ΙΟΥΔΑ 5 1881 Westcott-Hort New Testament (WH)  [PE]
5 ὙπομνῆσαιTo remind δὲbut ὑμᾶςyou βούλομαι,I am wishing, εἰδότας(ones) having known    ἅπαξonce for all πάντα,all (things), ὅτιthat ΚύριοςLord λαὸνpeople ἐκout of γῆςearth Αἰγύπτουof Egypt σώσαςhaving saved τὸthe δεύτερονsecond [time] τοὺςthe (ones) μὴnot πιστεύσανταςhaving believed ἀπώλεσεν,he destroyed, 

ΙΟΥΔΑ ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ 5 Nestle-Aland 28th / United Bible Society 5th (NU TGNT) [P]
5 ὙπομνῆσαιTo remind δὲbut ὑμᾶςyou βούλομαι,I am wishing, εἰδότας(ones) having known    ἅπαξonce for all πάντα,all (things), ὅτιthat ἸησοῦςJesus λαὸνpeople ἐκout of γῆςearth Αἰγύπτουof Egypt σώσαςhaving saved τὸthe δεύτερονsecond [time] τοὺςthe (ones) μὴnot πιστεύσανταςhaving believed ἀπώλεσεν,he destroyed, 

ΙΟΥΔΑ ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ 5 1550 Stephanus New Testament (TR1550)
5 ὙπομνῆσαιTo remind δὲbut ὑμᾶςyou βούλομαι,I am wishing, εἰδότας(ones) having known    ἅπαξonce for all πάντα, all (things), ὅτι ὁthat     the ΚύριοςLord λαὸνpeople ἐκout of γῆςearth Αἰγύπτουof Egypt σώσαςhaving saved τὸthe δεύτερονsecond [time] τοὺςthe (ones) μὴnot πιστεύσανταςhaving believed ἀπώλεσεν,he destroyed,

Jude 5 Updated American Standard Version (UASV) 5 Now I want to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord, after saving a people out of the land of Egypt, the second time destroyed those who did not believe.

Jude 5 English Standard Version (ESV)5 Now I want to remind you, although you once fully knew it, that Jesus, who saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe.

Jude 5 King James Version (KJV)5 I will therefore put you in remembrance, though ye once knew this, how that the Lord, having saved the people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed them that believed not.

WH ἅπαξ πάντα, ὅτι Κύριος
having known “all things once for all that the Lord”
C* (א Ψ omit ο) syr^h

variant 1/NU TGNT απαξ παντα, οτι Ιησους
having known “once for all, that Jesus”
A B 33 Cyril Jerome Bede

variant 2 παντα, οτι Ιησους απαξ
having known “all things once for all that Jesus”
1739 1881 Origen^{according to mg} cop

variant 3 απαξ παντα, οτι θεος Χριστος
knowing “once for all, that God [the] Messiah (or, Messiah God)”
P⁷² (P^* παντας)

variant 4 απαξ παντα, οτι ο θεος
knowing “once for all, that God”
C² vg^ms

variant 5/TR απαξ τουτο, οτι ο κυριος
“once [you knew] this, that the Lord”
(K L) Maj

The Preponderance of Evidence [PEP is that WH was the original wording [ἅπαξ πάντα, ὅτι Κύριος] having known “all things once for all that the Lord,” which is found in the manuscripts (C* (א Ψ omit ο) syr^h) and has the support of Sinaiticus (c. 330–360). Variant 1/NU [απαξ παντα, οτι Ιησους] having known “once for all, that Jesus” has weighty manuscript support (A B 33 Cyril Jerome Bede), but this reading is very difficult as a plausible reading. Yes, it is true that generally speaking the harder reading is preferred because the scribal change of this sort tended toward making the reading easier. Therefore, from the textual side of things, one can see how “Jesus,” if original, would have been changed to “Lord” or “God” rather than “Lord” or “God” having been changed to “Jesus.” The reading with “Jesus is found in NA28, UBS5, and TGNT and a number of English translations.

However, when looking at the internal evidence, it is very unlikely that Jude would have referred to Jesus as the one having saved the Israelites out of the land of Egypt. Metzger says, “Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt (yet compare Paul’s reference to Χριστός in 1 Cor 10:4), copyists would have substituted (ὁ) κύριος or ὁ θεός.” However, this is not an equal comparison. One thing is Paul says “Jesus Christ” and Christ Jesus but he also uses Christ alone many times. Jude, however, never refers to Jesus Christ as just “Jesus” but always as “Jesus Christ.” In just one tiny epistle of 24 verses in one chapter, Jude refers to “Jesus” six times as “Jesus Christ.” (Jude 1 twice, 4, 17, 21, 25) It is possible that the name Ἰησοῦς (“Jesus”) could have resulted when a copyist confused the common abbreviation ΚΣ (κύριος; Lord) for ΙΣ (Ἰησοῦς; Jesus). It would seem that the unusual reading in P⁷² written as nomina sacra (θεός Χριστὸς [θ̅ς̅ χ̅ρ̅ς̅]; God Christ) was simply a copyist error; otherwise, we would have found Χριστὸς (“Christ”) in other manuscripts as well.

