CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
 GIFT OF 
 
 Alfred C. Barnes 
 
Date Due 
 
 -R^ 
 
 :2^^»i 
 
 iMAi 
 
 'i w < i i ^» < a>g f iy ww^ 
 
 Ift Wfo^pJx/^ arr 
 
 Printed in u. ». a 
 
 cSJ 
 
 CAT. NO. 23233 
 
 BS2815 W """"""* '■"'""y 
 ^''Wllimmlia^ S-'ond eptet 
 
 olln 
 
 3 1924 029 294 984 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this bool< is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029294984 
 
THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 AND THE 
 
 SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETEE 
 
THE 
 
 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 AND THE 
 
 SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETEE 
 
 GREEK TEXT 
 
 WITH 
 
 INTRODUCTION NOTES AND COMMENTS 
 
 JOSEPH B. EAYOR, M.A. Camb., Litt.D. Duel. 
 
 EMERITUS PROFESSOK OF EINO'S COLLEGE, LONDON 
 HONORARY ITELLOW OF ST. JOHN'S COLLEOB, CAMBRIDGE 
 
 SLonbon 
 MACMILLAN AND CO., Limited 
 
 NEW YORK: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY 
 1907 
 
 All Rights Reserved 
 
{l i '^'\ ' uU^ - 
 
 Richard Clay and Sons, Limited 
 
 bread stkekt hill, b.c., and 
 
 b uno ay, suffolk. 
 
 ^ ^--V^Uj-rvv' 
 
 
THOMAE • ARNOLDO 
 
 *IAAAHeEI $IAANBPnnfll *IAOeEQI 
 
 CVIVS ■ ETIAMNVM • ADSVNT ■ MIHI 
 
 VOX • ILLA • AC • BENE • NOTVS • OLIM • VVLT VS 
 
 INTER -PA VCOS -SVPEBSTES -DISCIPVLOS 
 
 HAEC • STVDIA • SENECTVTIS 
 
 QVAE • VTINAM • TANTO • NOMINE • DIGNIORA • ESSENT 
 
 GRATO • ANIMO • DEDICO 
 
PKEFACE 
 
 The present volume follows mainly the same lines as my edition 
 of the Hpistle of St. James, to which it may be considered to form a 
 sort of appendix, since the study of St. James naturally leads on to 
 the study of one who claims to be his brother, and the study of St, 
 Jude is inseparably connected with that of the Epistle known to us 
 as the Second Epistle of St. Peter. When I began tp pay special 
 attention to the last named epistle, I was of course a^oare of the general 
 weakness of its canonical position as compared with that of the other 
 books of the Neio Testament ; hut my own feeling was that the 
 traditional view must be OMiepted, unless it could be disproved by 
 positive evidence on the other side ; and I was not satisfied that such 
 positive evidence had yet been adduced in proof of its sptmousness. 
 Further consideration, however, of the language, matter, and tone of 
 the two Petrine epistles has gradually forced me to the conclusion 
 already arrived at by Calvin and Grotins, as well as by many modern 
 commentators, that the second epistle is not written by the author of 
 the first epistle — a conclusion which in my view is equivalent to saying 
 that it is not by the Apostle St. Peter. Some have shrunk from this 
 conclusion, because they thought that a falsata epistola, as Bidymus 
 calls it, was unworthy of the place in the canon assigned to it hy the 
 Church of thefouHh century. But we have already an example of a 
 spurious writing admitted into the Old Testament canon in the book of 
 J^cclesiastes, which few or none loould now ascribe to Solomon ; and we 
 
PREFACE 
 
 may at any rate find a parallel to it in the Booh of Wisdom, which 
 we are hidden to read 'for example of life and instruction of manners' 
 Uusehius, while himself regarding it as uncanonical, confesses that 
 TToXXot? j^/3Jj<rt/ios (j>avei(ra fiera t&v dWmv eaTrovBdaffr) jpa^&v 
 {E.E. Hi. 2i),'and Calvin says it contains adeo nihil Petro indignum 
 ut vim spiritus apostolici et gratiam ubique exprimat. If we 
 compare it with what I hold to he the genuine epistle of St. 
 Jude, I think there are few who would not feel that the exclusion 
 of the former from our New Testament would be a far more serious 
 loss than the exclusion of the latter, in spite of the admiration 
 expressed for this last by Clement and Origen. For the full discus- 
 sion of these points the reader is referred to the earlier chapters of 
 the Introdiiction which follows. 
 
 Perhaps it may he well to say a word or two here as to the textual 
 emendations mentioned in the twelfth chapter of the Introduction. I 
 have never heen able to see why there should he any objection to 
 applying to the N. T. a process which has been so often found essential 
 to the restoration of the right text in classical authors. Of course the 
 abundance of evidence from MSS., versions, and quotations very much 
 circumscribes the field for emendation in the former case ; hut where 
 a full consideration of this evidence fails to supply a natural or even a 
 possible sense, it seems to me we are bound to fall hack upon that which 
 constitutes the basis of all rational emendation, viz. (1) the careful 
 investigation of the relevant facts, so as to ascertain exactly what is 
 wanting in order to put them into proper relation with one another, 
 and (2) a possible explanation of the corruption of the text. This 
 proceeding becomes more necessary in proportion to the defective state 
 of the diplomatic evidence, as in Jude and 2 Peter: see the notes on Jude 
 1, where Sort proposes to transfer eV from @em to 'Irjirov ; 2 P. 1^^, 
 where Field proposes iieKriam for fMeWTja-m and Spitta suggests 
 irapaBoOeia-rj for irapovari ; 3^", where Vansittart and Abbott suggest 
 
PREFACE 
 
 TTvptodrjcreTai for evpedrjasTai ; besides 2^^ where it is proposed to 
 read aydtrrjv for ■fjhovrjv ; and 3^, where 81 ov is proposed for Si &v. 
 
 One who undertakes to edit a book which has been the object of 
 such minute and contimto^is study, as any portion of the New 
 Testament has been, cannot but feel how insignificant is the contri- 
 bution which he can himself hope to make to its interpretation, as com- 
 pared with the accumulated work of preceding generations. Sis first 
 acknowledgments therefore are due to the labours of his predecessors in 
 the same field, from stich patristic helps as the Adumbrationes of 
 Clement and the compilations of the Catenae, down to the latest commen- 
 taries and aids of whatever kind, grammatical, historical, or theological, 
 to which reference vnll befoundin thepages which follow. I have more- 
 over to return rny grateful thanks for private help given by Dr. Gow, 
 Dr. Gwynn, the Rev. G. Horner, Dr. F. G. Kenyon, Professors F. 
 Fuller and G. D. Liveing, and Mr. Herbert Richards; above all 
 to Dr. Chase and to Dr. E. A. Abbott. The former had kindly 
 undertaken to look over my proof-sheets, but was unable to go 
 beyond the earlier sheets in consequence of his removal from the 
 comparative leisure of the professorship to the exacting duties of 
 the episcopate. I have also found, in his articles mi Peter and 
 Jude in Hastings' 'Dictionary of the Bible, hy far the best intro- 
 duction known to me on the two epistles here dealt with. To my old 
 friend Dr. E. A. Abbott I am even more indebted : he has carefully 
 read through the larger portion of my sheets and helped me with many 
 suggestions, which I have found all the more useful because we have 
 not always succeeded in arriving at the same conclusions. 
 
 I have only to add that I shall be. much obliged for any correction 
 of errors found in my book beyond those which are already noted in 
 the Table of Corrigenda. 
 
 Dec. 29, 1906. 
 
 ix 
 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 
 
 p. 22. — On (wayavi^firBai, add Clem. Strom, in. p. 553 firayaviiofifvos tj, 
 idea 8d^. 
 
 P. 23, 1. 9 MT^.—For ' 1 Cor. 2 ' read ' 1 Cor. l^.' 
 
 P. 24, 1. 4. — Add Clem. Strom, v. p. 666 6 Kipios 8ia t&v itaOwv ds ttjv toO 
 appjjTOv yvSxriv wapeiaSvdfitvos. 
 
 P. 26, 1. 9. — Transfer comma from before bracket to after bracket in ). 10. 
 
 P. 31. — After § 3 adci : But see Horn. Orf. xv. 349 ^^ova-iv iir' avyas ^eXt'oio. 
 
 P. 32. — After § 2 add Soph. Ant. 640 yvi>pris Ttarp^as ttvlvt' Snia-Bep iirrdvai. 
 On wpoKfivTai add Jos. £.J. vi. 2. 1 KaXov vTroSeiyna croi TrpiKtirai fiaaiXfi/s 
 lexoviat, Demosth. p. 1078 vojuiffre t6v iroiSa tovtov iKfTripiav vpiv irpoKeXaBai 
 imep tS>v TcTfKtvrrjKoTav. 
 
 P. 33, last 1.— For repeated hi compare 1 Cor. 1>2, la"-, 153». 
 
 P. 40, add to note. — Eiiphorion ap. Clem. Al. Strom, v. p. 673 Jin. fai/r 
 {'=6a\aa'a'a) Se irori imi\d8€(r<ri veatv oXereipa KOKVvet. 
 
 P. 46. — After § 1 add : See Hort on 1 P. 2^' ' Sometimes desires, as snoh, 
 are implied to be evil, as in 4^ ' and 1", Sometimes they are implied to be 
 evil in so far as they are individual and so separate and ultimately selfish, as 
 in James 1^* utto ttjs ISias erriSvplas i^eXKOfitvot : cf. Jude 16 and 18, 2 Pet. 3^ 
 Kara ras l&ias imBviitag airav Tropevd/tenot. Sometimes a desire is called evil 
 (leait^ Col. 36, irapKiKTi 1 Pet. 2", Koa-ptKr, Tit. 2>2).' 
 
 P. 46, 1. 5 up. — Om. ref. to Hort's note. I had carelessly omitted to notice 
 that he laid the stress on xaipS not on eV;(urm. 
 
 P. 48. — On cTToiKofioGiTcf add Clem. Strom, v. p. 644 f/ koiv^ ttiVtis KoBaTrep 
 6epe\ios virSKdTai. 
 
 P. 51, 1. 3.— For 'jrpo'read 'wp&s.' 
 
 P. 52. — Oil anratoToi add Epict. Fr. 62 Schw. rJKia-Ta irraia-fis iv rals Kpiaea-iv 
 eav airds iv t^ ;8i(ji awrma-Tos fitareX^s, Antoninus V. 9. 
 
 P. 80. — First 1. of § 3 add after bovKos ' in 1', though we read of Ofov SoCXos 
 in 2".' 
 
 P. 81. — Add after § 2 'Col. 1'^ t^v neplBa tov xXijpov t&v iyiav with Light- 
 foot's n.' 
 
 P. 84, 1. 4. — For ' Appendix ' read ' Introduction, p. cxxx.' 
 
 P. 86. — Add to exx. of*the combination of positive and superlative, Clem. 
 Strom, p. 587 t^i eKevdepias xai Kvptmran;; dya'mjr. 
 
 P. 88, 1. 5. — After 86^av add 4 Mace. 18' Bflas p.fplBos KOTijIimflijo-ai/. 
 
 P. 89.— Add to § 3 cf. Phil. 21* ". 1. 3 up, /or ' Appendix ' reati 'p. cxxx.' 
 
 P. 90, 11. 14-16.— Transfer 'in the 8!jpos' to 1. 19 after (rrpaToweBov. 1. 17, 
 /or 'Polyb. iii. 78' read 'Polyb. iii. 68.' 1. 1 up, after icXI/iag add, Cf. the 
 Sorites in Wisdom 6'* '• dpxv a-ocptas ^ iXi/fleordnj wmSelas iiriBvp.la, ^povris hi 
 iraidtlas dydjri?, nydjr^ hi rqpriins vopav airrfS, irpoa-ox^ hi vopav ^e^aiatris 
 dtjjBapiTias, d^Bapaia hi eyyils tlvai, Troiei eeoC- iiriBvpla apa a-o(pias avdyti iirX 
 SatriXeiov, 
 
ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA 
 
 P. 92, 1. 24.— For ' S^s ' read ' 5^V 1. 10 up.— On eva-i^cia see Bonitz, Index 
 to Aristotle S.V., Diog. L. iii. 83, and my note on Cic. N.D. i. 116. 
 
 P. 95. — After § 4 add Cf. Wisdom 13^ fiarmoi iravrts &v6pemoi, ^a-ti oh 
 TToptjv Ocov dyvaaia, Aesch. Pers. 391 <l)6^os De iratn ^apPdpou Trapfjv, Bum. 385 
 BavfM 8' ifipAUTiv irapfjv. 
 
 P. 98, last 1. — After 5'° add Dan. 7^^' ^ ^aa-CKela avrov fiacrCKeia alamos, 
 Isa. 45" (TmTrjpia al&vios, 1 Mace. 2^' 6p6vov ^aa-iKeias els alava almvos, Wisdom 
 10'* 86^a al&vtos. 
 
 P. 101, § 2.— Add on bieydpa ' rare in classical Greek, used in Aristot. Fr. of 
 stirring up the feelings, see Bonitz, Index, s.v. On tTKrjvajia see quotations 
 from Eus. H.E. in Introd. p. cxx, from Apoc. Pauli in p. cxxi. (rKrjvos is 
 used by ps. Plato, see Ast's Lex. 
 
 P. 104, § 4.— ^eyaXejrfriji is found in Jer. 40» (339) and 3 Esdr. 1*. 
 
 P. 105, § 5.— Toioo-8e also occurs in Ezra 5'. Other exx. of the use of 
 jxeydKoTrpiireia occur in Ps. 2(fi, 144*' ". The phrase neydkoirpeirrjs 86^a occurs 
 in two of the early Greek liturgies (Swainson, pp. 129, 268). 
 
 P. 107, § 3.— The reading in Mt. 12" is doubtful : WH. and Ti. omit els and 
 read Sv with B^ ; Treg. reads ip S with CD, vg. etc. : els Sv is supported by 
 C2L etc., Clem. Horn. iii. 53, Eus. Dem. Ev. p. 452 0. § 5-— Dr. Chase 
 states that the phrase ayiov opos is always followed by a possessive genitive in 
 the O.T. but there seem to be some exceptions, e.g. Ps. 87' oi 6ep.eKioi avrov ev 
 To'is Spea-iv To'is ayiois, Isa. 27'^, Dan. 9^°, 1 Mace. 11'' (of a document) Te6r}Tca 
 ev T& Spei ra dyi^ ev ToTTffl enia-^pM. In Isa. 11' it stands for the Messianic 
 king'dom. §' 6. — exopev ffe^wrepov', compare the exx. of jSc/Soiov wapexeiv ttjv 
 avr/v in the index of Dittenberger's Sylloge Inscriptionum. 
 
 P; 111, end of § 1.— Insert ' Alex.' after Cyril. 
 
 P. 118, 1. 6 vip.—Fm- ' 15 ' read ' 18.' 
 
 P. 124, 1. 24 up. — After ' Cf.' insert 2 Tim. 2'* Xoyofiaxe'iv . . . cVt KaTaarpo^ji 
 rS>v aKovovTav, Gen. 19^' e^airiarreCKe tov Aojt enc fieaov ttjs KaTOirTpotp^s. 
 
 P. 128, end of § 1.— Om. 1 before Tit. 1. 4 up.— Read Sixaws. 
 
 P. 133, heading. Om. '12.' 
 
 P. 134, 1 3 up.- — Comma after dxpaTois. 
 
 P. 135, last line. — Read SiSafii. 
 
 P. 138, § 4. — (j)6eyy6p,evoi, cf. Acts 4'^ Trap^yyeiKav fifj (j>deyyea-6ai em tm 
 6v6p.an. 
 
 P. 141, last § but one ^TTtjrai. — This is the only place where the verb occurs 
 in the N.T., but the cognate fja-a-oio is found in 2 Cor. 12", and ^rrij/ia in Rom. 
 and 1 Cor. We meet with the active in Isa. 54'' wdvTas ^mjo-ets. 
 
 P. 143, 1. 8 up. — See Introd. p. xii n. 
 
 P. 144, end of first note. Add ' This rendering is confirmed by the Stori/ of 
 AhiTcar ed. by Oonybeare and others, Camb. 1898, pp. 54, 82, and 115 'My 
 son thou hast behaved like the swine which went to the bath with people of 
 quality, and when he came out, saw a stinking drain, and went and rolled 
 himself in it' The edd. consider that the story dates from 150 b.c. and that 
 traces of it are to be found in the sapiential books of the O.T. 
 
 P. 146, § 2. — In 1 P. 1'2 we have a similar reference to missionaries in the 
 plural, hid tS>v evayye\i<rap,evav v/ias. 
 
 P. 148, 1. 19.— Read 'Pet. 4i8.' 
 
 P. 151, § 2. — Add R.V. ' compacted out of water and amidst water ' and the 
 explanation of Oecumenius f) y^ e| vSaros p,ev i>s e^ vKikov aWiov, 8i' vbaros be 
 i)s 8iA TeXiKov' vSap ydp t6 iTVVe\ov •n)v yrjv, olov KoKha ns virdpyov avrjj. 
 
 P. 160, n. 3.— Read 'Dr. Bigg.' 
 
 xu 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 INTRODUCTION 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 RELATION OF THE SECOND EPISTLE OP PETER TO THE EPISTLE OF JUDE 
 
 2 Peter ch. I compared with Jude, p. i ; ch. II, p. v ; ch. Ill, p. xii. Summary 
 of agreements and differences, p. xv ; doctrines compared, p. xvi. Priority 
 of Jude maintained against Spitta, Zabn, and Bigg, p. zxi. 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 GRAMMAR AND STYLE OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETBK 
 
 Unusual Inflexions, p. xxvi. Uses of the Article, p. xxvi ; with qualified 
 nouns, p. xxvii ; irregular omission of Article, p. xxx, especially in 
 poetry or prophecy, p. xxxiv. Cases, Nom. p. xxxv, Ace. p. xxxvi, Gen. 
 p. xxxvi, Dat. p. xxxviii ; Number and Gender, p. xxxix ; Pronouns, 
 p. xl ; Adjectives, p. xlii. Verbs, Moods and Tenses, p. xlii ; Voices, 
 p. ilviii. Compound Sentence, p. xlix. Negatives, p. 1. Adverbs and 
 Particles, p. 1. Ellipsis, p. li ; Pleonasm, p. lii ; Periphrases, p. lii ; 
 Anacoluthon, p. liv. 
 
 CHAPTER III 
 
 FURTHER REMARKS ON THE STYLE OP THE TWO EPISTLES 
 
 Jude's fondness for triplets, p. Ivi ; Iteration in 2 P., p. Ivii ; Rhythmical 
 effects in the two epistles, p. Iviii. Criticisms on the style and vocabulary 
 of 2 P. considered, p. lix ; vagueness and obscurity of 2 P., p. Ixiv. 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 COMPARISON BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER 
 
 Differences between them explained by Jerome as due to St. Peter's employing 
 different interpreters, p. Ixviii. Resemblances in the vocabulary, p. Ixix ; 
 words used by 1 P. not by 2 P., p. Ixx, used by 2 P. not by 1 P., p. Ixxii ; 
 specimens of different terminology, p.. Ixxiv ; significant differences, 
 p. Ixxvi ; the language of 1 P. recalls scenes in our Lord's life or sayings 
 of His, p. Ixxvi. ft shows also a warmth of feeling and depth of 
 spirituality to which 2 P. affords no parallel, p. Ixxviii ; there is, however, 
 some resemblance in the topics discussed, p. Ixxx. 1 P. has many more 
 allusions to the O.T. than 2 P. has, p. Ixxxv. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 Compariaon between the grammar and style of the two epistles,_ p. Ixxxix. 
 Similarity in their use of the article, p. Ixxxix, and generally in their use 
 of the eases, p. xci, especially in their accumulation of prepositions, 
 p. xciii. There is no great difference in their use of the verb, except that 
 1 P. employs the articular infinitive, p. xcvii, and uses nepux€i and 
 irapeBldov in a curious way, p. xcviii. Compound sentenceSj p. xeix ; 
 negatives and other particles, p. c. Ellipsis, Anacoluthon, p. oiii. On the 
 whole, 1 P. is a little smoother and easier and has more command of 
 particles ; but the difference in grammar and style is much less than that 
 in vocabulary, and this again is less than that in matter, feeling, and 
 personality, p. civ. 
 
