them to, who cannot effect the expulsion of a factious, a drunken, or otherwise disorderly member, contrary to the vote of a majority. No organization of a church can be scriptural, which prevents the carrying into effect the precepts of the Apostles.

They who are empowered by the many, according to the scriptural rule, are authorized by God; because constituted according to His appointment: and to them, therefore, it is the duty of all to submit themselves, as to those who watch for their souls and must give an account: that they may do this with joy, and not with mourning; for that would be unprofitable.

Nothing is known for certainty about the ancestry of Joel, or about him personally. There is even some uncertainty as to the precise time when he prophesied, although the prophecy itself provides a number of clues, as shall be seen.

Literal locusts?

Joel pictures an enormous locust invasion brought by God upon His land, as a punishment and a warning to His people (Joel 1:15; 2:11). The devastation wrought by the locusts brings the inevitable famine, and Joel chronicles the suffering of man and beast alike, in its wake (Joel 1:4,5,9-12,16-18).

Outline

1.	The locust plague as a foretaste of the Day of the Lord: Joel 1:1 – 2:17
	a)	The calamity: Joel 1:1-20
	b)	The scourge as the forerunner of the judgment day: Joel 2:1-17
2.	The averting of judgment and bestowal of blessings: Joel 2:18 – 3:21
	a)	The Lord’s restoration of Judah: Joel 2:18-27
	b)	The outpouring of the Holy Spirit: Joel 2:28-32
	c)	Judgment upon the nations: Joel 3:1-16
	d)	The blessings on God’s people: Joel 3:17-21

Historical application

But Joel has more in mind than a literal plague of locusts. Whether there was, in Joel’s day, a real such infestation, or whether the prophet is presenting an idealized picture merely based on the well-known phenomenon of such plagues… either way, he definitely also has in mind a real army, of men, not insects (Joel 1:6,7; 2:1-7).

What was this army which Joel saw sweeping down upon the Land of Israel? Most likely the Assyrians of Sennacherib, who first devastated most of the north of Israel, and then turned upon the south of Judah, besieging and capturing most of its fortified cities (2Ki 17; 18; Isa 36; 37). Assyria was joined in its onslaught upon Judah and its capital Jerusalem by the Arab nations of Tyre and Zidon, Edom and Egypt (Joel 3:4,19). Egypt was the natural enemy of Assyria, but that did not stop the Egyptians from using Judah’s misfortune as a chance to ravage their share of Judah’s south. Would the Assyrian hordes also destroy Jerusalem, along with Temple of the LORD? Or would God at last spare His own city? The answer lay in Israel’s reaction to this great invasion of human “locusts” (Joel 2:12-14). True repentance and faith would save Jerusalem from the Assyrians. Led by their fine king, Hezekiah, the people did repent, and the Assyrian confederation was destroyed by the Angel of the LORD (2Ki 19; Isa 38): “Then the LORD will be jealous for his land and take pity on his people” (Joel 2:18). “And everyone who calls on the name of the LORD will be saved; for on Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there will be deliverance, as the LORD has said, among the survivors whom the LORD calls” (Joel 2:32; cp Joel 2:20; 3:16).

Last Days application?

But this historical fulfillment is, as we have come to expect, only half the picture. The normal pattern of Bible prophecy, with few exceptions, is the presentation of a two-fold message:

• a contemporary reference to events in or near the days of the prophet (necessary to confirm his credentials as a true prophet: Deu 18:20-22), and

