Teks -- Jude 1:9 (NET)

1:9 But even when Michael the archangel was arguing with the devil and debating with him concerning Moses’ body, he did not dare to bring a slanderous judgment, but said, “May the Lord rebuke you!”

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per frasa)

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - Michael the archangel

Michael the archangel ( ho Michael ho archaggelos ).

Michael is mentioned also in Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1; Rev 12:7. Archaggelos in N.T. occurs only here and 1Th 4:16, but in Dan 10:13, Dan 10:20; Dan 12:1.

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - Contending with the devil

Contending with the devil ( tōi diabolōi diakrinomenos ).

Present middle participle of diakrinō , to separate, to strive with as in Act 11:2. Dative case diabolōi .

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - When he disputed

When he disputed ( hote dielegeto ).

Imperfect middle of dialegomai as in Mar 9:34.

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - Concerning the body of Moses

Concerning the body of Moses ( peri tou Mōuseōs sōmatos ).

Some refer this to Zec 3:1, others to a rabbinical comment on Deu 34:6. There is a similar reference to traditions in Act 7:22; Gal 3:19; Heb 2:2; 2Ti 3:8. But this explanation hardly meets the facts.

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - Durst not bring

Durst not bring ( ouk etolmēsen epenegkein ).

"Did not dare (first aorist active indicative of tolmaō ), to bring against him"(second aorist active infinitive of epipherō ).

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - A railing accusation

A railing accusation ( krisin blasphēmias ).

"Charge of blasphemy"where 2Pe 2:11 has "blasphēmon krisin ."Peter also has para kuriōi (with the Lord), not in Jude.

Robertson: Jud 1:9 - The Lord rebuke thee

The Lord rebuke thee ( epitimēsai soi kurios ).

First aorist active optative of epitimaō , a wish about the future. These words occur in Zec 3:1-10 where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan. Clement of Alex. ( Adumb. in Ep. Judae ) says that Jude quoted here the Assumption of Moses , one of the apocryphal books. Origen says the same thing. Mayor thinks that the author of the Assumption of Moses took these words from Zechariah and put them in the mouth of the Archangel Michael. There is a Latin version of the Assumption. Some date it as early as b.c. 2, others after a.d. 44.

Vincent: Jud 1:9 - Michael the archangel

Michael the archangel

Here we strike a peculiarity of this epistle which caused its authority to be impugned in very early times, viz., the apparent citations of apocryphal writings. The passages are Jud 1:9, Jud 1:14, Jud 1:15. This reference to Michael was said by Origen to be founded on a Jewish work called " The Assumption of Moses," the first part of which was lately found in an old Latin translation at Milan; and this is the view of Davidson, so far at least as the words " the Lord rebuke thee" are concerned. Others refer it to Zec 3:1; but there is nothing there about Moses' body, or Michael, or a dispute about the body. Others, again, to a rabbinical comment on Deu 34:6, where Michael is said to have been made guardian of Moses' grave. Doubtless Jude was referring to some accepted story or tradition, probably based on Deu 34:6. For a similar reference to tradition compare 2Ti 3:8; Act 7:22.

Vincent: Jud 1:9 - Michael

Michael

Angels are described in scripture as forming a society with different orders and dignities. This conception is developed in the books written during and after the exile, especially Daniel and Zechariah. Michael ( Who is like God? ) is one of the seven archangels, and was regarded as the special protector of the Hebrew nation. He is mentioned three times in the Old Testament (Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1), and twice in the New Testament (Jud 1:9; Rev 12:7). He is adored as a saint in the Romish Church. For legends, see Mrs. Jameson, " Sacred and Legendary Art," i., 94 sq.

Vincent: Jud 1:9 - A railing accusation

A railing accusation ( κρίσιν βλασφημίας )

Lit., a judgment of railing; a sentence savoring of impugning his dignity. Michael remembered the high estate from which he fell, and left his sentence to God.

Wesley: Jud 1:9 - Yet Michael

It does not appear whether St. Jude learned this by any revelation or from ancient tradition. It suffices, that these things were not only true, but acknowledged as such by them to whom he wrote.