 CHAPTER V 
 
 COMPARISON BETWEEN THE PETER OP THE TWO EPISTLES AND THE PETEH 
 OF THE REST OF THE N.T. 
 
 The character of St. Peter as it comes out in the Gospels, p. cvi, in the Acts, 
 p. ex, in Qalatians, p. cxii, agrees with 1 P. (not with 2 P.). 1 P. stands 
 between the epistle of James and that to the Bomans, as St. Peter himself 
 stood between the Bishop of Jerusalem and the Apostle of the Qentiles, 
 p. exiv. 
 
 CHAPTER VI 
 
 AUTHENTICITY OP THE EPISTLE OP JUDB AND OF THE SECOND EPISTLE OF 
 PETER CONSIDERED 
 
 Extei'nal Evidence : Jude, p. cxv, 2 Peter, p. cxvi. Internal Evidence : 
 2 Peter, p. exxiv. Feeling of the Early Church with regard to Pseud- 
 epigrapha, p. cxxv. The epistle shows marks of a post-apostolic date, 
 p. exxvi. Resemblances between 2 Peter and Josephus, p. cxxvii, between 
 2 Peter and Philo, p. cxxiv, between 2 Peter and the Apocalypse of Peter, 
 p. cxxx, between 2 Peter and the Acts of Peter and Simon, p. cxxxiv. 
 
 CHAPTER VII 
 
 UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES WERE THE EPISTLE OP JUDE AND THE TWO 
 EPISTLES OP PETER WRITTEN 1 
 
 2 Peter not addressed to the same readers as 1 Peter, p. cxxxv. The letter 
 from St. Paul to the readers, to which allusion is made in 2 Peter, seems 
 to have been our Epistle to the Romans, p. cxxxvi. Lightfoof s account 
 of the Church at Rome during the time of St. Paul's imprisonment, 
 p. cxxxvii. 1 Peter written from Rome, p. cxxxix. Early tradition as 
 to St. Peter's labours in Rome, p. cxl. Chase and Zahn on the later 
 history of St. Peter, p. cxli. How to explain the absence of allusion to 
 St. Paul in 1 Peter, and to St. Peter in the later letters of Paul, if they 
 were working togjether in Rome, p. cxlii. Allusion to the Gospel of Mark 
 in 2 Peter, p. exliii. Other allusions which favour a late date, p. cxliv. 
 Date of Jude, p. cxlv. 
 
 CHAPTER VIII 
 
 THE AUTHOR OP THE EPISTLE OP JUDE 
 
 The name Jude, p. cxlvi. What we learn about St. Jude from the NT 
 p. cxlvii, from Eusebiua, p. cxivii. Resemblances between this epistle 
 and that of James, p. cxlix ; differences between them, p. cl. 
 
Table of contents 
 chapter ix 
 
 USE OF APOCRYPHAL B00K8 BY JUDE 
 
 The Book of Enoch, p. cliii ; the Aasuraption of Moses, p. oliv ; Testaments 
 of the Patriarchs, p. civ. Allusions to Apocryphal Books in other 
 portions of the N.T., p. clvi. 
 
 CHAPTER X 
 
 STORY OF THE FALLEN ANGELS 
 
 Gradual development of this story out of the Hebrew legend referred to in 
 Gen. ch.^, p. clviii, until it togk shape in the Book of Enoch and other 
 similar writings, p. clx ; generally accepted by Jewish and Christian 
 writers till the end of the third century, p. clxiii, except by Philo and 
 Origen, who (with doubts on the part of the latter) understood it meta- 
 phorically, p. clxiv. Another interpretation was that of Julius Africanua, 
 who understood 'sons of God' of the children of Seth, p. clxiv. This 
 interpretation, though certainly erroneous, prevailed generally after 
 A.D. 400 p. clxv. 
 
 CHAPTER XI 
 
 FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH TOWARDS THE END OF THE FIRST 
 
 CENTURY 
 
 The innovators as described in Jude, p. clxvii ; in 2 Peter, p. clxviii ; in 
 Paul's speeches and writings, especially the Pastoral Epistles, p. clxix, 
 and in John, p. clxxiii. The same features are found in all, p. clxxiv. 
 They seem to point especially to the heretics known as Nicolaitans and 
 Simonians, and to the later Ophites and Carpooratians, p. clxxvi. 
 
 CHAPTER XII 
 
 NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER 
 
 Unsatisfactory condition of the text. Improved knowledge of the Syrian and 
 Egyptian versions owing to the researches of Dr. Gwynn and the Rev. G. 
 Homer, p. clxxxi. Jude v. 1, p. clxxxii, m. 2, 4, 5, p. clxxxiii, vv. 6, 7, 
 12, p. clxxxv, vv. 17-20, pp. clxxxv-olxxxviii, vv. 22, 23, pp. clxxxvili- 
 cxci. 2 P. 1', p. cxci, V-*, p. cxcii, l''''^', p. cxciii, !"■", 2*, p. exciv, 
 2^-', p. cxcv, 2">", p. cxcvi, 2", p. cxcvii, 2"''", p. cxcviii, S^", p. cxcix 
 f., 3u. '6, p. cc f. Readings of B tested, p. cci f. 
 
 TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER, pp. 1—15 j 
 
 NOTES ON ST. JUDE, pp. 17 — 54 
 
 APPENDIX ON <f)6ivoira>piv6s, pp. 55 — 59 
 
 jude: paraphrase and comments 
 
 vv. 1, 2. Salutation, p. 60. , . , 
 
 vv. 3, 4. Reasons for Writing, p. 60. iiraya>vl^fa-6ai. rr) arra^ napaboBe'urn toIs 
 Ayiois trior f I, pp. 61 — 71. . 
 
 V. 4. Denial of a Person, p. 72. 
 
 vv. 5—13. Illustrations of Sin and Judgment, p. 72. Example of the Arch- 
 angel, pp. 74—76. 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 m. 14—16. Prophecy of Enoch, p. 76. 
 
 vv. 17—19. The Faithful are bidden to call to mind the Warnings of the 
 
 Apostles, p. 77. eV iaxarov XP°^°'"> PP- '^'^ ^• 
 m. 20 — 23. Final Charge to the Faithful : h irvevfian &yia irpoaevxoutvoi, 
 
 pp. 78 f. 
 m. 24, 25. Benediction and Ascription, p. 79. 
 
 NOTES ON THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETEB, pp. 80 — 170 
 APPENDIX ON iirlyvtaa-ii, pp. 171 — 174 
 APPENDIX ON (pBeipa AND <i)dopa, pp. 175—179 * 
 
 2 PETER : PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 
 
 1' Address. Su^eo)i/ TUrpos, pp. 180 f. toIs lo-onpLov rffiiv "Kaxpvaiv wiariv, 
 p. 181. iv SiKaioiTvvji Tov deov, p. 181. 
 
 1'-* Salutation. Complexity of the passage, p. 182. How Grace and Peace 
 flow from the knowledge of God, pp. 183 — 187. to irpbs C"!" «"' 
 fvae^eiav, pp. 187 — 189. tov KoKia-avros fip.as Idla So^jj koI apery, p. 189. 
 fit' S>v Ta Tijua koi psyiara ^p,lv iirayyc\p,aTa 8e8a>pj]Tai, pp. 189 f. Oeias 
 KoivcDvoi (jyv&eas, p. 190. t^s iv t^ Koa-juf iv iwi6vp.'ui (jiBopds, pp. 190 f. 
 
 16-7 Exhortation to make full use of the grace imparted, p. 191. The ' ogdoad,' 
 or list of eight virtues, growing out of faith and completed in love, 
 compared with other lists of virtues, pp. 191, 192. 
 
 18-11 Remarks on the importance of these virtues, p. 193. 
 
 112-16 The writer's promise, p. 194. 
 
 116-21 ipijg grounds of our belief jpp. 194 f. The Transfiguration an earnest of 
 the future glory, p. 195. The light of prophecy. Dr. Arnold's explana- 
 tion of ISias iwiXia-eas, pp. 196 — 198. 
 
 2'-' The false teachers of the new dispensation answer to the false prophets 
 of the old, p. 198. 
 
 24-10 Examples of judgment joined with mercy, p. 199. 
 
 210-18 Further description of the Libertines, pp. 199, 200. Prof. Batiffol on 
 the Love-feasts, pp. 200 f. The ass speaking with man's voice, pp. 200 — 
 203. The story of Balaam, pp. 203—205. 
 
 217-22 Mischief caused by the Libertines, p. 205. 
 
 31-* Warning of the spread of unbelief in the last days, p. 205. 
 
 3"" Scoffers answered, p. 206. Ideas as to the unchangeableness of the 
 universe and as to its destruction by fire both found some support in the 
 language of the Scriptures and of contemporary science. Modem science, 
 which lately favoured the idea that our ^anet was destined to perish by 
 cold, seems now to look to heat as the more likely agent of destruction, 
 pp. 207 — 209. Peter's answer to the difficulty caused by the delay of the 
 coming of the Lord to judgment, pp. 209 — 211. 
 
 311-I8 Final exhortation, p. 212. a-nevbovras ttju irapova-lav, pp. 212, 213. 
 
 ADDITIONAL NOTE ON Kara wepiKJiatrlv, p. 213. 
 INDEX 
 
 Index of Greek Words, p. 215. 
 Index of Subjects, p. 237. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 Relation of the Second Epistle of Petek to the 
 Epistle of Jude^ 
 
 The general resemblance between the two Epistles will be plain 
 to any one who takes the trouble to read them as they stand 
 side by side ia my Text (pp. 2-15). The resemblance of vocabu- 
 lary is shown in the Index of Greek words, and it is also indicated 
 in my text by the marginal references and by difiference of type. 
 I propose here to compare the Epistles throughout, stating the 
 reasons which have led me to believe that the epistle of Jude was 
 known to the author of 2 Pet. not vice versa.^ 
 
 To begin with, both style themselves servants of Jesus 
 Christ and address themselves to those who in some way 
 belong to God and Jesus Christ, desiring that peace might be 
 multiplied upon them. We notice here certain differences occa- 
 sioned by the difference of the writers. J. marks his identity 
 by naming his brother James; P. claims apostleship. J. adds 
 the prayer for mercy and love to that for peace; P. who is 
 about to speak more fully of love immediately, omits it here, and 
 changes e\eo? into the wider %<xpj?. J. defines his readers as 'the 
 called who have been beloved by God the Father and kept safe in 
 Jesus Christ ' ; P. defers the notion of ' calling ' to the 3rd and 10th 
 verses, and dwells here on God's free gift of faith (rol<s Xa'^ovacv 
 irlariv) as characteristic of his readers. He adds two remark- 
 able phrases, (1) that, through the justice^ of our God and of 
 
 ^ For justification of the readings adopted see the Chapter on the Text, and for 
 the translations the explanatory notes. 
 
 ^ In what follows P. stands for 2 Peter, J. for Jude. 
 
 3 We may compare niaT^ Kriarig in 1 Pet. 4'", Bom. 2' (4iro/c<£A.ui^is) StKaioxpurla- 
 ToO @eov, is aroSiiirtt fKdarif (cari t& tpya auroD, and 2" oi yip iariv itpoiranros 
 KtiH^la Traptt t$ 0t^. 
 
 b 
 
ii INTRODUCTION 
 
 our Saviour Jesus Christ, this faith is (2) equally privileged with 
 that of the writer (whether we are to regard him as repre- 
 senting the Apostles, or the Jews, as seems to me more probable),^ 
 and he emphasizes this equality of Jew and Gentile by the 
 unique use of his own double name, the Hebrew 'Symeon' 
 added to the Greek 'Peter,' suggesting that his sympathies 
 embrace both. We may compare with this the friendly 
 reference to St. Paul in 3", and the association of Silvanus 
 with the writer in 1 Pet. 
 
 After this greeting J. turns at once to the immediate occasion 
 for his letter. He had been preparing, he says, to write on the 
 subject which is of highest interest to all Christians, ma. 
 salvation,^ when news reached him of a new danger threatening 
 the Church, against which he felt bound to warn his readers. It 
 seems hardly possible to suppose that this note of alarm could 
 have come to him through P., who writes in a much more 
 leisurely way, not feeling it, necessary at once to plunge into 
 controversy and supply his readers with weapons for the defence of 
 the faith. In fact the latter begins with the very subject which J. 
 had felt himself obliged to omit, or at least to postpone to the end 
 of his epistle (v. 20), viz. the doctrine of salvation. Thus we seem to 
 lose sight of J. until the beginning of the second chapter of P., but 
 ■we shall see that in the intervening passage of P. there is frequent 
 recurrence to thoughts which are found in the former epistle. In 
 -the latter part of 1^ P. introduces a topic which is of great im- 
 portance in his eyes, eVtyvwo-t?. ' The knowledge of God is (not 
 a privilege reserved for the few, but) the means,' he says, 'by 
 which grace and peace are multiplied ; just as it is through 
 the knowledge of Him who called us ^ iy Ms own glory and good- 
 ness that the Divine power has granted us all that is needed for 
 life and godliness. Through this manifestation of the Divine good- 
 ness you have received the most blessed promises (cf. 2 Cor. 1^°), in 
 order that thereby you might be made partakers of the Divine 
 nature, having escaped from the corruption which is in the world 
 
 ' If the epistle ia assigned to the second century, the term itnJTi/iios may have 
 reference to the pretensions of the Gnostics. Compare what Clement of 
 Alexandria says of the relations between faith, knowledge, and love {Strom, vii. 
 55), and his condemnation of the heretics who considered that the distinction 
 .between the elect and others existed (\>i<rei, and stood in no need of the 
 •iirixofntyta of which P. speaks in 1"-". 
 
 ^ The word itoiviiv here may have suggested to P. his phrase iVciTi^uoi' irlaTtv. 
 
 ^ Cf. J. V. 1 kXijtoij. 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE iii 
 
 through lust.' <f>6opd here (cf. ^deipovrai in J. 10) is opposed to 
 ^(01] in V. 3. It is not original evil, but 17 iirl to x^'^P"" f^era^oXij. 
 Here we find the writer freely using expressions borrowed from 
 Greek philosophy, such as tjj? deia^ Svvdfiemi;,6eia<! koivwvoX ^uo-ecos, 
 the dperrj of God ; and thus showing his sympathy with the 
 Hellenic spirit, in other words welcoming Hellenism within the 
 pale of Christianity. 
 
 After speaking generally of the blessings in store for man 
 through the goodness of God, P. goes on (1^) to speak of the 
 corresponding duty on man's part. We are to use every effort to 
 build up the Christian life in its seven-fold ^ completeness on the 
 rock of faith. Towards the end of J. we find words which may 
 very possibly have suggested to P. this idea of the seven ascending 
 tiers rising on the foundation of faith and culminating in love 
 (J. V. 20) iirolKoSofiovvTe'i iavToini rfj dyKOTaTri vfi&v ir i a t e i . . . 
 eavroiif iv dy dv rj @eov rrfpijcrare. The phrase o-ttovS^v irdaav 
 of P. 1^ occurs also in J. 3. The philosophic dperi] occurs twice in 
 P. 1^. It has been suggested by Dr. Chase that the association 
 of 71'wo-ts with iyKpareia in the next verse may be pointed at the 
 antinomianism of some of the Gnostics. The mention of 
 eva-e^eta in P. 1^' *' ' may be due to the prevalence of dae/Seca 
 so often deplored by J. The verses which follow {1^'^^) dwell 
 on the importance of the cultivation of these virtues or graces. 
 ' Their continued growth will tend to make us not unfruit- 
 ful (cf. J. V. 12) in regard to that knowledge of God out of which 
 they grow. Their absence causes blindness, or at least limits 
 us to narrow eai-thly views, and makes us forgetful of the 
 baptismal cleansing from the sins of our old life. Remember that 
 it is not enough simply to have been baptized. We have to 
 make sure the calling and election of which baptism was the seal. 
 If you are diligent in doing this, you will never stumble, but will 
 have a glorious entry into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ' Here too we find connecting links with 
 the later verses of J. 'Eternal life' is the goal in J. 21, 'the 
 eternal kingdom,' in P. 1^^. The ov /j,^ inalarjre and the TrXoucrtms 
 iTnxopvy'n^V<^^'''"-'' of P- remind us of J.'s summing up in v. 24, 
 
 ' The number seven plays an important part in the Apocalypse, where we have 
 7 ehurohea, 7 lamps, 7 spirits, 7 stars, 7 horns, 7 eyes, 7 seals, 7 angels, 7 thun- 
 ders 7 vials, 7plagues. So there are 7 deacons (Acts 218), an^ 7 pillars in the 
 house of Wisdom (Prov. 9'), cf. also the spirits in Isa. II''', and Clem. Al. p. 813. 
 
 b 2 
 
iv INTRODUCTION 
 
 ' God our Saviour is able to keep 'as without stumbling and to 
 set us before his glory without blemish in exceeding joy.' 
 
 P. continues (1^^'^*), ' I know that you are established 
 in this truth, but it will be always my care to remind you of it, as 
 I am indeed bound to do, whilst I continue in this eartVily 
 habitation. Even after I leave it, as our Lord Jesus Christ has 
 warned me that I must soon do, I hope to bequeath to you a 
 legacy which will enable you to make mention of these things after 
 my departure.' We have here an echo of J. ■p. 5 ' I desire to put 
 you in remembrance, though ye know all things,' i.e. as it is 
 explained afterwards, though you are familiar with the examples of 
 iudgment contained in the O.T., including the punishment of the 
 angels who sinned. P. addressing Gentiles, who could hardly be 
 expected to be familiar with a narrative resting mainly on Jewish 
 tradition, gives the phrase a more fitting application in reference 
 to the general moral and religious teaching which precedes. 
 
 In \^^^ P. goes on to speak of the evidences of the 
 Christian religion. ' It was no vamped up story we declared to 
 you, when we preached the coming of the Lord in power. I was 
 myself one of the eye-witnesses of His majesty on the holy mount,^ 
 when the voice came to him from the excellent glory, proclaiming 
 him to be the beloved Son, in whom the Father is well 
 pleased.^ Thus was confirmed to us the word of prophecy, 
 to which you rightly give heed as to a lamp shining in darkness 
 until the day dawn and the day-star arise in your hearts. 
 And remember, in your study of prophecy, that it is not 
 limited to the prophet's own horizon, or to any one particular 
 interpretation ('God fulfils himself in many ways'), since it is 
 no mere product of man's thought and will, but is the expression 
 of the eternal thought and will of God uttered through men 
 inspired by the Holy Ghost.' Why does the writer here lay stress 
 on the thought that prophecy tSt'a? eiriKvtremt! ov yiverai ? Is it 
 because, while he recognized one Coming in the Transfiguration, be 
 in no way regarded this as precluding a greater Coming, but on 
 the contrary as being a sort of preparatory rehearsal, confirming 
 the faith of those who witnessed it ? Or could it be because, as 
 
 , 1 This phrase is used in Isa. 11» and 65™ of the Messiah's kingdom, ' They shall 
 not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain,' saith the Lord. Perhaps P. 
 means that in the Transfiguration the three Apostles were admitted to behold 
 the glories of that kingdom, without alluding to any particular Jewish mountain. 
 ^ Cf. WeHtcott, Hiatork Faith, p. 264. 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE v 
 
 we read below (3*), doubts were entertained of any Second 
 Coming, some affirming, like Hymenaeus and Philetas, that the 
 Resurrection was past already (2 Tim. 2^^' ^^) ? In any case, 
 his main object seems to have been to make his readers under- 
 stand that prophecy, though uttered so long ago and under such dif- 
 ferent circumstances, cannot lose its significance, but has a message 
 for all times, all characters, and all situations.^ This deeply interest- 
 ing and instructive view of prophecy is suggested rather by St. Peter's 
 words in the Acts (S^i, 10**) and 1 Pet. (iw-i^) than by anything in 
 the Epistle of Jude, though the latter refers to Enoch's prophecy of 
 the future Coming to judgment (w. 14, 15) and speaks of the 
 inspiration of the Holy Spirit (v. 20) as aiding our prayers. 
 