• a Messianic application, having to do with the first Coming or the second Coming, or — quite often — both. In this, Joel does not disappoint us. Seen in a first century application, the apostle Peter cites Joel as an explanation for the Holy Spirit being poured out on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2:16-21). Peter used Joel’s prophecy as the basis for his appeal to the people to repent and be baptized, and so be saved (Acts 2:37-40). Seen in a Last Days perspective, every indication is that Joel envisions an attack by a great Arab confederacy upon a faithless nation of Israel. These Arab peoples were previously too weak, but now at last [because of continual arm supplies from the West, and/or from the former USSR?] they are finally strong enough to accomplish their goal (Joel 3:9,10). Such an attack will be initially successful (see Joel 3:1-7), destroying much of Israel’s livelihood and reducing God’s people to helplessness. It will then be only by a renewal of their faith, in the God of their fathers, that a remnant of Israel will be saved when — once again and to a far greater extent than ever before — “….the LORD will roar from Zion and thunder from Jerusalem; the earth and the sky will tremble. But the LORD will be a refuge for his people, a stronghold for the people of Israel” (Joel 3:16).

How do we know that this great alliance of the Last Days will be Arab? (a) In Hebrew, the words for “locust” (arbeh) and “Arab” (arbi) are practically identical. (b) The nations actually mentioned by Joel (the ones “on every side”: Joel 3:12) are Tyre and Zidon (Lebanon and Syria, in modern terms) and Philistia (exactly equivalent, linguistically, to the “Palestinians”!) in Joel 3:4; and Egypt and Edom (modern Jordan and/or Saudi Arabia) in Joel 3:19. In order to defeat Israel, these will line up with “Assyria” (modern equivalent: Iraq, or just possibly Syria, or even both). (c) The phrase “Prepare for [or make holy] war” (the literal meaning of Joel 3:9) suggests a jihad, or Moslem holy war. The first attack, in Joel’s day, by Assyria and its allies was seen by its leaders as a “holy war” — between Ashur the god of Nineveh and Jehovah (or Yahweh) the God of Israel (Joel 2:17; 2Ki 18:22,25,30-35; 19:14-19). And now, in our day, though the Arab “god” is called by a different name, the controversy is the same: whether “Allah” the god of Iraq, Syria, Jordan, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, et al is greater than Yahweh the God of Israel.

Temple Mount controversy

The controversy of the Last Days, between Arab and Jew, is preeminently about:

• Zion (Joel 2:1,15,23,32; 3:16,17,21),
• God’s holy mountain (Joel 2:1; 3:17),

• Jerusalem (Joel 2:32; 3:1,16,17,20), and
• the house of the LORD (Joel 3:18)….

…where, after Israel’s defeat and true repentance, a great Divine deliverance will come, and where the LORD God will dwell once again “in the midst of Israel… and my people shall never again be put to shame” (Joel 2:26,27).

A great deal of language in Joel (regarding sacrifices and services) suggests that the Last Days will see a resurgence of religion in Israel. It is possible that a revived Judaism will accelerate and exacerbate a controversy with the devotees of Islam — over their own “holy places” on Mount Zion, in the heart of the Old City of Jerusalem. To what extent such Temple worship may develop before Christ returns (even to the removal or destruction of the ancient “Dome of the Rock” to provide the site for a modern Jewish Temple), one cannot be certain. But many other Last Days prophecies point to a controversy in or over God’s holy place or mountain or Temple — so many, in fact, that this possibility must loom large: Eze 25:3; 36:2,3; Psa 79:1-4; 83:12; Rev 11:1-3; 2Th 2:3,4; Isa 14:13,14; Oba 1:16,17; Mal 3:1; Dan 9:24-27; 11:31,45; 12:11; Mat 24:15; Mar 13:14; and Luk 21:20-24.

