Semantic Analysis — Jude (Послання Юди) — English → Ukrainian

0. Scope and Full-Book Coverage Note

Jude is a single-chapter, 25-verse letter — the shortest sustained argument in the New Testament outside 2/3 John. Per the PRD Phase 1 mandate, every verse of the entire book is covered below, not only the core passage. Because Jude has only one chapter, the “chapter-by-chapter” requirement used for multi-chapter curricula (Romans, Galatians) is satisfied here as follows:

• Part 1 treats the core passage, Jude 1:3–23, verse by verse — the theological anchor and the great majority of the letter’s load-bearing vocabulary.
• Part 2 treats the remainder of the single chapter — the salutation (Jude 1:1–2) and the closing doxology (Jude 1:24–25) — with the same field-by-field treatment. Nothing in the book is left unreviewed.

Terms already fixed in the baseline Romans/Galatians translation_memory.json are reused exactly as recorded there (e.g. покликаний, благодать, віра, спасіння, святі, Господь, любов, мир, апостол, Святий Дух, слава, гріх, тіло, Дух as bare pneuma). Where Jude uses a shared term in a distinct sense from its Romans/Galatians usage (e.g. πίστις as a defended body of doctrine rather than personal trust; δόξα of angelic beings rather than divine glory), this is flagged explicitly rather than assumed.

Citation convention: Jude = Послання Юди (abbreviated Юд.), per Ohienko-tradition book-naming conventions established in the baseline (cf. Рим., Гал.). Author’s name: Юда (Yuda).

---

Part 1: Core Passage Verse-by-Verse Analysis (Jude 1:3–23)

Jude 1:3

Greek: Ἀγαπητοί, πᾶσαν σπουδὴν ποιούμενος γράφειν ὑμῖν περὶ τῆς κοινῆς ἡμῶν σωτηρίας ἀνάγκην ἔσχον γράψαι ὑμῖν παρακαλῶν ἐπαγωνίζεσθαι τῇ ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ τοῖς ἁγίοις πίστει.

• ἀγαπητοί (agapētoi) — lit. “beloved ones.” Semantic range: term of affectionate pastoral address, from ἀγαπάω. English variants: “beloved,” “dear friends.” Contextual meaning: establishes pastoral warmth before a sharp polemical warning. Rendering: улюблені (ulyublenі) — reuses the root of baseline любов (love). Risk: Low. Ohienko uses “любі” (v.3, v.17) and “улюблені” (v.20/v.1) interchangeably; either is acceptable but should be used consistently across the curriculum’s exposition.
• σπουδή (spoudē) — lit. “haste, diligence, eagerness.” Semantic range: earnest effort, zeal. English variants: “eagerness,” “diligence,” “earnestness.” Contextual meaning: Jude’s urgency in writing. Rendering: старання/ревність (starannya/revnist’). Risk: Low.
• κοινῆς … σωτηρίας (koinēs sōtērias) — “common/shared salvation.” σωτηρία is the baseline Critical-risk term (спасіння), reused exactly. κοινός adds “held in common,” stressing the letter’s unifying appeal before its warnings divide faithful from false teachers. Rendering: спільне спасіння (spil’ne spasinnya). Risk: Critical (inherits спасіння’s baseline Critical tier). Must anchor to the same Christ-centered, decisive-event sense established for Romans, not left to soften into a vague sense of shared religious identity across Ukraine’s three traditions.
• ἐπαγωνίζομαι (epagōnizomai) — lit. “to contend/struggle upon/for,” an intensified compound of ἀγωνίζομαι (root of English “agony,” “agonize”), itself the source of athletic-contest and combat imagery. Semantic range: to fight vigorously for a cause, to contend earnestly. English variants: “contend for,” “fight for,” “strive for.” Contextual meaning: the letter’s programmatic verb — defending the faith is an active, effortful struggle, not passive custodianship. Rendering: боротися (borotysya), following Ohienko exactly (“заохочував вас боротися за віру”). Risk: High. боротися is Ukraine’s ordinary word for armed/military struggle as much as figurative contention; in the current wartime context this verb carries acute lived resonance (“боротьба за свободу,” “боротьба за Україну”). This resonance can be a genuine pastoral asset (contending for the faith as a real, costly struggle) but must not be allowed to collapse Jude’s doctrinal-defense argument into a metaphor for the literal war, nor vice versa. Requires explicit framing, paralleling the baseline’s caution on свобода/воля in Galatians 5.
• ἅπαξ παραδοθείσῃ … πίστει (hapax paradotheisē pistei) — lit. “the once-for-all-delivered… faith.” παραδίδωμι = “to hand over, hand down, deliver, entrust.” ἅπαξ = “once, once for all, a single completed time” (not “once upon a time” but “definitively, non-repeatably”). πίστις here shifts sense from Romans’ personal trust (fides qua) to the body of apostolic doctrine entrusted to the church (fides quae creditur) — “the faith” as a defined deposit, not an act of believing. English variants: “once for all delivered,” “once entrusted,” “once for all given.” Rendering: requires split register per baseline convention: раз дана (raz dana, “given once”) for Scripture citation, following Ohienko’s own choice at this verse; одноразово передана (odnorazovo peredana, “delivered once for all”) is acceptable in exposition when the handed-down, entrusted sense needs foregrounding. Risk: CRITICAL. This is the single most theologically loaded phrase in the letter for a Ukrainian audience. παραδίδωμι/παράδοσις is the identical semantic root behind Передання (Holy Tradition), the living, continuously unfolding body of councils, patristic writings, and liturgical practice that both the Orthodox and Greek Catholic traditions hold as jointly authoritative alongside Scripture. Jude’s ἅπαξ (“once for all,” closed, non-additive) is doctrinally in tension with a tradition-category understood as ongoing and accretive; the curriculum must state explicitly that “the faith once for all delivered to the saints” names a fixed, completed apostolic deposit (the gospel of grace through Christ, under direct threat from the false teachers in view), not an invitation to read Передання’s expansive, still-developing category into the text. Ohienko’s choice of “дана” over a Передання-cognate verb is a helpful existing precedent and should be followed for Scripture citation; exposition must still address the tension directly rather than let it pass unspoken. Human theologian review mandatory.
• ἅγιοι (hagioi) — “saints.” Reuses baseline High-risk term святі exactly, with the baseline’s existing caution: must read as the whole believing community, not a canonized minority.

Jude 1:4

Greek: παρεισέδυσαν γάρ τινες ἄνθρωποι, οἱ πάλαι προγεγραμμένοι εἰς τοῦτο τὸ κρίμα, ἀσεβεῖς, τὴν τοῦ θεοῦ ἡμῶν χάριτα μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν καὶ τὸν μόνον δεσπότην καὶ κύριον ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἀρνούμενοι.

