CHAPTER IV.

ON THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.

SECTION 1.

ON THE GENUINENESS AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES.

I. Origin of the Appellation Cathoäc Epistles.-II. Its Antiquity.-Observations on their Authenticity.—III. On the Order in which they are usually placed.

I. THE Epistles of Paul are followed in the canon of the II. The denomination of Catholic Epistles is of very con New Testament by seven Epistles, bearing the names of the siderable antiquity, for Eusebius uses it as a common appelapostles James, Peter, Jude, and John. For many centu-lation in the fourth century, and it is probably earlier; for ries, these Epistles have been generally termed Catholic John's first Epistle is repeatedly called a catholic Epistle by Epistles, an appellation for which several conjectures have Origen, and by Dionysius bishop of Alexandria. Of these been assigned. Epistles, two only, víz. the first Epistle of Peter and the first Epistle of John, were universally received in the time of Eusebius; though the rest were then well known. Athanasius, Epiphanius, and later Greek writers, received seven Epistles which they called catholic. The same appellation was also given to them by Jerome.

1. Salmeron and others have imagined that they were denominated Catholic or general Epistles, because they were designed to be transcribed and circulated among the Christian churches, that they might be perused by all; for they contain that one catholic or general doctrine, which was delivered to the churches by the apostles of our Saviour, and which might be read with advantage by the universal church of Christ. In like manner they might be called canonical, as containing canons or general rules and precepts which concern all Christians. Unquestionably, the doctrines they contain are truly catholic and excellent; and they also contain general rules and directions that concern all Christians, as well as precepts that are binding upon all, so far as their situations and circumstances are similar. But these remarks are equally applicable to the other books of the New Testament, and Paul's Epistles may, for the same reasons, with equal propriety, be termed catholic or canonical Epistles; for the doctrines there delivered are as catholic and excellent as those comprised in the seven Epistles now under consideration. They likewise contain many general precepts that are obligatory upon all Christians; and the particular precepts are binding so far as the circumstances of Christians in later ages are similar to those referred to by the great apostle of the Gentiles.

Although the authenticity of the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the Epistle of Jude, and the second and third Epistle of John, was questioned by some ancient fathers, as well as by some modern writers, yet we have every reason to believe that they are the genuine and authentic productions of the inspired writers whose names they bear. The claims to authenticity of these disputed Epistles are discussed in the following sections. We may, however, here remark, that the primitive Christians were extremely cautious in admitting any books into their canon, the genuineness and authenticity of which they had any reason to suspect. They rejected all the writings forged by heretics in the names of the apostles; and, therefore, most assuredly, would not have received any, without previously subjecting them to a severe scrutiny. Now, though these five Epistles were not immediately acknowledged as the writings of the apostles, this only shows that the persons, who doubted, had not received complete and incontestable evidence of their authenticity. But, as they were afterwards universally received, we have every reason to conclude, that, upon a strict examination, they were found to be the genuine productions of the apostles. Indeed, the ancient Christians had such good opportunities for examining this subject, they were so careful to guard against imposition, and so well founded was their judgment concerning the books of the New Testament, that, as Dr. Lardner has remarked, no writing which they pronounced genuine has yet been proved spurious; nor have we at this day the least reason to believe any book to be genuine which they rejected.

2. Others are of opinion that they received the appellation of catholic or general Epistles, because they were not written to one person, city, or church, like the Epistles of Paul, but to the catholic church, Christians in general, or to Christians of several countries, or at least to all the Jewish Christians wherever they were dispersed over the face of the earth. Ecumenius, Leontius, Whitby, and others, have adopted this opinion, which, however, does not appear to be well founded. The Epistle of James was, indeed, written to the Christians of the twelve tribes of Israel in their several dispersions; but it was not inscribed to the Christians in Judæa, III. The order in which these Epistles are placed, varies nor to Gentile Christians in any country whatever. The two in ancient authors; but it is not very material in what manEpistles of Peter were written to Christians in general, but ner they are arranged. Could we fix with certainty the date particularly those who had been converted from Judaism. of each Epistle, the most natural order would be according The first Epistle of John and the Epistle of Jude were pro-to the time when they were written. Some have placed the bably written to Jewish Christians; and the second and third three Epistles of John first, probably because he was the Epistles of John were unquestionably written to particular beloved disciple of our Lord. Others have given the priority to the two Epistles of Peter, because they considered him as the prince of the apostles. Some have placed the Epistle of James last, possibly because it was later received into the canon by the Christian church in general. By others, this Epistle has been placed first, either because it was conjectured to have been the first written of the seven Epistles, or because Saint James was supposed to have been the first bishop of Jerusalem, the most ancient and venerable, and the first of all the Christian churches; or because the Epistle was written to the Christians of the twelve tribes of Israel, who were the first believers. In the following sections the usual order has been retained 1

persons.

