"Most of My Evangelical Students Are Practicing Sabellians"

Why Christology Matters in the Church Melvin Sensenig, Mission Anabaino 1st Annual Collaborative, Oct. 21, 2013
Shortly after we first moved to New Haven in the fall of 1997, I sought out a few professors in the religion Department at Brown University who had some connections to Yale. I was hoping that I might be able to use our connections through some professors as ways to build relationships with the University. One comment that has stood out from those conversations throughout all my years of ministry in the PCA was one made by a professor of Ancient Christianity, who had been raised as a Southern Baptist and was now in the Eastern Orthodox church. At one point in our conversation, she said, Mel, most of my evangelical students are practicing Sabellians. She wasnt being critical or negative, just observing that when most evangelicals came into her classes on ancient Christianity they tended to identify their views of Jesus Christ more with Sabellian ways of thinking than with Christian orthodoxy as summarized in the Nicene Creed:

I believe in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only -begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man
Of course, there is more to the Nicene Creed than this, but it provides a helpful focus for our topic. After my conversation with the professor, I came back and quickly refreshed my memory on Sabellianism! There is some question today as to whether Sabellius himself ever actually believed the ideas that have been attributed to him. Its possible that he didnt, but the ideas have been forever stuck with his name. It was a theological movement that grew out of Monarchianism in the second and third centuries, an attempt to safeguard monotheism and the unity of the Godhead. And in their zeal they failed to do justice to the independent existence of the Son. There were two groups, the Adoptionists and the Modalists, or Sabellians. The first group argued that Jesus was God only in the sense that the power of the Father rested upon the human person of Jesus, an idea that may well have been in existence when the epistles of John were written. The second group, the Modalists, with whom we are concerned, held that the only differentiation in the Godhead was in their successive modes of operation.1 For instance, God the Father appeared at creation, God the Son for salvation and God the Holy Spirit after the ascension of Jesus. It is probably helpful to remember at this point that they had no intention of becoming heretical. They were attempting to guard monotheism, and in the process shortshrifted Jesus Christ.2
1

This is based on the excellent summary in F. L. Cross and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds., Monarchianism, Oxf. Dict. Christ. Church (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005). 2 In the words of Tertullian regarding Praxeas, another prominent modalist, he put to flight the Paraclete, and he crucified the Father. Tertullian, Against Praxeas, in Lat. Christ. Its Found. Tertullian Three Parts Apol. Ii AntiMarcion Iii Ethical (ed. A. Cleveland Coxe; trans. Dr. Holmes; vol. III, American ed., CD-ROM.; The Ante-Nicene

One can see in the New Testament, especially the later writings of the New Testament, the difficulties the early church faced with keeping practical, ordinary, run-of-the-mill Christians and churches focused on Jesus Christ as he truly was. There were other versions of the Jesus-story, just as there are now. One version, perhaps a precursor of adoptionistism, another form of Monarchianism, may well have been the focal point in the epistles of John. There, most scholars think that the opponents against whom the epistles were written advocated a very high view of Jesus Christ as an inspired founder of a new religion. They appeared to hold that Jesus was born of a normal union between Joseph and Mary, and then received the divine influence of the Holy Spirit at his baptism, and his entire ministry was conducted as a human being, Jesus of Nazareth, upon whom the heavenly Christ rested until his crucifixion. At the crucifixion, the heavenly Christ left him to return to heaven, and the man Jesus of Nazareth died.3 Given that the churches under Johns oversight had suffered a split over these issues, some have speculated that this group became the foundation for later Gnosticism. I personally think that is more interesting to see how this idea apparently captivated a number of leaders in Johns churches. Although there is sparse evidence to go on sometimes none at all I can speculate a little bit as both a pastor and an academic who works in a secular setting. I suspect that this latter story of Jesus was attractive because it avoided the difficult issues of virgin birth, crucifixion and resurrection. Of these, as Paul learned at Corinth, the most offensive was crucifixion, the idea that the Son of God would die in a non-heroic way, but as an object of total duration and scorn. In fact, given how Gnosticism caught on in later centuries, it probably seemed likely that this latter account of Jesus had the best chance of success, and what we know as orthodoxy today probably seemed doomed to a quick death. These alternate accounts of the life of Jesus keep appearing, in Gnosticism, Islam, and the radical revisionist Protestant confessionalism of modernism.4 These issues are well known and documented in the scholarly literature. Yet, little has been done to examine the issue of suspect Christology within evangelicalism and its impact on a missional total Christ ecclesiology.5 The point of my paper is that the problems in evangelicalism have at least a partial explanation in the other side of Monarchianism, Sabellianism, or Modalism. Thankfully, the Scriptures dont leave us alone on this issue. The epistle of Jude, which follows immediately the epistles of John in