• παρεισδύω (pareisdyō) — lit. “to slip in secretly/stealthily beside.” Semantic range: covert infiltration. English variants: “crept in unnoticed,” “slipped in stealthily,” “wormed their way in.” Rendering: крадькома вдерлися (kradkoma vderlysya), following Ohienko. Risk: Low. Vivid but doctrinally uncomplicated.
• κρίμα (krima) — “judgment, sentence, verdict” (distinct nuance from κρίσις below: krima often stresses the specific verdict/condemnation rather than the act of judging). English variants: “condemnation,” “judgment,” “sentence.” Rendering: осуд (osud). Risk: Medium. Must be kept terminologically distinct where possible from κρίσις (суд), though Ukrainian has fewer lexical options than Greek; consistent use of осуд for κρίμα and суд for κρίσις throughout the letter helps preserve Jude’s repeated judgment vocabulary as a unified theme rather than incidental synonyms.
• ἀσεβεῖς / ἀσέβεια (asebeis / asebeia) — lit. “without reverence [for God],” from σέβομαι (“revere, worship”) + alpha-privative. Semantic range: active impiety, irreverence, godlessness — not mere wrongdoing but a fundamental orientation away from and against God. English variants: “ungodly,” “godless,” “impious.” Contextual meaning: the letter’s defining charge against the false teachers, occurring with unusual density (6x) for so short a book — this is Jude’s central diagnostic category. Rendering: безбожний / безбожність (bezbozhnyy / bezbozhnist’), following Ohienko exactly (“безбожні люди,” v.4). Risk: High. Must be distinguished from generic гріх (sin, baseline High-risk term): ἀσέβεια names a stance of irreverence and rebellion against God’s authority as such, not an isolated act of wrongdoing. Given the baseline’s existing caution that гріх in wartime moral discourse risks narrowing to mean only “atrocity” committed by an external party, безбожний carries a parallel risk: it must land as a category that could, in principle, describe false teachers within the church — not be read as a term reserved for obviously monstrous outsiders.
• χάρις (charis) — “grace.” Reuses baseline Critical-risk term благодать exactly. Here used in an entirely new, negative construction: false teachers “turn God’s grace into a license for sensuality” (μετατιθέντες εἰς ἀσέλγειαν). Risk: CRITICAL (extended). The baseline’s existing Critical flag on благодать (three competing theological frameworks) must here be supplemented with a further explicit teaching point: this verse describes grace’s misuse as a pretext, not grace itself as dangerous. The curriculum must make unmistakably clear that Jude condemns the perversion of grace, not grace as such — otherwise a careless reading could seem to validate exactly the kind of works-anxious suspicion of “cheap grace” language that already complicates благодать’s reception across Ukraine’s three traditions (see baseline notes on grace).
• ἀσέλγεια (aselgeia) — “unrestrained sensuality/licentiousness,” moral abandon without shame. English variants: “sensuality,” “licentiousness,” “debauchery.” Rendering: розпуста (rozpusta), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• δεσπότης (despotēs) — lit. “master, absolute owner, sovereign lord of a household or slaves.” Semantic range: a title of total, proprietary authority, distinct from and stronger than κύριος in this construction; used of God/Christ rarely and pointedly in the NT (also Luke 2:29; Acts 4:24; 2 Pet 2:1; Rev 6:10). English variants: “Master,” “Sovereign Lord,” “absolute Ruler.” Rendering: Владика (Vladyka), following Ohienko exactly. Risk: CRITICAL. The obvious transliteration-adjacent option деспот (despot) must never be used: in modern Ukrainian деспот denotes exclusively a cruel tyrant/dictator, a devastating and entirely wrong connotation for a title of Christ’s or the Father’s rightful, benevolent sovereignty — especially loaded in a country whose modern political vocabulary is saturated with denunciations of tyranny (imperial, Soviet, and current). Владика is correct and already carries appropriate dignity from its use as a title of address for Orthodox and Greek Catholic bishops (Владико!), which is a genuine asset here, not a collision — it correctly signals supreme, legitimate authority. A secondary interpretive question requires human theologian review: whether δεσπότην and κύριον in this verse are two titles both applied to Christ (the majority reading, and this curriculum’s), or δεσπότην to the Father and κύριον to Christ (a minority reading reflected loosely in Ohienko’s phrasing “єдиного Владики Бога й Господа нашого Ісуса Христа”); the exposition must state its interpretive choice explicitly rather than let ambiguity stand unaddressed.
• κύριος (kyrios) — “Lord.” Reuses baseline Critical-risk term Господь exactly (bible_term_registry.json risk tier).
• ἀρνέομαι (arneomai) — “to deny, disown, refuse to acknowledge.” English variants: “deny,” “disown,” “renounce.” Rendering: відкидатися / зрікатися (vidkydatysya / zrikatysya), following Ohienko’s “відкидаються.” Risk: Low.

Jude 1:5

Greek: Ὑπομνῆσαι δὲ ὑμᾶς βούλομαι, εἰδότας ὑμᾶς ἅπαξ πάντα, ὅτι [ὁ] κύριος λαὸν ἐκ γῆς Αἰγύπτου σώσας τὸ δεύτερον τοὺς μὴ πιστεύσαντας ἀπώλεσεν,

• ὑπομιμνήσκω (hypomimnēskō) — “to remind.” Rendering: нагадати (nahadaty). Risk: Low.
• σώζω (sōzō) — “to save, rescue, deliver.” Root of baseline Critical спасіння. Here in the historical-typological sense: God saved Israel out of Egypt. Rendering: спас/врятував (spas/vryatuvav). Risk: Medium. Establishes the first of Jude’s three Old Testament warning-types (Israel); must retain the concrete historical referent (the Exodus) rather than dissolve into generic “God saves” language, so that the force of the warning — God’s own redeemed people were later destroyed for unbelief — lands with its full weight.
• ἀπόλλυμι (apollymi) — “to destroy, ruin, cause to perish” (distinct from ἀποκτείνω, “to kill” — ἀπόλλυμι stresses the destructive outcome/loss, not merely the act). English variants: “destroyed,” “brought to ruin,” “caused to perish.” Rendering: погубив/знищив (pohubyv/znyshchyv), following Ohienko-adjacent usage. Risk: Medium. Recurs at v.11 (Korah) — should be rendered consistently across occurrences to preserve the letter’s judgment-vocabulary unity flagged under κρίμα above.