 The connexion between the two Epistles is most conspicuous in 
 the second chapter of P. In both, this section begins with a short 
 Introduction (J. v. 4, P. 2^"*), describing in general terms the 
 innovators against whom the readers are warned. They steal into 
 the Church, they deny the Lord, their lives are stained by impurity, 
 the verdict of heaven has long been pronounced against them. 
 To this P. prefixes a clause to connect the new subject with that 
 of the preceding chapter. The gift of prophecy was liable to 
 misuse under the old dispensation (of which he presently quotes 
 Balaam as an example, cf. P. 2^^' ^^ and J. v. 11). Corresponding 
 to this in the new dispensation will be the abuse of teaching 
 (cf. James 3^"'^) ; and these false teachers will introduce destructive 
 heresies and bring on themselves swift destruction. [The word 
 airatXeia does not occur in J., but in the next verse he says that 
 the Lord Tov<i fir) irio'TevcravTai a-TrmXea-ev.] P. adds the Pauline 
 epithet ayopda-avra before hea-irorrfv. He foretells that many 
 will follow the loose living of these teachers and that thus the way 
 of truth (Ps. 119*") will be evil spoken of (_Isa. 52^). He speaks ot 
 their covetousness, cf. J. v. 11 on Balaam [efiiropevaovrai in P. 2* 
 perhaps contrasted with dyopdaavTa in 2^], and of their glozing 
 words. While J. speaks of ol iraXai •irpoyeypafifiivoi et<; tovto to 
 Kpifia (where the reference in tovto is obscure), P. has the fine 
 phrase ol? to xpifia ovk apyel kuI t] d-rrdtXeia avTMv ov vvarTai^ei. 
 On the other hand we lose J.'s ttjv tov @eov ■x^dpiTa /j,6TaTc6epT6<s 
 €4S dtreKyeiav, for which perhaps iXevdepiav avTol<i enayyeWofievoi , 
 avTol BovXot VTrdpxovTe<! Trj<: ^dopdi (P. 2^') was intended as an 
 
 ^ Dr. Abbott compares Christ's warning against those who say, ' Lo here is 
 the Christ, or there,' Mt. 24^3. 
 
vi INTRODUCTION 
 
 equivalent, cf. Gal. 5^^ eV iXevOepia eKXi]6r)Te- fiovov (irj tt)!/ 
 eXevOeplav eh a.<j)op/j,rjii rfj crapKi. 
 
 Then follow (J. 5-7) three examples of judgment taken from the 
 O.T. : Israel in the Wilderness, the offending angels, the sin of 
 Sodom, which are repeated in P. 2*"^, except that the Deluge takes 
 the place of the punishment of Israel. Why was this change made ? 
 Probably because the destruction of the world by water and the 
 destruction of Sodom by fire were recognized types of Divine ven- 
 geance (Lk. 17^^'^^), and also because P. had already referred to the 
 case of Israel (ev tw \aw) in comparing the false prophets of the O.T. 
 with the false teachers of the N.T. Perhaps, too, he wished to 
 keep the chronological order in his three examples.^ It has been 
 suggested in the note on to Bevrepov that in speaking of the 
 destruction of Israel after their falling back into unbelief, J. may 
 have had in his mind the question of the forgiveness of post- 
 baptismal sin. There is perhaps a similar reference in P. P Xijdrjv 
 \a/3mv rov Kudapiafiov tS)v irdkai avTOv dfiaprtrnv as well as in 
 P. 2^". With regard to P.'s triplet, it is to be noticed that it is 
 given in a far more animated form than that of J., being used as a 
 protasis to an apodosis applying the same principles to the persons 
 addressed, el yap 6 @eos ovk e<f>ei<TaT'0 k.t.X. Of the angels P. 
 says merely that they sinned, J. dwells on their pristine diguity, 
 and follows the book of Enoch in making their sin to consist partly 
 in the fall from their high estate, and partly in their going after 
 aapKot; eripa^, as the men of Sodom did afterwards (rov ofioiov 
 rpo-Kov TovTOKs J. 7). If P. had J. before him, these omissions 
 are natural : if J. wrote after P., he would scarcely have gone out 
 of his way to insert particulars so derogatory to the angelic 
 nature. As to their punishment, they are reserved for judgment 
 under darkness in chains. P. uses the strong phrase ' chains of 
 darkness' and the extremely rare word TapTapa>aa<i^ which may be 
 regarded as another instance of his fondness for Hellenistic phrases. 
 
 ' Dr. Abbott suggests that P. may also have preferred a cosmopolitan iudg- 
 ment (like the Deluge) to one which was confined to Israel. 
 
 ^ I supplement here what is said in the explanatory note on 2». The simple 
 verb rain-ap6u, occurs in Amphiloohius (fl. 370 A.D.) Patrol. Oraeca vol. xxxix 
 p. 41 A, SiA TrapeevtKov toketoC TeTapripaiTai Sai/iovlav iopdrav tA Totravra kJ 
 TTiXiKavra av<fri\iMna. The substantive riprapos occurs in Clem Horn iii 35 (on 
 the immensity of creation) n4xpi not toS intepivrou raprdpov rb &irt\pov fidSos ■ 
 inl Tlvi iTraiwpuTai 6 itivTa Trepi^X"" obpav6s ; ib. i. 4 iropaSoS^croiioi xar' Ma^ 
 ^i\oa6,t,a>y\6yov! Tlx,pi^\(yt«ovTi Kol Taprdptp . . . kclI ?<ro/.a. iv ^Sou rby ai&ya Ko\a- 
 id/xivos, lb. XX. 9 6 noVTiphs (TKiJt^ X"'?"" ""tA t{,j/ icpaaiv ^fyovis ueri tUv baoioi- 
 \wv Ayyekuv (is rh rov Taprdpov aK6ros KaTe\ei,v fiSfrai, ib. Ep. ad Jac 14 rapTo- 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE vii 
 
 The Deluge is described in P. 2^, where he uses the words ^i/\ttcro-a» 
 and da-e/Si]^ found in J. 4, 15, 18. Besides the reasons mentioned 
 above, P. was naturally led to speak of the Deluge here, as he is 
 about to make use of it below (3^"') to show that there is nothing 
 incredible in the supposition of the destruction of the existing 
 universe by fire. 
 
 It is interesting to compare what is said in the two epistles 
 about the two missionaries of the antediluvian world. In J. 
 V. 14 Enoch, the seventh from Adam, appears simply as the 
 denouncer of vengeance to come : in P. Noah is a preacher of 
 righteo\isness and he is the eighth saved. I have suggested 
 (p. 192) that P. may have intended a mystical opposition between 
 the two numbers ; and, I think, this is confirmed by the way in 
 which the number 8 is introduced in 1 P. 3^* (ki^iotov) el<; rjv 
 oKcyoi, TOVT eartv okto) tjrv^ai, hieamdrfaav Si vSaTO<}.^ The ark 
 is here regarded as a symbol of the Church. What was the 
 writer's motive in adding that it contained only a few, and further 
 that these few, on being reckoned up, were found to amount to 
 8 ? Must he not have intended to signify that, while the visible 
 Church consisted of a mere ' remnant,' a ' little flock,' yet these 
 few represented all who share the Resurrection of Christ, ' the 
 general assembly and church of the first-born,' which would be 
 continually recruited not only from the. living, but also from the 
 dead by the ever-present, ever-active Spirit of Christ (3^^) ? ^ 
 In the account of Sodom (P. 2*) P. differs from J. in laying 
 stress on Lot's protest against surrounding wickedness, and on 
 the mercy shown towards him, just as he had done before in 
 regard to Noah (hereby illustrating the duty of the faithful 
 under the present stress) ; and the moral he draws from the two 
 stories is that ' God , knows how to deliver the godly from 
 trial, as well as to keep the wicked under chastisement 
 for the day of judgment.' P. alone gives details as to the de- 
 struction of Sodom (re^/sfflo-a? KaraaTpo^y KaTeKpivev),^ while 
 
 peiav xiipvjSSiv. The force of the vefbal termination is the same as in oupafifai, 
 irovria and, KaTairoiiT6a, icaTaea\arT6a), xap'ticio, of. Eustath. {de ThesacUon. 403 0. 
 ed. Tafel) rh iv i/iol x^^"""' oipaviaas, Nicol. Damasc. 445 ed. Val. rohs avepdirovs 
 oJa aBfovs iirSfTcoaev. 
 
 1 Cf. Justin M. DicU. 138, Iren. i. 18. 3. 
 
 2 Cf. Clement on this subject in Str. vi. § 44-§ 52, esp. § 4:1 Jin. ov yap ivTavBa 
 fUvov 7} S6vafiis 7j ivepyiyni^ (tow ®eov) tpSdvfif irdvTT} S4 effri leal &el ipya^erai. 
 
 * In my note on 2' I have illustrated these words from Pliny's letter to Tacitus, 
 giving an account of the eruption of Vesuvius. Is it possible that 2 P. borrowed 
 these details from Pliny ? 
 
viii INTRODUCTION 
 
 J. speaks of its present state as a warning to future ages. 
 As regards this warning P.'s viroSeiyfiu fieXKovToov aae^iaiv is 
 better expressed than J.'s rather confused wpoKeivrai Belyfia 
 •jTVpcxi aitoviov Si/crjv virexova-ai,. In v. 8 J. turns to the 
 libertines and declares that they are guilty of like sins with these 
 sinners of the old world : they defile the flesh, make light 
 of authority and rail at ' glories ' (as the men f)f Sodom did 
 towards the angels), and this they do because they are still 
 buried in a carnal sleep (cf. Eph. 51*). These men (v. 10 
 oi)Toi, Se) rail at things beyond their ken, while they surrender 
 themselves like brute beasts to the guidance of their appetites, and 
 thus bring about their own destruction.^ P. (2^") combines part 
 of J.'s description of the men of Sodom, who went OTriarat aapKo<: 
 erepas (for which he substitutes hirlam a-apKO'i iv iiridvfiia fiiaafiov 
 iropevoiievov<;) with J.'s condemnation of the libertines as despising 
 authority,^ and predicates both characteristics of the wicked, whom 
 God keeps under chastisement for the day of judgment. Then 
 turning to the libertines he exclaims against them as ' headstrong 
 and shameless (ToXfirjTai, cf eroKfirjaev J. v. 9) men that shrink not 
 from railing at glories' (2^"). In 2'^ he goes on, as J. does in v. 10, 
 with a ovToi Si, ' these are like brute beasts.' Apparently he wants 
 to bring out more fully the force of J.'s ocra ^vaiKw^ iiriaTavTai, iv 
 TovToii ^QeipovTai by the periphrasis yeyevvTifieva ^vaiKo, ei<! aXcaa-iv 
 Koi, (jiOopdv and ev ry sjidopa avrSiv (jtOaprjaovTai. That is, while J. 
 simply states that the libertines are destroyed through their indul- 
 gence in their animal instincts, P. draws out the comparison to the 
 brute beasts, 'which are born mere creatures of instinct, with a view 
 to capture and slaughter,' and then adds that the libertines will share 
 their fate, since they mock at that higher world which is beyond 
 their ken. Here there can be no doubt that P.'s language is far more 
 obscure than that of J. Even J. is not quite clear. The true 
 antithesis would have been 'they rail at what transcends the 
 senses, they admire what appeals to the senses and appetites ' (and 
 yet these are the causes of their ruin). Is it possible that P., 
 writing with an imperfect recollection of J,, understood iv tovtoi<; 
 (^deipovTat to mean ' perish among them,' i.e. among the brutes ? 
 
 •* For the connexion between the darkened heart which refuses to know God, 
 and the indulgence in the vilest lusts, see Rom. V^-^. 
 
 ^ It will be noticed that, while J. couples Kvpwrtira and ii^as as belonging 
 to the same category, P. only names the abstract word /ci/piiiTriTo here, and 
 introduces Biijoj later on as a concrete example. 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE ix 
 
 We have now to consider the very curious verse interposed 
 between J. 8 and 10, P. 21" and 2^^ In J. it runs ' Michael, the 
 archangel, when he was disputing with the devil about the body 
 of Moses, did not venture to bring a judgment of railing, but said, 
 " the Lord rebuke thee " ' : in P. ' whereas angels, though greater 
 in power and might, do not venture to bring against them a railing 
 judgment before the Lord.' The former is a little difficult, but 
 with the help of the Ascensio Mosis we can understand that, if the 
 chief of the archangels abstained from using any contemptuous 
 expression against Satan, and contented himself with making his 
 appeal to God, much more should frail and sinful mortals abstain 
 from slighting language about the powers of the invisible world. 
 What however is to be made of P. ? Standing by itself, it is 
 merely a riddle, for which the answer is to be found in J. That 
 is to say, P. wrote with J.'s sentence ia his mind, but for some 
 reason or other chose to eliminate the points essential for its 
 intelligibility. What was his reason ? The same, I think, which 
 led him to omit the details as to the fall of the angels, which are 
 mainly derived from the Book of Enoch, in 2*, and the reference 
 to the preaching of Enoch below. He objects, that is, to make use of 
 these apocryphal writings, and generalizes the story by dropping 
 the proper names and by twice changing a singular into a plural 
 (ayyeXot, avTwv). So too a vague irapa K.vpi<p takes the place of 
 iiriTifi'^a-ai, croi Ku/sto?, and the vagueness is increased by the use 
 of the indeterminate aiir&v and by the omission of the object of 
 the comparative fiei^ove<;. In fact the sentence is meaningless 
 except to one who was already acquainted with its parallel in J., 
 thoiigh it may perhaps be true, as Dr. Bigg suggests, that P. felt 
 himself justified in his generalization by the remembrance of an 
 obscure passage in the Book of Enoch. 
 
 I go on to J. V. 11, ' Woe to them, for they have followed in the 
 steps of Cain, and been carried away in the error of Balaam for 
 gain, and lost themselves in the rebellion of Korah. These are 
 sunken rocks in your love-feasts, where they join your feast 
 without any feeling of religious reverence, caring only for their own 
 enjoyment. They are clouds without water, scudding before the 
 wind; trees without fruit in the fruit-bearing season, twice dead, 
 torn up by the roots; raging waves foaming out their own shame; 
 wandering stars for which the blackness of darkness is reserved 
 for ever.' This passage corresponds to P. 2^^"", but, in the latter, the 
 
X INTRODUCTION 
 
 order is considerably altered and there are various additions and 
 omissions. Balaam (who is also prominent in the Apocalypse 2^*) 
 is the only one of the old haeresiarchs referred to, but his story 
 is given at more length in 2^^'^^ 'They (the libertines) have 
 wandered from the straight path, following the path of Balaam 
 son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness and was 
 convicted of his error by the dumb ass, which spoke with human 
 voice and stayed the prophet's madness.' Here P. clenches the 
 comparison made before (2^) between the false prophet of the O.T. 
 and the false teacher of the N.T., and brings out again the motive 
 of covetousness (see above 2* and 2'^^). Has he any special 
 reason for introducing the story of the ass rebuking the prophet ? 
 We may compare other passages in which God is represented as 
 choosing the foolish things of this world to confound the wise 
 (1 Cor. 1^', Ps. 8^), or in which men are called upon to learn a 
 lesson from animals, as Isa. 1^ Jer. 8'^, Prov. 6", Job 12^. Possibly 
 P. may be thinking of the scorn entertained for simple believers 
 by those who called themselves Gnostics (see below 2^*). 
 
 J. v. 12 appears with some remarkable alterations in P. 
 2'^, aTTiXoi Kal fi&jMoi evTpv(f)&vTe'i iv Tats aira/rai^ aiiT&v 
 t7vvevw)(pi)iievoi, v/xiv. Here cnriXoi and aira/Taiii are substituted 
 for (TTTtXaSe? and dyd'7Tai<; in J. Some editors read dydirat^ with 
 B, but the addition of airmv suits much better with aTrarat?. J. 
 speaks of dydirai's v/imv. It was natural of course that the 
 wolves should seek to find their way into the sheep-folds; but 
 can we suppose that the faithful would enter the love-feasts of 
 the libertines ? Moreover the change of an original dyd-!rai<; 
 to dirdrai<; by a copyist is hardly conceivable, while the reverse 
 change to suit J. is most natural. But how are we to account 
 for the disappearance of the important — we might almost call 
 it the indispensable word — dyaTnj ? In the chapter on the 
 Readings I have suggested that dydirrjv was the original 
 reading, instead of ^Bovijv, in the earlier part of this verse {rjBov^v 
 •^yovfievoi ttjv iv ■^/Jt-epa Tpv^rjv); where my explanatory note 
 will show how hard it is to make a satisfactory distinction between 
 rjSovrjv and rpv^rjv. On the other hand dydirifv gives exactly the 
 sense required ' thinking that revelling in the daytime makes an 
 dydiT'T),' as niay be seen from the quotations from Clement given 
 in the chapter referred to (cf. too Rom. 13^^). I account for ^Soi'j;i' 
 by supposing that it was a marginal gloss on rpv^rjv. The word 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xi 
 
 aTrarjj is often joined with t/bik^t;, as shown in the explanatory 
 note, and it is wanted here to explain how the libertines managed 
 to gain admission to the love-feasts of the Church. We have 
 next to ask why o-TrtXaSe? should have been changed to airiXoi. 
 The former word is a daring metaphor even among the metaphors 
 which accompany it in J., but quite out of place here, and P. 
 substitutes for it the similar sounding a-iriXo<i found in Eph. 5^', of 
 which the derivatives ao-7rt\os and a-n-iXoco are found elsewhere 
 in P. and J. Are we to suppose that P. intentionally replaced J.'s 
 words by others of similar sound, in order not to startle people 
 who were already familiar with them ? or was it the unconscious 
 action of the mind, calling up similar sounds, as in rhyming or 
 alliteration ? The latter seems to me the more probable 
 explanation. 
 
