Copyright
James Hastings.

Dictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) online

. (page 212 of 234)
Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 212 of 234)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


a scribe who wished to make it clear which Jude
was intended. The precise date must of course
remain very uncertain. Nothing compels us to
go below the year A.D. 100. Moreover, the author
has apparently a new situation to deal with. It
ought, however, to be frankly recognized that the
Epistle is quite conceivable as the work of Jude
the Lord's brother in the decade A.D. 70-80.

4. Destination. Nothing is known as to the
destination of the Epistle, nor can anything be
inferred with confidence. It is not clear whether
the Epistle is catholic or is addressed to Dreaders in
a definite locality, though the former is perhaps
the more likely view.

LITERATURE. Commentaries by Hutber in Meyer (1852,
Eng.tr. from 4th ed., 1881), Meyer-Kuhl (1897), Meyer-Knopf
(1912), H.vonSoden(1890, 3 1899),E. H.Plumptre (Cambridge
Bible, 1880), C. Bigg (ICC, 1901). W. H. Bennett (Century
Bible, 1901), J. B. Mayor (1907), who also contributes the
Coinmentaryto#Gr(1910),HoUmann(1907),Windisch(1911);
F. Spitta, Der zweite Brief des Petrus und der Brief des Judas,
1885 ; the relevant sections in NT Introductions, especially
these by H. J. Holtzmann ( 3 1892) ; A. Julicher (51906, Eng.
tr., 1904) ; T. Zahn (Eng. tr., 1909, ii.) ; W. F. Adeney (1899),
and J. Moffatt (1911) ; artt. by F. H. Chase in HDB, Sieffert
in PRE 3 , O. Cone in EBi, R. A. Falconer in SDB.

A. S. PEAKE.

**JUDGE, JUDGING (Ethical). No account of
judging in the Apostolic Church can be complete
which is not based on our Lord's prohibition, ' J udge
not, that ye be not judged' (Mt 7 ia ). This is not
to be interpreted as a disparagement of the intel-
lectual faculty of criticism per se, but as a limita-
tion of it in harmony with the Christian stand-
point. __ In the corresponding passage in Lk 6, the
repression of the critical spirit is directly associated
with the character of God, who makes no distinc-
tions in His gifts, but is kind and merciful to all
alike. The section in Matthew has rather a
relation to the temper of the Pharisee, which was
supercilious and narrowly strict in its judgments
of others. The Pharisee ' despised others ' ; hence
his incapacity to understand human nature, his
judgments being rooted in contempt. The citizen
of the Kingdom of Heaven, on the other hand, has
to avoid the censorious temper and make the best

** Copyright, 1916, by Ck



of everyone and everything ; he has to repress the
tendency to be uncharitable ; otherwise, when he
is obliged to utter a moral verdict, it will be of
small weight. But our Lord never countenances
the easy-going tolerance which in effect abrogates
the right of moral judgment. He does not absolve
His followers from discriminating between right and
wrong even in the case of a ' brother' (Mt 18 15 ~ 18 )
and indeed urges upon them the duty of 'binding
and loosing,' condemning and acquitting, according
to the recognized moral standard of the Kingdom.

The teaching of St. James has many echoes of
the ethical injunctions of our Lord, and the passage
4 llf - in his Epistle recalls the spirit, if not the actual
language, of the Sermon on the Mount. We are
not to indulge in the habit of fault-finding : 'Who
art thou that judgest thy neighbour?' We are
never to judge from any other motive than the
moral improvement of the person judged : we are
to remember our own defects, and to utter our
verdict with a due sense of responsibility ; other-
wise we 'speak against the law and judge the law.'
The Apostle means by this that there is to be a
proper standard of right and wrong, and not a
subjective criterion formed out of our own likes
and dislikes. If we make our own standard, we
set ourselves above the law-giver and the law.

In similar strain St. Paul writes (Ro 14 4 ), 'Who
art thou that judgest another man's servant ? To
his own master he standeth or falleth.' The words
are suggested by the relationship between the
'strong' and the 'weak.' The 'strong,' conscious
of their freedom in Christ, may despise the ' weak,'
who still feel it their duty to continue an ascetic
habit, even though they have accepted Christ ; on
the other hand, the 'weak,' condemning what
seems to them the laxity of the 'strong,' may be
led into the habit of censorious judgment (see
an admirable discourse by A. Souter in ExpT
xxiy. [1912-13] 5 ff .). The same Apostle, however,
while thus discountenancing the habit of judging
one another, expressly advocates the duty of acting
according to a moral standard in dealing with
moral offences. In 1 Co 5, e.g., he condemns the
Corinthians for allowing a case of immorality to
go unchallenged and unjudged. At the same time
the Christian Church is to limit its judgments to
those that are within ; those that are without are
to be left to the judgment of God (1 Co 5 13 ). It
would appear, then, that the Apostle, while not
absolving the Christian from the duty of judgment
in offences against morality, advocates the widest
tolerance in minor matters of everyday life, e.g. in
Ro 14 4 ' 10 a passage which closes with the state-
ment : 'we shall all stand before the judgement-
seat of God.'