3. A third opinion is that of Dr. Hammond, adopted by Dr. Macknight and others, which we think is the most propable. It is this:-The first Epistle of Peter and the first Epistle of John, having from the beginning been received as authentic, obtained the name of catholic or universally acknowledged (and therefore canonical) Epistles, in order to distinguish them from the Epistle of James, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Epistle of Jude, concerning which doubts were at first entertained, and they were considered by many as not being a rule of faith. But their authenticity being at length acknowledged by the generality of the churches, they also obtained the name of catholic or universally received Epistles, and were esteemed of equal authority with the rest. These Epistles were also termed canonical by Cassiodorus in the middle of the sixth century and by the writer of the prologue to these Epistles, which is erroneously ascribed to Jerome. The propriety of I. this latter appellation is not satisfactorily ascertained. Du Pin says that some Latin writers have called these Epistles canonical, either confounding the name with catholic, or to denote that they are a part of the canon of the books of the

New Testament.

SECTION II.

ON THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JAMES.

Account of the author of this Epistle.-II. Its genuineness and authenticity.-III. To whom addressed.—IV. Its scope.→ 1 Benson's Preface to the Catholic Epistles. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 264 271. Pritii Introd. ad Nov. Test. pp. 62-65. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. Fi 465-468.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 366, 367. Rosenmüller, Scholia, vol. v. pp. 317, 318.

PP.

V. Synopsis of ts contents.-VI. Observations on this
Epistle.

fewer than seven allusions to it, which Dr. Lardner thinks sufficient to prove the antiquity of this Epistle. It is classed whose authenticity the ancients were not unanimous, though by Eusebius among the Ary, or writings concerning the majority was in favour of them. This Epistle was quoted as genuine by Origen, Jerome, Athanasius, and most of the subsequent ecclesiastical writers: and it is found in all the catalogues of the canonical books of Scripture, which were published by the general and provincial councils. But the most decisive proof of its canonical authority is, that the Epistle of James is inserted in the Syriac version of the New Testament, executed at the close of the first or early in the second century, in which the second Epistle of Peter, the second and third of John, the Epistle of Jude, and the book of Revelation are omitted. This, Dr. Macknight truly Jewish believers, to whom that Epistle was addressed and remarks, is an argument of great weight; for certainly the delivered, were much better judges of its authenticity than the converted Gentiles to whom it was not sent, and who had perhaps no opportunity of being acquainted with it until long

after it was written.