Revelation parallels

There are numerous and striking correspondences between Joel 1,2 and Revelation 8,9:

Locusts	Joel 1:4	Rev 9:3
Like a nation?	Joel 1:6	Rev 9:4,7
Teeth like lions’ teeth	Joel 1:6	Rev 9:8
Trees, pasture burnt up	Joel 1:12-20	Rev 8:7
Destruction from God	Joel 1:15;	Rev 9:11
Fire	Joel 1:19; 2:3,5	Rev 8:7; 9:17
Rivers of water dried up	Joel 1:20	Rev 8:10; 9:14
Blowing of trumpets	Joel 2:1,11,15	Rev 8:6
Darkness	Joel 2:2	Rev 9:2,18
Horses	Joel 2:4	Rev 9:7,9
Chariots	Joel 2:5	Rev 9:9
Torment	Joel 2:6	Rev 9:6
Earthquake	Joel 2:10	Rev 8:5
Sun, moon, and stars are darkened	Joel 2:10,31; 3:15	Rev 8:12; 9:2
“Turn to me,” says God!	Joel 2:12	Rev 9:20,21
The “locusts” go back to the abyss	Joel 2:20	Rev 9:1
Day of Atonement	Joel 2:15-17	Rev 8:2-4
Deliverance for the faithful remnant	Joel 2:32	Rev 9:4

It is reasonable to conclude that Joel and Rev 8; 9 describe the same events. Therefore it is possible to deduce a Last Days application: a battle for Jerusalem and its holy places, fought by Jew and Arab, which ends with Christ returning to Israel to save the faithful remnant who call upon him (Joel 2:32; 3:20). This interpretation is supported by the observation that the sounding of the first six trumpets (Rev. 8; 9), with their sense of immediacy and urgency, culminates in the sounding of the Seventh Trumpet (Rev 11:15-19) and “the time for the dead to be judged”. And so Joel contributes his share of details to the ever-changing (and sometimes mysterious) mosaic of future events, a challenge and consolation for every student of Bible prophecy.

“Beloved brethren, human nature is always tending to extremes and transcending what is written. As the saying is, it will strain at gnats and swallow camels by the herd. It set up the Inquisition and is incessantly prying into matters beyond its jurisdiction. It is very fond of playing the judge and of executing its own decrees. It has a zeal but not according to knowledge, and therefore its zeal is intemperate and not the zeal of wisdom or knowledge rightly used. It professes great zeal for the purity of the Church, and would purge out everything that offends its sensitive imagination. But it is not a good thing to have a church without tares, black sheep, or spotted heifer? Yea, verily, it is an excellent thing. But then it is a thing the Holy Spirit has never yet developed, and cannot be developed by any human judiciary in the administration of spiritual affairs. There are certain things that must be left to the Lord’s own adjudication when he comes…” (John Thomas).

“Wherever there is intolerance, wherever we find conditions of communion among Christians imposed, which Christ hath not clearly enjoined; wherever creeds and modes of worship are enforced by human power, and men made to forfeit any of their civil rights, or are stigmatized on these accounts, there is the spirit which is not of God. Wherever one Christian, or a number of Christians, assumes the seat of authority and judgment in the Church of Christ, wherever they call for fire to destroy those who dissent from them or only exclude them from their communion and affection, there is a portion of the spirit of Antichrist, which has so long opposed itself to the benign principles of the Kingdom of the Prince of Peace, has been the cause of so many evils to humanity, and the occasion of making the inconsiderate esteem the amiable yet distinct and uncompromising religion of Jesus, as a source of mischief, instead of benevolence. “Alas, how much of this spirit remains amongst us all!! How few have learned that ‘In Christ circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but the keeping of the commandments of God’ ” (John Thomas).

When did the prophet Joel speak and write? Understandably, on the answer to this question depends much of interpretation of his book. And yet a brief review of Christadelphian expositors shows a remarkable diversity on this question. Presented in chronological order, there are at least six views of the matter:

A. The reign of Jehoshaphat (approximate dates 860-860 BC) Edward Whittaker and Tony Benson in Testimony 46:387-392.

Reasons: No direct allusion to the great powers of Assyria and Babylon, who rose to prominence later. No direct reference to idolatry, again most appropriate for an early date. Two references to the valley of Jehoshaphat’ (3:2,12), which the authors equate with the valley of Berachah (2Ch 20:26) where Jehoshaphat and Judah won a miraculous victory over the locust-like invaders of Moab, Ammon and Edom. (The two ‘locust’ invasions in Scripture, they point out, were both Arabic in character (Jdg 6:3-6; Rev 9:1-11). It is suggested that the famine in Israel during Ahab’s reign, prayed for by Elijah (James 5:17; 1Ki 17:1), affect to some degree the adjacent kingdom of Judah (Joel 1).

