Last week I wrote a reflection/brief commentary on the short book of Jude. In it I dealt with the general problem of false antinomian teaching that had been cropping up in the church, it’s parallels to the current doctrinal struggles with moral revisionism, and our call to remain faithful in the middle of it all. Well, though I dealt with the whole of the letter, I judged it worth returning to the letter and take a closer look, especially at Jude’s admonitions to mercy towards the end.
As I read this last week with my small group, I was struck by Jude’s emphasis on mercy. I suppose I am a bit more sensitive to the subject after meditating on Thomas Watson’s beautiful reflections on the mercy of God. Still, after a letter full of warnings judgment it can strike some as a bit of a left turn. And yet it shouldn’t really. Only those with a sharp appreciation for God’s holy opposition to sin can understand the gratuitous nature of the mercy of God. It is to this dimension of Jude’s thought that I’d like to direct our attention. There is a level of discernment and discrimination (in the good sense) Jude shows, which we need to recover if we’re going to deal pastorally with those in our midst prone to various sorts of “doubt” and disagreement.
Meditating on Future Mercy
After condemning the false teachers and issuing a general call to faithfulness and resistance, Jude offers encouragement to his people:
But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in God’s love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. (20-21)
Jude tells his people to build themselves up like the holy Temple they are on the foundation of the faith, the solid doctrine they’ve been handed on from the apostles, prayerfully dependent on the Holy Spirit. They should do this as they keep themselves in the love of God, obeying God’s will. In order to do this, Jude says they should “wait for the mercy of our Lord.” Waiting for the future mercy of God in the final salvation that Jesus will bring when he returns gives them the strength to endure. This is one of those places where having a sense of the “now and not yet” dimension of our salvation is so crucial. Christians are able to trust in this future mercy only because they are confident of the mercy already shown them in the sacrifice of Christ’s cross. His death for sin is the assurance they have passed from death to life and that the judgment of God to come no longer has their sins in view.
Mercy Towards Three Types of Doubters
From this encouragement to meditate on the mercy of God towards them, Jude urges them to extend this mercy towards others.
Be merciful to those who doubt; save others by snatching them from the fire; to others show mercy, mixed with fear—hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh. (22-23)
That’s one of the true tests of whether or not you understand the mercy of God: do you have any inclination or instinct to show others the grace God has shown you? If you are an unmerciful person who tends to hold grudges, keeps anger hot, and ready to unleash on others, stop and spend some time meditating on the mercy of God. You cannot do this enough.
In any case, Jude moves on to enumerate three types of people (doubters) who need to be shown mercy, but in each case there seems to be a different shape that this mercy is to take. While mercy is to be shown to all, distinctions need to be made. As we’ll see, it might be unmerciful to do otherwise.
First, there is the group that seems to be “in doubt”, or hesitant. Here we can imagine the average church-goer sitting in the pews who has been confused by the influx of smart, charismatic false teachers advocating a tempting lifestyle. It’s not an aggressive, arrogant doubt, but one that is tentative, and would likely respond if properly and carefully corrected. I’ve seen this a lot. In fact, this about 99% of what I’ve encountered in my time. Students who come in, worried about this or that article they’ve read, difficult conversation they’ve had, and so forth and they ask me a difficult question. In this case, usually that is needed is a careful conversation or two and they are ready to hear biblical truth. Mercy here is gentle engagement.
Second, there seems to be a different category where the “doubt” is more aggressive. Richard Bauckham suggests that as those who need to be “snatched out of the fire”, these people have already been lead astray by the false teachers to the point of engaging in sinful, licentious behavior. And yet, it is likely that many here would respond to proper correction. All the same, it may be that a sharper approach is necessary. Once you’re engaged in sin, all sorts of rationalizations set in which require a more forceful approach. It’s the different between warning little Johnny from running into the street while he’s in the yard, versus reaching out and pulling him out of the street after he’s already crossed the line. It’s not sufficient to call softly. “Johnny, please come back here” when there’s a car rumbling down the road, set to interrupt his play-time. In the same way, a different level of rhetorical and spiritual urgency will be required in this second case, not to mention possible movement towards church discipline.
Finally, there is a third group of those whom we are still to show mercy, but do so with fear. At this point Jude appears to be referring to the false teachers themselves. There is a certain kind of person who is not simply confused, not simply doubting, not only led astray through a lack of knowledge or sinful desire, but is actively pursuing and propagating false teaching. This isn’t the kid with normal (though difficult) questions or the relatively skeptical but honest dude in your Bible study. No, this is someone with a culpable level of responsibility, or personal authority, who is trying to influence others into adopting beliefs and practices that oppose holiness and the truth of God. It’s the difference between Eve being led astray through doubt, and the malicious serpent who “doubted” and taught others that same sort of doubt.
Jude commands us to show them mercy, nonetheless, but do so with fear because there’s a foolish sort of “openness” that can put you in danger of being led astray. Of course, you still need to love this person, pray for their salvation, and hope that God changes their hearts. But you probably need to change the way you engage with them, have fellowship with them, or whether you treat them like a believer or not. There’s a holy fear, a hatred of sin which is a part of the love of God (Rom 12:9), of even the garment that leads to sin, which means that at a certain point you may have to guard yourself from certain kinds of conversations or contact. This person needs mercy, but there’s an understanding that they should be engaged by the proper authorities who are equipped for that sort of thing. Don’t be too arrogant to think you can’t be misled.
