Fallen and Flawed

D, before you & I are caught in a crossfire ambush by our Lord’s enemies, let me try to clarify a point:
Both yesterday and today you have spoken of, “someone who, once a believer, rejects Christ.” Meanwhile, I have elsewhere on this blog referenced Jesus’ promise that He will never cast out whoever comes to Him and that no one is able to pluck us from His hand (“no one” including even we ourselves).
???
Are we contradicting each other? We are not. Paul says that even demons believe in God (and that they have the good sense to tremble before Him). The book of Job clearly demonstrates that even satan himself believes and obeys God.
So the one of whom you speak, who has believed in and later denied the Lord is not necessarily one who has “come to” Christ– in fact, according to Jesus’ promises, that would be impossible.
!!!
But it is obviously not only possible, but commonly practiced, to believe the gospel without accepting it; to, as a non-practicing/non-participating believer, reject God’s claim on one’s life. These latter, then, are the apostates to whom Jude and you refer.

Great point Al.

I think Matthew 7:15-23 supports this position:

15 “Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. 18 A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will recognize them by their fruits.
21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

First, the apostate does slip into the church wearing a disguise (Demian, you are dead on).
Second, we recognize the wolves by their fruit. Jude lays out the bad fruit for us.
Third, not all who claim/believe in Christ are saved. To claim belief is to simply be on par with the demons. “Depart from me, for I never knew you.”

Demian, you covered this well above. And you are supported by other scripture.

Al, 100 percent with you.
–
Yes, you’re right the person I am referring to, as you point out, is the person who walked away from the faith, and the only reason they could walk away from the faith was because they were never in the faith to begin with. They enjoyed intellectual acknowledgment of God, Christ and the doctrines of Christ, but never “denied themselves, took up their cross or followed Jesus.” On the outside they fit the criteria, but on the inside were woefully detached and rebellious. And it is indeed those were conversion actually stick that enjoy the perseverance of the saints. I speak to the authentic Christian and how he can be known in my salvation story. There’s 11 indicators I share, all found in 1 John, by the way. Hope this helps.

Demain,

Just curious (OK OK, probably just stirring), why did you skip over v14-15 when it is clearly so relevant to the topic?
Does it bother you that the bible quotes scripture that is not actually in the bible?

As for the subject of this posting, I’m not even sure where to begin. I understand that Jude is not equating all this nasty behaviour with apostacy, he is merely saying that a real Christian should not do these things. What does bother me is that (correct me if I’m wrong, please) whenever apostacy is mentioned in the bible it always has some sort of linking with immoral behaviour. In my many childhood and teenage years at church, I heard many sermons mention (anonymously, thankfully) anecdotes of people who abandoned the faith because it was too hard or they stopped trusting god or whatever, and now they are living a debaucherous life e.g. drugs, alchocol, basically saying they had gone off the rails.
I never once heard an anecdote where someone stopped believing, stopped attending church but otherwise their lifestyle/character remained the same.
This is what bothers me, that believers (subconsiously or deliberately) do have some sort of automatic link between apostacy and immorality. Excuse the armchair psychology here but I think its a false association that helps their brain to deal with doubts, by allowing them to treat non-belief as a bad thing.

I am pleased to report that I have just as much respect for people as a non-believer, and no less empathy either. I don’t believe in karma or anything like that, but I would never steal or hurt someone deliberately simply because I know I would pity them too much afterwards, no matter who they were.
I’m certainly not perfect and I do make mistakes, what I am saying is that my behaviour is at least as good as the average christian.
And yes, I was a true believer. I believed everything I was taught in sunday school and youth group, put it into practise in my life. I was very active in university ministry until my 2nd year when I gradually became unable to believe it.
Any one of the many strangers I walked up to and shared my faith and the good news with at university would agree that not only did I enjoy intellectual acknowledgment but that I also denied myself, took up my cross and followed Jesus.
With this in mind I guess this puts me outside the category of Apostate according to al and yourself.

It is refreshing to see thoughtful christians such as yourself, Demian, that are willing to explore these issues and debate them with someone outside the church.

James, you’ll have to help me out with what you mean by the relevancy of v14-15…
–
Couple of things: I think it is a shame that we move from apostasy to immorality [in the debauched, lewd sense] when you’re right, people can just walk away from the faith and never deviate from their straight life. Perhaps even become more charitable or more patient. I think the key to understanding this text, however, is that the author, Jude, is writing a letter to people in a church about people who are in the church and continue to call themselves a Christian, behaving immorally–whether they be critical, self-seeking or arrogant or flat out godless and perverted. And understand, he’s not suggesting that every immoral person has all these indicators. All they need is one. The more he has the easier to spot, for sure.
–
And one final note, James…I’m not qualified to judge you or anyone else outside of the church or your experience. I hope I don’t come across that presumptuous. All I’m qualified is to state that we all sinned and fall short of the glory of God. Including me. But I could never expect you to live by rules in a book you don’t even believe in [see the comments in the 13 Quick Facts on Fundamentalism to see a deeper discussion].
–
In the end, God is the ultimate and only qualified judge of any man’s obedience and faithfulness. That includes, again, me: I’m not aware of any unconfessed or habitual sin in my own life, but my limited understanding assumes that I’m not the final verdict.
–
And James, you said:

It is refreshing to see thoughtful christians such as yourself, Demian, that are willing to explore these issues and debate them with someone outside the church.

Thank you for the encouraging words. And honestly, I don’t think Jesus would want it any other way. Furthermore, my life and faith are deeper and richer through the exercise. And I think it’s equally refreshing to see thoughtful non-believers respect and explores these issues with someone in the church. Means a lot, James.