Wesley: Jud 1:9 - The archangel

This word occurs but once more in the sacred writings, 1Th 4:16. So that whether there be one archangel only, or more, it is not possible for us to determine.

Wesley: Jud 1:9 - When he disputed with the devil

At what time we know not.

Wesley: Jud 1:9 - Concerning the body of Moses

Possibly the devil would have discovered the place where it was buried, which God for wise reasons had concealed.

Wesley: Jud 1:9 - Durst not bring even against him a railing accusation

Though so far beneath him in every respect. But simply said, (so great was his modesty!) The Lord rebuke thee - I leave thee to the Judge of all.

JFB: Jud 1:9 - Michael, the archangel

Nowhere in Scripture is the plural used, "archangels"; but only ONE, "archangel." The only other passage in the New Testament where it occurs, is 1Th 4:16, where Christ is distinguished from the archangel, with whose voice He shall descend to raise the dead; they therefore err who confound Christ with Michael. The name means, Who is like God? In Dan 10:13 he is called "One ('the first,' Margin) of the chief princes." He is the champion angel of Israel. In Rev 12:7 the conflict between Michael and Satan is again alluded to.

JFB: Jud 1:9 - about the body of Moses

His literal body. Satan, as having the power of death, opposed the raising of it again, on the ground of Moses' sin at Meribah, and his murder of the Egyptian. That Moses' body was raised, appears from his presence with Elijah and Jesus (who were in the body) at the Transfiguration: the sample and earnest of the coming resurrection kingdom, to be ushered in by Michael's standing up for God's people. Thus in each dispensation a sample and pledge of the future resurrection was given: Enoch in the patriarchal dispensation, Moses in the Levitical, Elijah in the prophetical. It is noteworthy that the same rebuke is recorded here as was used by the Angel of the Lord, or Jehovah the Second Person, in pleading for Joshua, the representative of the Jewish Church, against Satan, in Zec 3:2; whence some have thought that also here "the body of Moses" means the Jewish Church accused by Satan, before God, for its filthiness, on which ground he demands that divine justice should take its course against Israel, but is rebuked by the Lord who has "chosen Jerusalem": thus, as "the body of Christ" is the Christian Church, so "the body of Moses" is the Jewish Church. But the literal body is evidently here meant (though, secondarily, the Jewish Church is typified by Moses' body, as it was there represented by Joshua the high priest); and Michael, whose connection seems to be so close with Jehovah-Messiah on the one hand, and with Israel on the other, naturally uses the same language as his Lord. As Satan (adversary in court) or the devil (accuser) accuses alike the Church collectively and "the brethren" individually, so Christ pleads for us as our Advocate. Israel's, and all believers' full justification, and the accuser's being rebuked finally, is yet future. JOSEPHUS [Antiquities,4.8], states that God hid Moses' body, lest, if it had been exposed to view, it would have been made an idol of. Jude, in this account, either adopts it from the apocryphal "assumption of Moses" (as ORIGEN [Concerning Principalities, 3.2] thinks), or else from the ancient tradition on which that work was founded. Jude, as inspired, could distinguish how much of the tradition was true, how much false. We have no such means of distinguishing, and therefore can be sure of no tradition, save that which is in the written word.

JFB: Jud 1:9 - durst not

From reverence for Satan's former dignity (Jud 1:8).

JFB: Jud 1:9 - railing accusation

Greek, "judgment of blasphemy," or evil-speaking. Peter said, Angels do not, in order to avenge themselves, rail at dignities, though ungodly, when they have to contend with them: Jude says that the archangel Michael himself did not rail even at the time when he fought with the devil, the prince of evil spirits--not from fear of him, but from reverence of God, whose delegated power in this world Satan once had, and even in some degree still has. From the word "disputed," or debated in controversy, it is plain it was a judicial contest.