 P. returns to J.'s metaphors in 2^', where he splits up ve(f>e\ai 
 avvSpoi viro avificov "rrapa^epofievai into two, "Trijyal avvhpoi and 
 ofiiy^Tuic viro \ai'\a7ro? iXavvo/ievai, perhaps because he regarded 
 J.'s expression as superfluous, and also because he thus provides 
 distinct pictures of present disappointment (the well) and future 
 uncertainty (the cloud). He omits the fruitless trees, the stormy 
 waves and wandering stars as un suited to his purpose, but inappro- 
 priately appends to his last metaphor, the clause in which J. 
 describes the doom of the wandering stars, oh o ^6(f)o^ tov ctkotous 
 TerijprjTai. Of course the gender shows that P. intends this clause 
 to apply to the persons whom he has just figuratively described, 
 as it is indeed applied by J. himself in v. 6, but it loses the 
 aptness which it has in J. v. 13, and thus supplies another convinc- 
 ing proof of the priority of J. How could the latter have had 
 the patience to gather the scattered fragments out of P. in 
 order to form the splendid cluster of figures in w. 12, 13 ? We 
 have still to consider the insertion in P. (2^^), aSiKovfjievoi, fiiaOov 
 ahi,Kla<s, which commences the loose series of participles ending in 
 2^^. If the participle is omitted, this phrase recalls J. 11 ry 
 irXavT) TOV ^aXaafi fiicrOov e^e'^yOrfaav and is repeated again in 
 2^ ; but aStKovfievoi is difficult. Apparently P. intends his 
 paradoxical phrase to correspond to J.'s ovai: the libertines are 
 miserable, because they are, as they think, ' robbed of (or ' robbed 
 as') the reward of their iniquity.' The following participles give 
 a striking and powerful description of the evil influence which 
 these men exercise over unstable souls, 6(f)6aXfioii<s e)(pvTe^ fiearoii^ 
 
xii INTRODUCTION 
 
 fjioi'^^aXiSov KoL dKaTavava-TOVi a/iapria^, Se\ed^ovT£<; yfrvxai 
 aarripiKTOvi (cf. yejevvr]fieva elt aXtoaiv, 2^^), xapBiav yeyvfifaa-- 
 fievrjv irXeove^iav exovTe<;, tcardpaii reieva. Perhaps P. may intend 
 this partly to take the place of J.'s fine figure KV/iara aypia 
 ■6a\da-ar)(s i-rra^pi^ovra ra? kavr&v aia'xvvaii. 
 
 In m. 14, 15 J. gives the prophecy of Enoch, the seventh from 
 Adam, which simply announces the future judgment on impious 
 deeds and words. To this P. makes no direct reference, but, as I 
 have before suggested, it may have been one reason for speaking 
 of Noah as the eighth. In v. 16 (perhaps taken from the Ascension 
 of Moses) J. goes on to describe the libertines as ' murmuring and 
 •discontented, walking after their own lusts, whose mouth \aXel 
 virepoyKa, and who flatter others for the sake of advantage.' To 
 the same effect P. (2^*) speaks of them as uttering viripoyKa 
 ^aTai6T7)ro<i, by which they seduce through the lusts of the flesh 
 those who were just escaping from heathen error. In 2^^'^ 
 P. is mostly independent of J., but I have already noticed that 
 iXevdeplav eTrayyeWo/xevoi may be an echo of J. 4 X"/"*''''* 
 fieraTidevTei; et's aa-e\yeiav. He continues el yhp dvo^vyovTet ra 
 fiidanara tov Koafjuov ev itrir/vaxrei rov Kvpiov koX (rcoTrjpoi 'lr}<rov 
 'KpiaTov, words which recall what he had said in 1* diro^vyovreii 
 T^S eV TcS KocrjJLi^ iv iindvfiiq, <f>Oopd<;, . . . Bid tjj? einyvmaeto's ■ . ■ 
 TOV ®eov /cat 'Irjarov rov Kvplov fifi&v, and goes on to give an 
 impressive warning against the dangers of backsliding, in which 
 he borrows from J. 3, vTroa-rpe^ai eK t^? 7rapaSodelari<s avroiv 
 dyla<; ivTo\ri<i, concluding with the proverb of the dog and the 
 sow returning to their foulness after being cleansed from it.^ 
 This may have a reference, like 1®, 2^", to post-baptismal sin, and 
 seems to have been applied to the torments of the unseen world in 
 iih.e Apocalypse of Peter, §§ 11 o t%&)/3 koX rj SvaooSla r&v KoXa^o/ievcov 
 '/caTeppee ical aa-Trep Xtfivr} iyevero ixel- KUKel eKdOrjvTO yvvaiKev 
 ■exova-at tov l-)(o>pa fiexpi tSjv Tpa^fi^'^v, and §§ 8, 9, 16, quoted 
 on p. cxxxi. 
 
 In the third chapter of P. we return again to J. Tlie readers 
 are addressed as dyaTr)roL in P. 3^ as in J. v. 17. In both, they 
 are bidden to remember the words of the Apostles, warning them 
 
 ' Compare the description of the Church aa a ship in CUm. Horn. {Ep. Clem, 
 ad Jac, § 15) yavriuvTes . . . iivefiuvres {al. atrfpavres) rovreffrtv 4^ofi,o\oyo'i/ievot 
 tA irapavT^fiara limrep votroTrotobs xo^<^<> ''is ix itticpias a/iaprlas Ktyw leal ri 4^ 
 imBviuuv i,r6iKTwv auptvBhra xaxi, Uriva rf dfioKoyiiirai Siairep i,w e pi,a a. vr e s 
 (cf. l^ipaixa in 2 P. 2^^) itou^iffirfle t^s v6aov. 
 
RELATION OP 2 PETER TO JUDE xiii 
 
 against mockers who should come in the last days, walking after 
 their own lusts. To this P. adds ('i^' ^) ' This is the second letter 
 I am writing to you, and in both I stir up your sincere mind by 
 calling on you to remember the command of the Lord and Saviour 
 spoken by your Apostles.' Since in 1^* he had used the phrase 
 ijvapicrafiev vfiiv rrjv tov Kvpiov rjfiSiv irapovaiav, it would seem 
 that P. must himself be included among ' your Apostles. He 
 further bids them ' remember the words which were spoken before 
 by the holy prophets,' recurring in this to what he had said in 
 1^". What are we to understand by the allusion to a previous 
 letter ? Our first thought is naturally of 1 P. But is there 
 anything in it which would answer to the description here given ? 
 Many have denied this, because they thought that the contents of 
 the prophecy, as given in J. 18, were included in P.'s reference to 
 an earlier epistle. J. there says ort eXeyov v/uv 'Ett' eaxarov 
 ■vpovov e<rovTai ifiTraiKTat k.t.X., that is, he asserts that the 
 words quoted by him were words which were often in the 
 mouth of the Apostles. On the other hand P. makes a clear 
 separation between 3"^ and 3^ by inserting the phrase tovto 
 irpSiTov yivaxTKovTe';, which he had previously used in 1^°, not to 
 introduce a particular prophecy, but to lay down how prophecy was 
 to be understood. The reference to a former letter is therefore 
 restricted by P. to 3^, bidding the readers pay heed to the words 
 of the prophets and the . apostles. If we turn now to 1 P. 1^"'^^ 
 Trepl ■q<i a-a)Tr)pia<i i^e^i]rr)trav . . . -tt p o^rjr a i o i tt e pi ttj? 
 €t? V fia <! 'x^dp no <; irpo^rjrevcravTet; . . . ol<s direKa- 
 XviftOrf on oiixeavTOi'!, vfuv Se SiriKOVOVP airdy a vvv ajiriyyeXrf 
 vfiiv Sia T 5} V evayyeXi<7afj,eva)v vfidv irvev/iaTi 
 dyta (cf. 1 P. 1^*), we shall find an exact correspondence to what 
 is stated here. The words t&v irpoetpr]fievo)i> prjudrmv (J. 17> 
 P. 3^) remind us of J. 4 ol irdXai irpoyeypafifiivoi et? tovto to 
 KpLfui (though no doubt the immediate reference there is to the 
 prophecy of Enoch) and of P. 2^ ols to KpLyta exwaXai ovk dpyei. 
 In citing the prophecy, P. adds the emphatic eV i/j/n-atyfiovjj, which 
 may be compared with iv rfl <j)0opa avT&v koX ^dapriaovrai of 2^^ 
 and with the reiterated aa-e^ei<i of J. 15 and Karh tA? em6vfiia<} 
 tropevo/jtevoi of J. 16 and 18. 
 
 In 3*, P., omitting J.'s somewhat obscure v. 19 oi/roi elatv 
 ol airohopi^ovre<s, ■^vxi'icoi, irvevfta fiij exovTef, goes on to specify 
 in what the mockery of the ifiiraiKrai consisted. They said that 
 
xiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 the promise of the coming of Christ (to which P. had borne 
 witness in l^®) remained unfulfilled, and that the world was 
 not liable to the catastrophic changes predicted as accompaniments 
 of the final judgment. There is a little awkwardness in 
 P.'s wording, air' apxv^ KTUeaxs following a^' ij? eKoinrjdrfaav, 
 but it is a very natural blending of two objections. I cannot 
 think that if J. had known this verse, which gives so much point 
 to the preceding prophecy, he would have refrained from inserting 
 it. P. gives a double answer in 3^'^" : (a) as the world was 
 created out of water by the word of God, so owing to ^ the same word 
 it was destroyed through water, and will be destroyed again by fire 
 on the day of judgment (cf. J. 6, 7, P. 23'*'9); (&) God is not 
 limited to days and years. If He waits, it is from His long-suffering 
 patience, because He desires that all should repent and be saved. 
 We may compare this with P.'s use of the O.T. types of judgment 
 to point out proofs of mercy in the case of Noah and Lot (2*' '), in 
 contrast with the severer tone of J. 5-7. In 3^° P. bids his 
 readers make a practical use of the knowledge that the Lord is 
 about to come unexpectedly. ' Do not be blind to the symptoms 
 of the breaking up of the frame of nature (perhaps a reference 
 to volcanic eruptions and earthquakes). Make ready for the 
 coming of the day of God by the practice of holiness and piety. 
 Look forward to the fulfilment of the promise of the reign of 
 righteousness in a new earth and heaven.' 
 
 At this point J. and P. again come together in J. 20 and P. 3", 
 both commencing a new section with ar^airryroL J.'s exhortation 
 to his readers ' to build themselves up on their most holy faith and 
 keep themselves in love ' has been already used by P., as we have 
 seen, in 1^'^. His reference to the Spirit's help in prayer may be 
 compared with P. 1^" on the inspiration of the prophets. His 
 phrase in v. 21 irpoa-Zexpfi.evoi to 6\eo5 tqu icvpiov fifi&v 'Irjcrov 
 XjOMTTof) 619 ^(orjv almviov is taken up in the Trpoa-hoKwvTai; of 
 P. 3^^ and Trpo(rSoKa)/j,ev of 3^^, and again in 3^*, while the goal et? 
 ^(OTJv alwvLov may be compared with et? rr)v alcoviov ^aaiXelav in 
 P. 1^1- P. inserts da-m\oi Kal afKOfirjroi (cf. 1 P. 1^') from J.'s 
 afia)p,ov^ in v. 24, and in contrast to his own a-iriXoi Kal ficofioi in 
 2^^ and to J.'s ia-inXmp.ivov in v. 23. iv elpj^vy looks back to J. v. 2 
 and P. 1^- While in w. 22, 23 we have J.'s stern rule for the treat- 
 ment of backsliders, P. gives utterance again (3^^) to the more hopeful 
 ' Reading Si' Sv, for which see Chapter on the Text. 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xv 
 
 view of 3^, and claims for it the inspired support of Paul. ' Yet Paul's 
 letters, wise and good as they are, offer some difficulties, which 
 have been misunderstood and perverted, like the rest of the Bible.^ 
 by the unlearned and unstable to their own destruction.' The 
 word awTqpla in h^ reminds US' that J. had originally intended to 
 write irepl t??? Kotvfj'} a-a)Ti!)pia(} (v. 3) and that his purpose is 
 apparently carried out to a certain extent in these last verses from 
 20 onwards. In v. 24 J. begins an Ascription partly borrowed 
 from St. Paul, addressed ' to Him who is able to keep His people 
 free from stumbling (cf. P. 1^") and present them before His glory 
 in exceeding joy ' (cf. P. 1"). P. bids his readers, ' knowing these 
 things beforehand (see above 1^^, 3^) to be on their guard, that they 
 may not be led away by the error (J. 11, P. 2^^) of the wicked 
 (P. 2', cf J. 23 iXedre ev ^6/3^), and so fall from their own sted- 
 fastness ' (cf. P. 1^^, 2^*, 3^*). J.'s ev dyaWtdaei soars higher than 
 the lesson which P. here inculcates : it may be compared, as we 
 have seen, with the 7r\ov(7t'a>s iirfXpprjyriBija-eTai of 1*^. P. con- 
 tinues his exhortation in 3^* av^dvere ev jfdpiTt ical yvataei, for 
 which we may compare ;\;apt? TrXrjdwOecr) in 1^ and ravra irXeopd- 
 ^ovra in 1®, also J. 4. The Ascription in P. is much simpler 
 than that in J., being addressed to our Saviour Jesus Christ, while 
 J.'s is addressed fiovco @e«3 a-eoTfjpi tjh&v Sid 'Irjo-ov ^piarov rod 
 Kvpiov Tiiimv. P. has ho^a only, while J. has the full liturgical form 
 B6^a,fiejaXcoa-vvr], Kpdro<;, xal i^ovaia. P. has Kal vvv koX eh ■^/J-epav 
 alwvo^, while J. has Trpo '7ravT0<; tov ai&vo<; koi vvv kuI el<! iravTaif 
 Tov<s al&va<!, concluding with d/jirjv, which is omitted in P. by WH. 
 after Cod. B. Cf J. of Theol. Stud. vol. viii. 75 on Emphasis in NT, 
 To sum up : What do we find to be the main points in which the 
 two epistles agree, what the points in which they differ ? Both 
 agree in making faith, which is itself the gift of God (P. 1^ 
 "Kaxovariv ttco-tiv), the foundation of the Christian life (J. 3, 20, 
 P. l^' ^) : both agree that its commencement- lies in the divine call 
 (J. 1, P. 1^' ^"y The call was sealed in baptism for the forgiveness 
 of sin (J. 5 in connexion with 1 Cor. 10^' ^, P. 1^), but we have to 
 make our calling sure through good works (P. 1^"), to build 
 ourselves up on the foundation of the faith (J. 20, P. 1^"'), to keep 
 ourselves in the love of God by praying with the help of the Holy 
 Spirit (J. 20), looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ 
 (which shall be fully revealed) in the life eternal (J. 21). God our 
 ' For the justification of this rendering see explanatory notes. 
 
xvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Saviour is able to keep us without stumbling and to present us 
 before his glory unblemished in joy (J. 24, 25). P. does not expressly 
 mention prayer, and he lays more stress on personal effort than J. in 
 the words ' give diligence that ye may be found in peace, without 
 spot and blameless in his sight ' 3^*, ' beware lest ye fall from your 
 steadfastness, grow in grace ' S^''- ^^. So in 1*'^ he bids his readers 
 add all diligence to supply 'in your faith energy, in your energy 
 knowledge,' etc., and goes on in u 10 to say ' if ye do these things, 
 ye shall never stumble : for thus shall be richly supplied to you the 
 entrance into the eternal kingdom.' At the same time he ascribes to 
 the divine power ' all that pertains to life and godliness through the 
 knowledge of Hira who called us by the manifestation of his own 
 goodness.' That manifestation has been to us the guarantee of 
 most blessed promises, through which we are enabled to become 
 partakers of.the divine nature (P. I^'*). 
 
 The broad distinction between the two epistles may be said to 
 be that, while J. is throughout occupied with the denunciation of 
 evil-doers, except in w. 1-3 and 20-25, P.'s denunciations are 
 mainly confined to a portion of chapter 2, and that the latter 
 dwells more upon the mercy of God as shown even in his 
 punishments. 
 
 Taking these points more in order, we will consider : 
 
 (1) The teaching as to the riatwre of God. — Jude speaks of the 
 love of God the Father {vv. 1, 21). He speaks of Him as the only 
 Master {y. 4), the only God, our Saviour, to whom glory is to be 
 ascribed through Jesus Christ {v. 25). His grace is made a pretext 
 for licentiousness and He is himself denied by the innovators who 
 have lately found their way into the church. ' The Lord ' saved 
 Israel but afterwards destroyed the unbelievers {v. 3). The 
 archangel Michael appealed to Him against Satan (v. 9). 
 
 Jesus Christ is called our Lord {vv. 4, 17, 21, 25). We look 
 forward to the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life 
 {v. 21). Enoch prophesied that ' the Lord ' will coine to judge the 
 wicked {v. 14). Jude calls himself the servant of Jesus Christ 
 {v. 1). Christians are kept sale in Him {y. 1). The innovators deny 
 Him, as they do the Father {v. 4). 
 
 The Holy Spirit is mentioned as the inspirer of prayer in v. 20. 
 The innovators are branded as Trvevfia fit) exovret {v. 19). 
 
 P. speaks of the Divine power, which has granted to us all that is 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xvii 
 
 needed for life and godliness (1^), of the Divine nature in which 
 man may share (1*). He refers to the word of God the Father 
 (styled also ' the Excellent Glory '), which was uttered at the Trans- 
 figuration, 'This is my son, my Beloved in whom I am well 
 pleased ' (1"). God is the source of the inspiration of the prophets 
 {1^). He spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down 
 to Tartarus in chains of darkness ; He saved Noah from the flood 
 which swept away the ungodly, and Lot from the overthrow of 
 Sodom. He knows how to save the righteous and pimish the 
 wicked (2*"*). The angels do not venture to utter a railing judg- 
 ment in His presence (2"). By His word He created the heaven 
 and the earth out of water : by the same word He destroyed them 
 through water, and will one day destroy them with fire (3^"^). In 
 2^ it would seem, from the ordinary use of the word Seo-TroT?;? in 
 early Christian writers, that we must understand tov dyopda-avra 
 heairoTTiv as used, at any rate in the first instance, of God, who 
 redeemed Israel out of Egypt (2 Sam. 7^^), though there is 
 probably also some reference to the Christian use of dyopd^m. 
 Measures of time have no relation to Him (3*). The delay in the 
 day of judgment (the day of God) is due to His long-suffering, 
 because He would have all come to repentance (3^^^^' ^^). 
 
 Jesus Christ is called 'our Lord and Saviour' in 1^^ 2^*, 3^ 3^^ 
 'our Lord' simply in 1^ where grace and peace are said to be 
 multiplied through the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord, in 
 I^* where He is said to have announced to Peter his approaching 
 death, in 1^* where the Transfiguration is described. In 1^ P speaks 
 of himself as a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ. Jesus has 
 called us ISia So^y koL apery and in this manifestation of His 
 character has made possible to us the highest hopes for the future 
 (1^- *). The final doxology is addressed solely to Him. 
 
 The Holy Spirit. ' Men spake from God ' utto ■7rvevfiaro<; dyiov 
 (ftepofievoi (1^^). 
 
 Many have drawn attention to the frequent use in 2 P. of what 
 Dr. Bigg has called ' reverential periphrases,' ?; 0eia Svva/ji,i,<;, Qeia 
 <f)va-i^, ■^ fieyaXoTrpeirrji; So^a. I have spoken of the two former as 
 denoting a sympathy with Hellenic feeling, which is not to be 
 found in Jude or 1 Peter. We may compare them with the 
 terms deorr}^ and to 0elov used by St. Paul (Col. 2", Acts IT'^"), 
 with the ' Word ' of St. John, and with such phrases as ' the 
 Deity,' ' Providence,' ' Heaven,' ' the Author of Nature,' ' the 
 
 c 
 
xviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 supreme Being,' which were common with the writers of the 18th 
 century, or with the striking phrase of Matthew Arnold ' A stream 
 of tendency which makes for righteousness.' If they stood alone, 
 such phrases might be regarded as in a way equivalent to the 
 a,yva>(rTo<; Oeoi of the Athenians-: they have an air of coldness and 
 remoteness which cannot but strike one on passing from 1 P. to 
 this epistle ; but they all express diflferent aspects of God's 
 revelation of Himself; and our author is only following St. Paul 
 and St. John when he recognizes these diflferent conceptions as 
 all included in the Christian faith. 
 