This author wrote Dr. Don Wilkins of the NASB about the textual issue in Jude 5. I asked Dr. Wilkins, “Is the new revised NASB staying with “Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that the Lord …” Or is it going the way of the ESV, CSB, and LEB, “Now I desire to remind you, though you know all things once for all, that Jesus …” If you are changing why? If not, why? Do you think theology is a motivating factor? I only ask because every textual scholar and commentator that I have read seems to prefer Jesus for that very reason.

Wilkins responded,

We haven’t yet come to a final decision on this one, but we’re leaning toward keeping “Lord” since it has at least the support of (א) [Codex Sinaiticus]; but I need to look at the MSS at Muenster still to see if KC can be mistaken for IC or vice-versa. I hate having to decide on readings that are too hard to be possible, and it seems somewhat explicable as a mistaken reading of the NS abbreviation. It’s one of those messy cases of the Alexandrians being divided, and this time it looks like 01 surprisingly took the conservative road. So if by theology you mean a reading that is too difficult to be acceptable, I would agree. Metzger, of course, called 1 Cor 10:4 into the mix, but what Jude would be saying by referring to Jesus is beyond that. So there is no doubt that “Jesus” is the more difficult reading and has equal or better ms support, and normally I would go with that. To reject it as too difficult, in my book, calls for a plausible explanation, usually a transcriptional one. Also, Jude doesn’t use “Jesus” by itself elsewhere in the letter and it seems a little crude to use it this way as a reference to the preincarnate Son here. The possibility that he could be referring to Joshua doesn’t fit historically

Theology plays a role from Jude to the copyist, to the textual scholars, to translators, to commentators. Many textual scholars, translators, and commentators argue that the early Christian copyists would be moved to change Ιησους (“Jesus”) to Κύριος “Lord” or θεος “God” rather than “Lord” or “God” having been changed to “Jesus.” Why? From Metzger’s textual commentary, “Struck by the strange and unparalleled mention of Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt …, copyists would have substituted (ὁ) κύριος or ὁ θεός.” (bold mine) Yes, it would boggle the mind for an early copyist too see Jesus mentioned in relation to the redemption of the Israelites out of Egypt, “strange and unparalleled” is saying it mildly. Maybe unfathomable would express it better.

The problem is that this is not something that Jude or any New Testament would have written either. It would have been just as strange and unparalleled, unfathomable for Jude as well. Look as Comfort tries to rationalize what Jude might have been thinking, “This was a divine activity. Thus, it is likely that Jesus is here being seen as Yahweh the Savior. In other words, from Jude’s perspective, it was Jesus, the I Am (see John 8:58), who was present with the Israelites and operative in their deliverance from Egypt.” Yes, there is a lot of theological gymnastics here in an effort to rationalize why Jude would have written “Jesus.” Why? Because he would not have written  “Jesus” for it would have been strange and unparalleled [to] mention … Jesus in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt.” (Metzger) If you doubt the theological motivations of later textual scholars, translators, and commentators, see more from P. Bartholomä’s analysis below.

So, in conclusion, theologically, Jude would in all likelihood have never written Ιησους (“Jesus”). Theologically, early Christian and Jewish Christian copyists would have changed Ιησους (“Jesus”) to “Lord” or “God” rather than “Lord” or “God” having been changed to “Jesus.” Therefore, it was a transcriptional issue of a copyist confusing the common abbreviation ΚΣ (κύριος; Lord) for ΙΣ (Ἰησοῦς; Jesus). The textual scholars early on were very slow to lean in the direction of Ιησους (“Jesus”). However, once the textual scholars in their critical texts (NA28, UBS5, TGNT) gave way to Ιησους (“Jesus”), some translations that evidence theological motivations elsewhere in their translations (ESV, CSB, and the LEB) were eager to adopt Ιησους (“Jesus”). Thus, we go from Jude, a Jew, early Christian, and Jewish Christian copyist never theologically fathoming Ιησους (“Jesus”) in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt to translators as well as commentators theologically eager to accept Ιησους (“Jesus”) in a statement about the redemption out of Egypt.

Jude was an author of God, moved along by the Holy Spirit. What Jude wrote was what God wanted him to write. God using Jude to say the Κύριος “Lord” may not necessarily be a reference to Jesus but rather a reference to the Father. Some textual scholars, translators, and commentators are assuming that “the Lord” of Jude 5 is a reference to Jesus Christ when it could just as easily and more likely be a reference to “the LORD,” that is, Jehovah, the Father. Here Jude is making it known that God the Father, namely, “the Lord,” which is the LORD, i.e., Jehovah, saved a people out of Egypt and later destroyed those who did not believe. With an angelic army, “the Lord” delivered the Israelites.

Exodus 12:41 Updated American Standard Version (UASV) 41 And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, on that very day, all the armies of Jehovah[1] went out from the land of Egypt.

Exodus 12:41 5 American Standard Version (ESV) 1 And it came to pass at the end of four hundred and thirty years, even the selfsame day it came to pass, that all the hosts of Jehovah went out from the land of Egypt.