Fathers. Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325; Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 1885), III597. 3 Cf. the summaries in Raymond Edward Brown, The Epistles of John (vol. 30, 1st ed.; The Anchor Bible; Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1982), 4ff.; C. Haas, Marinus de Jonge, and J. L. Swellengrebel, A Handbook on the Letters of John (CD-ROM.; UBS Handbook Series; Helps for Translators; New York: United Bible Societies, 1994); Gary R. Habermas, The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ (Joplin, Mo: College Press Pub. Co, 1996); Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes (ed. F. F. Bruce; [New ed. with] New Introduction (Johannine Studies since Westcotts Day) by F. F. Bruce.; Abingdon (Berks.): Marcham Manor Publishing, 1966); John R. W. Stott, The Epistles of John: An Introduction and Commentary (New Testament Commentaries 19; Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1960). 4 For this last, cf. the intriguing argument in Michel Foucault, History of Madness (ed. Jean Khalfa; trans. Jean Khalfa and Jonathan Murphy; Pbk. ed.; New York: Routledge, 2009), 151159. 5 Cf. the interpretation of Rick Brannan, ed., The Symbol of Chalcedon, in Hist. Creeds Confessions (CD-ROM.; Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1997); St. Aurelius Augustine, Tractates on the Gospel of John XXI, in St Augustin Homilies Gospel John Homilies First Epistle John Soliloquies (vol. 7, CD-ROM.; The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997), 7140. At Rev. Preston Graham, Jr., Mission, Vision, & Strategy, Mission Anabaino, n.d., n.p. [cited 19 October 2013]. Online: http://www.anabaino.org/what-is-ma/mission-visionstrategy/.

the canon, appears to speak to elements that may have been precursors to Modalism. Whether or not that is accurate historically, there are at least enough parallels in the thought structures that a look at the epistle of Jude is in order. The epistle of Jude was late in acceptance in the canon mainly because it quotes 1 Enoch, and has allusions, in the passages we will look at, to The Apocryphon of John, 2 Enoch, and The Testament of Solomon.6 So, lets take a brief look.

Jude 37 (NRSV) 3 Beloved, while eagerly preparing to write to you about the salvation we share, I find it necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints. 4 For certain intruders have stolen in among you, people who long ago were designated for this condemnation as ungodly, who pervert the grace of our God into licentiousness and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ. 5 Now I desire to remind you, though you are fully informed, that the Lord, who once for all saved a people out of the land of Egypt, afterward destroyed those who did not believe. 6 And the angels who did not keep their own position, but left their proper dwelling, he has kept in eternal chains in deepest darkness for the judgment of the great day. 7 Likewise, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, which, in the same manner as they, indulged in sexual immorality and pursued unnatural lust, serve as an example by undergoing a punishment of eternal fire.
The scholarly consensus of all interpreters, of every theological strike is that the faith ( ) and sometimes even just faith ([anarthrous] ) refers to the settled traditions about Jesus that were already well formed by the middle of the first century and probably earlier as well, the traditions we find in the canon of the New Testament. 7 Interestingly enough, Jude never takes time to define the faith, but simply assumes that everyone knows what it is. The point is that this epistle, one of the later epistles in the New Testament, already has a set definition of the faith that Jude can assume both his supporters and opposers have a working knowledge of. When he goes against the opposition, theres no question what hes talking about. 8 He means the true understanding of Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ of
6