 (2) Man as he is ly nature. — J. speaks of man under grace, 
 and man fallen from grace, but hardly at all of man by 
 nature. P. on the other hand, adopting the language of St. 
 Paul and St. John, speaks of the believer's escape from 'the 
 corruption which is in the world through lust' (1*), from 'the 
 pollutions of the world ' (2^), from ' those that live in error ' (1*), 
 from ' the ignorance of the way of righteousness ' (2^). He refers 
 to ' the old sins from which we are cleansed in baptism ' (1*). 
 
 (3) Man under grace. While still in this ignorant, degraded state, 
 man is made conscious of a call (P. l^'io) and of an answering faith, 
 which is itself a gift from God (1^). The call consists in the appeal 
 made to us by the exhibition of Divine goodness in the life of 
 Jesus Christ (1*), which is the foundation and embodiment of all 
 the promises of future good contained in the Gospel (1*), promises 
 which are summed up in our being made partakers of the Divine 
 Nature (1*). This call is sealed in baptism for the washing away 
 of sin (1"). The more we know of God and of Jesus Christ, 
 the more we shall grow in grace and peace (1^, 3^*). The Divine 
 power has granted to us all that is needed for life and godliness (1*). 
 The goal which we have in view is ' the entrance into the eternal 
 Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ' (1}^), otherwise 
 described as the ' new heavens and new earth in which righteous- 
 ness dwells ' (3^). 
 
 On this subject J. says that those to whom he writes are holy 
 and called, beloved by God the Father and kept safe in Jesus 
 Christ (1^-^). The faith once for all delivered to the saints has 
 been communicated to them, and they are to build themselves up 
 upon it with prayer in the Holy Ghost (J. 20). He prays that 
 ' mercy, peace, and love may be multiplied upon them ' (J. 2), that 
 they may be ' kept from stumbling,' and eventually ' presented 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xix- 
 
 before the Divine Glory, faultless in exceeding joy' (J. 24), 
 They are further exhorted to ' keep themselves in the love of God,, 
 looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ (to be fully revealed) 
 in eternal life ' (J. 21). 
 
 (4) Danger of falling aioay. It is possible to be again entangled 
 in the pollutions of the world after escaping from them (P. 2^). 
 To have thus turned away from the holy law once delivered to us 
 is worse than never to have known the way of righteousness (2^1). 
 The danger arises from sloth and unfruitfulness as regards the 
 knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, from forgetting the 
 baptismal cleansing, from blindness or short-sightednesss (1^). 
 "We fall from our own steadfastness, being carried away by the 
 surrounding evil (3^''). We must make our calling and election 
 sure or else we shall stumble (l^"). For this purpose it is neces- 
 sary to use every effort to build up the Christian character on the 
 foundation of faith, adding to our faith energy and knowledge 
 and self-denial and endurance and piety and brotherly kindness, all 
 crowned with love to God and man d^"^). And we shall be able 
 to do this, if we keep in mind that God has granted to us all that 
 is needed for life and godliness (l^' *). It will help us to resist 
 temptation, if we are always on the watch for the coming of 
 the Lord and endeavour to prepare ourselves for it by doing our 
 duty in that state of life to which we are called and by persever- 
 ance in religious exercises (3^^). At the present time there is a 
 special danger impending from false teachers who will steal into the' 
 church and assault both your faith and practice by denying the 
 Master who bought them and indulging their lusts without restraint 
 (2^'^). They seduce the ignorant and unwary by their confident 
 words (2^*) promising them liberty, while they are themselves 
 slaves to corruptness (21^-"). They live by sight and not by faith, 
 they have no reverence for the unseen world, they seek to make 
 gain of you by encouraging the gratification of your lower nature 
 ^23.10,12^^ they dishonour your love-feasts by their loose behaviour. 
 They pervert the meaning of Scripture to their own ruin (3^®). They 
 mock the Christian hope by the sneering question ' Where is the 
 promise of His coming ? All remains unchanged' (3^'*). 
 
 J. calls upon his readers to defend the faith once delivered 
 to them against the assaults of impious men who have crept 
 into the fold, changing the grace of God into licentiousness and 
 denying the only Master and Jesus Christ our Lord w. 3, 4. These 
 
 c 2 
 
XX INTRODUCTION 
 
 innovators are stained by the sins of Sodom ; they make light of 
 authority whether visible or invisible (v. 8) ; they have an eye 
 only for the things of sense (v. 10); they are covetous, rebellious, 
 discontented, self-confident (vv. 11, 16); they flatter you in the 
 hope of gain (v. 16) ; they make invidious distinctions, are not led 
 by the Spirit (v. 19), profane your love-feasts (v. 12); they are the 
 mockers of the last days against whom the apostles uttered their 
 warning (w. 17, 18). 
 
 (5) Punishment of the false teachers. They will fall under the same 
 judgment as that which overtook the sinners of the 0. T. (P. 2**). 
 They are reserved under punishment for the day of judgment, 
 which will be the day of their final destruction (2®, 3'). Similarly 
 J. speaks of the judgment long ago prepared for these impious 
 men (v. 4), compares them to trees twice dead, to falling stars for 
 whom the blackness of darkness is reserved. 
 
 (6) Possibility of repentance after falling away — Both P. and J. 
 speak somewhat doubtfully on this point. P. says that if men, after 
 having escaped from the pollutions of the world through the 
 knowledge of our Saviour Jesus Christ, are again entangled in 
 these pollutions and overcome by them, their last state is worse 
 than the first, since men become slaves to that by which they are 
 overcome (2^''^°). So he speaks of those who have forgotten the 
 cleansing of baptism (1*). On the other hand the delay of punish- 
 ment is a token of the long-suffering patience of God, who would 
 not that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance 
 (3®). Hence we are told that we are justified in regarding the 
 long-suffering of God as a token of our own salvation (3^). 
 The tone of J. is less hopeful : he speaks of Israel once for all 
 saved from Egypt, but destroyed in the wilderness when they 
 again fell into unbelief (y. 5) ; and though he bids the faithful to 
 do their best to convert those who were going astray, yet he 
 mentions one class in whose case trembling pity combined with 
 abhorrence of their sin seems to be all that is possible (vv. 22, 23). 
 
 (7) Eschatology and the Evidences of Christianity are two subjects 
 on which P. speaks at considerable length. The mockers 
 denied the Second Advent {^ irapovala) on the ground that 
 the promise of its occurrence during the life-time of those 
 who bad seen the Lord, was still unfulfilled. The fathers had 
 died, yet all remained as it was from the beginning of the world 
 (3*). P. answers generally that God is not limited by measures 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xxi 
 
 of time which are merely relative to man ; but he had already 
 given a more precise answer in 1^® where he declared that he 
 had been himself an eye-witness of rrjv rov xvpiov Svvafiiv koI 
 irapova-iav. He might also have answered that the fall of 
 Jerusalem was itseK a a-vvreXeia tov al&vo<;, another fulfilment 
 of the prophecy of the ttapovala, which, like all prophecies, was a 
 matter ovk ISia^ eiriXvcretoi}. He turns however to the assertion 
 that the world had remained without change from the creation, 
 and cites the Deluge as evidence to the contrary. As the world 
 was then destroyed by water at the word of God, so on the great 
 day of judgment it will be destroyed by fire ia consequence of 
 the same word, and will be succeeded by new heavens and a 
 new earth, the dwelling-place of righteousness (3^"^^). On that great 
 day the offending angels and ungodly men will meet their doom 
 (2*, 2*). J. quotes the prophecy of Enoch that the Lord will 
 come with hosts of angels to execute judgment on impious men 
 and impious deeds (v. 14). For that judgment the rebel angels 
 are reserved in chains under darkness, and sinners shall then be 
 punished in eternal fire (w. 6, 7), while the righteous enter into 
 eternal life, being presented before the throne of God in exceeding 
 joy (vv. 21, 24). 
 
 P. speaks of the evidence of prophecy in 119-32 j^ jg ^\^q word 
 of God uttered by men under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. 
 Hence it is of no limited application, but declares the universal 
 principles of God's government. It appears first as a lamp in 
 darkness, but to those who attend to it, it is the harbinger of the 
 full light of the Gospel day and of the day-star of the Spirit in 
 the heart. Its teaching is confirmed by the eye-witness of those 
 who beheld the glory of Christ when on earth (l^^'^^), and by the 
 contemplation of his goodness as manifested in the record of his 
 acts and words (1^). 
 
 The conclusion I have drawn from the above comparison of the two 
 epistles as to the priority of J., is confirmed by the general opinion 
 of modern critics, as by Neander, Credner, Ewald, Hilgenfeld 
 Holtzmann, Harnack, Bernhard Weiss, Abbott, Farrar, Salmon 
 above all by Dr. Chase in his excellent article on the Second 
 Epistle of St. Peter in Hastings' B. of B. It is true some of the 
 best authorities speak very doubtfully both of this priority and of 
 the authenticity of 2 P. Thus DoUinger, who in his First Age of 
 
xxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 the Church had maintained the priority of 2 Peter, wrote to Dr. 
 Plummer ia the year 1879 that he could no longer hold this 
 opinion (Plumraer's St. James and St. Jude 1891, p. 400). See 
 also Plummer's St. Jude p. 268 ' Wliile admitting that the case 
 is by no means proved, we may be content to retain the priority; 
 as well as the authenticity of 2 Peter, as at least the best work- 
 ing hypothesis.' And Hort is quoted by Dr. Sanday (Inspiration 
 p. 347) as saying that ' If he were asked he should say that the 
 balance of argument was against the epistle ; and the moment 
 he had done so he should begin to think that he might be wrong.' 
 On the other hand three of the most recent critics, Spitta in 
 his Commentary on the two epistles 1885, Dr. Bigg in his 
 International Critical Commentary ed. 2, 1902, and the veteran 
 Zahn in his JSinleitung in das N.T. ed. 2, 1900 have no hesita- 
 tion in maintaining the priority and authenticity of 2 P. I 
 proceed to consider the arguments which have been adduced by 
 them or by others in favour of that view.^ 
 
 (1) Assuming the genuineness of the two epistles, it is easier, 
 in a case of evident borrowing, to suppose that the borrower should 
 be the comparatively obscure Jude, rather than Peter, the foremost 
 of the Apostles. 
 
 (2) Jude seems to acknowledge his obligations to Peter in 
 V. 4 ol TTokai vpoyeypafifiivoi el<! tovto to Kpifia . . . tov 
 fiovov hea-iroTTiv apvovfievoi and in m. 17, 18 fivija-0i]Te r&v 
 pr/fiuTtov Twv -irpoeiprj/iipcov virb r&v anrodToKfov tov Kvpiov fifiwv 
 'Itjo-ov 'K.pKTrov, OTi eXeyov vfiiv 'Ett' iaxarov j^ovov eaovrai 
 i/jLiraiKTai Kara ra? kavTotv iinOvp.Ca'i -iropevo/jLevoi, the former 
 verse being regarded as an allusion to P.'s 2* eV ifilv eaovrai 
 yfrevBoBiSdaKaXoi . . . rov ayopdaavra aiTov<{ SeairoTTjv apvov- 
 /.levoL . . . oh TO Kpifia eKiraXai ovk apyei, the latter to P. S^-* 
 fwqa-drivai, t&v irpoeiprifievmv prj/naTcav vTrb r&v dyicov •7rpo<f>r}T&v 
 Kal TTjs Tcov d-n-oa-ToXcDv Vfx&v ivToXrit tov Kvpiov kuI cra)Tripo<i, 
 TOVTO TrpfoTov yiva>aKOVTe<i on iXevaovTai eV iaxdrcov tuv 
 ■qfiepav iv e/J-iraiy/iovy ifivaiKTai Kara rd^ tS/a? eTrtdv/j,ia^ avratv 
 iropevofievoc. 
 
 (3) The priority of P. is confirmed by the prevailing use of the 
 future tense in regard to the innovators, whereas J. uses the past 
 
 II agree with Dr. Bigg that it ia superfluous to consider theories which suppose 
 2 Pet. to be made up of two independent epistles. Its unity, as shown in the 
 earher part of this chapter, forces itself on the mind of any careful reader. 
 
RELATION OF 2 PETER TO JUDE xxiii 
 
 or the present, cf. P. 2^ eaovrai, irapeiad^ov<nv, 2^ e^atcoKov- 
 &^<rovaiv, ^'\.aa-<ji7i/jLr]dijcrerai, 2* ifiiropevtrovrai with J. v, 4 
 TrapeiaeSuritrav, V, 8 fiiaivova-iv, v. 10 fiXaa-^rjfiovo'iv and the 
 aorists in ?;. 11. 
 
 [I will deal first with these objections taken from Spitta and 
 Zahn. We may concede that, if both epistles are genuine, we 
 should rather have expected the borrowing to be on the side of the 
 more obscure. Yet the probability is not one that can be pressed. 
 Milton and Handel borrowed from men much inferior to themselves ; 
 Isaiah borrows from Micah, and 1 P. from James. If on the other 
 hand we find reason to believe (see chapter on the Eelation 
 between 2 P. and 1 P.) that 2 P. was not written by the Apostle, 
 the objection only amounts to this, that, though St. Peter him- 
 self had borrowed from James in 1 P., an admirer of St. Peter 
 could not have borrowed from Jude in 2 P. With regard to obj. (2), 
 I have pointed out in my note that the word -iraXai, in J. 4 cannot 
 refer to P., but must be understood of the prophecy of Enoch, quoted 
 in J. V. 15, in which the word ao-e/Sets (which sums up the judgment 
 in V. 4), occurs no less than four times (if we include the cognate 
 verb and abstract noun). I have also pointed out that J. in v. 17 
 refersnot to any one writer, but to the oral teaching of the Apostles, 
 and that P. in 3^ does not profess to utter any new prophecy, but 
 simply adds to what Jude had said, that the teaching of the Apostles 
 rested upon the authority of Christ, and that it was in agreement 
 with the teaching of the prophets. As regards obj. (3), the 
 difference of tense, P. is not consistent in his use of the future. 
 We have the pres. in 2^" rpifiovcnv, 2^^ eltriv, 2^^ Be\ea^ova-iv, 
 3^ \av6dvei, from which we should conclude that the innovators 
 had already begun their work, if not among those to whom he 
 writes, yet among other churches, to which J. may have addressed 
 himself. If the former epistle is a product of the second century, 
 the writer may have used the future tense to give it verisimilitude, 
 while falling at times into the present from inadvertence.] 
 
 (4) Spitta asks why, if P. is borrowing from J., he makes no 
 reference to him, as he does to Paul ? It might be enough to ask 
 in reply, ' Why, if J. borrows from P., does he makes no definite 
 acknowledgment of the fact ? But we have a parallel case, though 
 no doubt on a smaller scale, in the unacknowledged borrowings 
 from the epistle of James in 1 Peter, on which see the Introduction 
 to my edition of James, pp. xcviii. to cii. The reason however 
 
xxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 for the mention of Paul in 2 P, is quite distinct from the acknow- 
 ledgement of a debt. The libertines claimed his authority in 
 behalf of their own views (cf. J. 4), and it was necessary for P. to 
 protest against this. 
 
 (6) Dr, Bigg says (p. 217) that ' Jnde has certain words which 
 maybe called Pauline and are certainly not Petrine,' He ' mixes up 
 the psychology of St. Peter with that of St. Paul, and this fact 
 seems to teU. heavily against him.' Supposing it to be true that J. is 
 more Pauline than Peter, as it is certainly true that he is more 
 Pauline than his brother James, I am unable to see in what way 
 this bears upon the question of the priority of either epistle. Dr. 
 Bigg instances certain words used by J., kXijt6<{, wyio^ ( = Christian), 
 iTvevfia ( = indwelling spirit), -^Irvxt/co^, which he regards as non- 
 Petrine ; but quotes no examples of ' Petrine psychology,' which 
 would be more to the point, if Jude is really copying 2 P. I will 
 deal first with the non-Petrine words. It is tnie that /cXijto's does 
 not occur either in 1 P. or 2 P., but kXtjo-k; is found in 2 P. 1*" 
 and KaXkat of the Divine calling four times in 1 P. as well 
 as in 2 P. 1^. The synonymous eKXeKr6<i is found in 1 P., as 
 ^KXoyri is found in 2 P. l^", both being thoroughly Pauline 
 words. When it is said that a-ytos is equivalent to ' Christian,' 
 this must mean that it denotes 'consecration' rather than the 
 actual holiness of the persons spoken of; but this is just the 
 sense which it bears in the phrase 'e6vo<; ayiov used in 1 P. 2*. 
 As to -TTvevfia, it may be true that the distinction between the 
 human soul and spirit belongs especially to the Pauline phraseology, 
 but we find it in Joseph. Ani. i. 34, where God is said to have 
 infused into Adam Trvev/xa koI i^i;%jfi/. And what are we to say of 
 1 P. 4* ^Mcriv Kara &ebv Trvevfiari and 3^ 6 ac/suttto? rrji; xapSia^ 
 avOpcoTTo^ ev tw a^Bdprcp tov ri<rv')(lov Trvevfiarov, where KapSla 
 and irvevfia are both preferred to i/fv%»7 ? So 3^* Xpia-rov 
 dyida-are ev rat? KapSian vfi&v. The 'indwelling spirit' is 
 surely indicated in 1 P. 1^^ to ev avroi? 7rvev/j,a Xpiarov. Again 
 the word ■<^vxi,k6<s is not exclusively Pauline. It occurs in the least 
 Pauline of the books of the N.T., written by Jude's own 
 brother (James 3^, where see note). Dr. Bigg denies that it 
 could have been used in the Pauline sense by Peter, because 
 to him '■^vxn means the soul in relation to the religious life,' 
 but we meet the phrase i/ru;j^^9 aarrjpUTov^ in 2 P. 2", and in 
 1 P. 3^* oKTtb f^vx<^i stands simply for ' eight persons ' without 
 
RELATION OP 2 PETER TO JUDE xxv 
 
 any allusion to the religious life, while on the other hand we 
 find the phrase oIko<s ■jrvev/jbaTiKo'; and •irvevfiaTi,Ka<i Ovaiat in 
 1 P. 2^ Dr. Hort commenting on 1 P. 2" ('lusts that war 
 against the soul ') says ' the modern religious sense of the 
 term " soul," as the highest element in man, is founded on a 
 misunderstanding of the N.T. On the other hand there is con- 
 siderable exaggeration in the supposition that the word has in the 
 N.T. a definitely depreciatory sense . . . We must not be tempted 
 to force into St. Peter's language here St. Paul's meaning in Gal. 
 V. 17 17 yap aap^ iiridv/jiel Kara tov Trvev/iaro^.' ■^vxv, as Hort 
 says, 'answers very nearly to our modern word and conception 
 " self." ' See my note on 2 P. 2" ■^vxvv Btxaiav e^aadvi^ev. 
 Other Pauline words which occur in Peter are ayopd^w, aip6a-i<!, 
 avofio^, yvcopi^o), Siicaioavvr], SovXoio, iyKpareia, ei\i,Kpivri<;, eXev~ 
 Oepia, cTTryvftXTt?, irapaSiSto/^i,, to name a few from 2 P., and 
 similarly we find &Yiaa-fi6<!, alfia 'Irjcrov, ^ptarov iraO^fiara^ 
 evKoyeto, evXoyr)T6^, evKoyia, KXripovofica, TrpoytvaxrKO), yoKa, 
 avveihrf<TL<i, avvKkripovofiOi, x,d-pitrfia, (rdp^, aapKiKo^ in 1 P. On 
 the other hand I have vainly searched for any specially Petrine 
 word such as a.vaa-Tpo<p4 (though that is not un-Pauline) in the 
 epistle of Jude.^ 
 
 It would be endless to go into a minute examination of the 
 parallel passages which have been cited to prove the priority of P. I 
 have already said all that I think need be said about them in the 
 earlier part of this chapter and in the explanatory notes. The 
 impression which they leave on my mind is that in J. we have the 
 first thought, in P. the second thought ; that we can generally see 
 a reason why P. should have altered J., but very rarely a reason 
 why what we read in P. should have been altered to what we find 
 in J. P. is more reflective) J. more spontaneous. 
 
