ΣΙ do not think the marginal reading in the R.V., “ cast themselves away,”
tenable.
+ Zahn understands πλάνη in an active, not a passive sense, as the ruling prin- ciple of the πλάνος Balaam, not as the error into which others fell through his
seductions. covers both.
I do not think Jude discriminated between these meanings:
πλάνη
266
καὶ τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ τοῦ Κορὲ ἀπώλοντο.
τι--
12. οὗτοί eiaw! [oi]
Ἰουτοι εισιν] add. (ex. v. 16) γογγυσται --πορενοµενοι SY C%,
Paul asserts of his own ministry that it Was οὐκ ἐκ πλάνης οὐδὲ ἐξ ἀκαθαρσίας οὐδὲ ἐν δόλῳ . . . αὔτε γὰρ ἐν λόγῳ κολακείας ἐγενήθημεν, οὔτε ἐν προφάσει πλεονεξίας, οὔτε ητοῦντες ἐξ ἀνθρώπων δόξαν, x Tim. iii. 8, 9, διακόνους μὴ διλόγους, μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ προσέχοντας, μὴ αἰσχροκερδεῖς, ἔχοντας τὸ µυστήριον τῆς πίστεως ἐν καθαρᾷ συνειδήσει, Tit. i. 7, 11 διδάσκοντες ἃ μὴ δεῖ κέρδους χάριν, 1 Peter v. 2. For the gen. μισθοῦ cf. Winer, p. 258, Plat. Rep. ix. 575 B, μισθοῦ ἐπικουροῦσιν, I Cor. vii. 23, τιμὴς ἠγοράσθητε.
On the whole I understand the passage thus: Balaam went wrong because he allowed himself to hanker after gain and so lost his communion with God. He not only went wrong himself, but he abused his great influence and his repu- tation as a prophet, to lead astray the Israelites by drawing them away from the holy worship of Jehovah to the im- pure worship of Baal Peor. So these false teachers use their prophetical gifts for purposes of self-aggrandisement, and endeavour to make their services attrac- tive by excluding from religion all that is strenuous and difficult, and opening the door to every kind of indulgence. See the notes and comments on the parallel passages of 2 Peter in my edi- tion of that Epistle.
τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ τοῦ Κορὲ ἀπώλοντο. For Korah’s sin see Num. xvi. 1 f. and compare, for the same rebellious spirit in the Christian Church, 3 John, g, 1ο
(of Diotrephes), Tit. i. το, 11, εἰσὶ πολλοὶ ἀνυπότακτοι . . . οὓς δεῖ ἐπιστομίζειν, ib. i. 16; 7b. iii. το, 11,
1 Tim. 1. 20 (among those who have made shipwreck of the faith mention is made of Hymenaeus and Alexander) ots παρέδωκα τῷ Σατανᾷ ἵνα παιδευθῶσιν μὴ βλασφημεῖν, id. vi. 3-6, 2 Tim. ii. 16- 18, ὁ λόγος αὐτῶν ὡς γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει, ὧν ἐστιν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος, οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν, ib. ii. 25, iv. 14, where the opposition of Alexander the coppersmith is noted; but especially iii. 1-9, which presents a close parallel to our passage, referring to a similar resistance to Moses in the case of the apocryphal Jannes and Jambres. For ἀντιλογία see Heb. xii. 3, avado- γίσασθε τὸν τοιαύτην ὑπομεμενηκότα ὑπὸ τῶν ἁμαρτωλῶν εἰς ἑαυτὸν ἀντιλογίαν. It is used as a translation of Meribah in
Num. xx. 13 αἰ. and (in relation to Korah} in Protev. Fac. 9, µνήσθητι ὅσα ἐποίησεν 6 Θεὸς τοῖς Δαθάν, Κωρέ, καὶ ᾿Αβειράμ, πῶς ἐδιχάσθη ἤ γἢ καὶ κατέπιεν αὐτοὺς διὰ τὴν ἀντιλογίαν αὐτῶν.
Rampf draws attention to the climax contained in these examples. The sin of Cain is marked by the words ἐπορεύ- θησαν ὁδῷ, that of Balaam the gentile prophet by ἐξεχύθησαν πλάνη, that of the Levite Korah by ἀπώλοντο ἀντιλογίᾳα.
Ver. 12. οὗτοί εἰσιν [ot] ἐν ταῖς aya- παις ὑμῶν σπιλάδες συνευωχούµενοι. Dr. Chase quotes Zech. i. 10 f., Apoc. vil. 14, Enoch xlvi. 3, Secrets of Enoch, Vil. 3 xviil. 3, xix. 3, etc., for the phrase οὗτοί εἰσιν, adding that it was probably adopted by St. Jude from apocalyptic writings, for which he clearly had a special liking. On the early history of the Agape, see my Appendix C to Clem. Al. Strom. vii. The parallel passage in 2 Peter (on which see n.) has two re- markable divergencies from the text here, reading ἁπάταις for ἀγάπαις and σπῖλοι for σπιλάδε.. There has been much discussion as to the meaning of the latter word. It is agreed that it is generally used of a rock in or by the sea, and many of the lexicographers under- stand it of a hidden rock, ὕφαλος πέτρα, see Thomas Mag., σπιλάς, ᾽Αττικῶς: ὕφαλος πέτρα, Ἕλληνες, Etymol. Μ., σπιλάδες . .. at ὑπὸ θάλασσαν κε- κρυµµέναι πέτραι, ὅθεν καὶ ὕφαλος ἄνθρωπος λέγεται ὁ κεκρυµµένος καὶ mavoupyos, ib, κατασπιλάζοντες, κατα- κρύπτοντες, ἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶν ὑφάλων πετρῶν, αἵτινες ὑπὸ ὕδατος καλυπ- τόµεναι τοῖς ἀπρούπτως προσπελάζουσι κίνδυνον ἐπιφέρουσι (both cited by Wetst.). The same explanation is given by the scholiast on Hom. Od. v. 401-405, καὶ δὴ δοῦπον ἄκουσε ποτὶ σπιλάδεσσι θαλάσσης ... ἀλλ᾽ ἀκταὶ προβλῆτες ἔσαν σπιλάδες τε πάγοι τε. See Plut. Mor. tol B, εὐδία σπιλάδος, which Wytt. translates ‘ tranquillitas maris caecam rupem tegentis,” 7b. 476 A, Oecumenius on this passage, at σπιλάδες τοῖς πλέουσιν ὀλέθριοι, ἀπροσδοκήτως ἐπιγενόμεναι (3) -νοις), and ἐξαίφνης, ὥσπερ σπιλάδες, ἐπάγοντες αὐτοῖς τὸν ὄλεθρον τῶν ψυχῶν. Wetst. also quotes Heliod. v. 31, θαλάσσῃ προσείκασας ἂν τοὺς ἄνδρας αἰφνιδίῳ σπιλάδι κατασεισθέντας. The compound κατα- σπιλάζω joined with the parallel case