Parallel passages: Joel 2:15-18 with 2Ch 20:3,4,11,13.

B. The early part of the reign of Jehoash (840-830 BC). Fred Pearce in The Christadelphian 112:263,264.

Reasons: Much the same as for (1) except that it is argued that the mention of the valley of Jehoshaphat refers to a past, though recently past, event. Since the four “Major Prophets” are unquestionably in chronological order, it is to be expected that the “Minor Prophets” follow a similar pattern, in which case Joel is seen to be quite early. In Joel the priests are still generally faithful and capable of repentance and reformation, which was not at all true toward the end of the kingdom. Suggested time: the regency of the faithful Jehoiada, while Jehoash was still a child (2Ki 11:17-20; 2Ch 23:16-18).

C. The first part of the reign of Uzziah (810-800 BC). T. Sutton in Testimony 5:407-409.

Again, the same arguments for a relatively early date as in (1) and (2).

Parallel passage: “His name spread far abroad; for he was marvelously helped” (2Ch 26:15). No other very precise evidence is offered.

D. The reign of Hezekiah (710-700 BC). WH Boulton in The Christadelphian 43:245-249.

Oblivious to much of the above evidence that would tend otherwise, WH Boulton lays great stress on the direction of the invasion — from the north (2:20). Thus it is suggested that the invasion of Sennacherib’s army (2Ki 18,19) is the fulfillment, and Assyria, though not directly mentioned, is the enemy of Israel. (JD Webster takes this same view in Dawn, Vol 19, pp 13-16, but offers no reasons. The same assumption is made by John Thomas in Eureka, Vol 1:44, where he refers to Joel’s vision of “the lions of Assyria, and others.)

E. Josiah’s reign (630-612 BC). EM Spongberg in Joel (Logos Publications), pp 7-12.

Most of the evidence offered for a later date consists of an attempt to dispute the various reasons for the earlier dates(as outlined above); and, it must be admitted, those proofs are all circumstantial. It is suggested that Josiah’s great reformation (2Ch 34,35) provides a fitting background for the prophecy.

F. The days of Jehoiakim or Zedekiah (612-586 BC). Carl Parry in Joel (Christadelphian Scripture Study Service), pp 3-7.

Here is something not otherwise stressed in any of the above: the Temple had already been sacked (3:5). [However, Whittaker and Benson do suggest in their exposition (No. 1 above) that Joel 3:5 was fulfilled by the Philistines and Arabians in the reign of Jehoshaphat’s successor Jehoram (2Ch 21:16,17). They see Joel 3:4-8 as a sort of ‘footnote’ added after the reign of Jehoshaphat. Such an interpretation of verse 5 well suits Fred Pearce’s exposition (2) also.] Parallels are suggested with Zephaniah (a contemporary with Josiah): Joel 1:10,11 with Zephaniah 1:2; Joel 1:18 with Zephaniah 1:3; Joel 1:15 with Zephaniah 1:7; Joel 2:1,2 with Zephaniah 1:14,15; Joel 3:2 with Zephaniah 3:8. The ‘lion’ of Joel 1:6 is taken as figurative of Babylon (Jer 50:17; Dan 7:4).

See also Fifield and Palmer, Testimony 46:224-228, where the book is specifically applied to Zedekiah’s reign on the grounds that Joel 1 describes a desolation which already existed, and which would fit the earlier desolation in the reign of Jehoiakim. Jer 4:5-8 is cited as parallel to Joel 1:6,13,14; and 2:1.

