Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 177:705 (Jan 2020)
Article: The Minority Report: A Different Assessment For Interpreting Jude, Part 1
Author: Herbert W. Bateman IV

BSac 177:705 (January-March 2020) p. 91

The Minority Report: A Different Assessment For Interpreting Jude, Part 1

Herbert W. Bateman IV

Herbert W. Bateman IV is president of the Cyber-Center for Biblical Studies, Leesburg, Indiana, and academic editor for Kregel Publications, Grand Rapids, MI.

Abstract

Scholars and Bible teachers have long assumed that Jude wrote his epistle in response to false teachers. Some see him responding to Gnostic false teachers, others to Christian false teachers. However, a close examination of this “majority report” reveals contradictions within this view, and the letter never explicitly refers to teaching. Part 1 will focus on these problems with the majority report, while part 2 will examine a “minority report” that offers a different background for the letter of Jude.

In 1956, Philip K. Dick published a short story in the science fiction magazine Fantastic Universe.1 The story later served as the basis for Steven Spielberg’s film Minority Report (2002), starring Tom Cruise. The movie questions the accuracy of a predetermined policing system that prevents crime.

The policing system is based on the interpretation of material offered by three precog mutants who foresee a crime before it occurs. The precog mutants are kept in a pool of water in a somewhat rigid position so that all of their energy can be directed at predicting the future. Precog data are fed into a computer, the computer analyzes the material, and a report is generated for each precog. Unfortunately, the precogs have questions about their interpretations and do not always agree. If the three reports differ, the computer

BSac 177:705 (January-March 2020) p. 92

identifies the two reports with the greatest similarity or overlap and produces a “majority report” about a foreseen crime. Police officers then prevent the foreseen crime by arresting the person who has been predetermined a “criminal” before the criminal act can even occur, thereby eliminating the free will of the person to choose another course of action.

I suggest that there are three precog reports about how Jude should be interpreted. Jude’s common name, the nameless recipients, and the obscure references to the “godless” (vv. 4, 15) and “these people” (vv. 8, 12, 16, 19), among other things, create a historical mystery that all three reports strive to solve. ...