Parts of what follows are adapted from several sermons I preached on this recently. Melvin Sensenig, An Exposition of Jude 1-2, sermon (Christ Presbyterian Church, 824 Washington St., Reading, PA, October 6, 2013); Melvin Sensenig, An Exposition of Jude 3-7, sermon (Christ Presbyterian Church, 824 Washington St., Reading, PA, October 13, 2013). I wont digress on the issue of canonicity, as Jude never referred to these other writings as Scripture, but made use of them to suit his point, which the church recognized and thus did include in the canon. 7 Cf., e.g., the contemporary critical summary in Daniel C Arichea and Howard Hatton, A Handbook on the Letter from Jude and the Second Letter from Peter (CD-ROM.; UBS Handbook Series; Helps for Translators; New York: United Bible Societies, 1993), 14. This follows the 19th century consensus. Ethelbert William Bullinger, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible (CD-ROM.; London; New York: Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1898), 600. Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield, Biblical Doctrines (ed. Ethelbert Dudley Warfield; vol. 2, CD-ROM.; Works of Warfield; New York: Oxford University Press, 1929), 482483. 8 Cf., eg., Acts 6:7 (NRSV) The word of God continued to spread; the number of the disciples increased greatly in Jerusalem, and a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith. Galatians 1:23 (NRSV) they only heard it said, The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy. Galatians 3:23 (NRSV) Now before faith came, we were imprisoned and guarded under the law until faith would be revealed. Galatians 6:10 (NRSV) So then, whenever we have an opportunity, let us work for the good of all, and especially for those of the family of faith.

God, a precursor to what the church would, in subsequent generations, define as the hypostatic union of Christ. Jude says that this faith, this true understanding of Jesus Christ, has been traditioned once for all to the saints. Here the NRSV doesnt quite get the sense of the traditioning process, considering it to be a n entrusting which could focus a little bit more on the personal aspects of faith, when in fact, Jude here is concerned with passing on the body of teaching about Jesus as the traditionary process of the church. In fact, he really seems to go out on a limb in verse 5. First he says that he wants to remind them, to whom everything has been made known once for all, that Jesus (not Moses or Joshua!) saved the people out of Egypt and destroyed the Watchers, or the Nephilim, of Genesis 6. Admittedly, this verse has a number of variants and the translations dont always reflect this. Nevertheless, Jude seems very determined to set Jesus Christ at the very center of 9 redemptive history, overshadowing everything that has gone before. Jude even appears to refer to a present, ongoing punishment of some of the most notable examples of evildoers of ancient history. Tradition had it that Sodom and Gomorrah were buried under the Dead Sea, where the fires were still going. The presence of hot springs and some lava flows on the southern end was seen as further evidence that these notorious wicked persons from ancient history were continuing to suffer. Here is where Jude seems to rely on stories of visits to the underworld as found, as I mentioned above, in Wisdom, the Apocryphon of John, 2 Enoch, and the Testament of Solomon.10 There are some truly frightening stories of the suffering of demons that would make anyone shudder. However, it is somewhat intriguing that Jude does not go into a great depth of detail about what, in fact, his opposers were doing. Because so much language of sexual immorality is used, most people assume that he must be talking literally about sexual sin. But this need not be the case. The prophets often used the imagery of adultery to describe syncretistic practices of the Israelites, when they combined worship from the gods of the nations around them with the worship of Yahweh. Given that Jude uses highly symbolic and figurative language throughout his epistle, it perhaps should not at all surprise us that he use the language of debauchery, hellfire and brimstone to describe the endpoint of his opposers. The