G. A seventh view is taken by Edgar Wille (The Christadelphian 104:317), who says:

“There (is) no doubt that the original northern army (v 20) was a terrible plague of locusts which brought Israel (ie, Judah) to their knees at some unspecified time in the past.”

---

Of all the views outlined here, this last offers the least as to historical context, but then, let it be remembered, he has the least chance of being wrong!

Such views of the historical context drastically affect the possible primary fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy, as well as the potential secondary, or latter-day, fulfillment.

CONTEXT	PRIMARY FULFILLMENT	SECONDARY FULFILLMENT
1. Jehoshaphat	A period of drought during his reign, and a series of devastating locust plagues towards the end of that period (Joel 1). Then the impending invasion of the great Arab confederacy (Joel 2; 2Ch 20).	From Joel 2:18 onwards. An invasion from the north, but with a distinctly Arab flavor: the ‘nations round about’ (3:11,12, RV). Cp Joel 3:4-8 with Psa 83:6-8.
2. Jehoash	The four great Gentile oppressors of Judah -Babylon, Persian, Greece and Rome-depicted by four phases of a locust plague. (No immediate fulfillment).	The invasion of Gog and Magog… Rosh… etc (Eze 38), with emphasis on the composite character of the northern host (combining qualities of all four ‘world’ empires).
3. Uzziah	Assyria, Egypt, Babylon and Rome (No immediate fulfillment).	Much the same as #2 above.
4. Hezekiah	Sennacherib’s invasion from the north.	The northern host in its role as the latter day Assyrian.
5. Josiah	Four successive steps of the Babylonian captivity (2Ki 24:1,2,10-16; 25:1-11).	The great northern army, more or less synonymous with “Babylon”.
6. Jehoiakim and Zedekiah	Babylonian invasion, with four progressive stages, as in #5. (No literal locust invasion.)	The same as #5.

The above summary is intended only to give a basis for further study, and not to advocate one view above the others.

In conclusion, there is general agreement as to the latter-day counterpart of the locust or locust-like army of invasion. By common consent, it is seen to be the same host described in Ezekiel 38 and Zechariah 14. But it is worth noting that what we perceive as the immediate context of Joel affects our grasp of the details of the final fulfillment, one example being: Will there be Arab participation in the last great war in Israel? and if so, to what extent? And, another question: Are the valley of Jehoshaphat and Armageddon to be understood as identical (as in Eur 3:603)?

A final point: If so many can disagree as to the application of a prophecy of which the initial fulfillment is already past, then is it any wonder that they disagree on the future fulfillments of other prophecies? And if such disagreement has been tolerated on the interpretation of Joel without any noticeable dislocation of the Truth’s foundations, then why should it be thought a thing intolerable that brethren disagree, for example, on the interpretation of Revelation?

Rules for Bible Study

First: In any doctrine taught by types or shadows, the anti-type must always correspond with the type, and the shadow with the substance.

Second: In studying the Scriptures, consider that the New Testament is a commentary on the Old.

Third: Never be afraid of results to which you may be driven by your investigations, as this will inevitably bias your mind and disqualify you to arrive at ultimate truth.

Fourth: Investigate everything you believe – if it is the truth it cannot be injured thereby; if error, the sooner it is correct the better. 

Fifth: Pursue this course with as much independence as if you were the only one concerned.

Sixth: Rely on no authority less than divine in so momentous an undertaking.

PROVE ALL THINGS: HOLD FAST TO THAT WHICH IS GOOD.

