Jude rebukes "filthy dreamers"

Jude heightened the awareness of a doctrine of sensuality in verse 18,19. According to him, they dreamed “filthy dreams”.

17 But you, beloved, remember the words which were spoken before by the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ: 18 how they told you that there would be mockers in the last time who would walk according to their own ungodly lusts. 19 These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

Its important to note that the reason their doctrines are sensual, is because they themselves are sensual, walking (this is their pattern of living) in lust.  When blasting the pharisees in Luke 6, Jesus told them that the abundance of the hearts flowed out of their mouths. We know the pharisees were full of wickedness and hypocrisy. Likewise, false teachers are full of what comes from their mouths. Some conceal it until they get into places of wider influence, but make no mistake it is in them. That’s why its necessary to listen with spiritual ears and check with berean eyes and be ready to rebuke words and ideology “preached” in church that do not find a home in the Word of God.

Apparently, the people Jude wrote to weren’t doing that.

Let me also explain sensuality in the context Jude used it.  Sensuality is the devotedness to the gratification of the bodily appetites; free indulgence in carnal or sensual pleasures; luxuriousness; voluptuousness; lewdness.  Sensuality isn’t exclusively about sex, but is a major manifestion of lust. Look very hard and see if you can find anything about that which is Godly. If you can’t, you know why.

The epistle of Jude is striking in its context perhaps because it so straightforward and blunt about false teachers. The urgent letter isn’t what he intended to write.  Jude intended to write more fully about salvation to an unknown group of readers, but when he became aware of the false teachers who had slithered in among the flock, he wrote a forceful letter commanding the church to fight back with passion.

It is striking too because although these men were clearly leaders in some capacity in the church (albeit through deception) Jude never addresses them as “brothers in error” or “anointed men of God” or fellow believers. He portrays them as sinister personalities with an agenda diametrically opposed to the spiritual health of the church and the will of God. Its a clear lesson to us not to ignore the false teachers of our day and to call them what they really are.

The errant theology of these false teachers was characterized by three main issues:

1. The focus of their teaching wasn’t Jesus, but sexuality and sensuality.

Jude compares these false teachers to the men of Sodom and Gomorrah who went after “strange flesh”.  There can be no mistaking that homosexuality is always branded as unnatural in the Bible. When you look at the wider context of the condemnation, you will see that its not cultural, its spiritual.

The false teachers love dropping Jesus’ name when they talk. They master using it without ever obeying or submitting to his lordship. This is quite possible to do while intentionally leading people astray. It is a smoke and mirrors trick used by false teachers to ensare the spiritually young and those who dont have a grip on the scriptures. Did you notice he said they spoke “great swelling words”? That’s a slap at their deep sounding oratory skills.  The name dropping and fancy talk is also a rallying beacon for the rebellious, seditious and God-haters embedded within the church. In other words, there are people in church who are just waiting for a false teacher to rise up and spout false doctrine which mirrors the wickedness in their own hearts. They will then declare how “anointed” this “man of God” is. If the “anointed man of God” is confronted about his false teaching, the cheerleader will quickly quote the “touch not mine anointed…” type scriptures to deflect the heat off the false teacher. We have seen this happen over and over on this blog. This is a good point to segue into the second characteristic.

2. Supporters engage in endless pursuits of worldly knowledge.

They attempt to explain scripture in an effort to (a) justify the words of the false teacher and (b) inject doubt and confusion into any attempt to uncover God’s truth.  They are always learning and promoting (the ways of the world and culture) but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth (2 Tim 3:7). The best way to handle these types is to severely restrict their voices and influence in the church. The more they are allowed to have their say, the more confusing things will get and the truth will never be uncovered. That’s why we have to ban some “Christians” on our blog. They aren’t concerned with truth, that’s why they avoid talking directly about the Word of God. Endless hypothetical questions only foster confusion.

3. The final charateristic is idolatry.

They place a love of self and of people above devotion and obedience to Christ. This is a noble thing to do in the world’s eyes, but it works different in the Kingdom of God. In doing so they become men pleasers rather than God lovers. This is the major problem with “social justice ministry” platform advocated by so-called liberal Christians. The main thrust of the gospel of Jesus Christ is not good works, nor is it people power. The preaching of the cross is so that man will see his sinfulness, repent and be reconciled to God. Without a right relationship with God, good works are pointless. Atheists and muslims can feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the prisons and fight AIDS. Does that mean they are right with God?

Please be aware of these devices and guard yourself from them. Gird up the loins of your mind and be sober. These false teachers are numerous and lusting for power and attention. But they can only get a foothold if you  are not paying attention to what they are saying and doing. Like Jude, we should get angry enough to stop our business as usual attitude and speak out and call them out before they have lead people into hell.

 

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Jude rebukes "filthy dreamers"

  1. “Jude compares these false teachers to the men of Sodom and Gomorrah who went after “strange flesh”. There can be no mistaking that homosexuality is always branded as unnatural in the Bible.”