 ^ The commentators generally recognize the influence of the Epistles to the 
 Ephesians and the Romans, especially the latter, on IP., and a glance at the 
 marginal references gives evidence of a closer connexion between them than 
 is to be found between 1 P. and any other book of the N.T. with the exception 
 perhaps of James. See Dr. Chase in Hastings' D. of B. iii. 788 for a careful list 
 of the resemblances between 1 P. and the Pauline Epistles. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 Grammar and Style of Jude and of 2 Peter * 
 
 Unusual Inflexions.^ 
 
 Jude V. 4 irapeurehvrjaav read by WH. after B for -n-apeiereSva-av 
 read by Ti. Treg. after N A. etc., see explanatory note. 2 Pet. 2* 
 eVa^av for the usual ivayaycav, cf. Blass p. 43. 2 Pet. l^* 
 4yevij0riv for eyevofirju. On the other hand it might seem that 
 hybrid aorist forms such as e0aXav, etreaav, which are found in 
 other books of the N.T., and the termination -aav in impf, or 2nd aor. 
 as eixo<rav, irapeXdfioaav, and -av for -aai in the pf. as eiaeKri- 
 \vdav, were unknown to the writers of these epistles ; but the 
 fact simply is that they have no examples of the 3rd pi. of the 
 imperfect, 2nd aor., and perfect (except otSacriv in v. 10), so that 
 we are without the means of judging which form would have been 
 preferred by the writers. For the confusion between the verbal 
 contractions in -dco and -ew see p. 51. 
 
 Article. 
 
 The Greek language differs from the English in prefixing the 
 definite article : (1) before proper names, a use which has the 
 advantage of showing the case, where the name is indeclinable, as 
 in Jude 9 6 Be Mt^^ajfX, 11 tov Kalv, tov BaXaa/i, tow Kope, also 
 in 2 Pet. 2^® tov HaXadfi. 
 
 It is omitted in J. ■y. 14 e^Sofiov dwo 'ASd/j., 'Ei/eo^, v, 1 'laKooffov, 
 V. 5 AlyvTTTov, 'Irjtrov Xptarov passim.^ So in 2 Pet. 2* Nwe, 
 2^ A«T. 
 
 ' Compare throughout my Introduction to St. .James, Chapters VIII. and IX. 
 As stress has been laid on the unclassical character of the Greek of 2 Pet. , I 
 have thought it advisable to point out his agreements, as well as his disagreements, 
 with the ordinary rules. 
 
 ^ Since this chapter was in type Messrs. Conybeare and Stock have brought out 
 Seleclicms from the Septuaginl with a useful introduction on Grammar. 
 
 ' Dr. Abbott has discussed the reasons for the presence or absence of the article, 
 Johannine Grammar, pp. 57 f. Cf. .J. H. Moulton (Jr. of N.T. Prolegomena, p. 83. 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxvii 
 
 (2) Before a name which is applicable only to one as 6 0eo?, 
 o Ku/oto? : always so with the nom. and often with other cases 
 in St. James; but found in St. Jude only where the word is 
 defined by a genitive, as in v, 4 t^v tov @eov ^/jl&v ■)(^api,Ta, v. 17 
 and V. 25 tow xvpiov rj/imv. In 2 Pet. 1^ we find iv Si/caioa-vvj) 
 TOV @eov, 1^ iv eircyvdia-ei tov @eov, 2i^^ rij? tov @eov ■^fiepai, 
 V^ TTjv tov KVplov rifiSiv Bvvafiiv. 
 
 Since the unique use easily passes into a proper name, the former 
 is often found, like the latter, without the article, as in Jude v. 1 
 ToZs ev @eo3 iraTpl ■^yaTrrjfiivoi'i, v. 21 ip dyd-nrj ®eov, v. 5 Kvpiot 
 airuiKeaev, v. 9 STriTifi'^a'ai croi Kvptof. So 2 Pet. 1^^ irapci ®eov 
 TraTp6<s, ib. v. 21 i\d\r)a-av d-Tro ©eou, 2^ olSev Kujoio? dae0ei<! 
 pveadai, 3® ov ^paSvvei Kvpio^, 2®, S'^" ■^fiepa TLvpiov, 2^\ 3* -irapd 
 Kvpitjf. When Kvpiot (nom.) is used as a proper name without 
 the article, it must be understood of God ; but in oblique cases it 
 is often used of Christ, as in 1 Cor. 7^^ d yap iv K.vpi(p KX'qOeX^ 
 hov\o<i d'TreXevdepo'i K.vpiov ia-Tiv, 1 Cor, 10^^ nroTi^piovK.vpiov. 
 
 This use is widely extended in the N.T. owing to the growth of 
 a special Christian terminology, e.g. irvevfia ayiov 2 Pet. 1^^ : a-dp^, 
 Jude V. 8 erapxa fiev fiialvovtriv, 2 Pet. 2^" tous oirlcroa crapKoi; 
 ir'opevofievov^, 2^ aapKo<! da-e\yeiai<! : ypa<f)-ij, 2 Pet. 1^* vpo^rjTeia 
 ypa(f>rj<i.^ 
 
 Use of AHicle with a Qualified Noun. 
 
 The noun may be qualified by the addition of an adjective 
 or participle, or of a genitive, or an adverb or adverbial phrase. If 
 the article is used, a noun thus qualified may take one of four 
 forms — (1) the ' compact,' where the qualification is placed between 
 the article and the noun as in 6 totb Koafio^ 2 Pet. 3^ ; (2) the 
 ' apposition al,' where the qualification stands in apposition to the 
 noun, the article being prefixed both to the qualifying phrase and 
 to the noun (a), or to the former only (6), as in Jude v. 17 t&v 
 pr/fidTcov T&v nrpoeiprffieveov (a\ in Jude v. 6 ayyekow; tov<s firj 
 TijpTja-avTa'; (&) ; (3) the 'loose' or 'uncompact,' where the article 
 is immediately prefixed to the governing noun, which is itself 
 followed by a qualifying phrase, as Jude v. IS 6 ^o^oi; tov a-KOTovi, 
 ib. 5 ev Tfi irlcTTei v/imv. I give below the more remarkable 
 examples of (1) and (3) which are found in these epistles. 
 
 (1) Jude V. 3 Trepl tjjs koivyj^ rjix&v cro}Tr)pia<;, ib. Trj a-rra^ -jrapa- 
 
 ^ See below under Irregular Omission of Article. 
 
xxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 BoOelffT) Tots 07401? iriarei, v. 4 ttjv rov @eov rjfi&v x^pi^Ta, v. 7 al 
 ■n-epX avra^ 7ro\et?, v. 9 Trepl tov Mavaeaxi acofiarov, v. 23 tov airo 
 TTji; a-apKOi ia-iriXcafievov ;)^tTWi'a, ». 12 [ot] ep rat? a'^/d.-rrat's v/i&v 
 a-TriXaBei irvvevcoxovfievoi. (Here, if we read the article, it seems 
 best to treat a-n-iXdSei as complementary to the following participle. 
 If we omit the article, <r7rt\aSe? becomes the predicate to the 
 sentence.) 
 
 2 Pet. supplies many elaborate instances of the compact form, 
 which is used by him, as Dr. Bigg remarks, with exceptional freedom 
 and elegance : so 1* t^? iv rm KoayM iv iiriOvfiCa ^ffopdq, 1^^ ri]v 
 TOV Kvpcov TjfjMiv hvvafiiv, 2} TOV dyopdaavTa avToii^ he<TiroTr]v, 
 2^ VTTo Tri<i T&v dOiapMV iv daeXjyela dvaa-Tpo^<;, 2^* tows oiriam 
 aapKOt iv i'rrt0vfiia fiiacrfiov nropevofievovi, 2^ t^v iv vp^pa 
 TpvArjv, 2^^ Ttjv TOV Trpo(l>i]Tov irapa^poviav, 2^ ix t^? -TrapahoBeiarff 
 avToii drfia^ ivTo\i]^, 3^ t^? toiv dirotTToXav v/iSiv evToX^?, 
 3^ KUTO, TTjv Sodeta-av uvtS ao^iav. 
 
 Where there is a complex qualifying clause, a part of this is 
 sometimes allowed to overflow the inclosure formed by the article 
 and noun, either for euphony, or in order to avoid clumsiness or 
 ambiguity, e.g. the word ttIo-tiv in 2 Pet. 1^ rots ia-oTifiov fifilv 
 Xavovtriv iricrTLv. Such a clause may be called ' semi-compact.' 
 Other examples are Jude v. 4 oi irakav irpo'ie^pap.fikvoi eh tovto 
 
 TO Kpip.a, V. 7 TOV OflOlOV TpOTTOV TOVTOl^, V. 18 KUTa Ta? eavT&v 
 
 iiridvfila^ TTopevop-evoi tcov d<re^eia>v, 2 Pet. 3^ fivrfo-dfjvai, twv 
 ■jrpoeiprip,eva)v prfp,dr(ov vtto t&v dyieov Trpo^r/T&v, ib. t^s t&v 
 d-rroaToXoav ivToXrj^ tov K.vpiov. 
 
 Sometimes we have the converse irregularity. A word from 
 the outside is inserted in the inclosure, e.g. 2 Pet. 1* to, Tifua xal 
 /jLeytaTa ■^p.lv itrarf'yiXpMTa SeScoprjTai, where the dative which 
 depends on SeSdyprjTai is introduced into the articular phrase. 
 
 (3) I proceed to give examples of the uncompact clause : Jude v. 6 
 Tou? p,r} TqprjaavTa^ Ttjv iavT&v dp^Wi ^- H '''V ^^S* '"''•' 1S.aiv, Ty 
 TrKdvjj TOV ^aXad/i, Trj dvTiXoyla' tov K.ope, v. 17 p.vritrdr)Te t5)v 
 prffiMTCOv T&v irpoeiprj/Meveov vtto t&v aTroaToKoav, v. 21 to e\eo^ tov 
 KVplov Tjfi&v. 2 Pet. 1* hid T^? iinyvcoaeio<; tov KaXiaavTOt 
 ^fid<; IBia So^y (where the desire of compactness would have 
 resulted in the less simple Sid t^s tov ISia Bo^rj rjp.d<i KaXea-avTO'; 
 iviyvdiaecov), 1* tov Kadapi(rp,ov t&v TrdXai aiiTov d/uipTi&v, 1^^ y 
 ei<roSo<! €t9 TTJV alwviov 0aaiXeiav tov Kvpiov ■qfi&v, 1^* tj dir6deai<; 
 TOV a-icT]v(op,aT6<s p,ov, 2^^ ttj oSo3 tou 'BaXddp, tov ^oa-op, 2^ tov? 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxix 
 
 oXiywi; d7ro<f)evyovTa'i tous ev -TrXdvy dvaarpe^ofievovi (where the 
 compact form would have been less clear), 3^^ rijv irapovcs-iav rfi<! 
 TOW %eov fjiiepat. 
 
 Use of Article with Possessive Genitive of Pronovm,. 
 
 By far the commonest order here is the uncompact, — article, noun, 
 geaitive, — as in Jude v. 4 tov ®eov rjii&v . . . rov Kvplov ■^/jl&v (also 
 W, 17, 21, 25), ^J. 12 iv Tai9 dyairai^ v/iStv, v. 16 tcara Ta^ eVt^w/it'a? 
 avT&v, TO (TTOfia avT&v, v. 24 rijs B6^ri<; avrov. 
 
 2 Pet. 1^ ToO @6o£) rm&v, 1^ Tov Kvpiov ruiwv (also in w. 8, 11, 14, 
 16, iii. 15, 18), 1* Tf)<; deiat; Swdfieaxs avrov, 1^ iv rfj iriffTei vfi&v, 
 1^* TOV cTKrjvoi/jiaTo^ fiov, V^ 6 vl6<} fiov, 6 dyavrjToi} fiov, V-^ ev 
 rat? KapBiaii v/imv, 2* ■q dirmXeia avr&v, '2P iv rfj ^dopS, avT&v, 
 2^^ iv rajs aTrarat? avrSiv, 3^ tS>v cnroarokaiv vfi&v, 3* rij? irapov- 
 ■crta? avTov, 3^ to iirdyyeKfia avrov. 
 
 Where the noun is preceded by an adjective or quasi-adjective, 
 the possessive genitive sometimes follows the noun, as in 2 Pet. 1^ 
 quoted above ; sometimes the adjective, as in Jude v. 3 rfji; Koivrj<s 
 ■f)fj.(^v a-(0T7]pia<s, V. 20 T^ dyicoTaTr) v/iSiv iriaTei, 2 Pet. 1® tSiv 
 irdXai avTov dfiapTi&v, 3^* o dyairrjTO^ '^fiS)v dSeX(f)6'i, S-"-® Trjv 
 iSiav avTcbv dirtaKeiav. 
 
 Where the possessive genitive follows immediately on the article, 
 as in Jude v. 6 ttjv eavr&v dpxtjv, u 13 ra? eavrmv ala'^vva';, ^). 18 
 ra? eavT&v iirtdu/j,ia^, the effect is to give special emphasis. 
 Since eavTov is in itself emphatic, it is usually found in this 
 emphatic position, as ia Mt. 8^^ tous eavT&v veicpov<i, Lk. 2^ 
 eKaaT0<; eh tt/v eavTov ttoXw, 9*" 6d-<^ai tov<; eavTwv veKpov<!, 11^^ 
 (j)vXdaa-ri tt/v eavTov aiiXijv, 14^^ Kal t-tjv eavTov '\jrv)(ijv, Rom. 4^^ 
 TO eavTov (7a>/j,a 'tjSrj veveKpm/jievov, 8* 6 ©eo? tov eavrov viov 
 •7refiyfra<;, 16* tov eavT&v Tpd'^^rjXov viredrfKav, 1 Cor. 7^ e/Kao-TO? 
 Tr)v eavTov yvvaiKa ixeTo), etc., but there are also cases in which 
 it is found after its noun, as in Mt. 25'^ iKoa-fjLrja-av Ta<; XafnrdSa<s 
 eavT&v, Lk. 14^' 6<7Ti(s oi ^acrTu^ei tov aTavpov eavTov. An 
 examination of the passages quoted under eavrov in the concord- 
 ance shows that in general the latter position is less emphatic than 
 the former, and that, in many cases of the latter, avrov and avr&v 
 occur as various readings. The more emphatic position is 
 naturally assigned to rovrmv in 2 Pet. l'^^ Tr)v rovraiv /jLvrjfirjv 
 TTOielaOai, and to iKelvov in 2 Pet. 1^^ t^? iiceivov fMeyaXeioTriro^. 
 So Joh. 5^^ Toii iKeivov ypafifiaatv, 2 Cor. 8® t^ iKelvov TTTWx^eia, 
 
XXX INTRODUCTION 
 
 8^^ TO eKeivav vepiffaevfia, 8^* to eKeivcov va-reprjfia, 2 Tim. 2^ to 
 eKeivov OeXrjfia, Tit. 3' rfi eKelvov ^(apiTi. In 2 Pet. 3'^ some 
 MSS. have tcS ainov Xoyp, which resembles James 1^ t&p avroO 
 KTUTfiaTav, 1 Pet. 1^ to iroXii ainov eXeoy, Tit. 3* to aiiTov eXeoy, 
 
 1 Joh. 2^ TO avTov X/3/a-/ia, Rom. 3^ t^ avTov ^dpiTi, 3^ toJ 
 avTov oLfian, 1 Thess. 2-'* ey t^ avTov trapovala, Heb. 2* kuto: 
 TTjv avTov BeXriaiv (quoted by Abbott, Joh. Gr. p. 415) ; but there 
 can be little doubt that in 2 Pet. P aiiTw is right, see explanatory 
 note. The possessive pronoun in tiiis position has the same 
 emphatic force as the genitive of the personal pronoun, e.g. 
 
 2 Pet. 1^^ fiBTo, TTJV ifiijv e^oSov contrasted with the preceding ufi.d<i. 
 In two passages of 2 Pet. we find the possessive genitive 
 
 preceding the articular phrase, 2^ TroWoi i^aKoXovOijaovaiv avToav- 
 Tat? da-eXyeiaii}, and 3^ Sieyeipeo vfimv iv vTronvijaei rijv elXixpivrf 
 Sidvoiav. Clauses of this form are common in St. John's Gospel, 
 and Dr. Abbott has christened them ' the vernacular possessive.'^ 
 See Joh. Gr. pp. 414 foil., where many examples are quoted, 
 e.g. Joh. 1^ "va Xvaa avTov top l/idvTa tov viroSijfiaTOi (corre- 
 sponding to Lk. 3^* Xvaai tov ifidvTa t&v VTroSijfidTav avTov'), 
 Joh. 4^* ^wvrjcrov aov tov avSpa, as well as from other books. In 
 most cases the preceding possessive genitive seems to throw special 
 stress on the following noun, but I do not think that this is so in 
 the examples above quoted from 2 Pet. ; and Dr. Abbott allows 
 that in some cases the genitive is itself made emphatic by contrast, 
 as in Joh. 13* av fiov vLTTTei<s Toix; ■jr6Sa<i ; 13" el ovv eya> eviyjra- 
 vfi&v Toi/^ TToSav . . . KoL vfieii o^eiXeTe dXKrjXwv vivTeiv tou? 
 •noBai;. 
 
 Irregular Omission of Article. 
 