Jude 1:6

Greek: ἀγγέλους τε τοὺς μὴ τηρήσαντας τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἀρχὴν ἀλλὰ ἀπολιπόντας τὸ ἴδιον οἰκητήριον εἰς κρίσιν μεγάλης ἡμέρας δεσμοῖς ἀιδίοις ὑπὸ ζόφον τετήρηκεν·

• ἄγγελος (angelos) — “angel, messenger.” Rendering: ангел (anhel), following Ohienko’s “Анголів.” Risk: Medium. Second of the three OT warning-types; requires brief background exposition (the fall of angels, echoing Genesis 6 and extrabiblical Second Temple tradition) for readers without continuous Old Testament exposure, per the baseline’s existing caution about liturgical-excerpt-only Bible familiarity.
• τηρέω (tēreō) — “to keep, guard, watch over, preserve.” This is the letter’s single most important recurring verb, appearing at v.1 (believers “kept” for Christ), here at v.6 (angels who did not keep their own position, and are now kept in chains), v.13 (darkness “reserved/kept”), v.21 (believers commanded to “keep” themselves), and v.24 (God who is able to “keep”/guard believers from stumbling). English variants: “keep,” “guard,” “preserve,” “reserve,” “watch over.” Rendering: берегти / зберегти / зберегти (berehty/zberehty), following Ohienko’s consistent choice across all occurrences. Risk: HIGH. The curriculum must preserve this single Ukrainian root (берег-/зберіг-) across every occurrence to carry Jude’s deliberate ironic structure: the very verb used of the angels’ judicial “keeping” in chains (v.6) is the same verb used of believers’ gracious “keeping” for glory (v.1, v.21, v.24). A translation that uses different, unrelated Ukrainian verbs for these occurrences (e.g. “тримати” in one place, “охороняти” in another) would silently destroy this wordplay and, with it, part of the letter’s rhetorical argument that being “kept” is a status under both warning and promise.
• ἀρχή (archē) — here “original position, domain, rank, first estate” (not its more common sense “beginning”). English variants: “position,” “own domain,” “proper place/rank.” Rendering: початковий стан (pochatkovyy stan), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• οἰκητήριον (oikētērion) — “dwelling, habitation, abode.” Rendering: житло (zhytlo). Risk: Low.
• κρίσις (krisis) — “judgment” (the act/process of judging, distinct nuance from κρίμα above, the verdict itself). Rendering: суд (sud), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. See κρίμα note on maintaining lexical consistency across the letter’s judgment vocabulary.
• δεσμοῖς ἀιδίοις (desmois aidiois) — “eternal/everlasting chains/bonds.” ἀίδιος (distinct from the more common αἰώνιος, though near-synonymous) stresses permanence without end. Rendering: вічні кайдани (vichni kaydany), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ζόφος (zophos) — “gloom, thick darkness,” especially of the netherworld/place of judgment (distinct from σκότος, ordinary darkness, used at v.13). Rendering: морок (morok), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Should be kept distinct from σκότος (тьма/темрява) where the Greek text itself distinguishes them (v.13 combines both: ζόφος τοῦ σκότους, “the gloom of darkness”), to preserve Jude’s intensifying, stacked imagery rather than flattening it into one generic “darkness” word.

Jude 1:7

Greek: ὡς Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα καὶ αἱ περὶ αὐτὰς πόλεις, τὸν ὅμοιον τρόπον τούτοις ἐκπορνεύσασαι καὶ ἀπελθοῦσαι ὀπίσω σαρκὸς ἑτέρας, πρόκεινται δεῖγμα πυρὸς αἰωνίου δίκην ὑπέχουσαι.

• Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα (Sodoma kai Gomorra) — proper nouns; Rendering: Содом і Гоморра (Sodom i Homorra), fixed transliteration from Genesis 19/Ohienko tradition. Risk: HIGH. This is the third of Jude’s OT warning-types and carries acute contemporary political weight in Ukraine independent of the biblical text itself: “Sodom” functions as a live rhetorical touchstone in current Ukrainian public debate over sexuality, “traditional values,” and EU/Western cultural alignment, a debate that intersects with real political fault lines (church statements, legislative debates around anti-discrimination law, culture-war framing of “European values”). The curriculum must present this warning-type in its own historical and canonical frame (a warning against covenant-breaking moral abandon, part of a three-item OT typology alongside Israel and the angels) and must not be leveraged, explicitly or by suggestive phrasing, into contemporary Ukrainian political debate on either side. Human theologian review required.
• ἐκπορνεύω (ekporneuō) — intensive compound of πορνεύω, “to commit sexual immorality” (the ἐκ- prefix intensifying: “to indulge in sexual immorality to the full/to excess”). Rendering: чинити розпусту (chynyty rozpustu), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium.
• σαρκὸς ἑτέρας (sarkos heteras) — lit. “strange/other/different flesh.” Semantic range: genuinely debated among commentators — the traditional reading takes this as same-sex sexual activity (paralleling Genesis 19’s account); a minority reading (drawing on Genesis 6:1-4 and Second Temple angelology, connecting to the “angels” warning-type in v.6 immediately prior) takes it as humans’ pursuit of sexual union with angelic/non-human beings, i.e. “flesh of another kind/order” rather than “another person’s flesh.” English variants: “strange flesh,” “unnatural desire,” “flesh of a different order.” Rendering: інше тіло (inshe tilo) or чуже тіло (chuzhe tilo) — either is lexically defensible; the exposition, not the translation choice alone, must state which interpretive reading is being taught. Risk: HIGH. This phrase sits at the intersection of two live sensitivities: (1) the same contemporary political weight flagged above for Σόδομα καὶ Γόμορρα, and (2) genuine scholarly interpretive uncertainty that this curriculum must not paper over by silently picking one reading without comment. Human theologian review required; footnote the interpretive options rather than resolving them invisibly in the translated text.
• δεῖγμα (deigma) — “example, sample, specimen [held up for others to see].” Rendering: приклад (pryklad), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• πυρὸς αἰωνίου (pyros aiōniou) — “eternal fire.” Rendering: вічний огонь (vichnyy ohon’). Risk: Medium. Establishes final-judgment imagery that recurs implicitly through the letter (cf. v.23’s rescue “out of the fire”); should be rendered consistently.

Jude 1:8

Greek: ὁμοίως μέντοι καὶ οὗτοι ἐνυπνιαζόμενοι σάρκα μὲν μιαίνουσιν, κυριότητα δὲ ἀθετοῦσιν, δόξας δὲ βλασφημοῦσιν.

• ἐνυπνιάζομαι (enypniazomai) — “to dream, be a dreamer” — here metaphorical, of the false teachers’ self-generated visionary claims lacking genuine revelatory authority. Rendering: снити (snyty), following Ohienko’s “снячи.” Risk: Low.
• σάρξ (sarx) — “flesh,” here in Jude’s ethical-defilement sense (“defile the flesh”). Reuses the baseline’s Critical-risk Galatians caution on тіло exactly: Ukrainian тіло is structurally a homograph for both σάρξ (corrupted, self-serving human nature/bodily indulgence) and σῶμα (the neutral physical body, including the dignified body-theology central to Orthodox/Greek Catholic icon and resurrection doctrine). Risk: CRITICAL. Must be disambiguated on first occurrence in Jude exactly as required for Galatians 5, given that this letter, unlike Galatians, offers no immediately adjacent “fruit of the Spirit” passage to anchor the contrast — the disambiguating exposition must be supplied independently here.
• κυριότης (kyriotēs) — “lordship, dominion, ruling authority” — likely referring to angelic order/authority structures (paralleling the angels’ warning-type above) rather than Christ’s lordship directly, though the referent is debated (some read it as rejecting the Lord’s own authority). Rendering: влада (vlada), following Ohienko’s “погорджують владою.” Risk: HIGH. “Влада” (authority/power/the authorities) is, per the baseline’s own opening framing note for this entire language package, one of the most acutely live and politically contested vocabulary items in wartime Ukraine (government legitimacy, martial law, church-state relations). This verse’s target is angelic/spiritual authority in a specific typological argument, not civil government (contrast Romans 13’s влада), but the identical lexical form risks readers importing the Romans 13 political frame here. Exposition should distinguish the two explicitly.
• δόξα (doxa) — here plural, δόξας, meaning “glorious ones” — very likely a reference to angelic beings/dignities (an unusual, debated sense), not “glory” in the abstract divine-attribute sense used elsewhere in the letter (v.24-25) and in Romans. English variants: “glorious ones,” “celestial beings,” “dignities.” Rendering: слави (slavy), following Ohienko exactly (“зневажають слави”). Risk: HIGH. This is a distinct sense-shift from baseline’s already-High-risk слава (God’s own glory, with its live patriotic “Слава Україні” resonance). Using the identical Ukrainian word for both “God’s glory” (v.24-25 of this same letter) and “glorious [angelic] beings” (v.8) risks readers collapsing the two senses; the curriculum must flag this shift explicitly on first occurrence, distinct from — but analogous to — the patriotic-resonance caution the baseline already applies to слава generally.
• βλασφημέω (blasphēmeō) — “to blaspheme, revile, speak evil of, slander.” Rendering: зневажати/хулити (znevazhaty/khulyty), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.