Clarke: Jud 1:9 - Yet Michael the archangel

Yet Michael the archangel - Of this personage many things are spoken in the Jewish writings "Rabbi Judah Hakkodesh says: Wherever Michael is said to appear, the glory of the Divine Majesty is always to be understood."Shemoth Rabba, sec. ii., fol. 104, 3. So that it seems as if they considered Michael in some sort as we do the Messiah manifested in the flesh

Let it be observed that the word archangel is never found in the plural number in the sacred writings. There can be properly only one archangel, one chief or head of all the angelic host. Nor is the word devil, as applied to the great enemy of mankind, ever found in the plural; there can be but one monarch of all fallen spirits. Michael is this archangel, and head of all the angelic orders; the devil, great dragon, or Satan, is head of all the diabolic orders. When these two hosts are opposed to each other they are said to act under these two chiefs, as leaders; hence in Rev 12:7, it is said: Michael and his angels fought against the Dragon and his angels. The word Michael מיכאל, seems to be compounded of מי mi , who, כ ke , like, and אל El , God; he who is like God; hence by this personage, in the Apocalypse, many understand the Lord Jesus

Clarke: Jud 1:9 - Disputed about the body of Moses

Disputed about the body of Moses - What this means I cannot tell; or from what source St. Jude drew it, unless from some tradition among his countrymen. There is something very like it in Debarim Rabba, sec. ii., fol. 263, 1: "Samael, that wicked one, the prince of the satans, carefully kept the soul of Moses, saying: When the time comes in which Michael shall lament, I shall have my mouth filled with laughter. Michael said to him: Wretch, I weep, and thou laughest. Rejoice not against me, O mine enemy, because I have fallen; for I shall rise again: when I sit in darkness, the Lord is my light; Mic 7:8. By the words, because I have fallen, we must understand the death of Moses; by the words, I shall rise again, the government of Joshua, etc."See the preface

Another contention of Michael with Satan is mentioned in Yalcut Rubeni, fol. 43, 3: "At the time in which Isaac was bound there was a contention between Michael and Satan. Michael brought a ram, that Isaac might be liberated; but Satan endeavored to carry off the ram, that Isaac might be slain.

The contention mentioned by Jude is not about the sacrifice of Isaac, nor the soul of Moses, but about the Body of Moses; but why or wherefore we know not. Some think the devil wished to show the Israelites where Moses was buried, knowing that they would then adore his body; and that Michael was sent to resist this discovery

Clarke: Jud 1:9 - Durst not bring against him a railing accusation

Durst not bring against him a railing accusation - It was a Jewish maxim, as may be seen in Synopsis Sohar, page 92, note 6: "It is not lawful for man to prefer ignominious reproaches, even against wicked spirits."See Schoettgen

Dr. Macknight says: "In Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21; Dan 12:1, Michael is spoken of as one of the chief angels who took care of the Israelites as a nation; he may therefore have been the angel of the Lord before whom Joshua the high priest is said, Zec 3:1, to have stood, Satan being at his right hand to resist him, namely, in his design of restoring the Jewish Church and state, called by Jude the body of Moses, just as the Christian Church is called by Paul the body of Christ. Zechariah adds, And the Lord, that is, the angel of the Lord, as is plain from Zec 3:1, Zec 3:2, said unto Satan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan! even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem, rebuke thee!"This is the most likely interpretation which I have seen; and it will appear the more probable when it is considered that, among the Hebrews, גוף guph , Body, is often used for a thing itself. So, in Rom 7:24, σωμα της ἁμαρτιας, the body of sin, signifies sin itself; so the body of Moses, גוף של משה guph shel Mosheh , may signify Moses himself; or that in which he was particularly concerned, viz., his institutes, religion, etc

It may be added, that the Jews consider Michael and Samael, one as the friend, the other as the enemy, of Israel. Samael is their accuser, Michael their advocate. "Michael and Samael stand before the Lord; Satan accuses, but Michael shows the merits of Israel. Satan endeavors to speak, but Michael silences him: Hold thy tongue, says he, and let us hear what the Judge determines; for it is written, He will speak peace to his people, and to his saints; Psa 85:8."Shemoth Rabba, sec. xviii. fol. 117, 3.

Calvin: Jud 1:9 - Yet Michael the archangel

9.Yet Michael the archangel. Peter gives this argument shorter, and states generally, that angels, far more excellent than men, dare not bring forward a railing judgment. [2Pe 2:11.]