Demian,

14-15 I considered relevant because it speaks of the judgement that has been prophesied of these people, the subject of the letter.
I supposed my motive for mentioning it is that I’ve never heard a Christian adequately defend the fact that Jude quotes from an apocryphal book.

James, ah, now I see. So what troubles you about that?

What troubles me about not hearing an adequate defence of this? nothing, personally, I was just curious to see whether you had one.
To me, it severely undermines the belief that God was in control of shaping the canon of scripture.

James, I think you’ll find that Jude 14-15 is not the only non-scriptural reference in the Bible (e.g. v.9, the origin of which is apparently lost in antiquity).
~
That the Bible quotes from non-canonized sources indicates at least two things:
[1] that such sources exist which were not, in and of themselves, fully (or even partially) inspired and authored by the Holy Spirit, and
[2] that what portions of such writings are found quoted in the canonized Scriptures have been foreordained by God to be worthy of inclusion in His Word by virtue of the truths He thereby uses them to express. In the example of Jude 14-15, it is that specific quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9 which God means to have us recognize as Holy Writ, but not the whole book of 1 Enoch.
~
Hope that helps…

James, you said:

To me, it severely undermines the belief that God was in control of shaping the canon of scripture.

Do you really mean “severely?” That’s a huge leap. I could understand this being one chink in the armor…but not the brick that brings the house down…
–
Regardless, like Al points out, that Jude quoted a book that wasn’t part of the canon doesn’t mean it wasn’t true or accurate. Just not inspired. Paul did the same thing in Acts, 1 Corinthians and Titus. Let me know what you think.

Thanks for your responses guys.

In the example of Jude 14-15, it is that specific quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9 which God means to have us recognize as Holy Writ, but not the whole book of 1 Enoch.

I suppose that makes it possible, it just seems strange to me, thats all. So Enoch is writing away, and suddenly god steps in and influences a single verse, then backs away again?
Even stranger, I had a quick look at someone’s english
translation of the book, and I see in verse two: Enoch a righteous man, whose eyes were opened by God, saw the vision of the Holy One in the heavens, which the angels showed me, and from them I heard everything, and from them I understood as I saw, but not for this generation, but for a remote one which is for to come.
It looks like Enoch considered himself to be writing an account of a complete vision from the angels. I think he would be surprised to hear that only a single isolated part of what he wrote was considered by the church to be from god. I think Jude would be equally surprised, assuming he read the book too.

It just seems like a question with two explanations – one is the more reasonable to an unbiased observer (if indeed there is such a thing!), the other bends over backwards (IMO!) in order to keep Christian doctrine intact.

I suppose “severely” is a strong word, but at least I only claimed that it “undermined”, others would go further that that i’m sure.:)

James, I’ll have to let Al explain what he means…cause I’m not sure I understand or even agree.

I’m sorry, gents– from your comments I can’t tell what part(s) of what I said may be in question or unclear. May I ask you to quote me specifically and state exactly what about my words is questionable or objectionable to you. Then I’ll do my best to clarify. Thanks!

Al,
My post already has a specific quote from you, followed by what I found questionable.
To summarize, I find it hard to believe that Enoch would write a full account of a heavenly vision, a fraction of which was actually “inspired by god”.
Indeed, that god would ‘partially inspire’ some line here and there of anybodies work seems odd.

James, thanks for condensing your post for me– I think that now I get what your question is. I said,

“In the example of Jude 14-15, it is that specific quotation from 1 Enoch 1:9 which God means to have us recognize as Holy Writ, but not the whole book of 1 Enoch.”

I think that I stated that in such a manner as to have led you to misunderstand my meaning. Let me try again:
^
I have no idea whether Enoch’s vision was of heavenly origin or, for that matter, whether he actually had a vision at all. I have no reason to doubt it; I simply have no opinion about it. The writings of Enoch are not recognized by biblical scholars as being inspired scriptures because that was not God’s intention. But God has chosen that a specific quote from one of Enoch’s books should be referred to in a book that was to be canonized. It is THAT quote which the Christian will acknowledge as being a part of God’s Word because He elected to present it in the context of Jude’s message, NOT because He is legitimizing the book of 1 Enoch OR that particular passage in the context of 1 Enoch.
~
A contemporary example might be if those who executed Saddam Hussein had said at his hanging, “Sic semper tyrannus,” they would not necessarily have been validating the deeds of John Wilkes Booth, nor even his use of the phrase.

James…what Al said…just cause it’s not inspired or even in the canon doesn’t mean it’s not true. Another example is when Paul in 1 Cor. 15, quoted from what’s thought to be an early creed…it’s still an accurate account…just not in the canon. And just so you know…when we talk about the canon, it’s simply means the church recognized these books as inspired…not that their ordained them inspired…[I have a hunch you knew that already cause you come across as a pretty smart guy.] Take care and you guys have a great weekend.

Al, I see what you mean, and once again our presuppositions take us in different directions. If you already believe that God ordained the protestant christian canon then I can see why your answer is reasonable.
I, however, don’t believe that and so i gravitate toward the more likely explanation given human authorship.

And thanks Demian, I’m no theologian but I do have years of sunday school and church under my belt

“I’m no theologian but I do have years of sunday school and church under my belt”

Careful– that can leave stretchmarks!

I echo D’s wishes for a wonderful weekend for all!

haha thanks al.
I’m in Australia so my weekend is almost over already!