Jude 1:9

Greek: ὁ δὲ Μιχαὴλ ὁ ἀρχάγγελος, ὅτε τῷ διαβόλῳ διακρινόμενος διελέγετο περὶ τοῦ Μωϋσέως σώματος, οὐκ ἐτόλμησεν κρίσιν ἐπενέγκαι βλασφημίας, ἀλλὰ εἶπεν· ἐπιτιμήσαι σοι κύριος.

• ἀρχάγγελος (archangelos) — “archangel,” a chief/ruling angel. Rendering: архангел (arkhanhel), following Ohienko (“Архангол Михаїл”). Risk: Low.
• διάβολος (diabolos) — “devil, slanderer,” from διαβάλλω (“to accuse, slander”). Rendering: диявол (dyyavol), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Must be presented as the sober, personal spiritual adversary of biblical theology, not folded into post-Soviet folk-superstitious “evil spirit” or occult categories the baseline already flags as a live risk zone for other spiritual-power vocabulary (духовні дари, спиритуальні здібності); диявол itself is the correct, unambiguous, well-established term and carries no such folk-occult drift, but surrounding exposition should keep the register theological rather than superstitious.
• Μωϋσέως σώματος (Mōyseōs sōmatos) — “Moses’ body.” This verse alludes to a tradition not recorded in the Old Testament canon (paralleled in the extra-biblical Assumption of Moses). Rendering: Мойсеєве тіло (Moyseyeve tilo), following Ohienko. Risk: HIGH. Jude’s use of extrabiblical material here (and again at vv.14-15 citing 1 Enoch) raises genuine inspiration-of-Scripture and canon questions that intersect meaningfully with this Ukrainian context: the three living traditions hold differing canon boundaries (the Orthodox and Greek Catholic canons include certain books the Protestant canon excludes as “anagignoskomena”/deuterocanonical, though neither Assumption of Moses nor 1 Enoch itself is included in any of the three mainstream Ukrainian church canons). This curriculum should teach explicitly that Jude’s citation of non-canonical material as illustrative tradition does not thereby canonize that source, extending the baseline’s existing High-risk caution on inspiration_of_scripture (Romans 1:2, 15:4) into new terrain. Human theologian review required.
• ἐπιτιμάω (epitimaō) — “to rebuke, reprimand sharply.” Rendering: докоряти/заборонити (dokoryaty/zaboronyty); Ohienko: “Хай Господь тобі докаже” — “docaty” archaic for “rebuke/prove against.” Risk: Low. May require a brief gloss for modern readers unfamiliar with Ohienko’s archaic verb “доказати” in this sense; docaty/докоряти as modern-register alternative is acceptable in exposition.

Jude 1:10

Greek: οὗτοι δὲ ὅσα μὲν οὐκ οἴδασιν βλασφημοῦσιν, ὅσα δὲ φυσικῶς ὡς τὰ ἄλογα ζῷα ἐπίστανται, ἐν τούτοις φθείρονται.

• ἄλογα ζῷα (aloga zōa) — “irrational animals/creatures” (ἄλογος, “without λόγος/reason/speech”). Rendering: нерозумні тварини / несловесні тварини (nerozumni tvaryny), Ohienko-adjacent. Risk: Low.
• φθείρω (phtheirō) — “to destroy, ruin, corrupt.” Rendering: гинути/псуватися (hynuty/psuvatysya). Risk: Low.

Jude 1:11

Greek: οὐαὶ αὐτοῖς, ὅτι τῇ ὁδῷ τοῦ Κάϊν ἐπορεύθησαν, καὶ τῇ πλάνῃ τοῦ Βαλαὰμ μισθοῦ ἐξεχύθησαν, καὶ τῇ ἀντιλογίᾳ τοῦ Κόρε ἀπώλοντο.

• οὐαί (ouai) — “woe!” A prophetic pronouncement of judgment, standard OT/NT prophetic-lament idiom. Rendering: горе (hore), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ὁδὸς τοῦ Κάϊν / πλάνη τοῦ Βαλαάμ / ἀντιλογία τοῦ Κόρε (Cain’s way / Balaam’s error / Korah’s rebellion) — three OT typological figures naming, respectively, murderous jealousy of a brother, mercenary false prophecy, and rebellion against divinely appointed authority. Rendering: дорога Каїнова / помилка Валаамова / бунт Кореїв (doroha Kayinova / pomylka Valaamova / bunt Koreyiv), following Ohienko’s phrasing. Risk: Medium. As with the Cain/Balaam/Korah figures elsewhere in the letter, requires supplied Old Testament narrative background (Genesis 4; Numbers 22-24, 31:16; Numbers 16) for readers whose primary Scripture exposure is liturgical-lectionary excerpts rather than continuous OT reading, consistent with the baseline’s existing caution on Davidic and Abrahamic covenant background (Romans, Galatians).
• μισθός (misthos) — “wages, hire, payment” — Balaam’s error was specifically mercenary (prophesying for pay). Rendering: заплата (zaplata), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ἀντιλογία (antilogia) — “contradiction, dispute, rebellion [against authority].” Rendering: бунт (bunt), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ἀπόλλυμι — see v.5 note; recurs here. Risk: Medium (consistency).

Jude 1:12–13

Greek: οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ ἐν ταῖς ἀγάπαις ὑμῶν σπιλάδες συνευωχούμενοι ἀφόβως, ἑαυτοὺς ποιμαίνοντες, νεφέλαι ἄνυδροι ὑπὸ ἀνέμων παραφερόμεναι, δένδρα φθινοπωρινὰ ἄκαρπα δὶς ἀποθανόντα ἐκριζωθέντα, κύματα ἄγρια θαλάσσης ἐπαφρίζοντα τὰς ἑαυτῶν αἰσχύνας, ἀστέρες πλανῆται οἷς ὁ ζόφος τοῦ σκότους εἰς αἰῶνα τετήρηται.