In the same way the apostolic writers press upon
their readers the duty of discrimination according
to certain standards of right and wrong. They
are to 'test all things and hold fast that which is
right' (1 Th 5 21 ), and to 'test the spirits whether
they be of God' (1 Jn 4 1 , the word doKi/j.dfeii> being
used, which more definitely suggests the approval
which results from a test or touchstone than the
simpler and more familiar Kplvtiv). They are to
pronounce anathema on the proclaimer of 'another'
gospel (Gal I 9 ), and to refuse hospitality to a false
teacher, on the ground that a welcome or salu-
tation involves participation in his evil works
(2 Jn 10f -). Thus doctrine, like life and conduct, is
to be brought to the test of a moral standard, and
what is subversive of the person and teaching of
the Lord is to be rejected. 'Happy,' says the
Apostle Paul (Ro 14 22 ), 'is he that judgeth not
himself in that which he approveth (8oKi/j,det,).
This passage appears to combine the two ideas
which enter into the NT treatment of the subject :
the Christian must avoid censorious judgment and

'.arles Scribner's Sons.



JUDGE, JUDGING (ETHICAL)



JUDGMENT, DAMNATION 661



yet courageously exercise his Judgment in the
realm of ethics and doctrine ; he is happy in the
strength of his faith, which enables him so to act
as to escape self-condemnation or misgiving. In
another passage (Ro 14 13 ) St. Paul plays on the
double use of Kplvca, viz. as indicating a hasty
and uncharitable judgment, and as implying the
determining of a course of conduct for oneself.
'Let us not judge one another any more, but judge
ye this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock
in his brother's way' the latter sense being
paralleled by 2 Co 2 1 , 'I formed this judgment or
determination for myself,' and 1 Co 2 2 5 3 , Tit 3 12 .
A similar usage occurs in the famous statement in
2 Co 5 14 , 'because we thus judge that if one died for
all,' etc. the word signifying a conviction that
has been formed out of spiritual experience (cf.
also 1 Co II 13 , where there is an appeal to a judg-
ment based on common sense).

For the judgments of others on the Christian
there are two passages worth our notice, viz. Col
2 16 , where the false teaching which infected the
Colossian Church is made the subject of warning,
eating and drinking being, according to the
Apostle, mere shadows of the reality, and therefore
not matters on which a judgment should be based
'let no man take you to task in eating and in
drinking' : scrupulous ritual and asceticism are a
return to an order of life which the gospel has
rendered obsolete. The other passage is Ja 2 12 ,
'So speak ye and so do as men that are to be
judged by a law of liberty' (cf. I 25 ). This is St.
James's variation on St. Paul's 'law of the spirit
of life in Christ Jesus' not a system of codified
regulations enforced from without, but a law
freely accepted and obeyed as the result of a new
relationship to God. 'It will,' says J. B. Mayor
(The Epistle of St. James 3 , 1910, p. 94), 'be a
deeper-going judgment than that of man, for it
will not stop short at particular precepts or at the
outward act, whatever it may be, but will pene-
trate to the temper and motive.' And it destroys
all morbid anxiety and questioning ' as to the exact
performance of each separate precept ' if there has
been true love to God and man. ' The same love
which actuates the true Christian here actuates
the Judge both here and hereafter.'

The reader is referred to a concordance for the
numerous passages in which God or Christ is
spoken of as Judge of humanity ; we have here
limited our survey to the non-forensic side of judg-
ment. There is a passage, however, which calls
for comment, viz. 1 Co 6 2 , 'Do ye not know that
the saints shall judge the world?' This is to be
taken along with a previous warning in 4 5 , 'Judge
nothing before the time, until the Lord come,' etc.
The meaning is that the saints will be associated
with then- Lord in the act of judging the world at
the Last Day, and their judgment will be exercised
not only on the world, but on 'angels' (6 3 ), mean-
ing the hierarchy of evil or fallen spirits. This
doctrine of the future is stated in Rev 20 4 and be-
came a rooted conviction of the post-Apostolic
Church, as we see from Euseb. HE vi. 42, where
the saints are called utroxoi rrjs icpia-eus atfroO, ' as-
sociates in His judgment.' The Divine Judgeship
is a truth essential to human thought. Experi-
ence deepens the sense of the ignorance and
fallibility attaching to man's judgments. The
epigram tout connaitre c'est tout pardonner is in
effect an expression of human helplessness ; and
the aspiration of David, ' Let me fall now into the
hand of the Lord . . . and let me not fall into the
hand of man' (1 Ch 21 13 ), is really the cry of
humanity for ever conscious of the limitations of
its own judgments.