I. CONSIDERABLE doubts have existed respecting the author of this Epistle. Two apostles of the name of James are mentioned in the New Testament. The first was the son of Zebedee, a fisherman upon the lake of Galilee, and the brother of the evangelist John; and as he is uniformly mentioned by the evangelists before John (except in Luke ix. 28.), he is supposed to have been the elder of the two. As he was put to death by Herod Agrippa, A. D. 44 (Acts xii.), it is evident that he was not the author of the Epistle which bears the name of James, because it contains passages which refer to a later period, viz. v. 1-8., which intimates the then immediately approaching destruction of Jerusalem, and the subversion of the Jewish polity. The other James was the son of Alpheus or Cleopas; he is called the brother or near relation of our Lord (Gal. i. 18, 19.), and is also generally termed "the Less," partly to distinguish him from the other James, and probably, also, because he was lower in stature. That he was an apostle, is evident from various passages in the New Testament, though it does III. Commentators and critics are by no means agreed not appear when his designation to this office took place. concerning the persons to whom this Epistle was addressed. He was honoured by Jesus Christ with a separate interview Beza, Cave, Scott, Fabricius, Bishop Tomline, and others, soon after his resurrection. (1 Cor. xv. 7.) He was distin- are of opinion that it was addressed to the believing Jews guished as one of the apostles of the circumcision (Acts i.who were dispersed all over the world. Grotius and Dr. 13.); and soon after the death of Stephen, A. D. 34, he seems Wall think that it was written to all the people of Israel to have been appointed president or bishop of the Christian living out of Judæa. Michaelis considers it certain that church at Jerusalem, to have dwelt in that city, and to have James wrote to persons already converted from Judaism to presided at the council of the apostles, which was convened Christianity; but at the same time he believes, as the apostle there A. D. 49. On account of his distinguished piety and was highly respected by the Jews in general, that he wished sanctity, he was surnamed "the Just." But, notwithstand and designed that it should also be read by the unbelieving ing the high opinion that was generally entertained of his Jews, and that this design and intention had some influence character, his life was prematurely terminated by martyrdom, on the choice of his materials. Dr. Benson is of opinion according to the account of Hegesippus, an ecclesiastical that this Epistle was addressed to the converted Jews historian, who flourished towards the close of the second out of Palestine; but Whitby, Lardner, and after them century. Having made a public declaration of his faith in Macknight, think it was written to the whole Jewish nation, Christ, the Scribes and Pharisees excited a tumult among both within and without Judæa, whether believers or not. the Jews, which began at the temple: or at least they availed This opinion is grounded on some expressions in the first ten themselves of a general disturbance, however it might have verses of the fourth chapter, and in the first five verses of the originated, and demanded of James an explicit and public fifth chapter, which they suppose to be applicable to unbedeclaration of his sentiments concerning the character of lievers only. Christ. The apostle, standing on an eminence or battlement alludes to the then impending destruction of Jerusalem, and It is true that in the fifth chapter the apostle of the temple, whence he could be heard by the assembled the miseries which soon after befell the unbelieving Jews; multitude, avowed his faith, and maintained his opinion, that but we think, with Bishop Tomline, that in these passages Jesus was the Messiah. The Jews were exasperated, and the apostle alludes merely to the great corruptions into which precipitated him from the battlement where he was standing; the Hebrew Christians had fallen at that time. and as he was not killed by the fall, they began to cast stones at him. The holy apostle, kneeling down, prayed to God to forgive his murderers, one of whom at length struck him with a long pole, which terminated his life. According to Hegesippus, this event took place about the time of the passover A. D. 62. At this time the procurator Festus is supposed to have been dead, and his successor Albinus had not arrived; so that the province was left without a governor. Such a season left the Jews at liberty to gratify their licentious and turbulent passions; and from their known character and sentiments about this time, they were very likely to embrace the opportunity. We may therefore date the apostle's death about the time assigned by Hegesippus, viz. A. D. 62, in which year it is placed by most learned men, who are agreed in dating the Epistle of James in the year 61.2

II. A considerable diversity of opinion has prevailed respecting the canonical authority of this Epistle; but though Michaelis and some other modern critics are undecided on this subject, we apprehend that there is sufficient evidence to prove that it was written in the apostolic age. Clement of Rome has alluded to it twice. Hermas has not

Hegesippus, cited by Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. lib. ii. c. 23. Eusebius also quotes a passage from Josephus, that is no longer extant in his works, in which the Jewish historian considers the miseries which shortly after overwhelmed his countrymen as a judgment for their murder of James, whom he calls a most righteous person. The genuineness of Josephus's testimony has been questioned, so that no reliance can be placed upon it. Origen and Jerome cite it as authentic, and they are followed by Bishop Pearson, who has defended its genuineness. Dr. Doddridge considers the testimony of Josephus as unworthy of credit; and Dr. Benson thinks that both the accounts of Josephus and Hegesippus are extremely dubious. Dr. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. vi. pp. 468-502.; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 368384. Dr. Benson's History of Saint James, prefixed to his Paraphrase, pp. 1-13. 2d edit. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp 273-292. It is well known that the venerable Martin Luther, in the earlier part of the Reformation, spoke rather in a slighting manner of this Epistle, which he called straminea epistola, a strawy epistle, and excluded it at first from the sacred canon on account of its supposed contradiction of Saint Paul concerning the doctrine of justification by faith; but more mature experience and deeper research induced him subsequently to retract his opinion.