• ἀγάπαι (agapai, plural) — “love feasts”: a technical term for the early church’s communal fellowship meals, distinct from ἀγάπη as an abstract virtue. English variants: “love feasts,” “communal meals,” “fellowship meals.” Rendering: вечері любові / бенкети любові (vechery lyubovi/benkety lyubovi). Risk: Medium. Must be explicitly distinguished from baseline любов (the virtue “love,” High risk) to avoid readers hearing “your love-feasts” as an abstract statement about the church’s love rather than a concrete communal meal practice the false teachers were exploiting.
• σπιλάδες (spilades) — genuinely disputed term: either “hidden reefs/submerged rocks” (a nautical hazard, fitting the maritime imagery of v.13) or, if related to σπίλος (“stain, blemish,” cf. 2 Peter 2:13’s near-parallel word), “blemishes/moral stains” at the love-feasts. English variants: “hidden reefs,” “blemishes,” “stains.” Rendering: an explanatory gloss is preferable to a single fixed term given the genuine lexical uncertainty; exposition should note both options. Risk: Medium.
• ποιμαίνω (poimainō) — “to shepherd, tend as a flock” — used here ironically: the false teachers “shepherd only themselves,” a reversal of legitimate pastoral care. Rendering: пасти себе (pasty sebe), following Ohienko’s “пасуться.” Risk: Medium. Church-leadership imagery; must be framed as an indictment of self-serving false leadership specifically, not as a general critique of pastoral ministry or church office as such.
• νεφέλαι ἄνυδροι (nephelai anydroi) — “waterless clouds” — clouds that promise rain but deliver none, an image of empty promise. Rendering: хмари безводні (khmary bezvodni), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• δένδρα φθινοπωρινὰ ἄκαρπα (dendra phthinopōrina akarpa) — “fruitless autumn trees.” ἄκαρπος (“fruitless,” alpha-privative + καρπός, “fruit”) sits in deliberate contrast with the baseline’s established Galatians term plid Dukha (fruit of the Spirit, Medium risk). Rendering: безплідні осінні дерева (bezplidni osinni dereva), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Should be cross-referenced to the established fruit-of-the-Spirit doctrine as its dark inversion: these teachers show no genuine spiritual fruit despite outward religious participation, a contrast worth making explicit in exposition given the term’s established place in this curriculum’s shared vocabulary.
• δὶς ἀποθανόντα / ἐκριζωθέντα (dis apothanonta / ekrizōthenta) — “twice dead… uprooted” — doubly dead (both by nature and by outward barrenness), and pulled up by the roots, beyond any hope of bearing fruit. Rendering: двічі померлі… викорінені (dvichi pomerli… vykoriненi), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• κύματα ἄγρια θαλάσσης / ἐπαφρίζω (agria kymata / epaphrizō) — “wild sea-waves… foaming up” — turbulence that produces only foam/froth, i.e. shame (αἰσχύνη) rather than substance. Rendering: люті хвилі морські… виявляють піну (Ohienko: “з піною викидають власні срамоти”). Risk: Low.
• αἰσχύνη (aischynē) — “shame, disgrace.” Rendering: сором/срамота (sorom/sramota). Risk: Low.
• ἀστέρες πλανῆται (asteres planētai) — “wandering stars” — the root of the English word “planet” (πλανήτης, “wanderer”), here describing objects that appear to be reliable heavenly lights but move erratically, offering no fixed guidance. Rendering: зорі блудячі (zori bludyachi), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ζόφος τοῦ σκότους (zophos tou skotous) — “the gloom of darkness” — combines ζόφος (v.6 above, netherworld-gloom) with σκότος (ordinary darkness), an intensifying stacked phrase. Risk: Medium — see v.6 note on maintaining lexical distinctness between ζόφος (морок) and σκότος (тьма/темрява) so this deliberate combination is not flattened.

Jude 1:14–15

Greek: Προεφήτευσεν δὲ καὶ τούτοις ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ Ἑνὼχ λέγων· ἰδοὺ ἦλθεν κύριος ἐν ἁγίαις μυριάσιν αὐτοῦ, ποιῆσαι κρίσιν κατὰ πάντων καὶ ἐλέγξαι πᾶσαν ψυχὴν περὶ πάντων τῶν ἔργων ἀσεβείας αὐτῶν ὧν ἠσέβησαν καὶ περὶ πάντων τῶν σκληρῶν ὧν ἐλάλησαν κατ’ αὐτοῦ ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἀσεβεῖς.

• προφητεύω (prophēteuō) — “to prophesy.” Reuses baseline Low-risk term пророцтво/пророкувати exactly.
• Ἑνώχ, ἕβδομος ἀπὸ Ἀδάμ (Enōch, hebdomos apo Adam) — “Enoch, seventh from Adam” — a direct quotation (vv.14-15) from the non-canonical Book of 1 Enoch (1:9). Rendering: Енох (Enokh), following Ohienko. Risk: HIGH — see v.9 note on inspiration_of_scripture and canon boundaries; this is the letter’s clearest instance of the issue (a verbatim citation, introduced with the formula “prophesied,” of a text outside every mainstream Ukrainian church’s canon). Requires explicit theological framing distinguishing Jude’s inspired use of a source from any implied canonization of that source. Human theologian review mandatory.
• μυριάσιν ἁγίαις (myriasin hagiais) — “holy myriads” — a vast angelic host. Rendering: святі тисячі / святі полки (svyati tysyachi), following Ohienko’s “святими тисячами.” Risk: Low.
• κρίσις — see v.6/v.9 note; recurs. ἐλέγχω (elegchō) — “to convict, expose, bring to light [wrongdoing].” Rendering: винувати/викривати (vynuvaty/vykryvaty), following Ohienko’s “овинити.” Risk: Low.
• ψυχή (psychē) — “soul, person, life.” Rendering: душа (dusha). Risk: Low.
• ἁμαρτωλοὶ ἀσεβεῖς (hamartōloi asebeis) — “sinners, ungodly ones” — combines baseline гріх’s derivative грішники with ἀσεβεῖς (see v.4 note). Risk: Medium (compound of two established terms).

Jude 1:16

Greek: Οὗτοί εἰσιν γογγυσταί, μεμψίμοιροι, κατὰ τὰς ἐπιθυμίας αὐτῶν πορευόμενοι, καὶ τὸ στόμα αὐτῶν λαλεῖ ὑπέρογκα, θαυμάζοντες πρόσωπα ὠφελείας χάριν.

