CHAPTER XXII

2 PETER-JUDE1

"THE SECOND EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER

WHO

HO wrote it,-The genuineness of this epistle has been more questioned than that of any other book in the New Testament. The external evidence for it is comparatively meagre. While it may be true that echoes of its language are to be found in not a few works of the second century, yet the first writer to make express and unmistakable mention of it is Origen (230 A.D.), and he does so in such a manner as to show that he has doubts about its genuineness. A century later it is classed by Eusebius among the disputed books of the New Testament.

The difficulty of accepting it as a genuine writing of Peter has chiefly arisen both in ancient and in modern times from its differing so greatly in tone and substance from the first epistle, written, as we have seen, near the close of Peter's life. There is scarcely any reference in it to our Saviour's sufferings or resurrection, which figure so largely in the first epistle; and what it chiefly inculcates is knowledge rather than hope.

But, apart from the versatility of Peter's mind, this difference may to a large extent be accounted for by the different circumstances under which the two epistles were written. While the first epistle was evidently designed to encourage and support Christians under persecution, this later one was intended to warn them against false teachers who were spreading corruption in 1 On the connection between these two epistles, see p. 142.

the Church. At the same time this epistle, like the first, is eminently practical, insisting on the necessity of Christian duty for the perfecting of Christian knowledge, emphasising the danger of knowledge without practice (i. 5-10; ii. 20-21), and giving a practical turn to the argument (iii. II, 14). Moreover, a close examination of the language and thought in this epistle brings out many points of resemblance between it and Peter's language elsewhere. A likeness to the first epistle will be found on a comparison of the undernoted passages.1 It may also be seen in the frequent use of twofold expressions, e.g. (in this epistle) "precious and exceeding great," "not idle nor unfruitful," "without spot and blame less" (i. 4, 8, 9, 19; ii. 3, 10, 13, etc.), and in the marked recurrence in both epistles of the word "holy." A number of verbal coincidences have also been observed between this epistle and the Gospel of Mark as well as Peter's speeches in the Book of Acts; but they are for the most part verbal, and such as can only be appreciated by a student of the original.2

It has also been found that this epistle, like the first, is distinguished by the use of rare words, occurring scarcely anywhere else in the New Testament; and these are, for the most part, of a striking and pictorial character, after the manner of Peter. E.g. "whose sentence now from of old lingereth not" (ii. 3), “turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes" (ii. 6), “enticing unstedfast souls," "they entice in the lusts of the flesh" (ii. 14, 18) (the word translated “entice” meaning literally to take with a bait, being such a word as a fisherman would naturally use) "which the ignorant and unstedfast wrest, as they do also the other scriptures" (iii. 16)—the Greek word for "wrest" meaning to put on the rack, like a criminal, for the purpose of extorting a desired confession.

It is worthy of remark as a note of genuineness that

1 i. 2, 1 Pet. i. 2; i. 7, 1 Pet. i. 22, iii. 8; i. 19-20, 1 Pet. i. 10-12; ii. 1, 1 Pet. i. 18; íii. 5, 1 Pet. iii. 20; i. 3, 1 Pet. v. 10; iii. 14, 1 Pet. i. 19.

Traced by Dr. Lumby in Speaker's Commentary, and Expositor, vol. iv., First Series.

although the writer was evidently acquainted with the first epistle (iii. 1), he does not copy its designation of the apostle, as a forger might surely have been expected to do, nor does he attach the same address to the epistle (i. 1, 1 Pet. i. 1). Similarly, when he mentions the words spoken by the voice from heaven at the Transfiguration, he does not give them exactly as they are reported in the Gospels; and, in immediate connection with the Transfiguration, he makes use of two words, namely "tabernacle" and "decease," that would naturally be associated in Peter's mind with the memory of that great incident (i. 14-18, cf. Luke ix. 31-33). In his use of the expression in the same passage, 66 even as our Lord Jesus Christ signified unto me," we may trace an allusion to our Lord's prophecy in John xxi. 18-19.

To whom written.-Apparently to the same readers as the first epistle (iii. 1).