Jude 5 New American Standard Bible (NSSB) 41 And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, to the very day, all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

[1] Jehovah of armies: (Heb. jhvh tsaba) literally means an army of soldiers, or military forces (Gen. 21:22; Deut. 20:9). It can also be used figuratively, “the sun and the moon and the stars, all the armies of heaven.” (Deut. 4:19) In the plural form, it is also used of the Israelites forces as well. (Ex. 6:26; 7:4; Num. 33:1; Psa. 44:9) However, the “armies” in the expression “Jehovah of armies” is a reference to the angelic forces primarily, if not exclusively.

If this does not sound feasible, consider the words of the apostle Peter at Acts 2:21 (“everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved”) and the apostle Paul at Romans 10:13 (“on the name of the Lord shall be saved”), which was a direct quote from Joel 2:32, (“whosoever shall call on the name of Jehovah shall be delivered,” ASV). Here the NASB renders Joel 2:32 “whoever calls on the name of the LORD will be delivered.” Clearly, both Peter (Ac 2:21) and Paul (Rom. 10:13) was referring to the Father, the LORD, Jehovah. In addition 2 Peter 2:4 says, “For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but cast them into Tartarus and committed them to pits of darkness, reserved for judgment.” Jude 6 is referencing the same event with the same situation and outcome and it seems only natural that God the Father, “the Lord” is meant here in verse 6 of Jude as well, which reads, “And the angels who did not keep to their own domain but deserted their proper dwelling place, he [“the Lord”] has kept in eternal bonds under deep darkness for the judgment of the great day.”

P. Bartholomä’s analysis.

P. Bartholomä argues from the perspective of reasoned eclecticism that ᾿Ιησοῦς is the best reading (NovT 50, no. 2 [2008]: 143–158). Externally, the reading ᾿Ιησοῦς is more widespread, being in Egypt/North Africa and the Western Empire in the first few centuries. Contextually, Jesus is called “master” in v. 4, a term used for the Father (Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; Rev 6:10), so a high Christology is already evoked, which makes the high Christology of an ᾿Ιησοῦς reading in v. 5 plausible. A very similar concept of Christ’s pre-existent involvement in the Exodus is likely present in 1 Cor 10:1–11 as well. It seems more likely that scribes would feel more uncomfortable with ᾿Ιησοῦς than with κύριος and change the former to the latter.^[1]

^[1] Retrieved on Friday, November 01, 2019, http://exegeticaltools.com/2017/11/20/yes-jesus-saved-destroyed-israelites/

Reaffirming “The Lord” as Jehovah in Jude 1:5

Jude’s Consistent Use of “The Lord” Refers to Jehovah

Jude 9 provides definitive internal clarity that reinforces the proper interpretation of Jude 5. In verse 9, when Michael the archangel confronts the devil, he does not rebuke Satan on his own authority but says, “The Lord rebuke you!” This language is directly borrowed from Zechariah 3:2, where Jehovah is the one who rebukes Satan. Michael, being a created angel, would only appeal to Jehovah—the Sovereign God—and not to another created being or even to the Son in His incarnate office. There is no change of subject from verses 5 to 9, meaning “the Lord” in Jude 5 must also refer to Jehovah.

Jude Never Uses the Standalone Name “Jesus”

It is also crucial to observe that Jude never uses the bare name “Jesus” elsewhere in the epistle. He always uses “Jesus Christ” (Jude 1, 4, 17, 21, 25). This consistent usage makes it highly unlikely that Jude would suddenly refer to the preexistent Son with the bare personal name “Jesus” in the context of Israel’s deliverance from Egypt—a context clearly invoking Jehovah in Old Testament theology.

Theological and Textual Coherence Supports “Lord”

Jude’s focus is on judgment, apostasy, and divine authority rooted in Old Testament history. The deliverance from Egypt, followed by judgment upon unbelievers, is always ascribed to Jehovah throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. Jude’s audience—familiar with the Old Testament—would naturally understand “the Lord” to mean Jehovah, not the preincarnate Christ. The return to “the Lord” in Jude 9 reinforces that there was no change in referent. Therefore, interpreting “the Lord” in Jude 5 as Jehovah is both textually consistent and contextually demanded.

Conclusion: Jude 5 is a Reference to Jehovah, Not Jesus

Jude was a man moved by the Holy Spirit, writing what Jehovah intended. The “Lord” who delivered the Israelites and later destroyed those who disbelieved was Jehovah, not Jesus. The reading “the Lord” (κύριος) in Jude 1:5 aligns with Jude’s internal usage, Jude 9, Old Testament theology, and the historical context of divine judgment. While “Jesus” may be found in early manuscripts, internal evidence rooted in scriptural consistency and theological clarity confirms that “the Lord” refers to Jehovah, the Father—not the Son.

You May Also Enjoy

How Can Textual Variants Strengthen Our Confidence in the Bible Rather Than Undermine It?

About the author

CLICK LINKED IMAGE TO VISIT ONLINE STORE

CLICK TO SCROLL THROUGH OUR BOOKS