• γογγυστής / μεμψίμοιρος (gongystēs / mempsimoiros) — “grumbler” / “malcontent, faultfinder [with one’s lot in life].” Rendering: ремствувач / незадоволений своєю долею (Ohienko: “ремствувачі, незадоволені з долі своєї”). Risk: Medium. Ohienko’s phrase literally invokes “доля” (fate/lot) — note the baseline’s existing sharp caution elsewhere (election, providence entries) that доля/фатум must never substitute for personal, purposive divine agency; here, however, Ohienko uses “доля” in its ordinary secular sense of “one’s circumstances in life,” which is acceptable in this idiom precisely because the false teachers are the ones fatalistically grumbling about their lot — the caution is that exposition should not let this idiom bleed into the letter’s own theology of God’s purposive providence (v.24-25) by implying Jude himself endorses a fatalistic worldview.
• ἐπιθυμία (epithymia) — “desire, longing, craving” — morally neutral in isolated form but consistently negative (“their own desires/lusts”) in Jude’s usage (also v.18). Rendering: пожадливість (pozhadlyvist’), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Key term for the doctrine of self-directed, ungoverned desire as opposed to Spirit-governed obedience (cf. baseline’s Galatians flesh/Spirit contrast); should be distinguished from neutral бажання (ordinary “wish/desire”) to preserve its consistently negative moral coloring here.
• ὑπέρογκα (hyperogka) — “bombastic, swelling, boastful [words].” Rendering: чванливе (chvanlyve), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• θαυμάζοντες πρόσωπα … χάριν (thaumazontes prosōpa … charin) — lit. “admiring faces … for the sake of [gain]” — a Hebraic idiom for flattery/partiality shown for self-interested advantage. Rendering: підлещуватися перед людьми через користь (pidleshchuvatysya pered lyudmy cherez koryst’), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.

Jude 1:17–18

Greek: Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀγαπητοί, μνήσθητε τῶν ῥημάτων τῶν προειρημένων ὑπὸ τῶν ἀποστόλων τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ· ὅτι ἔλεγον ὑμῖν [ὅτι] ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου [τοῦ] χρόνου ἔσονται ἐμπαῖκται κατὰ τὰς ἑαυτῶν ἐπιθυμίας πορευόμενοι τῶν ἀσεβειῶν.

• ἀπόστολος (apostolos) — “apostle.” Reuses baseline Medium-risk term апостол exactly.
• ἐπ’ ἐσχάτου χρόνου (ep’ eschatou chronou) — “in the last time(s).” Standard eschatological formula. Rendering: в останні часи (v ostanni chasy), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Should not be presented as a novel or newly urgent claim specific to the present moment (a live temptation in a wartime context already saturated with apocalyptic-feeling public discourse), but as the settled apostolic teaching that the entire church age, from the apostles’ own time onward, is “the last time” in this sense.
• ἐμπαίκτης (empaiktēs) — “mocker, scoffer.” Rendering: насмішник (nasmishnyk), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• ἐπιθυμία / ἀσέβεια — recur; see vv.4, 16 notes.

Jude 1:19

Greek: οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες, ψυχικοί, πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες.

• ἀποδιορίζω (apodiorizō) — a rare verb, “to mark off by a boundary, cause division/separation.” Rendering: відлучатися [від єдності] (vidluchatysya [vid yednosti]), following Ohienko’s “хто відлучується від єдности.” Risk: Low.
• ψυχικός (psychikos) — “soulish, natural, unspiritual” — describing a person governed by natural human faculties alone, without the Spirit (contrast πνευματικός, “spiritual”). English variants: “worldly,” “unspiritual,” “natural,” “soulish.” Rendering: Ohienko renders this as тілесні (tilesni, “fleshly/bodily”); a more precise modern-register alternative is душевні (dushevni, “soulish,” from душа/soul) or земні (zemni, “earthly/worldly”). Risk: HIGH. Ohienko’s “тілесні” compounds the тіло/σάρξ-vs-σῶμα homograph risk already flagged Critical at v.8: using тіло-derived vocabulary here for ψυχικός (a distinct Greek root, ψυχή not σάρξ) risks blurring two already-separate risk categories into one. This curriculum’s exposition should prefer душевні or a plain gloss (“natural, without the Spirit”) over a straight adoption of Ohienko’s тілесні, or at minimum flag the distinction explicitly, to avoid a triple collision between σάρξ, σῶμα, and ψυχή all funneling into тіло-family vocabulary.
• πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες (pneuma mē echontes) — “not having the Spirit” — describing the unregenerate state, lacking the Holy Spirit’s indwelling presence. Rendering: не мають Духа (ne mayut’ Dukha), capitalizing Дух. Risk: CRITICAL. Extends the baseline’s already-Critical Galatians caution on bare πνεῦμα (Gal 5:16-25): every occurrence must be capitalized as Дух and explicitly glossed as the Holy Spirit, given the ever-present risk of readers hearing secular idioms like “бойовий дух” (fighting spirit/morale), especially salient in current wartime usage. Here the negated construction adds a further nuance requiring explicit exposition: this describes the absence of the Spirit’s indwelling in the unregenerate, not a temporary loss of morale or resolve — a distinction worth stating plainly given how naturally “не мають духу” could be heard in ordinary Ukrainian as “have lost heart/morale.”

Jude 1:20–21

Greek: Ὑμεῖς δέ, ἀγαπητοί, ἐποικοδομοῦντες ἑαυτοὺς τῇ ἁγιωτάτῃ ὑμῶν πίστει, ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ προσευχόμενοι, ἑαυτοὺς ἐν ἀγάπῃ θεοῦ τηρήσατε, προσδεχόμενοι τὸ ἔλεος τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον.

• ἐποικοδομέω (epoikodomeō) — “to build up, build upon [a foundation].” Rendering: будувати себе (buduvaty sebe), following Ohienko. Risk: Low. Parallels the baseline’s mutual_edification doctrine (Low risk) though here reflexive (building up oneself, not others) — worth a brief note that Jude’s focus here is personal spiritual formation as the ground for the following imperative to show mercy to others (vv.22-23).
• ἁγιωτάτῃ … πίστει (hagiōtatē … pistei) — “most holy faith” — superlative of ἅγιος modifying πίστις here in its v.3 sense (the body of apostolic doctrine), not personal trust. Rendering: найсвятіша віра (naysvyatisha vira), following Ohienko. Risk: High (inherits both святий’s Medium tier and the v.3 πίστις-as-doctrine Critical flag).
• πνεῦμα ἁγίῳ προσευχόμενοι (pneumati hagiō proseuchomenoi) — “praying in the Holy Spirit.” Reuses baseline Critical-risk term Святий Дух exactly (with the article present — unlike v.19’s bare πνεῦμα — so no additional capitalization-gloss risk here beyond the baseline’s standing caution).
• τηρέω (reflexive: τηρήσατε ἑαυτούς) — “keep yourselves.” See v.6 note on this letter’s central keeping-vocabulary. Rendering: берегти себе (berehty sebe), following Ohienko’s “бережіть себе самих.” Risk: HIGH. This imperative form introduces a genuine theological nuance requiring explicit exposition: believers are commanded to “keep themselves” in God’s love (v.21) even as the letter’s climax affirms that it is God who is able to “keep”/guard them from stumbling (v.24, φυλάξαι). This is not a contradiction but the letter’s own synergy of divine preservation and human responsibility; a careless translation or under-explained exposition risks either collapsing into a self-effort-only reading (works-anxiety, a live risk given the baseline’s existing caution about praxis-only readings of Christian life common to both majority liturgical traditions) or an assurance-without-responsibility reading (a different distortion). Both must be avoided by explicit teaching, not left to the wording alone.
• ἀγάπη θεοῦ (agapē theou) — “the love of God.” Reuses baseline High-risk любов exactly.
• ἔλεος (eleos) — “mercy.” Rendering: милість (mylist’). Risk: High. New core term for this letter’s doctrine of Mercy and Rescue of the Wavering (also vv.2, 22-23). Must be kept lexically and conceptually distinct from благодать (grace, baseline Critical): милість names God’s compassionate response to human weakness, wavering, and need, while благодать names the wider unmerited-favor basis of salvation; the two overlap but are not simple synonyms, and Jude’s repeated ἔλεος (opening greeting, closing exhortation to show mercy) makes this term programmatic for the letter’s pastoral, not merely polemical, half.
• ζωὴν αἰώνιον (zōēn aiōnion) — “eternal life.” Rendering: вічне життя (vichne zhyttya). Risk: Medium. Straightforward and well-established across all Ukrainian Christian traditions; low ambiguity risk, but worth defining precisely as unending, personal life in communion with God, consistent with the baseline’s existing caution (under resurrection) against any confusion with reincarnation-adjacent cyclical categories, even though no such confusion is native to Ukrainian folk religion.