 So far the N.T. usage does not differ materially from that of 
 classical Greek. In what follows I think we must recognize a 
 failure to appreciate the refinements of the Greek article on the 
 part of those whose mother tongue was not Greek and who may 
 have also been influenced by the fact that Latin had no article. 
 Such cases are : 
 
 (1) Where the noun is defined by a dependent genitive, as Jude 
 V. 6 ek Kpia-iv fieydXrig ^fiipai (R.V. ' the judgment of the great 
 day'). Here the ordinary use in prose would have required eh 
 TTJV T^s fieydXrii Vf^epa^ Kpiatv : but the phrase fieydXri ^fiepa, as 
 well as the word Kpiaii, has acquired a technical sense, which 
 
GRAMMAR OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxxi 
 
 allows of the omission of the article without causing ambiguity^ 
 and this omission is further facilitated by the preposition. We 
 may compare the phrase iv ruiepa Kpia-eax;, which occurs four times 
 in Mt., et? ^/jbipav Kpia-eatii 2 Pet. 2®, 3', '^^ei ■^f/,epa Kvpiov 3^"^ 
 et? rjfiepav ala)vo<{ 3^^, cf. ovk dvaaTTjaovTai aae^el^ iv Kpicrei Ps^ 
 1^, /ie'xpt r)fiipa<; Kplaem<i Enoch x. 11 (Gizeh), p. 339 ed. Charles. 
 On the other hand we find the full form t^9 tov @eov -^fiepaf 
 2 Pet. 3^^, iv Tjj rifiepa tjjs Kpicreaxs 1 Joh. 4^', iv rrj r]fi4pa r^ 
 fieyaXr/ (MS. t>59 — ^V^) '''V'' Kpia-eto^ Enoch p. 337. Jude v. 14 iv 
 dyiai<! fivpidaiv avTov : the parallel in Enoch has criiv rots (?) 
 fivpidaiv avTov xat Tol<: dyloit aiiTov (p. 327 Charles) ; but th& 
 article is omitted in Heb. 12^^ TrpoaeXrfKvOare . . . fivpida-iv dyye- 
 Xcov, Ps. 3® ov (f)0^rjdij<rofiat diro fivpidSiov Xaov, and in Deut. 33^ 
 (Tvv fivpidai KaSrj? (R.V. ' from the ten thousands of holy ones '). 
 In our passage the R.V. is probably right in translating 'with 
 ten thousands of his holy ones ' so as to keep the indefinite force. 
 In the quotation from Enoch, which occurs in Jude v. 15 Trepl 
 irdvTcov t5)v epyav dae^eia<; avr&v, the Gizeh Greek (followed 
 by ^ and others) omits dae^ela's avTwv, and Treg. brackets 
 dare^eia^. The omission of the article is awkward but not more 
 so than in Job. 31''-^ Si dae^eiav Bcopcov &v ihi'xovTo, and other 
 examples cited in my Introduction to St. James, p. cxciii. So 
 Jude V. 7 TTvpoi; alcoi'iov Si/crjv viri'Xpvaai (R.V. ' suffering the 
 vengeance of eternal fire'), where we should have expected ri^v 
 Tov alaviov ttv/jo? ZiKrjv, cf. Heb. 6^ (ffefieXiov KaTa^aXKofievoi} 
 ffaTTTKT/JMV SiBa^^v, iTri6eaeco<; re ')(eip5iv, dvaa-Taaeax; veKpmv Kal 
 KpifiaToi aiaviov. Jude v. 21 eV dydirr) @eov (R.V. ' keep your- 
 selves in the love of God '). Wo find similar examples in 2 Pet. ■ 
 
 2 Pet. 1^ iv SiKaioa-vvj} tov @eov rifimv (R.V. ' in the righteousness 
 of our God '), cf Rom. 4^* Bid Si/caioa-vvrj^ Trt'trTeo)? and even the 
 nominative in Rom. l''^' SiKaLocrvvrj @6ov iv avrm diroKdkvTTTeTai ; 
 so 2 Pet. 1^ iv iiriyvma-ei, tov ®eov and 2^", but we meet the full 
 form just below 1* et? ttjv tov Kvpiov rifimv iiriyvioa-iv and 1* Sta 
 T^s eTnyva>a-€Q}i; tov KaXiaavTos; rifj,d<!, as in Rom. 2^ we have Tr]v 
 oSov TJJ? SiKat,oa-vvr)<;. 2 Pet. 1^^ ov yap deXtj/iaTi dvOpatirov 
 rive^dn Trpo(f>r}Teia (R.V. ' by the will of man '), cf. Joh. 1^* i/c 
 deXrjfiaToi; aapK6<}, 1 Pet. 4? OeKrjiiaTi @eov ^i&crat : so the phrase 
 Sid deXrj/iaTog @eov occurs seven times in St. Paul. 2 Pet. 2* 
 KaTaK\va-fiov K6a-/J,a> dae^Stv ivd^ai (R.V. 'the world of the 
 ungodly ') : we might translate ' a world of ungodly meu,' but 
 
xxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 Koa/jLov is often anarthrous, not only in prepositional phrases such 
 as atro KaTa^oXrj<i Koafiov, air' apXV<! fcoa-fiov, afiapria Tjv iv 
 Koa-fKp, but in such cases as Rom. 11^^ to irapavTcofia avrov 
 ifK.oi)To<s Kodfiov, and even in the nominative, as Gal. 6" hi ov 
 €fioi Kocrfioi; iaravpcoTat, Kcu^ay Koap-a. 2 Pet. 2* TroXet? Z^oho- 
 fjLosv Koi. Top,6ppa<i Kareicpivev (R. V. ' the cities '), cf. Lk. 2* ave^rj 
 €K voXeax; NaJ'apeV. 2 Pet. 2^" rovi orriaoa aapKOi iv eTri,6vp,ia 
 fiiaa-p,ov •jTopevop.ivov; (R.V, ' after the flesh in the lust of defile- 
 ment '), cf. 2^ ev iindvp.lai'i arapKO<i aaeXr/eiai<; (R.V. ' in the lusts 
 of the flesh,' but see explanatory note), Gal. 5^* i-n-idv/iiav aapKot 
 ov p.r} TeXearjTe, 1 Pet. 4^ avOpdoiraiv e-7ndvp,lai<; . . . ^laxrai. 
 2 Pet. 2'^' 1* fiiadov aStKia? (R.V. ' the hire of wrong-doing '), cf. 
 Acts 1^* eKTrjaaTo ■)(copiov e'/c p.co'dov t^? dSiKia<i. 2 Pet. 3* a-jr 
 dpxn'! /cTia-eax; (R.V. 'from the beginning of the creation'), cf. 
 above dir dpyfjii Koapiov, 
 
 (2) Other examples of omission. Jude v. 21 eh ^corjv 
 almviov, which is more usual than the full phrase, ttjv ^coijv 
 TT/v alcoviov in 1 Joh. 1^, 2^. Jude v. 18 iir' iax^Tov j(P^vov 
 (R.V. ' in the last time '), cf. 2 Tit. 3^, James ^5^ iv iayaTai^i 
 r]p,epai^, 1 Pet. 1^ iv Kaipm eo-^arg), 1 Joh. 2^* ia-xdrr] &pd iartv, 
 2 Pet. 3^ iir ia-xciTcov t&v fip,epS)v, where see note. Jude v. 25 
 ixovtp @6o3 a-o)Trjpi r)p,Siv So^a (R.V. ' to the only God our Saviour,' 
 Rom. 16^' p,6va) cro^£ &e£, 1 Tim. 1" fiov^ 0ee3 rip.^ ; but in 
 Joh. 5** T'^j/ So^av TTjv Trapa rov p,6vov @eov ov fjjTetre, ib. 17^ iva 
 yivcoaKtociv ae. tov p,ovov dXrjBivov @e6v, Jude v. 4 tov p,6vov 
 heairorrfv. Cf. Thuc. iii. 57. 4 r/fiett re, w AaK68aip,6vioi, 57 p,6vr} 
 iXTrli, SiSip^ev p,r) ov iSi^aioi rjre, Joh. Crr. p. 10. 2 Pet. 2^ 
 dpxo-iov Koa-p-ov ovk icfteitraro (R.V. ' spared not the ancient 
 world '), cf. Ps. 78^ p,T} pvr)(T0f}i; r]p,S)v dvopiMsv apxaCcav, Job 21^ 
 vTrep TTjv (fipovjja-iv -irdvTCov dpxciicov dvOpdiirasv. 2 Pet. 2^ Kwra- 
 XetTroi/Te? evOelav oSov (R.V. ' the right way ') : elsewhere in this 
 epistle 6S6<; is joined with the article, as in 2^, 2^^, and in Jude 
 V. 11 ; but it is anarthrous in Mt. 21^^ iv oStS BiKaioavvr]^, Lk. 1™ 
 eh oSov elprivr)!;, James 5* e'/c TrXai/rj? oSoi) avrov, and in the 
 following quotations from the LXX., Acts 2^ iyvapiadi /iot 6Boii<{ 
 ^corj';, Rom. 3^^ oSov eipi]vr]<; ovk eyvtocrav, and constantly in the 
 poetic books of the O.T. e.g. Ps. 1« ohov BiKaitov, oSo^ da-e^&v, 
 Ps. 21^ e| 6S0V hiKaia<;, Prov. 2" diro ohov evdeia^, 2^ oBov ev\a- 
 ^ovpevcov avTov Bia^vXd^ei. 2 Pet. 2^^ eXey^iv ecrxev lSla<! irapa- 
 voplat, 1* IBla Bo^ji, cf. Acts 13* IBia yevea vTrr)per'qaa<;, 1 Cor. 9^ 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxxiii 
 
 Tt's a-TpaTeverat IBioi^ 6'^wvioK ; Gal. 6^ Kaipm ISiai depitrofiev, 
 Tit. 2® BovXov^ IBioii Seo-wdrat? vtrordaaeadai, Evang. Petri 
 § 6 Xa^atv top Kvpiov ela-rjyayev et? iSiov rd^ov. In 2 Pet. 1^° 
 •jrpo<f>r]Teia ISiav eVtXiJa-em? oi yiperai is indefinite in scope, 
 ' Prophecy is not a matter of private interpretation.' In 2^ and 3^' 
 we have the article eirKTTpi-^a'i iirl to tSiov i^epafia, eKTriaijTe 
 Tov IBlov a-Ttipi/YHov, and in 3^' ^^ this is further strengthened by 
 the addition of avT&v. 2 Pet. 2^ -i^v-yr^v SiKaiav dvo/Moi^ e'/oyois 
 e^atrdvi^ev (R.V. ' vexed his righteous soul with their lawless 
 deeds'). If we had not seen so many examples of the writer's 
 freedom in dispensing with the article, we might have given an 
 indefinite force to the sentence ' vexed a righteous soul at unlawful 
 deeds' ; but cf. 2 Pet. 2^ BUaiov Amr . . . epvaaro, which must ba 
 translated ' saved just Lot,' not ' a just man named Lot,' and Ps. 1 1 1^- ' 
 lavvv epycov avTov dv^yyetXe . . . epya •)(et,pS)v avrov oKrjBeia Koi 
 KpitTLf, Wisdom 3^ i^uj^ai BtKaitov iv ^etjoi @eov. 2 Pet. 1* deia<! 
 Koivtovol tjiva-ecoi (R.V. ' of the divine nature ') : here too an 
 indefinite rendering is possible, ' partakers of a divine nature.' 
 
 We will now consider some nouns apart from their construction. 
 Ovpav6<s ^ is anarthrous in 2 Pet. 1^* tjxovfjv ef ovpavov evexOelaav, 
 3^ ovpavol ?ia-av eKiraXai, 3^^ ovpavol XvdijtrovTai, 3^® Kaivoix} 
 oipavovi TrpoaBoKco/iev. Here 3^ and 3^* are indefinite, but l'^^^ 
 and S^^ refer definitely to a known heaven. The article is rightly 
 used in 3'^ ol vvv ovpavol as contrasted with the former heavens, 
 but in 3^* there is no special occasion for it, as it is followed by the 
 anarthrous aroixela and yfj and also by ovpavol in 3^^. The 
 article is often omitted both with the singular and plural in other 
 books of the N.T. where a preposition precedes : we also find ov 
 Bel ovpavov Be^aa-dai. Acts 3^^, ovpavov /cal yrji; K.vpio^ Acts 17^*, 
 and the nominative ovpavix; vyjrr)\6<!, yrj Be ^aOela (R.V. ' the 
 heaven for height, and the earth for depth ') Prov. 25^ 2 Pet. l^* 
 ^M? o5 r)fiepa Biavydcry ical (j}(oa-(j>6po<i dvarelXy (R.V. ' the 
 day,' ' the day-star '), cf. Job. 38^^ ea)a-<j}6po<s eireiBe r-qv eavrov 
 rd^iv, Mai. # dvaTeXet vfuv ij\io<! BiKaLoa-vvrji, and the phrases 
 •^/lipa Kvpiov, rfiiepa Kplaea'i mentioned above. 06776X09 is used 
 without the article in Jude v. 6 dyyeKovi Toix; fir) Triprjaavrais 
 ' angels, viz. those that kept not,' and 2 Pet. 2* ayyekav dfiaprri- 
 advTtov ovK ecjiela-aTo 'spared not angels when they sinned,' 
 
 1 Cf. Joh. Or. pp. 49 foil. 
 
 d 
 
xxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 2 Pet. 2^^ ovov dyyeXoi ' whereas angels, though greater,' etc. So 
 ev<ye^el<i and ahUovi in 2 Pet. 2* olhev Kw/Jto? eva-e/3ei9 f>ve<T0ai, 
 ahUov; hi KoKa^ofievov^ rrjpeiv, where R.V. has 'the godly,' 'the 
 unrighteous,' but it is possible to keep the indefinite force ' godly 
 men,' ' unrighteous men ' contrasted with the definite class which 
 follows, fiaXtcTTa Se roix: 6-rriaco aapKOi;. 
 
 It is sometimes a little difficult to see why the article is used, as 
 in 2 P. 1* St' S)v TO, TCfiia vfuv iirayyeXfiara SeSmprjrai, where 
 definite reference is made to the promises of Christ. So in 1^* 
 exeiv vfid(; Tr)v tovtcov fiv^firjv •jroteicrdai, ' that ye should have it 
 in your power to practise the mention (not simply ' to make 
 mention ') of these things.' 
 
 , The combination of the fully formed articular phrase with what 
 might be thought an illiterate use of the anarthrous noun is very 
 remarkable in this writer. The latter feature is more visible in the 
 prophetic portions (ii. 4-18, iii. 7-12), the first chapter, which is 
 chiefly argumentative, preserving more of a classical character 
 throughout. We may compare the difference between the preface 
 and the poetical portions of the early chapters of St. Luke, 
 the former affording a good specimen of the periodic style, 
 eireihri'irep iroSXol iirejfelprfaav dvard^aaffai hirjyrjaiv irepl rmv 
 TrevXr)po<f>opr)ij,ipa>v iv rjfiiv irpayjidrcov, the latter resembling the 
 broken utterances of the Sibyl, tov Sovvai yvSxrw acaTtjpia^ tiS 
 XaiS avTov iv d^eaei d/iapnaiv aiiT&v Sid a-irXdyyva eXeou? &eov 
 rj/jbrnv. So the use of the article in the narrative portion of the 
 book of Job is for the most part in accordance with ordinary rules, 
 e.g. V^ en tovtov XaXovvTO<i aWo? wyyeXo^ epy(^eTai Xeytov rco 
 'I(B)8, Tmk vi&v aov Kal r&v Ovyaripayv aov ia-diovTeav Kal irivovTtov 
 Trapd Tm aSeX^fiS avrmv rm irpea^vTepw, e^at'^vTj? trvevfia fieya 
 iirrfKOev iic t^s ipij/iov Kal ^yfraTO twv reaadpav yiovi&u rfji 
 oiKia<s, Kai f-ireaev r) oIkm sttI rd nrathla <rov Kal eTeXevTrja-av, 
 while in the drama itself we meet such phrases as o-vveKXeia-e 
 vvXa<s yaa-Tpixs p.r)Tp6<s fiov 3^", la-xiiv prj/^aTtov aov rt? inroiaei ; 4^, 
 (TT6vo(i XeovToq, (fxavij Se Xeaivrji, yavpiafia Se SpaKovratv ia-^ia-07] 
 4^*, d^pova dvaipel opyrj, nreirXavijijAvov Se davarol ^fjXo<s 5*. There 
 is a similar contrast between the style of the narrative portion of 
 Judges, e.g. 4^^ avveKoXv^^ev avrov iv r^ Seppei avTii<s, koX 
 eXa^ev . . . tov wda-aaXov tjj? aKi^vrj^ xai edrjKe t^ a^vpav iv ry 
 Xeipl avTr]<! . . . koX evixpovae tov TrdaaaXov iv Ty yvd6(p avTov 
 zeal Sii]Xaa-ev iv Ty y^, and the song of Deborah 5* o/m; iaaXev- 
 
GRAMMAR OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxxv 
 
 Orjaav a'Trb Trpocraivov K.vpiov, tovto ^ivd airo irpoaanrov JLvpiov, 
 O'^" ao^ai ap^ova-osv avri]^ avTUTreKpivavTO Trpo'; avTijv. 
 
 If we ask why there should he this difference hetween the lan- 
 guage of prose and that of poetry or prophecy, it may be answered 
 generally that the aim of prose is clearness and exactness, while 
 that of verse is to appeal to the feelings and imagination ; that 
 largeness and mystery are proper to the latter, which frets at the 
 minute and definite restrictions of the former. In Greek this 
 natural predilection of verse was assisted by the fact that in Homer 
 the article was not yet separated from the pronoun, and that later 
 poets followed in the footsteps of Homer. The LXX. translators 
 would naturally endeavour to maintain a corresponding distinction 
 between prose and verse in their translation of the O.T., and we 
 know from the Sibylline books that Alexandrian Jews had practised 
 the writing of Greek hexameters, where the article is not more 
 common than in Homer, for more than 150 years before the 
 Christian era. 
 
 Article belonging to more than one Noun. 
 
 2 Pet. 1^\ 2^", 3^, 3^® Tov Kvplov koX crmTf}po<; {'Irjaov Xpto-ToO). 
 Here the ordinary rule holds good : substantives subordinated to the 
 same article are simply different names for the same subject ; but in 
 2 Pet. 1^ iv SiKaioffuvy tov ®eov fjumv Koi awTrjpo'i 'Irj<rov X.pi(TTov 
 (crcoT'^p belonging to the class of anarthrous nouns) it seems 
 better to understand the substantives as indicating different 
 subjects, since they are plainly distinguished in the next verse tov 
 @eov Kal 'Irja-ov tov Kvplov ^fi&v ; so too in Jude v. 4 tov fiovov 
 SeaTroTTjv xal Kvpiov 'Irjirovv HpiaTov, where see note.^ In 2 Pet. 
 l-'" 0e^aiav v/jl&v t^v KXrjaiv koL eicKoyrjv iroielaOai, 1^® ttiv tov 
 Kvpiov fj/i&v Svvafi'iv /cat irapovalav, 3'^ ol afiadei's koX acrT'^piKTOi, 
 the single article is sufficient because the connected nouns belong 
 to one category (see Winer, p. 154). 
 
 Cases. 
 
 Nominative. — There is a tendency in the Hellenistic writings 
 to put the noun or participle into the nominative case, when by 
 the ordinary rules of grammar it should be in an oblique case to suit 
 the preceding construction, see 2 P. 3^'^ Sieyeipco v/jl&p ttjv Bidvoiavy 
 
 1 J. H. Moulton, p. 84, understands rod Beoi 2 P. 1^ of Christ. 
 
 d 2 
 
xxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 fiv7}<T6fjvai T&v fyrifiaTwv . . . '^ivaiaKovTe'}, where the participle 
 should have been in the ace. to agree with the understood subject 
 of the infin. /ivrja-d^vai,. See below under Anacoluthon, and Moulton, 
 Prolegomena, p. 69 ; Blass, pp. 81, 242, 243, 284. 
 
 Accusative. — Jude (1) Adverbial: v. 5 to Sevrepop fir) Tria-rev- 
 cravTa<!, v. 7 tov ofioiov rpoirov Tovroi<; iKiropvevaaaaL ; (2) with 
 prepositions ^ : eh, v. 4 ol iraXai, irpoye'^paiMiievoi eh tovto to icpipM ; 
 '}(apiTa fierariOivTei eh aa-iXyeiav ; v. 6 eh Kplaiv rerijptjKev ; 
 V. 13 eh al&va rex'^prjTai ; v. 25 @eo3 So^a eh iravra^ tou? al&va<! ; 
 1). 21 TrpoaSe'XPfievoi, to e\eo<; eh ^a>rjv alwviov. trepi c. ace. v. 7 at 
 irepl aiiTa'i Tro'Xets. vtto, Jude v. 6 vtto ^oipov Terijprj/cev, cf. 
 Moulton p, 63. 
 