Lardner's Works, Svo. vol. ii. p. 44.; 4to. vol. i. p. 301

of his Epistle to believers, and part to unbelievers, without
It does not appear probable that James would write part
any mention or notice of that distinction. It should also be
remembered, that this Epistle contains no general arguments
for the truth of Christianity, nor any reproof of those who
refused to embrace the Gospel; and, therefore, though Bishop
Tomline admits that the inscription" to the twelve tribes that
are scattered abroad" might comprehend both unbelieving
and believing Jews, yet he is of opinion that it was intended
for the believing Jews only, and that Saint James did not.
expressly make the discrimination, because neither he nor
any other apostle ever thought of writing to any but Christian
further observes, "was to confirm, and not to convert; to
"The object of the apostolical Epistles," he
those who did not believe. The sense of the above inscription
correct what was amiss in those who did believe, and not in
seems to be limited to the believing Jews by what follows
almost immediately, "The trial of your faith worketh patience.'
(i. 3.) And again, My brethren, have not the faith of our
Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of per-
sons.' (ii. 1.) These passages could not be addressed to

converts.

unbelievers."%

6

IV. The design of the apostle James, in writing this Epistle, we may collect, from a consideration of its contents, to be as follows:

First, to prevent the Jewish Christians from falling into the vices which abounded among the Jews; such as pride in prosperity, impatience under poverty, or any other afflic tion; unworthy thoughts of God, and more particularly the looking upon him as the author of moral evil; a valuing without a virtuous practice; a very criminal partiality for themselves on their faith, knowledge, or right opinion, the rich, and a contempt for the poor; an affectation of being doctors or teachers; indulging passion and rash anger, envy and uncharitableness, strife and contention; abusing the Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. pp. 58-60.; 4to. vol. i. pp. 309, 310.

• Bishop Tomline's Eleinents of Christian Theology, p. 472

noble faculty of speech, and being guilty of the vices of the tongue, such as cursing and swearing, slander and backbiting, and all rash and unguarded speeches whatever. So, likewise, he wrote to caution them against covetuousness and sensuality, distrusting the divine goodness, neglecting prayer, or praying with wrong views, and the want of a due sense of their constant and immediate dependence upon God.

Secondly, to set the Jewish Christians right as to the doctrine of justification by faith. For as they were not to be justified by the law, but by the method proposed in the Gospel, and that method was said to be by faith without the works of the law; they, some of them, weakly, and others, perhaps, wilfully, perverted that discovery; and were for understanding, by faith, a bare assent to the truth of the Gospel, without that living, fruitful, and evangelical faith, which "worketh by ove," and is required of all that would be saved.

Thirdly, to intimate unto such of them as laboured under sickness or any bodily disorders occasioned by their crimes, that if they were penitent, they might hope for a miraculous

cure.

Fourthly, another and a principal reason of Saint James's writing this Epistle to the Jewish Christians at this time was, to prevent their being impatient under their present persecutions or dark prospects; and to support and comfort them, by assuring them that the coming of the Lord was at hand. It is evident from the Acts of the Apostles, and many of the Epistles, that most of the persecutions which befell the Christians arose from the unbelieving Jews. Now, as their destruction was approaching swiftly, the evils, which the Christians suffered from them, were as swiftly drawing to an end. And it was highly proper for Saint James to put them in mind of these things; for the prospect of a speedy deliverance is one of the greatest motives to patience under any calamity.

V. Conformably with this design, the Epistle divides itself into three parts, exclusive of the introduction (i. 1.); viz. PART I. contains Exhortations,

1. To joyful patience under trials. (i. 2-4.)

VI. This Epistle of James is one of the most pathetic and instructive in the New Testament. Its style possesses all that beautiful and elegant simplicity which so eminently characterizes the sacred writers Having been written with the design of refuting particular errors which had been introduced among the Jewish Christians, it is not so replete with the peculiar doctrines of Christianity as the Epistles of Paul, or indeed as the other apostolical Epistles; but it contains an admirable summary of those practical duties which are incumbent on all believers, and which it enforces in a manner equally elegant and affectionate.1

I.

SECTION III.

ON THE FIRST GENERAL EPISTLE OF PETER.

Account of the apostle Peter.-II. Genuineness and canonical authority of this Epistle.-III. To whom written.IV. Of the place whence it was sent.-Date.-V. Its design and contents.- -VI. Observations on the style of Saint Peter's two Epistles.