What can be determined about the gospel preached by John the Baptist? It can be established, from the Bible, that he taught:

1. Mortality of man: Isa 40:6-8.
2. Jesus, perfect sacrifice: Joh 1:29,36.

3. Jesus, judge of all: Luk 3:17.
4. Holy Spirit: Luk 3:16.

5. Repentance: Mat 3:2; Luk 3:3.
6. Baptism for remission of sins: Mar 1:4.

7. Life of faith and self-denial: Luk 3:10-14.
8. Resurrection: implied in Mat 14:2.

9. Kingdom of God: Mat 3:2 // Mat 4:17!

AUTHOR: Either Judas the apostle (Luk 6:16) or Judas the half-brother of the Lord (Mat 13:55). The first of these is ruled out by most commentators on the ground that one who was himself an apostle would not write: “Remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ” (v 17). But why shouldn’t he? There is a very close parallel in 2Pe 3:2: “…that ye should remember the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of our Lord and Saviour through your apostles”. If Peter could write about “your apostles”, why should not one of his fellow apostles do the same? There is also the consideration that if this Jude were the apostle, then all the epistles of the NT came from apostolic pens. (The strength of the case for regarding the Epistle of James as written by the son of Zebedee is not to be set aside.)

On the other hand, this Jude is explicitly “brother of James”. But by analogy with “Judas Iscariot of Simon” (Joh 6:71), “Judas of James” (Luk 6:16) appears to mean “son of James”, and not “brother of James”. If it can mean “brother of James”, the point is settled.

What grounds are there for identifying Jude with the son of Mary and Joseph (Mat 13:55)? Exactly none, except that he appears to be the only alternative to the Judas just discussed. There is, of course, the possibility of the writer being some other Judas of whom nothing is known, but the likelihood of this is mighty small.

DATE: The date of the epistle has to be inferred from the slight incidental indications which the text affords. It is surely a valid argument that Jude wrote before the troubles of AD 70, for had he written after that date, he could hardly have let the destruction of the temple go unmentioned. Indeed, there seem to be several prophetic hints in the epistle of impending judgement. God destroyed His saved people “who believed not” (v 5). A judgement of being “plucked up by the roots”, such as Jesus foretold regarding Jewish opposition to the gospel, is implied (v 12). “Wandering stars, for whom is reserved the blackness of darkness of the ages” (v 13) seems very appropriate to the dispersion of Israel.

Peter’s prophecy concerning evil men “in the last days” (2Pe 3:3) is picked up by Jude as having a fulfillment in the corrupt movement he excoriated: “These be they…” (vv 18,19). What “last days” if not the last days of the temple?

PURPOSE: The great enemy of the gospel in the first century was neither Jewish nor Roman persecution, but the systematic infiltration of the ecclesia, as part of an insidious Judaistic campaign, by unscrupulous Jews who were set on wrecking this new movement from within. The methods employed were, in the main, threefold:

1. The insidious corruption of Christian morals: “lasciviousness… fornication… defiling the flesh… they corrupt (the ecclesia)… twice dead” (vv 4,7,8,10,12).

2. Abrupt rejection of the authority of the apostles, and the exaltation of other leaders in their place: “speak evil of dignities…. hard speeches… murmurers, complainers… having men’s persons in admiration” (vv 8,15,16).

3. One part of the campaign which does not come in for mention in Jude, but which caused Paul much trouble elsewhere, was an insistence that faith in Christ must be bolstered up with observance of the Law of Moses.

One has the impression that the recipients of the letter were Jewish believers, and probably Jews of the Holy Land. Some of the phrases seem to take on special meaning from this point of view. But there is not enough to go on regarding this.

OUTLINE:

• Introduction: vv 1,2
• Godless men — their sin and ultimate doom: vv 3-16

• Exhortation to perseverance: vv 17-23
• Doxology: vv 24,25

With great regularity, those around Jesus understood his figurative language as literal: John 2:19,20; 3:3,4; 4:10,11,32,33; 6:41,42, etc; John 7:34,35; 8:56,57; 9:39,40; 10:30-33; 11:11-13.

Tying these thoughts together is a Greek word used three times in John’s Gospel: “paroimia”, which is a different way of saying “parable” or “proverb” than the Greek word “parabole” used 48 times in the other three gospels. Consider how John uses this word: (1) “Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them” (John 10:6); (2,3) “Though I have been speaking figuratively, a time is coming when I will no longer use this kind of language but will tell you plainly about my Father… Then Jesus’ disciples said, ‘Now you are speaking clearly and without figures of speech’ ” (John 16:25,29).