Jude 1:22–23

Greek: καὶ οὕς μὲν ἐλεᾶτε διακρινομένους, οὕς δὲ σῴζετε ἐκ πυρὸς ἁρπάζοντες, οὕς δὲ ἐλεᾶτε ἐν φόβῳ, μισοῦντες καὶ τὸν ἀπὸ τῆς σαρκὸς ἐσπιλωμένον χιτῶνα.

Textual/structural note: the Greek manuscript tradition for these two verses is notably unsettled — some manuscripts present a two-fold division (two groups to be treated) rather than NA28’s three-fold division reflected above. Risk: Medium at the textual-critical level; the curriculum should note this variation exists rather than presenting the three-group structure as textually uncontested, even while proceeding with NA28’s reading as the working text.

• διακρίνομαι (diakrinomai) — here “to waver, doubt, be in dispute [with oneself]” (a distinct middle/passive sense from its active “to judge/distinguish” sense elsewhere in the NT). Rendering: вагатися (vahatysya), following Ohienko’s “хто вагається.” Risk: High. Core term for this letter’s doctrine of Mercy and Rescue of the Wavering: names not settled apostasy or false teaching but genuine doubt/instability among believers exposed to the false teachers’ influence — a pastorally distinct category from the ἀσεβεῖς condemned throughout the letter, and this distinction must be made explicit so mercy toward the wavering is not confused with tolerance toward the false teachers themselves.
• σῴζετε ἐκ πυρὸς ἁρπάζοντες (sōzete ek pyros harpazontes) — “save, snatching [them] out of the fire.” ἁρπάζω = “to seize, snatch, grab forcibly/urgently” (the same verb used elsewhere in the NT of the rapture/being caught up, 1 Thess 4:17; Acts 8:39). Rendering: спасайте, витягаючи з огню (spasayte, vytyahayuchy z ohnyu), following Ohienko, reusing baseline Critical спасіння root. Risk: High. Vivid urgency-of-rescue imagery that should be preserved in its full force, not softened into a gentler “help them” — this is emergency rescue language, consistent with the letter’s earlier “eternal fire” judgment imagery (v.7).
• φόβος (phobos) — “fear” — here a reverent, cautious fear guarding against contamination by the very sin being addressed, not terror. Rendering: страх (strakh). Risk: Medium. Should be distinguished from both ordinary secular fear/anxiety and, in the current context, the intensified everyday salience of “страх” as a wartime emotional register; here it names a disciplined, self-protective spiritual carefulness while showing mercy, not psychological terror.
• μισοῦντες (misountes) — “hating.” Rendering: ненавидячи (nenavydyachy), following Ohienko’s “майте на осторозі” (a softened paraphrase) or a more literal “ненавидячи.” Risk: Low.
• τὸν ἀπὸ τῆς σαρκὸς ἐσπιλωμένον χιτῶνα (ton apo tēs sarkos espilōmenon chitōna) — “the garment stained by the flesh” — σάρξ recurs (see v.8 CRITICAL note); χιτών, “tunic, garment,” used symbolically for moral contamination requiring careful, almost fastidious avoidance even while extending mercy. Rendering: одежа, оскверненна від тіла (odezha, oskvernenna vid tila), following Ohienko. Risk: High (inherits the standing Critical тіло/σάρξ-σῶμα caution, plus the vivid image’s own symbolic weight requiring exposition rather than a bare literal reading).

---

Part 2: Full-Book Coverage — Remainder of Chapter 1 (Jude 1:1–2, 24–25)

Jude’s salutation (vv.1-2) and closing doxology (vv.24-25) complete the single-chapter book. Both passages carry significant load-bearing vocabulary not repeated within the core passage and are treated here with the same rigor, completing full-book coverage.

Jude 1:1–2 (Salutation)

Greek: Ἰούδας Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ δοῦλος, ἀδελφὸς δὲ Ἰακώβου, τοῖς ἐν θεῷ πατρὶ ἠγαπημένοις καὶ Ἰησοῦ Χριστῷ τετηρημένοις κλητοῖς· ἔλεος ὑμῖν καὶ εἰρήνη καὶ ἀγάπη πληθυνθείη.

• Ἰούδας (Ioudas) — “Jude/Judas,” the author, traditionally identified as the half-brother of Jesus and brother of James (Ἰάκωβος). Rendering: Юда (Yuda), the established Ohienko/Ukrainian Bible-tradition form, distinct in spelling convention from Юдас-style transliterations and clearly distinguished in context from Judas Iscariot. Risk: Low, provided context makes clear which “Judas/Юда” is meant (a real but manageable disambiguation risk given the name’s more infamous NT bearer).
• δοῦλος (doulos) — “slave, bondservant.” Same self-designation Paul uses of himself in Romans 1:1. Rendering: раб (rab), following the Ohienko-tradition rendering already established for Paul’s parallel self-designation. Risk: Low. Straightforward continuity with the baseline’s existing precedent (though “раб” is not a separately flagged baseline TM entry, its rendering here should match Ohienko’s own consistent practice at Romans 1:1 for cross-curriculum consistency).
• ἀδελφός (adelphos) — “brother.” Rendering: брат (brat). Risk: Low.
• ἠγαπημένοις (ēgapēmenois) — perfect passive participle of ἀγαπάω, “having been loved [by God]” — a settled, ongoing state, not a momentary feeling. Rendering: улюблені (у Бозі Отці) (ulyublenі u Bozi Otsi), following Ohienko. Risk: Low, reusing baseline любов root.
• τετηρημένοις (tetērēmenois) — perfect passive participle of τηρέω, “having been kept/preserved [by Jesus Christ].” See the extended HIGH-risk note under Jude 1:6 above — this is the letter’s opening deployment of its central keeping-motif and must use the same Ukrainian root (збережений/берегти) as every other occurrence for the wordplay to survive translation.
• κλητοῖς (klētois) — “called ones.” Reuses baseline Medium-risk покликаний exactly.
• ἔλεος, εἰρήνη, ἀγάπη πληθυνθείη (eleos, eirēnē, agapē plēthyntheiē) — “mercy, peace, and love be multiplied [to you].” Rendering: милість вам, і мир, і любов нехай примножиться (mylist’ vam, i myr, i lyubov nekhay prymnozhytsya), following Ohienko’s triadic structure exactly. Risk: High overall (compound of the newly-flagged High-risk милість, the baseline High-risk мир — with its acute, current wartime resonance as the opposite of the ongoing war, exactly as flagged for Romans 5:1 — and the baseline High-risk любов). This opening greeting deserves the same pastoral sensitivity the baseline requires for Romans 5:1 and 8:15: мир here names God’s relational blessing on the reader, not a ceasefire, but the current political weight of the word will inevitably be heard by Ukrainian readers and should not be treated as incidental.