    I am surprised that you link going after “strange flesh” with
    homosexuality. The Greek word translated strange is, heteros,
    from which we get our English word, heterosexual.

    http://www.blueletterbible.org/cgi-bin/c.pl?book=Jud&chapter=1&verse=7&version=KJV#7

    Heteros conveys the meaning of ‘different,’ emphasizing the fact
    that the men of Sodom wanted to have sex with angels
    (different flesh, different bodies, I Corinthians 15:39-40).

    If Jude or God intended us to understand that the sin of Sodom
    was homosexuality, they would have used the Greek word,
    homoios, from which we get our English word, homosexual.
    Homoios conveys the meaning of ‘same’ but God did not use
    homoios in this verse, which should tell you something.

    Rick Brentlinger

  2. Wrong GC101. Jude used a combination of of two words: heteros and sarx meaning “another flesh with the same quality.”

    He did not only use heteros. As usual, you gay christians leave out parts which condemn homosexual activity, thus changing the meaning of the entire scripture. This is the work of filthy dreamers.

    More information

  3. The men of Sodom did not know that the visitors were angels. They referred to the visitors as “men.” As for heteros, it also means “of uncertain affinity” as well as “different.” (Actually, homoios means “likewise, in the same way.”) That verse means that men left the natural use of women and went after other men. This order is found in the book of Genesis during creation. Lot even offered his daughters, but the city men didn’t want them. The root of Sodom’s sin was pride. They had plenty of food and were idle. This led to them committing abomination before God (Ezekiel 16:49-50)
    Remember, we built our modern words from those Greek root words, not vice versa. Those individual words alone did not carry sexual connotations, but were meant to be read in context.
    It is impossible to get away from the fact that homosexuality is an abomination to God. Accept this and repent, and stop trying to find “strange” meanings to the scriptures.

  4. I concur that homeseuxuality is stated as being explicitly wrong…If lusting after a woman is a sin, than how much more so must be lusting after a man? The Bible says:

    (NKJV)1 Cor 6:9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites,

    GC101: i’ve noticed that you are a fan of going back to the original greek, I am also. In 1 Cor 6:9 even in the greek there is a word that explicitly refers to homosexuals…I don’t think it gets any clearer than that. I don’t say these things to condemn you, but rather in the hope that your eyes will be opened to the truth. You might not like what I say, I say it not to be liked,but rather b/c I am called to love my fellow man, to preach the gospel of hope.

  5. Hello, Rick Brentlinger:

    Nice try at parsing the Koine; nevertheless, when one man’s
    predilection and thrust is for the insertion of his peepee into
    another man’s cesspool, it’s an abomination.

    “Gay” does not immediately come to mind, when I think on
    your predilection, Rick.

  6. zsirrom-

    The problem with saying arsenokoites means homosexual is that the word, arsenokoites, was not used to describe committed, faithful same sex relationships.

    As conservative, heterosexual, evangelical New Testament scholar, Dr. Gordon Fee points out, arsenokoites is rarely used in Greek literature,

    “especially when describing homosexual activity.”

    -The New International Commentary on the New Testament, The First Epistle To The Corinthians, Eerdmans, 1987, Dr. Gordon D. Fee, p. 244.

    He still thinks I Cor 6:9 refers to homosexual activity in spite of the evidence to the contrary. That’s the problem. When you start with a presupposition that I Cor 6:9 refers to homosexuals, your conclusion is tainted unless you factor in actual usage of the word, arsenokoites.

    Some of you admit that the word arsenokoites was never used to mean homosexual. Then you continue to insist that arsenokoites means homosexual and refers to a committed, faithful, non-cultic relationship.

    You arrive at that false conclusion based on etymology, your belief that since arseno means man and koite is a euphemism for sex, that when the two parts are combined into one word, it must mean homosexual or a man who has sex with men.

    Dr. James Barr, whom the Times Online obituary lauded as:

    “probably the most significant Hebrew and Old Testament scholar in Britain in the twentieth century” had this to say about etymology.

    “The main point is that the etymology of a word is not a statement about its meaning but about its history… it is quite wrong to suppose that the etymology of a word is necessarily a guide either to its ‘proper’ meaning in a later period or to its actual meaning in that period.”

    James Barr, The Semantics of Biblical Language, Oxford University Press, New York, 1961, p. 109.

    The way arsenokoites was actually used in the ancient Greek language should be our guide as to its meaning.

    Rick Brentlinger

  7. Great post – as always!

    Came over today to tell you that I have selected your blog for the “Awesome Site Award”!

    Congratulations and God bless you!

    Christine

  8. Very interesting insight. The gay thing is black and white, no grey areas it is wrong with no exception. Called me bigotted, fine but it is stll sin.

