Jude on the Attack: A Comparative Analysis of the Epistle of Jude, Jewish Judgement Oracles, and Greco-Roman Invective by Alexandra Robinson

Abstract

Reviewed by: Jude on the Attack: A Comparative Analysis of the Epistle of Jude, Jewish Judgement Oracles, and Greco-Roman Invective by Alexandra Robinson John Painter alexandra robinson, Jude on the Attack: A Comparative Analysis of the Epistle of Jude, Jewish Judgement Oracles, and Greco-Roman Invective (LNTS 581; London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2017). Pp. xix + 251. $114. This book bears the marks of Robinson's Ph.D. thesis (Macquarie University, 2016; supervised by Larry Welborn and Stephen Llewellyn). It is systematically detailed but at times unidiomatic in its expression. It follows a clear plan set out in the introduction (chap. 1) and in each new section/chapter. This is clear, if at times tedious. In the introduction, she deals with matters presupposed in her treatment. She notes that Jude's authenticity was disputed in the late fourth century because of its use of the pseudepigraphic Book of Enoch. The evidence for this is found in Jerome's De viris illustribus 4, in his brief account of Jude. Jerome notes that, because the epistle "quotes from the book of Enoch it is rejected by many" (NPNF: Theodoret, Jerome, Gennadius, and Rufinus [ed. Philip Schaff; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1892]). In response she correctly notes that 1 Enoch is one of the most commonly attested works at Qumran and that, at the time, there was no clear-cut recognition of canonical works as distinct from pseudepigrapha. Yet R. fails to note that the authenticity of Jude was questioned in the early fourth century (ca. 320 c.e.) because, like James and the other Catholic Epistles apart from 1 John and 1 Peter, it lacked early attestation (see Eusebius Hist. eccl. 2.23.24-25; 3.25.3). Though Jerome unashamedly drew on Eusebius for his pre-fourthcentury lives, he fails to note Eusebius's comments. R. briefly treats the question of authorship in chap. 2, but she concludes that it "is partially irrelevant" (p. 9). That "partially" exonerates R. from the necessity to justify the identification of the author as one of the brothers of the Lord, but she tentatively adopts this position without addressing the lack of [End Page 745] early attestation or adequately treating other related issues. R. rightly justifies ignoring overlaps with 2 Peter, recognizing the use of Jude by 2 Peter (pp. 10-11). Textual issues are reduced to choosing between NA27 or 28 in vv. 5 and 22-23, and only the latter makes much difference. In chap. 3 (and in the book as a whole), R. evidences a wide use of English-language literature. She notes the importance of "Greco-Roman and Jewish influences woven throughout the epistle" and, in preparation for the assertion of authorship by Jude, contends, quite rightly, that "Greek language and culture steadily infiltrated the entire Mediterranean . . . including Jewish Palestine" (p. 18). R. combines evidence of the sophisticated use of Greek vocabulary and genre with the assertion of the Jewish character of Jude and its evidence of the influence of Jewish traditions (pp. 20-21), elaborating the subtitle of the book as a comparative analysis of Jewish judgment oracles and Greco-Roman invective. In the introduction, R. asserts that Jude "is a polemical text which takes the form (structure, aims and style) of a typical Greco-Roman invective but is filled with Jewish content (themes and allusions), drawing on Israel's heritage for the benefit of his primarily Jewish-Christian audience" (p. 5). If the epistle is by Jude, the use of "Jewish-Christian" seems to be an anachronism, as it fits a time period later than the author to whom it is attributed. The main body of the book (chaps. 4–7) deals with Jude as the expression of Jewish judgment oracles and Greco-Roman invective from the perspective of structure (chap. 4), aims (chap. 5), themes (chap. 6), and style (chap. 7). Here R. makes detailed use of evidence of Greco-Roman invective to establish its presence in Jude and similarly offers evidence of Jewish judgment oracles to affirm their place in the document, and "how each genre broadly functions in relation to structure, aims, themes, and style" (p. 38). Robinson makes a good case for the...