Where and when written.-We may regard it as certain that it was written before the destruction of Jerusalem. Otherwise such an impressive instance of divine judgment could scarcely have been left unnoticed in alluding to the retributive justice of God.

At the same time the errors and dangers described in this epistle, which bear a strong resemblance to those referred to in the pastoral epistles (1 Tim. iv. 1-2; vi. 5, 20-21; 2 Tim. ii. 18; iii. 1-7), prove that it could not have been written much sooner than 70 A.D. The allusion to Paul's epistles as known to his readers (iii. 15-16) leads to the same conclusion, as does also the frequency of the expression "put in remembrance" and kindred words (i. 12, 13, 15; iii. 1-2), which indicate an advanced period in the apostolic age, as well as in the life of Peter-if he was the writer.

Like the first epistle, this was probably written from Rome; but the use of the apostle's Hebrew name of Symeon, or Simon (i. 1), as well as the connection of this epistle with that of Jude, would seem to indicate a Palestinian influence of some sort, possibly in the person of Peter's amanuensis or secretary.

Its Character and Contents.-This epistle, unlike the first, is full of denunciation and warning. It was designed to put its readers on their guard against false teachers, who were enticing unsteadfast souls, "promising them liberty while they themselves are bondservants of corruption. In opposition to their immoral doctrines this epistle inculcates a steady and persevering endeavour after holiness as the only way to advance in true knowledge and secure an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. In particular, the writer seeks to confute the arguments and counteract the influence of certain scoffers who made light of the Second Coming, as if it were a vain delusion, and appealed to the constancy of Nature as a warrant for their unbelief. The delay of the divine judgment the writer attributes to the fact that "one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day," alleging the delay to be a proof of God's mercy and longsuffering. The destruction of the world in the days of Noah is cited as an act of divine judgment analogous to that which is to take place at the end of the world, when the destroying element, however, shall be not water but fire. From the dread catastrophe there shall arise new heavens a 1 a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness," for which Christians ought to be preparing ; and the epistle concludes much in the same way as it commenced, by a call to "grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.'

The intrinsic worth of the epistle is well expressed by Calvin when he says, "the majesty of the Spirit of Christ exhibits itself in every part of the epistle."

THE GENERAL EPISTLE OF JUDE

Who wrote it.—"Judas, a servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James.' It may be regarded as certain that the James here referred to was the well-known head of the Church at Jerusalem, one of our Lord's brethren, and the writer of the epistle that bears his name (cf.

Jude is therefore not to be apostles of the same name Had he been an apostle he

Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3). identified with any of the mentioned in the Gospels. would doubtless have claimed the title, instead of being content to call himself "the brother of James." Regarding Jude personally we know little or nothing, but an interesting tradition concerning two of his grandsons has been preserved by Hegesippus. That historian (as quoted by Eusebius) tells how the Emperor Domitian, being moved with jealousy, sent for these two kinsmen of our Lord to inquire of them regarding the kingdom to which they aspired. When he learned from them that they were merely peasant proprietors farming a few acres of land in Palestine, and saw their hands horny with constant labour, and when they told him further that the kingdom to which they looked forward was not of this world, but to be revealed when Christ came to judge the quick and the dead, his alarm was removed, and he allowed them to depart in peace. Tradition tells that they lived to the reign of Trajan, honoured by the Church for their confession and for their relation to the Lord.

The obscurity of Jude himself is a strong argument for the genuineness of the epistle, as a forger would have chosen some more distinguished name to associate with his work. Although it is reckoned by Eusebius among the disputed books, we find it quoted by Clement of Alexandria in the end of the second century; and it has also a place in the Muratorian Canon.

To whom written.-On this subject we are left to conjecture. Considering the Jewish features of the book and the Jewish character of its author, it would seem probable that it was written to Christians in Palestine, but not to any particular Church, as it contains no special salutations or messages.

Where and when written.- Regarding the place of writing we have no direct information, but all the circumstances point to Palestine as its source. From the absence of any allusion to the destruction of Jerusalem