Philippians 1:25 (NRSV) Since I am convinced of this, I know that I will remain and continue with all of you for your progress and joy in faith, 9 This is Clement of Alexandrias understanding. A. T Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (6 vols., CDROM.; Nashville: Broadman Press, 1930), bk. Jude 5. For the opposing viewpoint, see Richard Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter (vol. 50; Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas: Word Pub, 1983), 43, 49; Arichea and Hatton, A Handbook on the Letter from Jude and the Second Letter from Peter, 22. Bauckham never explains why this could not have referred to the preexistent Christ. For a critical scholarly review, cf., Carroll D. Osburn, Discourse Analysis and Jewish Apocalyptic in the Epistle of Jude, in Linguist. New Testam. Interpret. Essays Discourse Anal. (ed. David Alan Black, Katharine G. L Barnwell, and Stephen H Levinsohn; Nashville, Tenn: Broadman Press, 1992), 295; Frederick W. Danker, Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study (CD-ROM.; Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2003), 27. 10 Wis 19:1317. James H. Charlesworth, ed., 1 Enoch, in Old Testam. Pseudepigr. Vol. 1 Apocalyptic Lit. Testaments Altern. Texts (trans. E. Isaac; vol. 1, 2 vols., CD-ROM.; The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 117. James H. Charlesworth, ed., Testament of Solomon (First to Third Century A.D.) (trans. D.C. Duling; vol. 1, CD-ROM.; The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha; New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), 1962963. William J. Deane, The Book of Wisdom: The Greek Text, the Latin Vulgate, and the Authorized English Version: Commentary (CD-ROM.; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1881), 217219. Robert Henry Charles, ed., The Book of Enoch, in Apocrypha Pseudepigr. Old Testam. Engl. Introd. Crit. Explan. Notes (vol. 2, 2 vols., CD-ROM.; Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913), 2185. Danker, Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, 220.

only thing he says at the very end of the epistle is that they are scoffers who cause divisions. 11 And the primary divisions among those familiar with the Jesus-story in the New Testament were over his nature. Was he, in fact, as those who had left Johns churches taught, a singularly gifted human being with the presence of the divine Christ upon him for his earthly ministry? Or was he the Jesus Christ the apostles taught, he of the virgin birth, crucifixion and resurrection, proving his divinity, as Paul argues at the beginning of Romans, by his resurrection? There is also no question that the readers of the epistle of Jude are to understand that he is the brother of James, and the half-brother of Jesus.12 Probably, like James, Jude was a skeptic who converted later. If there was anyone who would have had cause to question the true nature of Jesus, certainly it would have been his half-brother who lived in his own house and grew up with him! This leads me to two separate, but related, sets of parallels. Jude, I surmise, was included in the canon immediately after the epistles of John so that the church would have two examples. In the epistles of John, they had to deal with those who argued with the apostolic teaching of the nature of Christ, and left the church. In Jude, they had to deal with those who disputed the apostles teaching of the nature of Christ and remained within the church, causing trouble. I made the comment earlier that the Adoptionist Monarchians had a view of Jesus that was similar to some of the revisionist Protestantism of modernist theology. Perhaps, as the professor at Brown University pointed out, we need to look more at Sabellian Modalism and its impact on evangelicals who remain within the church, or at least consider themselves connected to Christianity in some way. This could go in two directions, both of which I will explore only briefly, to allow further discussion afterward. The first direction is what defective Christology means in terms of personal Christian discipleship. The second direction is what it means in terms of the union of the church with Christ. The ancient Christian church warned against defective views of Christ because these defective views represented a nonexistent person. The person defined by those defective views will not appear at judgment day to plead your case because no such person exists. At the level of individual Christian discipleship, I suggest that discipleship revolves around several core themes involving the orthodox New Testament view of Christ as opposed to the opponents of, say, the epistles of John or Jude: In our Christian lives, we and the people in our churches will fight to remember that he was born of a virgin, something the world says is practically impossible. Practical impossibilities are not impossible with God. We know, of course, if we read the Bible for a while, that the Bible actually says this (Luke 18:27). Jesus said it here, although the same thing appears in

11 12

The verb form of the word for scoffers is only used to describe those who mocked Jesus at his crucifixion. for the scholarly consensus, cf. ." J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude (Blacks New Testament Commentaries; Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999), 241242. Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, 21, 24. Danker, Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, 31. Cf. also the discussion in Donald Guthrie, New Testament Introduction (Rev 4th Ed.; The Master Reference Collection; Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic, 2004), 902=905. Further, R. L. Webb, Jude, ed. Ralph P Martin and Peter H Davids, Dict. Later New Testam. Its Dev. (Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1997). For the opposing viewpoint, cf. Martin Luther, The Catholic Epistles (ed. Helmut T Lehmann; trans. Walter A. Hansen; vol. 30, 55 vols., American ed. CD-ROM.; Luthers Works; Saint Louis: Concordia Pub. House, 1967), 203. Martin Luther, Word and Sacrament I (ed. E. Theodore Bachmann; vol. 35, 55 vols., American ed. CD-ROM.; Luthers Works; Saint Louis: Concordia Pub. House, 1960), 397398. James W. Thompson, Jude, The Letter Of, ed. Paul J Achtemeier, Harpers Bible Dict. (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985), 514.