See, further, artt. JUDGMENT and TRIAL-AT-
LAVV.



LITERATURE. C. Gore, Sermon on the Mount, London, 1897,
ch. ix. ; J. B. Mayor, The Epistle of St. James*, do. 1897, p.
221; |J. R. Seeley, Ecce Homo", do. 1876, ch. ix. ; J.
Martineau, Types of Ethical Theory 3 , Oxford, 1889, vol. li.

ch - i- R. MARTIN POPE.

JUDGMENT, DAMNATION. The idea of judg-
inent is involved in that of government: a ruler,
if he is to assert his authority and maintain order,
must call recalcitrants to account. Since the Deity
has always been thought of as exercising some kind
of sovereignty, the idea of judgment may be said
to be co-extensive with that of religion.

1. The OT conception. Long before the days of
the great prophets, Israel worshipped Jahweh as
a God of judgment. Jahweh avenged not only
insults against His own honour, but also deeds of
violence and wrong (Gn 4 11 , Jg 9 56f ). Justice was
administered in His name, and as the supreme
Judge He saw that right was done. It would,
however, be too much to say that His actions were
regarded, as invariably regulated by a regard for
j ustice. He had His favourites among individuals,
and Israel was His favourite nation (1 S I 11 , 2 S
12 24 ). In the exercise of His despotic power, He
could act in a certain way simply because it so
pleased Him. For His rejection of Saul and His
surrender of Israel into the hand of the Philistines
the older traaition knew no reason. Not till we
come to the great prophets do judgment and justice
appear as equivalent terms.

The prophetic conception of Divine Judgment
can be summed up in a few sentences. Jahweh is
the World-ruler and Judge : not only Israel but all
nations of the earth stand at His bar (Am 1. 2).
His judgments rest on purely moral grounds and
are absolutely just (Is 28 17 45 21 ). Even in the case
of Israel, justice must take its course (Am 3 2 ).
Though individuals are occasionally spoken of as
suffering for their private sins, in the main it is
not with the individual but with the nation that
Jahweh reckons. The individual is merged in the
State and shares its fate. The theatre of judg-
ment is this earth: of reward or punishment
beyond death the prophets know nothing. Good
and bad alike descend to Sheol and share the same
bodyless, pithless existence in separation from
Jahweh (Is 14 4 ' 18 , Ps 6 5 ). Judgment, at least so
far as Israel is concerned, never appears, except
perhaps in Amos, as an end in itself and the
ultimate law of Jahweh'a working. Israel has a
worth in Jahweh's eyes; He refuses to give her
up ; and, when His judgments have accomplished
their disciplining work, salvation will surely follow
(Is 40 1 2 ) . That the correspondence between desert
and lot in the existing order is but imperfect, and
salvation an object of hope rather than of experi-
ence, are facts to which the prophets are keenly
alive. But their faith finds refuge in the concep-
tion of a great day in the near future, 'the day of
the Lord,' in which Jahweh will interpose in a
decisive way in human affairs, to overthrow His
enemies and inaugurate a new and happier era.
For Israel this day will be one of sifting and
purging, for her oppressors a day of terror and
anguish (Is 2 17 - 18 , Jl 2 14 ' 16 ). To this conception, as
we shall see, the subsequent development attached
itself.

With the Book of Daniel a new chapter opens
in the history of Hebrew eschatology. 'I beheld,'
we read, 'till thrones were placed, and one that
was ancient of days did sit. . . . Thousand thou-
sands ministered unto him, and ten thousand
times ten thousand stood before him : the judg-
ment was set and the books were opened. . . .
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the
earth shall awake, some to everlasting life and
some to shame and everlasting contempt' (Dn 7 9
12 2 ). Compared with the outlook of the great



662 JUDGMENT, DAMNATION



JUDGMENT, DAMNATION



prophets, this conception of a resurrection of the
dead for judgment and sentence is something alto-
gether new. Written in the crisis of the Macca-
baean struggle (165 B.C.), the Book of Daniel forms
the first of the long series of Jewish Apocalypses.
For an understanding of NT eschatology these
writings are of such cardinal importance that it is
necessary to give some account of their leading
ideas.