I. SIMON, surnamed Cephas or Peter, which appellation signifies a stone or rock, was the son of Jonas or Jonah, and was born at Bethsaida, on the coast of the sea of Galilee. He had a brother, called Andrew, and they jointly pursued the occupation of fishermen on that lake. These two brothers were hearers of John the Baptist; from whose express testimony, and their own personal conversation with Jesus Christ, they were fully convinced that he was the Messiah (John i. 35-42.); and from this time it is probable that they had frequent intercourse with our Saviour, and were witnesses of some of the miracles wrought by him, particularly that performed at Cana in Galilee. (John ii. 1, 2.) Both Peter and Andrew seem to have followed their trade, until Jesus Christ called them to "follow him," and promised to make them both "fishers of men." (Matt. iv. 18, 19. Mark i. 17.

2. To ask wisdom of God, in faith, and with an unwavering Luke v. 10.) From this time they became his companions, mind. (5-8.)

3. To humility. (9-11.)

4. To constancy under temptations, in which part of the Epistle the apostle shows that God is not the author of sin, but the source and giver of every good. (12-18.)

5. To receive the word of God with meekness, and to reduce it to practice. (19—27.)

PART II. censures and condemns,

1. Undue respect of persons in their religious assemblies, which is contrary to the law of love. (ii. 1-9.) It is then shown that the wilful transgression of one commandment violates the whole law of God. (10—12.)

2. Their mistaken notions of justification by faith without works; these mistakes are corrected and illustrated by the examples of Abraham and Rahab. (ii. 13-26.)

3. The affectation of being doctors or teachers of their religion; for as all are offenders, more or less, so vices in such a station would be the more aggravated. (iii. 1, 2.) Hence the apostle takes occasion to show the fatal effects of an unbridled tongue, together with the difficulty and duty of governing it (3-12.); and contrasts in a most beautiful manner the nature and effects of earthly and heavenly wisdom. (13-18.)

4. Those who indulge their lusts and passions. (iv. 1—5.) 5. The proud, who are exhorted to repentance and submission to God. (6-10.)

6. Censoriousness and detraction; annexed are exhortations to immediate and constant dependence upon God, enforced by considerations of the shortness and uncertainty of the present life. (11—17.)

7. Those who placed undue reliance upon their riches. (v. 1-6.)

PART III. contains Exhortations and Cautions; viz.

1. An exhortation to patience and meckness under trials, in the hope of a speedy deliverance. (v. 7—11.)

2. A caution against swearing, and an admonition to prayer and praise. (12, 13.)

3. Concerning visiting the sick, and the efficacy of prayer. (14-18.)

4. An encouragement to attempt the conversion of sinners, and the recovery of their offending brethren. (19, 20.)

and when he completed the number of his apostles, they were included among them. Peter, in particular, was honoured with his master's intimacy, together with James and John. With them Peter was present, when our Lord restored the daughter of Jairus to life (Mark v. 37. Luke viii. 51.); when he was transfigured on the mount (Matt. xvii. 1. Mark ix. 2. Luke ix. 28.), and during his agony in the garden (Matt. xxvi. 36-56. Mark xiv. 32-42.); and on various other occasions Peter received peculiar marks of his Master's confidence. At the time when Peter was called to the apostleship, he was married and seems to have removed, in consequence, from Bethsaida to Capernaum, where his wife's family resided. It appears also that when our Lord left Nazareth, and came and dwelt at Capernaum (Matt. iv. 13.), he took up his occasional residence at Peter's house, whither the people resorted to him.2

In the evangelical history of this apostle, the distinguishing features in his character are very signally portrayed; and it in no small degree enhances the credibility of the sacred historians, that they have blended without disguise several traits of his precipitance and presumption, with the honourable testimony which the narration of facts affords to the sincerity of his attachment to Christ, and the fervour of his

zeal in the cause of his blessed Master. His ardour and forwardness are apparent on many occasions. He is the first to reply to all questions proposed by our Lord to the whole collective body of disciples, of which we have a memorable instance in Matt. xvi. 13-16. He hesitates not to rebuke our Lord himself, when he first announced his future sufferings. The ardour of his spirit is strikingly evinced in his venturing to walk on the sea to meet his Master (Matt. xiv. 28-31.); and still more decisively in his conduct towards the high-priest's servant, whom he smote with his sword, and whose right ear he cut off, when the Jewish officers were confidence sufficiently appear in his solemn asseverations about to apprehend our Lord. His presumption and selfthat he would never abandon his Master (Matt. xxvi. 33.);

1 Benson's Preface to Saint James, pp. 14-20. Macknight's Preface, 67-79. Harwood's Introd. to the New Test. vol. i. pp. 216-240. Heidegger sect. 2-4. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 292-314. Pritii, Introd. ad Nov. Test. pp. Enchirid. Bibl. pp. 612-617. Janssens, Hermeneutique Sacrée, tom. il. pp. 68-72. See also Hug's Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 549-584.