Jude 1:24–25 (Closing Doxology)

Greek: Τῷ δὲ δυναμένῳ φυλάξαι ὑμᾶς ἀπταίστους καὶ στῆσαι κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ ἀμώμους ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει, μόνῳ θεῷ σωτῆρι ἡμῶν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν δόξα μεγαλωσύνη κράτος καὶ ἐξουσία πρὸ παντὸς τοῦ αἰῶνος καὶ νῦν καὶ εἰς πάντας τοὺς αἰῶνας· ἀμήν.

• φυλάσσω (phylassō) — “to guard, keep watch over, protect” — a near-synonym of τηρέω (v.1, v.6, v.21), forming the letter’s climactic final statement of its central keeping-theme: it is ultimately God, not the believer’s own effort, who is able to guard against stumbling. Rendering: зберегти (zberehty), following Ohienko (“Хто може вас зберегти від упадку”), using the same root as τηρέω throughout for thematic unity. Risk: HIGH. This is the letter’s resolution of the tension flagged at v.21 (believers commanded to “keep” themselves) — the doxology’s opening word answers that command by affirming it is God who is ultimately able to keep believers secure. The curriculum must make this literary and theological resolution explicit: v.21’s imperative and v.24’s declaration of divine ability are two sides of the same doctrine (Kept by God and Presented Blameless), not competing claims.
• ἀπταίστους (aptaistous) — “without stumbling” (a rare word, occurring only here in the NT). Rendering: від упадку / непохитними (vid upadku / nepokhytnymy), following Ohienko’s “від упадку” (from a fall/stumbling). Risk: Medium.
• στῆσαι κατενώπιον τῆς δόξης αὐτοῦ (stēsai katenōpion tēs doxēs autou) — “to present/set [you] before his glory.” δόξα here returns to its ordinary sense of God’s own radiant glory (distinct from v.8’s “glorious ones” — see that note on the sense-shift). Rendering: поставити перед Своєю славою (postavyty pered Svoyeyu slavoyu), following Ohienko, reusing baseline High-risk слава. Risk: High, inheriting both the baseline’s existing слава caution (patriotic “Слава Україні” resonance) and this letter’s own internal need to distinguish this sense from v.8’s angelic “glorious ones” sense of the same word.
• ἄμωμος (amōmos) — “blameless, without blemish/spot” — sacrificial-cultic background (of unblemished offerings) applied to believers’ final, glorified state. Rendering: непорочний (neporochnyy), following Ohienko. Risk: Medium. Should not be confused with the everyday folk-religious sense of ritual purity/blessing already flagged as a risk for baseline’s освячення (sanctification) — this is eschatological, forensic-and-transformative completeness, not ritual cleanliness of an object or space.
• ἐν ἀγαλλιάσει (en agalliasei) — “with [great, exultant] joy.” A stronger, more exuberant term than ordinary χαρά (“joy”). Rendering: у радості / з великою радістю (u radosti/z velykoyu radistyu), following Ohienko’s “в радості.” Risk: Low.
• σωτήρ (sōtēr) — “Savior.” Rendering: Спаситель (Spasytel’), the established Ukrainian Bible-tradition term, directly built on the baseline’s Critical-risk спасіння root. Risk: High. Should be anchored, per the baseline’s existing instruction for спасіння generally, to the concrete, decisive saving work of Christ’s death and resurrection, not left to default unqualified into any one tradition’s fuller theological system.
• μεγαλωσύνη (megalōsynē) — “majesty, greatness.” Rendering: величність (velychnist’), following Ohienko. Risk: Low.
• κράτος (kratos) — “might, power, dominion, sovereign strength” (a term for exercised ruling power, distinct from δύναμις, raw capability). Rendering: сила (syla), following Ohienko’s “сила.” Risk: Medium. This is the same Ukrainian word (сила) used in the baseline’s established сила Божа (power_of_god, Romans 1:16), where the baseline specifically cautions against the term енергія owing to its distinct technical meaning in Orthodox Palamite theology (uncreated divine energies). Here in a doxological, not soteriological, context the collision risk is lower, but consistency of сила across both curricula is itself worth noting as an asset: readers will recognize continuity between “God’s power for salvation” (Romans) and “power” as a doxological divine attribute (Jude) without needing a new term.
• ἐξουσία (exousia) — “authority, right, jurisdiction.” Rendering: влада (vlada), following Ohienko’s “влада.” Risk: HIGH. As already flagged at v.8’s κυριότης (also rendered влада in this letter), this creates a genuine convergence risk: two distinct Greek words (κυριότης, v.8, and ἐξουσία, v.25) both render to the identical Ukrainian word влада, and влада itself is, per the baseline’s own opening framing note, among the most acutely live, politically contested vocabulary items in wartime Ukraine (government legitimacy, martial law, church-state relations, contested jurisdiction claims among OCU/UOC/UGCC). The curriculum’s exposition should flag this double convergence explicitly: v.8’s влада (angelic/spiritual authority structures rejected by false teachers) and v.25’s влада (God’s own rightful, doxological sovereign authority, affirmed) are opposite in valence (one condemned, one worshipped) despite using the same Ukrainian word for two different Greek terms — a genuine translation-form gap requiring explicit exposition, not resolvable by word choice alone. Human theologian review required.
• αἰών (aiōn) — “age, eternity.” Rendering: вік (vik). Risk: Low.
• ἀμήν (amēn) — “Amen.” Established transliteration амінь (amin’), per the baseline’s existing instruction for this exact term. Risk: Low.

---

Summary: Full-Book Coverage Confirmation

All 25 verses of Jude have been analyzed: vv.3–23 (core passage) verse by verse in Part 1; vv.1–2 and 24–25 (salutation and doxology) in Part 2. As a single-chapter book, this constitutes complete first-to-last coverage of the curriculum book per the PRD Phase 1 mandate. No verse or load-bearing term has been silently omitted. See analysis/08_core_glossary.md for the consolidated glossary table drawing on every term identified above.