Apocalyptic had its roots in the hope held up
before Israel by the prophets of a glorious day in
the future, 'the day of the Lord,' when her op-
pressors would be overthrown, and she, purified by
her sufferings, exalted to a position of unparalleled
splendour and power. Through her fidelity to God
and her supremacy among the nations God's reign
on earth would be visibly realized, and Nature
itself would be made fairer and more generous to
grace the new order. This national hope proved
itself vital enough to survive the most disillusion-
ing experiences, but somewhere in the dark days
of Persian or Greek ascendancy it was subjected
to radical modification, and fitted into a world-
view widely different from that to which it origin-
ally belonged. The new development was char-
acterized in the first place by a thorough -going
pessimism. In the eyes of apocalyptic writers the
existing world or age is incurably evil, incapable
of being transformed by any conceivable process
of moral renewal into a kingdom of God. Human
beings are in the mass hopelessly corrupt, and
wicked men occupy the seats of power. And this
is not all. A portentous development of the belief
in evil spirits tends to apocalyptic pessimism a still
darker hue. The world is the haunt of throngs of
such spirits, who, under Satan their head, form a
demonic hierarchy. With unwearied activity they
prosecute their hellish work, thwarting the will of
the Almighty, hounding on the heathen persecutors
of His people, inciting men to wickedness and
smiting them with disease. To these sinister
figures God, by an inscrutable decree, has sur-
rendered the government of the world. Satan is
the world's real master. But, despite this pessi-
mism with regard to the existing order, apocalyptic
writers have no thought of surrendering their faith
in God or in His promise to Israel. Only, their
faith, finding nothing in the present to which it
can attach itself, takes refuge in the future and
becomes eschatological. The present world is
given up to destruction, and religions interest
transferred to the new and glorious world which
God will reveal when the old has been swept away.
With passionate eagerness the great catastrophe
that shall open the way for the Kingdom is antici-
pated, and the horizon scanned for signs of its
approach. When it arrives, its opening scene will
be one of judgment. To the bar of the Almighty
the whole world, Jews as well as Gentiles, and
what is still more significant the dead as well as
the living, will be gathered to answer for the deeds
they have done. The fate of each soul having been
decided, sentence will at once be executed. For
the righteous there is reserved a blessed and death-
less life in the presence of God ; for the wicked,
everlasting destruction.

Before leaving Jewish apocalyptic, two points
must be more particularly noted as bearing on
questions that will emerge later. The first relates
to the personality of the Judge. In most writings
it is God Himself who is represented as occupying
the throne (Dn 7 9 - 10 , En. i. 3-9, xc. 20, 2 Es 6 6 1 33 ).
Sometimes, however, the Messiah or Son of Man
appears as conducting the Judgment in God's name
(En. li. 1. 2, Ixix. 27; Apoc. Bar. Ixxii. 2). There
was no fixed doctrine on the subject ; the one
matter of importance was that the Judgment was
a Divine Judgment. The second point relates to



the fate of the wicked. Here again we find no
uniform view, except that their fate involves final
and irretrievable ruin. Many passages assume
that only the righteous will be raised from the
dead. For the sinner death will be the end (Ps.-
Sol. iii. 13-16, Apoc. Bar. xxx. ). Sometimes, how-
ever, Sheol, into which the dead descend, is itself
transformed into a place of punishment, so that to
be left there does not mean annihilation (Eth. En.
xcviii., xcix., civ.). We have also passages in
which Sheol is the abode of the lost only until
the Day of Judgment, when they are thrust into
Gehenna or hell, to suffer eternal torment, with
devils for their companions (En. liii. 3-5, liv. 1. 2).

This belief in a resurrection of the dead and
a universal judgment forms a landmark in the
history of Hebrew religion. We see in it the
victory of individualism. It is no longer the
nation but the individual that is the religious unit.
The worth of the individual is recognized, and he
is set solitary before God. How is the rise of the
apocalyptic conception of things to be explained ?
Partly, no doubt, by the calamitous situation of
the Jewish people under Persian and Greek rule.
A fulfilment of the prophetic promise through the
means that the prophets had in view inner reform,
political revolution, a victorious leader no longer
seemed within the range of possibility. God had
ceased to speak to the people through the living
voice of prophecy, and a feeling was abroad that
He had forsaken the earth. This explanation is,
however, only partial. The pessimism and dualism
of the apocalyptic world-view, its demonology and
angelology, its conception of a death-struggle be-
tween the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of
God, its conception of a resurrection from the dead
and a Final Judgment, can be accounted for only on
the hypothesis of Persian influence.