Luke iv. 40. Matt. viii. 16. xvij. 24-27. Mark i. 32. 34.

• Matt. xxvi. 51-51. Mark xiv. 46, 47. Luke xxii. 50, 51. John xviii. 10, 11

SECT. 3. contains an exhortation to patience, submission, and to holiness of life, enforced,

figuratively to signify that it would resemble Babylon in its idolatry, and in its opposition to and persecution of the church of God: and that, like Babylon, it will be utterly destroyed. But these things the inspired writers did not think fit to say plainly concerning Rome, for a reason which every reader may understand.

2. From the total silence of ecclesiastical history, it is not probable that Peter ever visited Babylon in Chaldæa; and Babylon in Egypt was too small and insignificant to be the subject of consideration.

the Oriental churches.

4. The Jews, to whom this Epistle was written, were fond of mystical appellations, especially in their captivities: Edom was a frequent title for their Heathen oppressors; and, as Babylon was the principal scene of their first captivity, it was highly probable that Rome, the principal scene of their second, and which so strongly resembled the former in her "abominations, her idolatries, and persecutions of the saints," should be denominated by the same title. And this argument is corroborated by the similar usage of the Apocalypse, where the mystical application is unquestionable. (Rev. xiv. 8. xvi. 19. xviii. 2., &c.) It is highly probable, indeed, that John borrowed it from Peter; or rather that both derived it, by inspiration, from the prophecy of Isaiah. (xxi. 9.)

i. By considering the example of Christ. (iii. 14-18.) ii. By reminding them how God punished the disobedient in the days of Noah. (19-22.)

iii. By reminding them of the example of Christ, and that by their conversion they became dead to the flesh. (iv. 1-6.)

iv. By showing them the approaching destruction of the Jewish polity. (7-11.) v. By showing them that, under the Gospel, they should consider afflic tion as their portion, and as matter of joy. (12-19.)

SECT. 4. Directions to the ministers of the churches, and the people, how to behave towards each other. (v. 1--11.) The Conclusion. (v. 12—14.)

3. Silvanus or Silas, the bearer, was the faithful brother, or associate of Paul in most of the churches which he had planted. And though he was not at Rome with the apostle when he wrote nis last Epistle to Timothy, he might naturally have come thither cellence, in the judgment of the best critics, does not fall VI. As the design of this Epistle is excellent, so its exsoon after; and have been sent by Paul and Peter jointly, to con- short of its design. Erasmus pronounces it to be worthy of firm the churches in Asia Minor, &c. which he had assisted in the prince of the apostles, and adds that it is sparing in words, planting. But Silvanus, Paul, and Peter had no connection but full of sense. That great critic, Joseph Scaliger, calls it with Babylon, which lay beyond their district; and, therefore, they majestic; and Osterwald says that the first Epistle of Peter were not likely at any time to build upon another's foundation. is one of the finest books in the New Testament, that the The Gospel was preached in Persia or Parthia, by the apostle second is written with great strength and majesty, and that Thaddeus, or Jude, according to Cosmas; and Abulfaragi reck-both of them evidently show their divine origin. Every part, ons, that the ancient Syriac version of the New Testament was indeed, of Peter's writings indicates a mind that elt the made in his time, and probably by his authority, for the use of power of the doctrines he delivered, and a soul that glowed with the most ardent zeal for the spread of the Gospel. His style expresses the noble vehemence and fervour of his spirit, his perfect knowledge of the Gospel, and his strong assurance of the truth and certainty of its doctrines. Little solicitous about the choice or harmonious disposition of words, his thoughts and his heart were absorbed with the grand truths which he was divinely commissioned to proclaim, and the indispensable obligation of Christians to adorn their profession by a holy life. Hence, in his first Epistle, he writes with such energy and rapidity of style, that we can scarcely perceive the pauses of his discourse, or the distinction of his periods. And in his second Epistle he exposes with holy indignation and vehemence the abandoned principles and prac tices of those false teachers and false prophets, who in those early times sprang up in the Christian church, and disseminated their pernicious tenets with so much art and cunning. His prophetic description of the general conflagration, and of the end of all terrestrial things (2 Pet. iii. 8-12.), is very awful. We see the planetary heavens, and this our earth, enveloped in the devouring flames: we hear the groans of an expiring world, and the crash of nature tumbling into universal ruin. How solemn and affecting is this practical inference! dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy (2 Pet. iii. 11.) "Seeing then that all these things shall be we have no evidence that he arrived there before the conversation and godliness." The meanest soul and lowest we are warranted in dating this Epistle in A. D. 64. V. It appears from the Epistle itself that it was written imagination cannot think of that time, and the awful de during a period of general calamity, when the Hebrew Chris-scription of it which we meet with in this place, and in tians were exposed to severe persecutions. The design of emotion and the deepest impressions.3 several other passages of Holy Writ, without the greatest this Epistle, therefore, is partly to support them under their afflictions and trials, and also to instruct them how to behave under persecution. It likewise appears from the history of that time, that the Jews were uneasy under the Roman yoke, and that the destruction of their polity was approaching. On this account the Christians are exhorted to honour the emperor (Nero), and the presidents whom he sent into the provinces, and to avoid all grounds of being suspected of sedition or other crimes that would violate the peace and welfare of I. Its genuineness and canonical authority.—II. Date.society. And, finally, as their character and conduct were liable to be aspersed and misrepresented by their enemies, they are exhorted to lead a holy life, that they might stop the mouths of their enemies, put their calumniators to shame, and win others over to their religion, by their holy and Christian conversation.