But as this history is thought to have been taken from an apocryphal book, it has hence happened that less weight has been attached to this Epistle. But since the Jews at that time had many things from the traditions of the fathers, I see nothing unreasonable in saying that Jude referred to what had already been handed down for many ages. I know indeed that many puerilities had obtained the name of tradition, as at this day the Papists relate as traditions many of the silly dotages of the monks; but this is no reason why they should not have had some historical facts not committed to writing.

It is beyond controversy that Moses was buried by the Lord, that is, that his grave was concealed according to the known purpose of God. And the reason for concealing his grave is evident to all, that is, that the Jews might not bring forth his body to promote superstition. What wonder then is it, when the body of the prophet was hidden by God, Satan should attempt to make it known; and that angels, who are ever ready to serve God, should on the other hand resist him? And doubtless we see that Satan almost in all ages has been endeavoring to make the bodies of God’s saints idols to foolish men. Therefore this Epistle ought not to be suspected on account of this testimony, though it is not found in Scripture.

That Michael is introduced alone as disputing against Satan is not new. We know that myriads of angels are ever ready to render service to God; but he chooses this or that to do his business as he pleases. What Jude relates as having been said by Michael, is found also in the book of Zechariah,

“Let God chide (or check) thee, Satan.”
(Zec 3:2.)

And it is a comparison, as they say, between the greater and the less. Michael dared not to speak more severely against Satan (though a reprobate and condemned) than to deliver him to God to be restrained; but those men hesitated not to load with extreme reproaches the powers which God had adorned with peculiar honors.

Defender: Jud 1:9 - Michael the archangel

This fascinating incident is never mentioned elsewhere in Scripture; in fact, the burial place of Moses is said to be known only to the Lord (Deu 34:6). However, a pseudepigraphical work called The Assumption of Moses , preserved now only as a fragment, seems to have recorded the story, and Jude may either have obtained it from that source or received it by direct revelation. In either case, its inclusion in Jude's inspired epistle is enough to confirm its actual occurrence. Satan evidently wanted the body of Moses for some purpose involving deception of God's people, hoping, perhaps, to lead them to doubt God again, or even to lapse back into idolatry, worshipping Moses' body or some idol spirit professing to be Moses. No one knows, but in any case God would not allow it, and He Himself buried Moses in a secret grave.

Defender: Jud 1:9 - railing accusation

The reason Jude introduced this event in his epistle was to stress the dangerous impropriety of speaking evil or speaking disdainfully of exalted angels in God's hierarchy of creation, let alone of God Himself. Michael is one of God's archangels, yet Satan (Lucifer) had once been the highest of all as the anointed cherub over God's throne (Eze 28:14). Even though he had fallen from heaven, he was still treated with great respect by Michael when contending with him.

Defender: Jud 1:9 - The Lord rebuke thee

See Zec 3:2 for a very similar response to Satan when disputing about God's high priest."

TSK: Jud 1:9 - Michael // archangel // the body // durst // The Lord

Michael : It is most probable, that the Apostle took this account concerning Michael, and that of the prophesying of Enoch, from an ancient tradition preserved and well known among the Jews. Dan 10:13, Dan 10:21, Dan 12:1; Rev 12:7

archangel : 1Th 4:16

the body : Deu 34:6

durst : Exo 22:28; Isa 36:13-21; Mar 15:29; Luk 23:39, Luk 23:40; 1Pe 3:9; 2Pe 2:11

The Lord : 1Ch 12:17; Isa 37:3, Isa 37:4, Isa 37:10-20; Zec 3:2

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per Ayat)

Poole: Jud 1:9

Michael the archangel: either this is understood of Christ the Prince of angels, who is often in Scripture called an Angel, or of a created angel; and that either:

1. One of the archangels: Dan 10:13 , Michael is called one of the chief princes, which though the word archangel be not found in the plural number in Scripture, may well imply a plurality of them; for what is one of the chief princes among the angels, but an archangel? Or:

2. A principal angel, or one that is chief among others.

When contending with the devil; it may be meant either of Christ contending with the devil, as Mat 4:1-25 , in his temptation, and Zec 3:1,2 , and Rev 12:7 ; or rather, of Michael, a created angel.