other places in the Bible. But this is where we often become practical heretics. In our hearts, we think, Well, its easy for Jesus to say that, he was the son of God! But Jesus himself had to undergo birth, in which he was completely passive. He had to entrust himself to the Father to bring about a practical impossibility, that the son of God would become born of a human woman through virgin birth. That same God is our God through Jesus Christ. We will fight to remember that he died, when the best religious impulses of humanity rise up against this idea. Yet, Hebrews says that Jesus saw joy on the other side of death. Thats impossible! And yet it happened. We will fight to remember this when God calls us to go through sufferings, especially when they are unique to us, sufferings which others are not called to. And we inherently think that our happiness is tied to our circumstances. Of course, theres a good deal of truth to this. Better circumstances would undoubtedly make us happier. But the miracle is when we can see joy on the other side of suffering. It makes a whole lot easier when we know that theres a person who actually did that, and thats why Christology matters. We will fight to remember that he rose from the dead. Again, at all of these crucial points, Jesus is passive and powerless, completely dependent on the other two persons of the Trinity to act on his behalf. As one who was fully human, the imminent prospect of death caused in the same fears that any human being would have just listen to his cry of dereliction. So we will fight to remember that our worst failure can be the means of Gods greatest triumph in our lives. And I dont mean this in the way its often said in the world, as if our greatest personal failure can turn around to be our greatest personal triumph. Sometimes that happens, but thats not what Im after here. What Im thinking about is the profoundly Spirit-born ability to say when we are facing our worst fears that God is in the process of bringing about his amazing triumph in our lives. This is the way we fight to affirm the resurrection all throughout our lives even unto death. Jude writes because there are members in the church not outsiders, not critics, not personal antagonists who had caused such a commotion that he had to write about that first. It was so important that he was calling the entire church to get involved in the struggle. The word that he uses here for contending for the faith is a word that is normally used for athletic contests or warfare. Many writers, both Christian and non-Christian, use the word to refer to the struggle internally for moral righteousness. But he doesnt call them to an agenda of moral reformation. Of course, the New Testament does care about morals, and that said numerous times throughout the New Testament, but whats remarkable about these moral codes is that theyre pretty unremarkable. The same standards wouldve been recognizable to most people in Greco-Roman society as ideals. Rather, this incredible struggle, this battle, this ultimate competition, was for the faith, the New Testament teachings about Jesus Christ, the object of human faith.

The second direction, which is perhaps most germane to our topic today, is how Modalism disconnects the evangelical church from Christ her head. Modalism understands that the differentiation in the Godhead is a mere succession of modes or operations. We are currently in the mode of the Holy Spirit. If we take our cue from the Creed, then within modalist evangelicalism the idea of God the father as Creator and Lord of providence is no longer in force in any practical way. Although Im not a philosopher, when I think of Hegel, I think of him as a modalist who sees the final stage of being in the Godhead as Being, in its constant change and synthesis, as the only reality. There is neither creation nor providence. And since the only reality is change and synthesis, then election can never be a source of security for the church, but only an artificial and unnatural restriction of reality. The church, in her