    What I find insightful is the whole area of sensuality. Our churches now have sexy gospel and sex appeal in the church today. I will use a real example.
    I appointed a couple of young women to the marketing team, women of integrity and good character but I was moaned at and pressurised to appoint the young women who showed their cleavage, wore micro-mini skirts and gave off a sexual vibe because the straight women were called boring.
    Coming from a Black Pentecostal church I found this to be unacceptable but I was removed from co-ordinating this area of the church because it was said I had a holier than holy attitude.

    And what do you know? The church has now ordained some of the same sleazy, weak doctrine, over sensual, personality centred individuals and here is the hook, they say that the church will never be complete until we have gays in the puplit. We in the UK are as backslidden as our brethen in the US.

  9. GC101 Your understanding has been darkened by your own refusal to see God’s simple and clear point —greek aside— as sin. Sadly this is a common trait in the gay christian movement and you are proving to be no exception.

    100% of the scriptures that address homosexuality speak against it in the harshest terms possible. 0% make any allowance for “committed, consensual loving homosexual acts”. Not one. You created that out of thin air.

    So you argue the mother of all red herrings: homosexual relationships now are different than homosexual relationships then. So homosexuals didnt start having consensual sex until…1950? Homosexuals didnt start “loving” each other until a couple of days after the Stonewall riots? Homosexuals never were “coupled” until Massachusetts instituted that wicked law? What foolishness! Sin has not changed since the first moment man committed sin. No matter how you redefine it, it is always rebellion and transgression against the good and perfect will of God.

    Your position seems to argue that YOU (finite and mortal) know something God (omniscient, omnipresent) could not see or know and therefore never addressed in the scriptures. But with a few greek words twisted just the right way, you have now exceeded the knowledge of the Most High. Do you really think you (and the scholars you quoted) are more believable above God?

    Sex between two men or two women is a sin whether it is consensual, forced or dreamed about in any context. God is a contemporary God. He is in the now, before now became now. From everlasting to everlasting, he IS God. Your argument does not take this into account, thus allowing you to conveniently errect a god who agrees with the sin in your heart.

    The semantics of biblical language? What is unclear about if a man lie with a man as with a woman both have committed abomination.? What about that do you not understand.

    GC101, lets conduct a simple test:

    If a sign is red, octagon shaped and mounted on an 7 foot metal pole at the intersection of two roads AND has big white, all cap ENGLISH letters that read STOP, what would you think the sign meant?

    In case you havent seen one of these here’s the visual.

  10. GC101, the Bible doesn’t differentiate between committed and uncommitted homosexual relationships. All homosexuality is a sin, end of story. Not only does the Bible have written in it what to abstain from, but also what is encouraged, how God desires for us to live.

    Proverbs 18:22 He who finds a wife finds a good thing, And obtains favor from the Lord.

    I would encourage you to go read Romans 1 without twisting the english or the greek to say what you want. Read it as it is written. All over that chapter particularly after verse 22 it states that both male and female homosexuality are sins. I don’t know what your prayer life looks like, or if you even have one. Regardless, I encourage you to go seek The Father on this matter. If God intended and is ok with homosexuality then why did he create woman?

    1 Peter 1:15 Therefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and rest your hope fully upon the grace that is to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ; 14. as obedient children, not conforming yourselves to the former lusts, as in your ignorance; 15. but as He who called you is holy, you also be holy in all your conduct, 16. because it is written, “Be holy, for I am holy.”

    We are called as Christians to be Holy, to be pure. Again if sex outside of marriage with a woman is wrong, then also sex with a man is sin. Sex was intended to be between a man and his wife. Not between a man and a woman who aren’t married, or between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman.

    I beseech you my brother, no longer let the enemy ensnare you and keep you in sin. Instead humble yourself and seek your Father in Heaven, ask Him for forgiveness and turn from your evil ways. Walk upright and Holy upon the straight and narrow path. There is a destiny over you and a calling on your life, this deception is nothing but the enemy trying to keep you from the plan God has for your life. In all that Jesus is, your brother Zachary Thomas

  11. I have nothing to argur with all of this people who called themselves Christian Gays for all i know is that Light and Darkness have nothing in common and the christianity that i know and believed that christ established on earth does not have anything to do with that devilish name which does not exist and can never exist in christedom until the second glorious coming of our lord Jesus Christ.

    The truth is that those that engage in such devilish act of Homosexuality may win the argurment or whatever that they may call it here on earth with the help of their devilish knowledge of the bible for the holy bible clearly stated it that this are people who will go on learning without coming to the knowledge of the truth and mind you that not that they don’t know the truth but they will intentionally sealed their conscience in defence of their devilish and wicked actions instead of seeking for grace to quit it. So they may won the argurment but let them believe it or not that at the appearing of christ their wisdom and knowledge will declared them fools.

    My beloved brothers, repent from your sins and ask for his mercy and stop justifying your devilish act with holy scripture because it is a total contradiction.

Comments are closed.