5. The second Epistle is generally agreed to have been writen shortly before Peter's death; but a journey from Babylon to Rome (where he unquestionably suffered) must have employed a long time, even by the shortest route that could be taken. And Petor must have passed through Pontus, &c. in his way to Rome, and therefore it would have been unnecessary for him to write. Writing from Rome, indeed, the case was different, as he never expected to see them more.

As Peter suffered martyrdom at Rome, A. D. 64 or 65, and

year 63,

The Epistle may be conveniently divided into four sections, exclusive of the introduction and conclusion. The Introduction. (i. 1, 2.)

SECT. 1. contains an exhortation of the Jewish Christians to persevere steadfastly in the faith with all patience and cheerfulness, and to maintain a holy conversation, notwithstanding all their sufferings and persecutions. This is enforced by the consideration of the peculiar blessings and privileges. which were freely bestowed upon them. (i. 3—25. ii. 1—10.) SECT. 2. comprises an exhortation,

To a holy conversation in general. (ii. 11, 12)

ii. To a particular discharge of their several duties, as Dutiful subjects to their sovereign. (13-15.)

Servants to their masters. (16-25.)

Husbands to their wives. (iii. ¡—13.)

1 Lardner, 8vo. vol. v. p. 272.; 4to. vol. iii. p. 55. Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 30.

SECTION IV.

ON THE SECOND GENERAL EPISTLE OF PETER.

III. Scope and synopsis of its contents.

I. SOME doubts were entertained by the primitive churches respecting the authenticity of this Epistle, which has been received as the genuine production of Peter ever since the fourth century, except by the Syrian church, in which it is read as an excellent book, though not of canonical authority. We have, however, the most satisfactory evidence of its genuineness and authenticity. Clement of Rome has three allusions to the second chapter, and one to the third chapter of this Epistle; and it is twice referred to by Hermas, once by Justin Martyr, and also by Athenagoras. Although this Epistle does not appear to be cited by any writer of the third

3 Nouv. Tes: pp. 276. 281. edit. Neufchatel, 1772. folio. Test. pp. 79-89. Macknight's Preface to 1 Peter. Benson's History of Saint Peter and his First Epistle, pp. 137-159. Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol vi. pp. 562-583; 4to. vol. iii. pp. 414-425. Dr. Hales's Analysis, vol. ii. book ii. pp. 1144-1147. Michaelis, vol. iv. pp. 315-316. See also Hug' Introduction, vol. ii. pp. 584-599.

Blackwall's Sacred Classics, vol. i. pp. 302-304. Pritii, Introd. ad Nov

Lardner's Works, 8vo. vol. ii. p. 45.; 4to. vol. i. p. 302.

• Ibid. Svo. vol. ii. p. 61.; 4to. vol. i. p. 311.

Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 126. ; 4to. vol. i. p. 347.

Ibid. 8vo. vol. ii. p. 186.; 4to. vol. i. p. 381.