And, of course, even today there are those who misunderstand or even wrest Jesus’ words to “prove” their own false doctrines, chief of which is the Trinity. So these regular occurrences of misunderstanding in the Gospel of John indicate plainly when a literal interpretation is “out of order”. To recognize this pattern is very useful in counteracting several false teachings that derive their support primarily from John’s Gospel.

The fourth and most spiritual of the gospels. The first three gospels portray mainly what Jesus did and how He taught, but the Gospel of John is different. It moves beyond the obvious facts of Jesus’ life to deeper, more profound meanings. Among the gospels, therefore, John offers a unique portrait of Christ that has been cherished by believers through the centuries.   John concentrates on Jesus as He taught in private, while the other three gospels record a more public method of address. The other gospels portray the actual form of Jesus’ teaching, while John shows greater insight into Jesus as a person.   John writes with a modest vocabulary, but his words are charged with symbolism. Terms like believe, love, truth, world, light and darkness, above and below, name, witness, sin, judgment (eternal) life, glory, bread, water, and hour are the key words of this gospel.   Main Themes

a.	The gospel contains a clear statement of purpose: “These [signs] are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name” (John 20:31). John brings out the thought that the sole purpose of life is to know the Father and experience life eternal through faith in the Son.
b.	The Son has come from above to glorify the Father (John 17:1); and He does so in His “hour” (John 12:23; 13:1) through His suffering on the cross.
c.	In the synoptic gospels — Matthew, Mark, and Luke — Jesus utters short sayings. Longer discourses, such as the Sermon on the Mount (Mat 5-7), are either collections of sayings on various themes, or, like (Mat 13), mostly parables. John, on the other hand, records no parables and few of the brief sayings so common to the synoptics. Rather, he expands upon an incident: Nicodemus (John 3), the woman at the well (John 4), the man born blind (John 9), Lazarus (John 11), or footwashing (John 13).
d.	In the first chapter, John introduces Jesus by seven key titles, a perfect echo to the Book of Rev: Word, Lamb of God, Rabbi, Messiah, King of Israel, Son of God, Son of Man.
e.	In his Gospel, John stresses the importance of “believing.” The verb “to believe” is found nearly a hundred times in the gospel.
f.	John does not record Jesus discussing questions of prayer, fasting, almsgiving, swearing, marriage, or wealth as do the other gospels. He rather concentrates on that all-important proof of discipleship — Love.

Outline

John 1:1-18:	Introduction: Jesus, the Word of God
John 1:19-51:	Jesus, the Son of Man and the Son of God
John 2:1 — 4:54:	Teaching though signs, and the new birth
John 5:1-47:	The Son of God
John 6:1-71:	The bread of life
John 7:1 — 10:42:	The Jews’ questions
John 11:1-54:	Resurrection
John 11:55 — 17:26:	The Passover — Jesus and his Father
John 18:1 — 19:42:	Jesus’ death
John 20:1-31:	Jesus’ resurrection
John 21:1-25:	Final words

JOHN, TIMELINE (Xdn 115:47):

The 6 feasts of John’s Gospel:	Other events:
—	1. Baptism, temptations, Cana (John 2:1-11).
2. First passover (John 2:13)	—
—	3. Early Judean ministry (John 3:22-24; 4:1-3), through Samaria (John 4:1-43); John imprisoned.
4. “A feast” (John 5:1) — 2nd passover	—
5. Third passover (John 6:4)	5. Feeding of 5,000 (John 6:1-14)
6. Tabernacles (John 7:2)	—
7. Dedication (John 10:22)	—
—	8. Raising of Lazarus (John 11:1-46)
9. Fourth passover (John 12:1)	—