He disputed about the body of Moses:

1. If Michael the archangel be meant of Christ, then the body of Moses may be taken figuratively, for that body whereof the Mosaical ceremonies were shadows, Col 2:17 , i.e. the truth and accomplishment of the law given by Moses; that accomplishment was to be in Christ, who is represented by Joshua, Zec 3:1-10 : him Satan resists in the execution of his office, and by him strikes at Christ, whose type he was, and whom he afterward opposeth in the execution of his office, when he was come in the flesh. Or:

2. If we take Michael for a created angel, which agrees best with the parallel place in Peter, then the body of Moses must be taken properly, (as most take it), and the dispute seems to be: Whether Moses’ s body should be so buried as to be concealed from the Israelites? Deu 34:6 , it is said God buried him, ( which might be by the ministry of Michael the archangel), and that no man knoweth of his sepulchre. The devil opposeth the angel, desiring to have the place of his burial known, that in after-times it might be a snare to that people, and a means to bring them to idolatry. And this seems very probable, if we consider what work the devil hath made in the world with the bodies of saints and martyrs, and how much idolatry he hath brought in thereby. This passage Jude, most probably, had (as was observed in the argument) from some known tradition among the Jews, the truth of which we are now sure of, because certified here concerning it.

Durst not bring against him; or, could not endure, (as the Greek word is often taken among profane writers), or find in his heart, not from fear of punishment, but by reason of the holiness of his own nature, and to give an example to us. And this sense agrees to the scope of the place, whether we understand it of Christ, or of a created angel, Heb 12:3 1Pe 2:23 .

A railing accusation: see 2Pe 2:11 .

But said, The Lord rebuke thee; i.e. put thee to silence, restrain thy insolence, hinder thy design, &c.: hereby the angel refers the cause to God.

Haydock: Jud 1:9 - When Michael // Contended about the body // Command thee

When Michael, &c. We do not find this in any other canonical Scripture, so that St. Jude must either have had it from some tradition among the Jews, or from some writing which he, by the Spirit of God, knew to be true. It is not expressed on what account this dispute or strife was, betwixt St. Michael and the devil, about the body of Moses. The common interpretation is, that St. Michael conveyed the body of Moses out of the way, and from the knowledge of the Israelites, lest they should pay to it some idolatrous worship; whereas the devil, for that end, would have it buried, so that the people might know the place and adore it. See Deuteronomy xxxiv. 6. where it is said, "and no man hath known of his sepulchre until this present day." (Witham) ---

Contended about the body, &c. This contention, which is no where else mentioned in holy writ, was originally known by revelation, and transmitted by tradition. It is thought the occasion of it was, that the devil would have had the body buried in such a place and manner, as to be worshipped by the Jews with divine honours. ---

Command thee, or, rebuke thee. (Challoner)

Gill: Jud 1:9 - Yet Michael the archangel // when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses // durst not bring against him a railing accusation // but said, the Lord rebuke thee

Yet Michael the archangel,.... By whom is meant, not a created angel, but an eternal one, the Lord Jesus Christ; as appears from his name Michael, which signifies, "who is as God": and who is as God, or like unto him, but the Son of God, who is equal with God? and from his character as the archangel, or Prince of angels, for Christ is the head of all principality and power; and from what is elsewhere said of Michael, as that he is the great Prince, and on the side of the people of God, and to have angels under him, and at his command, Dan 10:21. So Philo the Jew ^o calls the most ancient Word, firstborn of God, the archangel; Uriel is called the archangel in this passage from the Apocrypha:

"And unto these things Uriel the archangel gave them answer, and said, Even when the number of seeds is filled in you: for he hath weighed the world in the balance.'' (2 Esdras 4:36)

when contending with the devil he disputed about the body of Moses; which some understand literally of the fleshly and natural body of Moses, buried by the Lord himself, partly out of respect to him; and partly, as some think, lest the Israelites should be tempted to an idolatrous worship of him; but rather it was to show that the law of Moses was to be abolished and buried by Christ, never to rise more: and they think that this dispute was either about the burying of his body, or the taking of it up again; Satan on the one hand insisting upon the taking of it up, in order to induce the Israelites to worship him, and Michael, on the other hand, opposing it, to prevent this idolatry; but then the difficulty is, where Jude should have this account, since the Scriptures are silent about it. Some have thought that he took it out of an apocryphal book, called "the Ascension of Moses", as Origen ^p, which is not likely; others, that he had it by tradition, by which means the Apostle Paul came by the names of the Egyptian magicians Jannes and Jambres; and some passages are referred to in some of their writings ^q, as having some traces of this dispute; but in them the discourse is not concerning the body, but the soul of Moses; not concerning burying or taking up of his body, when buried, but concerning the taking away of his soul, when he was alive; which none of the angels caring to undertake, at length Samael, the chief of devils, did, but without success, wherefore God took it away with a kiss himself: besides, the apostle produces this history as a thing well known; nor is it reasonable to suppose that such an altercation should be between Michael, and the devil, on such an account; or that it was in order to draw Israel into idolatry on the one hand, and on the other hand to prevent it; since never was the custom of the Israelites to worship their progenitors or heroes; nor did they seem so well disposed to Moses in his lifetime; nor was there any necessity of taking up his body, were they inclined to give him honour and worship; yea, the sight of his dead body would rather have prevented than have encouraged it: but this is to be understood figuratively; and reference is had to the history in Zec 3:1; as appears from the latter part of this verse: some think the priesthood of Christ is intended, which was the end, the sum and substance, of the law of Moses; and seeing that Joshua, the high priest, was a type of Christ, and the angel of the Lord contended with Satan about him, he might be said to dispute with him about the body of Moses; but this sense makes a type of a type, and Christ to contend about himself; besides, this should rather be called the body of Christ than of Moses, others think that the temple of the Jews is meant about the rebuilding of which the contention is thought to be; and which may be called the body of Moses, as the church is called the body of Christ; though it should be observed, that the temple is never so called, and that not the place where the church meets, but the church itself, is called the body of Christ: but it is best of all to understand it of the law of Moses, which is sometimes called Moses himself, Joh 5:45; and so the body of Moses, or the body of his laws, the system of them; just as we call a system of laws, and of divinity, such an one's body of laws, and such an one's body of divinity: and this agrees with the language of the Jews, who say ^r, of statutes, service, purification, &c. that they are גופי התורה, "the bodies of the law"; and so of Misnic treatises, as those which concern the offerings of turtle doves, and the purification of menstruous women, that they are גופי, "the bodies" of the traditions ^s, that is, the sum and substance of them: so the decalogue is said ^t to be "the body of the Shema", or "Hear, O Israel", Deu 6:4, so Clemens of Alexandria ^u says, that there are some who consider the body of the Scriptures, the words and names, as if they were, το σωμα του μωσεως, "the body of Moses" ^w. Now the law of Moses was restored in the time of Joshua the high priest, by Ezra and Nehemiah. Joshua breaks some of these laws, and is charged by Satan as guilty, who contended and insisted upon it that he should suffer for it; so that this dispute or contention might be said to be about the body of Moses, that is, the body of Moses's law, which Joshua had broken; in which dispute Michael, or the angel of the Lord, even the Lord Jesus Christ himself,

durst not bring against him a railing accusation; that is, not that he was afraid of the devil, but though he could have given harder words, or severer language, and which the other deserved, yet he chose not to do it, he would not do it; in which sense the word "durst", or "dare", is used in Rom 5:7,

but said, the Lord rebuke thee; for thy malice and insolence; see Zec 3:2; and this mild and gentle way of using even the devil himself agrees with Christ's conduct towards him, when tempted by him in the wilderness, and when in his agony with him in the garden, and amidst all his reproaches and sufferings on the cross. And now the argument is from the greater to the lesser, that if Christ, the Prince of angels, did not choose to give a railing word to the devil, who is so much inferior to him, and when there was so much reason and occasion for it; then how great is the insolence of these men, that speak evil of civil and ecclesiastical rulers, without any just cause at all?