The Trouble with Mercy Outside the Church
Now, there are all kinds of application for this sort of text today. First, of course, is in our actual churches. Pastors, people in the pews, and various church leaders need to have these distinctions in mind when dealing with false teaching popping up. You need to be able to distinguish between the honest Christian who is “hesitant” and those who are maliciously stirring up others. Dealing harshly wth the first would be to break a bruised reed, while dealing too gently with the latter might put the rest of the flock in danger. This can be difficult, which is why we should constantly be in prayer in the Spirit, meditating on the person of Jesus, and the witness of Scripture so that our instincts and imaginations can be formed and shaped by God’s Word.
Second, there’s the troubling question of online interactions. See, one of the problems I see with a lot of the doctrinal discussion online is that all of these categories get mixed up. The internet makes these lines harder Say there’s some blogger in the third category, actively trying to lead people astray, but who is read and finds sympathy with people in categories one and two. And say some pastor moves to correct or argue against a position they’re advocating. Well, the problem I see is when your signals get crossed and the harder words you have for the false teacher get read as the tone, approach, or estimation of those who are merely hesitant, or maybe still open to rebuke. Ironically enough, in your desire to guard them, they might end up being pushed towards that position in reaction.
On the flipside, you have those in that third category who hide under the mantle of the first. “Is that what God said?” becomes a cover for “Did God really say?”, so that the aggressive doubt being advocated gets smuggled in surreptitiously under its more benign cousin. I don’t know that I have a real answer to all of this. I suppose I think it’s important enough to simply be aware of those dynamics and the way it colors the way we read online engagements, or go about conducting them. Stating our understanding of what exactly it is we think we’re doing, thinking about who our conversation partners are, who might silently watching from the sidelines, and so forth. For others, it might simply be wise to start considering the nature of doubts and questions. To that end, I’d recommend Matt Anderson’s book The End of Our Exploring. I can’t think of a more helpful resource on the subject.
Finally, I suppose I can end by simply noting the way that this is one more text that reminds us every inch of Scripture, even the weirdest bits like Jude, has some fitting word to speak into our day. A word of truth as well as a word of mercy for those who struggle with it.
Soli Deo Gloria
A question from someone who mostly watches silently from the sidelines: do you honestly think people like Matthew Vines and Rob Bell–those you’d label ‘false teachers’–are intentionally leading people astray? That they’re doubts about your version of Christianity are truly ‘aggressive’? That they’re like malicious serpents? Is everyone who disagrees with your interpretation of the Bible just rationalizing?
I don’t know, man, it just seems like some pretty intense rhetoric for an article about mercy. You’ve written in the past about the tendency to question the motives of those you disagree with, and it kind of seems to me like that’s what you’re doing here. I mean, isn’t it possible that these ‘false teachers’ have come by their conclusions honestly? What exactly do you think your ideological/theological opponents are up to? Are they just wrong, or are they actively and intentionally doing evil?
I’m an atheist and have no real skin in the game, so I’m not going to bat for the progressives here. I actually have more respect for the conservatives and the conservatish. You guys aren’t just picking out the cuddly bits and patching together some shiny happy Oprah-approved God; you swallow the whole biblical pill, smitings and all. I can dig it.
Okay, shutting up now. Keep on writing in the free world, brother.
Thanks for your questions. A couple of things I feel should be pointed out:
First, I am trying to explain the text and there’s a level of intensity of rhetoric that flows from matching Jude’s own admonitions.
Second, I never named specific names, nor put my finger on specific issues people are “disagreeing with me” about, precisely because I don’t know the specific internal mindset of each my ideological opponents. I would say that, objectively, there is a propagation of destructive false teaching happening in those cases, but even there…it’s tough to say how much of people’s “honest” conclusions that something the Bible says is sin is okay, isn’t to some degree very motivated reasoning.
Third, mercy in many cases is specifically about the way you treat those you believe have done wrong. It is not a judgment that what they have done is okay. So you can have a pretty intense judgment about a person’s actions/ideas while still showing them mercy in the way you treat them.
I don’t know that this helps, but I hope it clarifies a bit.
That definitely clarifies things! Particularly the third point. I mean, I have some pretty intense judgments about some of your ideas, but I’ve been reading your stuff long enough that I can trust they’re coming from a place of genuine good intention.
Still, I’m not sure how merciful it is to say someone’s not really a Christian because you think they’re wrong on this or that thing. What’s non-negotiable? Where do you draw the line? And whose line is the right one? Because conservatives say holding certain ‘liberal’ beliefs make you not really a Christian, and progressives say holding certain ‘conservative’ beliefs make you not really a Christian. Who are the real Christians? (The only one I’m sure about personally is Fred Rogers).
How much do you have to get wrong to be a false teacher, anyway? I’ll not name the dude, but let’s take a semi-famous pastor/author for example: this guy is an open theist, has a church with female pastors on staff, doesn’t consider the Bible to be inerrant, doesn’t subscribe to penal substitutionary atonement, but does believe the only marriages God approves of are between a man and a woman. Is he a real Christian?
Okay, done rambling. Absolutely do not expect a response to any of that, it’s just some stuff that popped into my head. Really appreciate you taking the time to reply.
I love that picture! I just saved it and I’m going to use it somehow. Thanks for your thoughts and have a great day!
“In The Beatitudes, Jesus was saying automatic sacrifice was not enough. Living any way the people wanted and then making the lawful offering to cover their sin was not the way to receive God’s mercy for their behavior. Mercifully receiving a place in God’s Kingdom is only attainable by adopting a life of demonstrating mercy to others. ”
Excerpt From: Mike Stair. “Be Attitudinal.” iBooks. https://itun.es/us/fBu8y.l