2. In the teaching of Jesus. So far as its
outward form is concerned, Jesus' conception of
judgment and punishment is wholly on apocalyptic
lines. The Judgment will come at the end of the
world ; it will be a judgment of individuals ; and
it will be universal (Mt 22 13 16 27 ). The sentence
pronounced will be final : nowhere do we find a
hint of future probation. With respect to the
person of the Judge, Jesus follows the tradition
that assigns the office to the Son of Man. ' For
the Son of man shall come in the glory of his
Father with his angels ; and then shall he render
unto every man according to his deeds' (Mt 16'-' 7
13 41 25 S1 ). No particular significance is, however,
attached to this fact : the emphasis falls, not on
the personality of the Judge, but on the judgment
He conducts. What is Jesus' teaching with regard
to the doom of the lost? Uniformly He follows
the tradition that regards them as consigned to
Gehenna or hell (Mt 5- w 10 28 18 9 ). And, as in
apocalyptic, Gehenna appears as a fiery furnace in
which the wicked suffer unending torment (Mt S 29 ,
Lk 16 24 , Mt 2S 46 ). Jesus is no theologian, but
something incomparably greater. In the main He
appropriates the conceptions of His time, modify-
ing or rejecting them only when they conflict with
some vital religious or ethical interest. What is
original in His teaching is not the theological con-
ceptions but the new content with which they are
charged. If His conception of the Judgment and
of punishment is in formal respects that of Jewish
apocalyptic, the spirit of which it is the vehicle is
all His own. New is the moral earnestness with
which He brings each individual soul face to face
with the righteous Judge. ' And be not afraid of
them which kill the body, but are not able to kill
the soul : but rather fear him which is able to
destroy both soul and body in hell' (Mt 10 28 ).
New also is the moral purity with which the con-
ception of judgment is carried out. Everything



JUDGMENT, DAMNATION



JUDGMENT, DAMNATION 663



national and sectarian falls away. Of a mechanical
balancing of good and bad actions we hear nothing.
The one test is character, and character in its
deepest principle the love in which lies the root of
all morality and all religion. ' I was an hungred,
and ye gave me meat : 1 was thirsty, and ye gave
me drink. . . . Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of
these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto
me ' (Mt 25 35ff -). And what is true of Jesus' teach-
ing about judgment is true also of His teaching
about punishment. The element of originality is
to be found not in the formal conceptions but in
the spirit they enshrine. In the descriptions of
hell in Jewish apocalyptic embittered national and
ecclesiastical feeling is at least as much in evidence
as moral hatred of iniquity. Far otherwise is it
when we turn to Jesus. What comes to expression
in His almost fierce words regarding the fate of the
wicked is His burning indignation against all high-
handed sin, particularly against hypocrisy and
heartlessness, His deep sense of the infinite and
eternal difference between right and wrong, His
immovable conviction that the first means ever-
lasting life to a man and the second everlasting
death. ' And if thy hand or thy foot causeth thee
to stumble, cut it off and cast it from thee : it is
good for thee to enter into life maimed or halt,
rather than having two hands or two feet to be
cast into the eternal lire ' (Mt 18 8 ).

3. In the Apocalypse of John. We begin our
study of the apostolic writings with the Apocalypse
of John, not because it is the earliest of these writ-
ings in its present shape it cannot be dated before
A.D. 95 but because the description it gives of the
events of the End is by far the most detailed, and
because we are probably justified in regarding it as,
in the main, representative of primitive Christian
views. In his programme of eschatological events
the writer follows closely his Jewish models. At
His Parousia, Christ will smite the nations of the
earth assembled against Him in battle, and pre-
pare the way for His millennial reign (19 U -2QP).
The-close of this reign will see a last uprising of
the powers of evil, ending in their utter and final
overthrow (20 7 ' 10 ). Then will come the general
resurrection and the Judgment (20 11 ' 13 ). The
Judgment, which is universal in its scope, is con-
ducted not by Christ but by God (20 U ). Men are
judged 'according to their works,' and out of
certain books, one being singled out by name as
' the Book of Life.' The books contain a record of
the deeds, good and bad, of each individual : the
Book of Life is the list of God's elect people. Ex-
ceedingly brief is the account of the fate of the re-
probate. 'Death and Hades were cast into the
lake of fire . . . and if any was not found written
in the book of life, he was cast into the lake of
fire.' Though the writer describes this as 'the
second death,' it is clear that he is thinking not of
annihilation but of an eternity of suffering (14 10 - n ).



Online LibraryJames HastingsDictionary of the apostolic church (Volume 1) → online text (page 212 of 234)