mission, has no assurance of victory, so any kind of guerrilla warfare becomes acceptable, whether its guerrilla tactics in evangelism, or using the church is just another weapon in the culture wars. Perhaps most importantly, Modalism can create an evangelical antichrist, an imaginary construct which does not exist, which nevertheless holds mythical power as if it did exist. A church that does not believe in the virgin birth will find it difficult to believe that the gospel can take root apart from natural means. Im not referring to signs and wonders or anything like that. Im referring to the difficult work of cross -cultural and cross-class mission work of local churches in their own communities. I see congregation after congregation blind to the fact that it is defined by its class and unwilling to try reaching beyond it for fear of failure. A missional church has to believe in the virgin birth. A church that does not believe that Jesus suffered under Pontius Pilate will find suffering an obstacle to be avoided, rather than an immediate opportunity to follow in the footsteps of a living Savior. If the sufferings of Jesus were merely part of one mode of existence of the Godhead, than there is no meaning to suffering in the church now. And Im not talking here about individual suffering so much, as the suffering of the church in going about its mission. Suffering misunderstanding from both the left and the right has no positive value for the church and must be avoided at all costs. Suffering financial and relational setbacks in pursuit of the difficult mission has no redemptive value and should be terminated. This will not do. A triumphant church must be prepared to follow in the footsteps of its suffering living Savior. A modalist evangelical church has no use for the crucifixion except as a legal event in the historical past. Paul dealt with this kind of thinking already in the church in Corinth, where the preaching of the cross was considered foolishness. Cross is the suffering of the Son of God. Revisionist Protestant confessionalism in the 19th-20th centuries believed that the upward progress of religion required an eventual divestment of any vestiges of leftover ancient near Eastern sacrificial imagery as found, for instance, in the epistle to the Hebrews descriptions of the cross of Jesus. Behind this was a great deal of cultural hubris.13 An evangelical church, disconnected from the painful work of learning to glory in the cross, will find its glory in the size of its congregation, its budget, its programming and church building. They may disagree vociferously with Protestant Modernism, but underneath they both share the same distaste for the shame of the cross. A modalist evangelicalism will have difficulty with the bodily resurrection of Christ, but not in the same way as revisionist Protestantism, or Modernism. Instead of preaching the power of resurrection and the creation, they will preach decisionism and moralism. The living, present reality of resurrection life exhibited in the body of Jesus Christ, today sitting at the right hand of God the father in heaven, is at the very heart of hope, real, solid hope that someone can hold
13

George S Williamson, The Longing for Myth in Germany: Religion and Aesthetic Culture from Romanticism to Nietzsche (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004), 283. Tertullian said of Praxeas, a modalist Monarchian, that he was of restless disposition, and above all inflated with the pride of confessorship simply and solely because he had to bear for a short time the annoyance of a prison; on which occasion, even if he had given his body to be burned, it would have profited him nothing, not having the love of God Tertullian, Against Praxeas, in Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian Three Parts: I. Apologetic; Ii. Anti-Marcion; Iii. Ethical (ed. Coxe; trans. Holmes), III:597.

onto. If there is real hope, then the church does not need to hesitate going into hopeless situations and proclaiming Christ, because the proclamation itself, empowered as it is by the living Christ through the spirit from heaven, is the beginning of eternal hope. But if resurrection was only related to one mode of being of God, and it no longer has any living reality, whether in the living Christ, sitting as a separate person, at the Fathers right hand today, nor in the method and preaching of the church. A missional church, a total Christ church, cannot afford Sabellianism today any more than it could in the early church. A missional church needs Christ in his totality, better suited to our unsteady faith, weak intellects and wavering faith. A missional church whose leaders hold firmly to the living Jesus Christ of the Creed can be assured of great boldness, great power and the mighty force of heaven in the Fathers providential care for his church true and living nature communicated by the Holy Spirit through the preaching of the word and sacrament in the church of Christ fully connected to her true and living head.

Works Cited
Arichea, Daniel C, and Howard Hatton. A Handbook on the Letter from Jude and the Second Letter from Peter. CD-ROM. UBS Handbook Series; Helps for Translators. New York: United Bible Societies, 1993. Augustine, St. Aurelius. Tractates on the Gospel of John XXI. Pages 13743 in St. Augustin: Homilies On The Gospel Of John Homilies On The First Epistle Of John Soliloquies . Vol. 7. CD-ROM. The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers 1. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1997. Bauckham, Richard. Jude, 2 Peter. Vol. 50. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas: Word Pub, 1983. Brannan, Rick, ed. The Symbol of Chalcedon. Historic Creeds and Confessions. CD-ROM. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, 1997. Brown, Raymond Edward. The Epistles of John. Vol. 30. 1st ed. The Anchor Bible. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday, 1982. Bullinger, Ethelbert William. Figures of Speech Used in the Bible. CD-ROM. London; New York: Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., 1898. C. Haas, Marinus de Jonge, and J. L. Swellengrebel. A Handbook on the Letters of John. CD-ROM. UBS Handbook Series; Helps for Translators. New York: United Bible Societies, 1994. Charles, Robert Henry, ed. The Book of Enoch. Pages 163281 in The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, with Introductions and Critical and Explanatory Notes . Vol. 2. 2 vols. CD-ROM. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1913. Charlesworth, James H., ed. 1 Enoch. Pages 590 in The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, Volume 1: Apocalyptic Literature and Testaments, Alternate Texts. Translated by E. Isaac. Vol. 1. 2 vols. CDROM. The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. , ed. Testament of Solomon (First to Third Century A.D.). Pages 93588 in . Translated by D.C. Duling. Vol. 1. CD-ROM. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983. Cross, F. L., and Elizabeth A. Livingstone, eds. Monarchianism. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. Danker, Frederick W. Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study. CD-ROM. Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2003. Deane, William J. The Book of Wisdom: The Greek Text, the Latin Vulgate, and the Authorized English Version: Commentary. CD-ROM. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1881. Foucault, Michel. History of Madness. Edited by Jean Khalfa. Translated by Jean Khalfa and Jonathan Murphy. Pbk. ed. New York: Routledge, 2009. Graham, Jr., Rev. Preston. Mission, Vision, & Strategy. Mission Anabaino, n.d. No pages. Cited 19 October 2013. Online: http://www.anabaino.org/what-is-ma/mission-vision-strategy/. Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. Rev 4th Ed. The Master Reference Collection. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic, 2004. Habermas, Gary R. The Historical Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Joplin, Mo: College Press Pub. Co, 1996. Kelly, J. N. D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude. Blacks New Testament Commentaries. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1999. Luther, Martin. The Catholic Epistles. Edited by Helmut T Lehmann. Translated by Walter A. Hansen. Vol. 30. 55 vols. American ed. CD-ROM. Luthers Works. Saint Louis: Concordia Pub. House, 1967. . Word and Sacrament I. Edited by E. Theodore Bachmann. Vol. 35. 55 vols. American ed. CDROM. Luthers Works. Saint Louis: Concordia Pub. House, 1960. Osburn, Carroll D. Discourse Analysis and Jewish Apocalyptic in the Epistle of Jude. Pages 287313 in Linguistics and New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Discourse Analysis . Edited by David

Alan Black, Katharine G. L Barnwell, and Stephen H Levinsohn. Nashville, Tenn: Broadman Press, 1992. Robertson, A. T. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. CD-ROM. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1930. Sensenig, Melvin. An Exposition of Jude 1-2. Sermon. Christ Presbyterian Church, 824 Washington St., Reading, PA, October 6, 2013. . An Exposition of Jude 3-7. Sermon. Christ Presbyterian Church, 824 Washington St., Reading, PA, October 13, 2013. Stott, John R. W. The Epistles of John: An Introduction and Commentary. New Testament Commentaries 19. Grand Rapids, Mich: Eerdmans, 1960. Tertullian. Against Praxeas. Pages 597632 in Latin Christianity: Its Founder, Tertullian Three Parts: I. Apologetic; Ii. Anti-Marcion; Iii. Ethical. Edited by A. Cleveland Coxe, Translated by Dr. Holmes. Vol. III. American ed., CD-ROM. The Ante-Nicene Fathers. Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to A.D. 325. Grand Rapids, Mich: William B. Eerdmans Pub, 1885. Thompson, James W. Jude, The Letter Of. Edited by Paul J Achtemeier. Harpers Bible Dictionary. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1985. Warfield, Benjamin Breckinridge. Biblical Doctrines. Edited by Ethelbert Dudley Warfield. Vol. 2. CDROM. Works of Warfield. New York: Oxford University Press, 1929. Webb, R. L. Jude. Edited by Ralph P Martin and Peter H Davids. Dictionary of the Later New Testament & Its Developments. Downers Grove, Ill: InterVarsity Press, 1997. Westcott, Brooke Foss. The Epistles of St. John: The Greek Text with Notes. Edited by F. F. Bruce. [New ed. with] New Introduction (Johannine Studies since Westcotts Day) by F. F. Bruce. Abingdon (Berks.): Marcham Manor Publishing, 1966. Williamson, George S. The Longing for Myth in Germany: Religion and Aesthetic Culture from Romanticism to Nietzsche. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2004.