 2 Pet. (1) Adveriial : 1^ avrb tovto Sef . . . eTriy^opriy^aaTe 
 apeTrjv. Ace. of duration of time : 2* rjfiepav ef ^/iepayf ip^vyhv 
 e^aa-dvi^ev. Cognate Ace. after passive verb : 2 Pet. 2^^ aSiKovfievoi 
 fiiaOov aSiKiw;. (2) with preposition : eh eleven times, the more 
 remarkable instances being 1* aKdpTrov<i eh ttjv eTriyvaxriv, 
 V^ eh ov evhoKTjaa* 2^^ {evia-Tpi'^Jra^) eh KvXia/wv ^op/36pov, 
 3* fiaKpoOvfiel eh w/^a?. Sta c. ace. 2^ St' oO? ^ 6S09 pXaa-(f>7)firi0'q- 
 treTai, 3® St' ov (Xoyov) 6 Koa-fioi; UTrcoXeTO (MSS. St' &v), 3^^ St' rjv 
 (irapovaiav) ovpavol XvO-qcrovTat, 3' /laKpodvfiei Si (al. eh) v/id<s. 
 irri e. ace. V^ i(f>' oaov, 2^^ iina-Tpey^a^ iirl to ioiov e^epa/ta. fieTa 
 c. ace. 1^^ p-eTo, ttjv ifirjv e^oSov. Kara c. ace. 3^ kuto, ra? eTriffv/iia^ 
 iropev6p,evoi, 3^^ kuto, to itrdyyeXp.a irpoa-SoKtafiev, S^ koto, ttjv 
 a-o<f>lav eypa^Jrev. tt/so? e. ace. 1* to, w/jos ^cor]v,f 3^ (rrpejSXova-iv 
 irpov diraiKeiav. 
 
 Complementary construction with factitive verb. 2 Pet. 2* Tat 
 TToXet? iiroSeiypa fieWovTiov dae/3etTiv TedeiKox;, of which we have 
 the passive in Jude v. 7 at TroXet? irpoKeivTai Seiyp.a ; 2 Pet. 1* 
 TavTa ovK dpyoixs {yp,d';) KaOiaTrjaiv ; Jude v. 24 ar^aai vficit 
 dp,(opov<; ; 2 Pet. 2^^ •qSov'qv fjyovpevoi ttjv iv Tip^ept} rpw^jji;, 31^ 
 TTjv p.aKpo6vp,lav afOTTjpiav ^yecaffe; Jude v. 24 <f>v\d^ai v/ta? 
 d-TTTalaTovi;. 
 
 Genitive. — The most noteworthy examples in Jude are 
 
 (after substantive) Possessive : v. 6 Kpiaiv p.eyd\ri<} fip.epa<s, v. 15 -n-epl 
 
 T&v epycov dae^eiaf avTmv, v. 18 KaTcL Td<s eavT&v eirtOvp.ia'i 
 
 1 On the use of the prepositions in later Greek, see J. H. Moulton, pp. 98-107. 
 
 * Denotes an unclassical use. 
 
 + Denotes an idiomatic expression. 
 
GRAMMAR OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xxxvii 
 
 T&v aae^eimv. Qualitative : v. 9 xpia-iv ^aa-<f>rifila<i* Material : 
 V. 6 7rvpb<s aimviov Bikijv* (After verb) : u 17 fivijadrjTe prj/ndrmv. 
 Gen. of Price: Jude v. 11 fjLKrdoD i^exvOrjaav. With prepositions : 
 diro twice, e'/e twice, iiri once, «>. 18 eV iaxdrov xpovov, irepl four 
 times, Sta once, irpo once, v. 25 Tr/ao Travro? roi) al&voi, Kara 
 twice, esp. v. 15 Trotfja-ai icpia-iv xard iravTcov,* inro twice, esp. 
 1>. 12 ve^eXat viro dvificov irapatfjepofievai,, oiriato* v. 7 a7re\- 
 Oovaat, OTTtVo) aapKOf, icaTevminov * v. 24 a-Tfjaai, KarevooTnov rrjv 
 So^V^, p^apti; V. 16 ttx^eXt'as X'^piu. 
 
 2 Pet. Noteworthy examples of the gen. are {after substantive) 
 the Possessive, I" 6 vto? /i*ou, o dr/airriTO'; /lov, S^^/j,epa Kvpiov, S^^ 
 ^/*6pa @6of), 318 ^/i6|0a alS>vo<}, 2\ B'' ^fiipa Kpia-eax;, 1^" irpo^Teia 
 ypa^iji, 2^ ^ oBoi t^? aXij0eia^. Objective : 1^ iTnyvaxj-ea^ tov xaXe- 
 (7avT0<!, V^ J7 diTodeaii; tov crKtjveofj,aTO<!, 1^^ rr/v rovreov fivijfirjv, 
 2^® 6A,e7^tj' irapavfiiiia<i. Reduplicated genitive * : 3^ fivrjadfjvai, ttJ? 
 Twi' airoa-ToXmv v/jlmv eVroXij? toO Kvpiov, wliere v/iwi/ depends on 
 aTToa-ToXcov, aTrocTToXcov on rij? ivToXrji: tov Kvpiov, and this last 
 on fiv7]a-0r]vai,. Gen. of Quality : 2^ alpea-ei^ aTreoXetai,* 2'^° i-mdviiia 
 fiiaa-fiov,* 2* treipolis ^ocjjov,* (reading aeipai^ it is easier to 
 explain it as a Gen. of Material). Gen. of Apposition : 2« -f-TroXet? 
 XoSofjbfov Kol Tofioppaf, (cf. Hes. Sc. Here. 469 ttoXiv Tpr/xivov, 
 Aesch. ^5'. 29 'IXiov 7ro\t?, Thuc. iv. 130 ■n MevSr] iroXi^). 
 Hebraistic : 2^* KaTdpa<s rsKva.* After neuter article : 2^^ -j-^^ ^^^ 
 irapoi/iia^. After neuter adjective : 2^® virepoyKa fiaTaioTrjTO';. So 
 Heb. 3^ ayia dyiav, 1 Cor. 5* iv d^v/juoK; elXiKpivla'i. This 
 construction is common with the article, as in Rom. 1^" to, dopaTa 
 TOV @eov, Eph. &-^ TCi irvevfiaTiKa t^? irovripia^, 1 Cor. 4^ to, 
 KpvTTTo. tov <tk6tov<;. But here it is not a whole class that is 
 spoken of, not the boastings of vanity in general, but occasional 
 swelling words, as in Jude v. 16 XaXel vTrepoyxa and in Dan. 11^^. 
 So even in Soph. Ant. 1209 Tea 8' adXia<! da-ijfia -rrepi^aivei, ^oj]<; 
 and 1265 wfiot efi&v avoX^a iSovXevfidTcov.^ Cf such Tacitean 
 phrases as vana rumoris, inania honoris. With adjective : of the 
 sphere 2^* dKaTairava-Tog dfiapTiai}, yeyv/jivacrfjiivo^ irXeove^ia^* ; 
 of possession or privation, 2** fieaToi; /ioixaXiSo'; 6ej)daXfj,6'i. With 
 verb: 2^ Koa-fiov (fteiSeadai, 3^ /jbinja-d^vai prj/jidTrnv, B^'' eieirmTei,v 
 
 ' I am indebted to Mr. Herbert Richards for the following additional examples, 
 Eur, Phoen. 1485 TrpoKaXmtToiieva 0oTpux<l>Sfos oj8po irapritSos, Sec. 192 iras ^84yyei 
 St/ieyapra Kanav ; Hor. C. iv. 12. 19 amara curarum, iv. 4. 76 acuta belli, Sat. II. 
 2. 25 vana rerum, II. 8. 83 ficta rerum, A. P. 49 abdita rerum, Cio. Verr. I. 6. 15 
 inania nobilitatis, Tac. Hist. iv. 50 arabigua sonitus, iv. 41 taoita suspioionum. 
 
xxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 a-T7]piyfiov, 1* aTro<f)evya) rrj^ <^dopa<i* (but with acc. 2^ air. ra 
 (iida-fiaTa and 2^^) ; of the sphere 1^" irpot^rjTela liiaf eTTtXwcrea)? ov 
 ryiveTai, 3' 0paBvvco eTrayyeXiai* Genitive absolute ^ : 2 Pet. 1* 
 Trji; 6eia^ hvvdfiew^ rb, tt/jo? i^mtjv SeSaprjfievr}!;, V-'' (fyavij^ eve- 
 ')(6ei<Tr}<i, 3^^ tovtcov irdvrcov \vo/j,evo)v. With prepositions: diro 
 three (or four if we read diro for vvo in 1^''), esp. 1^^ eXdX-qtrav 
 diro ®eov* 3* a^' ^s (jjfiepasi) ixoifi'^dria-av.f e« five, esp. 2^ 
 TjiMspav 6^ )7/A6/oas.f inro five (or four if we read utto in 1^'), 1^^ 
 vTTO TTvevfiaTOi (j)ep6/j,€voi, 2'^ Kara-irovoviievov viro r^y t&v aOeafitav 
 ava(7Tpo(j)f}^ (where we should rather have expected Sid or the 
 dative, but see my In trod, to St. James, p. cc, and the note on James 
 3*), 2" d/it%\fflt iiro \at\a7ro? iXavvofievai. otriadi* once, 2^* 
 TOv<i otrlcrm a-apKo<i 'Tropevofievov's. eco^ once, 1^^ ew? o5 (xpopov) 
 r)Hepa Siavyda-rj.f Bid five times (six if we read Sia B6^<s in 
 1^, four if we read Bi ov in 3^), esp. 3^ yrj Bi vB»to's avvecrTmaa* 
 where it seems to have the force oi/Mera^v. iiri once, 3^ eV iaydrwv 
 T&v r]/jiepa)v. Kard once, 2"- ov (^epovaiv kut avr&v ^Xdatjiijfiov 
 Kpca-iv* Trapd once, 1^^ Xa^wv iraph ®eov ri/njv. "rrepi twice. 
 
 Dative. — Jude. 0/ Indirect Object : v. 3 ypd<f)eiv vfiiv bis, v. 13 
 oh ^6<j)o<; TeT7]pr]Tai,v. 1 'Kpia-rm rerripri/jiivoi (?), ■y.S ^ •irapaBoOeicra 
 Toi<; dyioKi iria-TKs. Dativus commodi: v. 2 e\eos vfilv. Of the 
 Agent : v. 1 ©eaJ -qyairrnjiivoi {al. iv ©ew). After etfii understood 
 •V. 25 fiovw 06«3 Bo^a. Following compound verbs: v. 3 eiraytovi- 
 ^eadai ry Triarei, v. 20 e'jroiKoBofiovvre<; eavToix; ry nriarei, v. 9 
 eTTiTifi'^aai croi. Following adjective : v. 7 Tpoirov op.oiov tovtok;. 
 With exclamation: v. 11 oval avToi<s, cf. Epict. iii. 19. 1 ovai fioi. 
 
 Of Instrument : v. 6 et? Kpiaiv Be<rfioi<! rerijprjKev. Of Cause : 
 V. 11 T^ dvTiXoyia tov Kope dircoXovTo. Of Manner*: ». 11 TJj 
 oSm TOV Kalv iiropevdrja-av, Ty irXdvy tov ^dXad/i e^6Xv0f]a-av. 
 
 With Preposition : iv eight times, three being unclassical, viz. 
 the dat. of the instrument in ». 10 iv tovtoi^ (fydeipovTai, that of 
 association in v. 14 iv dyiai<; /xvpida-iv ^Xdev, that of divine 
 influence v. 20 iv irvevfiaTi Trpoa-evxofievot. See Index. 
 
 2 Pet. Dat. of Indirect Object : after Stopio/iai 1^, 1*, i-irixoptiyeat 
 
 V^, TrapaSiBcofii 2*, 2^, BiBcofii S^^, BrjXoeo 1", yvapi^m 1", iirdyto 
 
 2\ 25, e-n-ayyiXXo/JLai 2^^, BovXom 2i», ypd<ji(o 3^, cf. 1^ rot? Uoti/jlov 
 
 Xaxovaiv Tria-Tiv, where xat'petv Xeyei is omitted, as at the 
 
 beginning of 1 Cor., 2 Cor., Gal., etc. and usually in epistolary 
 
 'Used correctly in 2 P. not, as often in N.T., of the subject or object of the 
 verb, see Blass, pp. 251 f. 
 
GRAMMAR OF JIIDE AND OF 2 PETER xxxix 
 
 correspondence (unless we prefer to say that xatpefi' is changed 
 into xdpi<; vfuv in v. 2, see note on James 1^), irpoa-ixovTe^ 
 Xvj(yy 119, ^epco V-'', riOrffii 2^ {vTroBei/yixa aaej3e(riv reOeiKmsi), 
 2* oil's TO tcpifia ovK dpyei. Bat. with elfii, etc. : 1^ v/JjIv virdp- 
 Xovra, 1^ &) irdpeerTiv ravra, 2^" yiyovev avToi^, 2^^ icpeiTrov ?iv 
 avToh, 2^^ av/ji^i^rjKev aiirol<;, 3^^ avrS 17 Sofa (verb understood), 
 1^ Xdpi-<i v/uv •jT^rjOvvdei'T}. After words implying agreement : 
 e^aKoXovOeo) 1^®, 2^, 2'^, laoTip.o'i •^p.iv 1^. After words implyi/ng 
 destination : 2^'^ ol<; reTijprjTai, S' irvpX redrjaavpiafievoi. Ethical 
 Dative : S'^* da-irCKoL avrS evpeOijvai. 
 
 Bat. of Instrument: V Ihia Bo^rj KoXelv, 2^ \670fs uytia?. 
 i/j/iropevo'ovTai, 2® KaTacrrpo^fj KUTSKpivev* 2^^ dcreX/yeiaii; 
 BeXed^o), 2^^ ^ ^TT97Tat, 3® Koa-fio^ vSart KaraKXyaOei's. Bat. of 
 Cause : 1^-^ deXijfian dvOpmiTov r)vex6rf, 2^ '\jrvxvv dvofioii; epyoi<s 
 i^acrdvi^ev* 3^ yfj avveaT&aa rm tov ®eov Xoycp, 3^ ovpavol rm 
 avrm Xoytp TeOrjaavpiafievoi,. Bat. of Respect : 2^ ^XefM/Mari SiKaiov* 
 2^^ tcr^uil fi6i^ove<!. 
 
 With Prepositions : ^ iv forty instances, many being unclassical, 
 e.g. the dat. of the instrument, 2^^ iv dvdpdnrov (fxuvy (fidey^dfjievov, 
 2^ iv irXeove^ia vfia^ ifi-n-opeva-ovrai, 1^ XaxoJV TriuTiv ev BiKato- 
 (Tvvri, dat. of manner, \^^ Sieyeipecv vfid<; iv inrofiv^aei, 3^ iv ip.- 
 vaiy/Movij iXevaovrai. irapd JLvpim Ms. avv once. With prep, in 
 compound verb : 2^^ avveveoxovfievoi, xjp.iv, 2^" tovtoo^ ip.TrXaKevTei, 
 3^'' irXdvri a-vvairaxdevrei;. 
 
 Number and Gender. 
 The rule as to neuter plurals being followed by a singular verb 
 is not strictly adhered to in the N.T. (see Blass Gr. p. 78), but it 
 holds good in 2 Pet. 1 ^ ravra Kadlarrrjo-iv, 1^ irdpea-riv ravra, and S-"^" 
 crroixela XvOijcrerao (where some MSS. have Xvdija-ovrai). Where 
 two or more subjects are joined each may have a separate verb, 
 (1) as in 2 Pet. l^^ §(^^ gg f]p,epa Siavyda-r] xal (pwatjiopo'i dvareiXfi, 
 3^^° ovpavol irapeXeva-ovrac a-roix^ia Be XvOrjaerat,, 3^^ ovpavoi 
 Xvdriaovrab /cal aroix^la rijKerai. Or (2) where the subjects are 
 names of things and in the singular number, they may be followed 
 by one verb in the singular, provided that the subjects belong to 
 the same general category, as Jude 2 (and 2 Pet. 1^) eXeos Kal 
 elprjvq Kal %a/3t9 trXr}dvv6eir]. A singular verb is also found where 
 the compound subject is made up of a singular and a neuter 
 
 ' See Index. 
 
xl INTRODUCTION 
 
 plural, as S^" yfj koI rh ev airy epya evpe0JjaeTai, (where some 
 MSS. have the plural). Elsewhere, as a rule, (3) the compound 
 subject is followed by a plural verb, as 3' ol vvv ovpavol koX fj yij 
 redria-avpia-fievoi eiaiv. In 3^ a plural relative follows a singular 
 noun SevT'epav ypd<jieo iiriffToXrjv ev ah Bieyelpca*, because Sevripav 
 carries with it the thought of a first letter. A collective noun in 
 the singular is followed by a plural participle in Jude v. 5, if we 
 omit the article, \aov troocra^ [tows] firj irLareva'avTai; li-irmXeaev. 
 Cf. Evang. Petri | 28 o Xab^ ycyyyv^ei koI KOTTTerai to, crTijdff 
 Xiyovre^ k.tX. 
 
 Plural of Abstract Nouns to express the various concrete mani- 
 festations of the abstract idea : Jude v. 18 ra? iTridvfiliKs r&v 
 aae^ei&v, v. 8 Bo^ai ^Xaa-<f)r)/iova-iv (' glories ' for ' glorious 
 beings ') : so 2 Pet. 2^* So^ag ov rpifiova-iv ^Xaa-^/iovvTeg, 2^ 
 TToWol i^a/coXovOtja-Qva-cv avrSiv raig aaehr/elaK, 2^ heXed^ovcriv 
 crapKOi! dcreXyeiaii; tov<; diro^evyovTa'i, 3^^ ev dyiai<; avaa-rpo^acg 
 Kal eia-e/3eiaK, where there may be an intentional reference to 
 Jude V. 18; see explanatory note. Other examples are James 
 2^ fi^ ev 'irpo(T(ovoXr][i-}^iai<s e'^ere rrjv iria-Tiv, Col. 2>^ ev 6<f>ffaX- 
 fioSovXeiaig, 1 Pet. 2^ v-rroKpicrei's, <p66vov<s. 
 
 Gender. — Exceptional examples are 2 Pet. 3^ ovpavol ^a-av 
 eK-rraXai xai yrj e^ vSarog a-vvea-Taxra, where I think we must 
 supply a-vvea-T&Tei; with ovpavol, the gender of the participle 
 being accommodated to the nearer, though less important, of the 
 nouns in the compound subject. On the other hand in 3^ oc 
 Se vvv ovpavol /cal f] yrj TedrjcravpKTfiivoi elalv the gender 
 agrees with that of the more important, though more distant, 
 noun. So in 3^^ ovpavoins xal yrjv wpocrSoKm^iev ev ol<i k.t.X. 
 the gender of the relative agrees with ovpavov<i. In Jude v. 12 
 the reading of the best MSS., ol . ... o-TTiXaSe? evat)(^ovfievoi, is 
 very harsh. I have suggested that a-7riXdSe<i may be taken as 
 complementary to the participle ; but it gives a much easier 
 construction to omit the article with K and some versions. There 
 will then be no difficulty in the fact that the subject ovroi diSers 
 in gender from the predicate o-7rt\aSe?, the following participle 
 being masculine to suit the subject. 
 
 Demonstrative. Pronouns. 
 
 oiTo<! (a) Substantival (masculine) used as in Demosthenes, of 
 opponents, in Jude 8, Kal ovroi iwirvia^ofievoi, 10 ovroi Se 
 
GRAMMAR OF J TIDE AND OF 2 PETER xli 
 
 ^Xa<T<f>7]fj,ova'i.i>, 12 ovtoi etcriv <nriKdSe<}, 16 o^Toi elcrcv yoyyvarac^ 
 19 ovToi eltrtv ol aTToStopl^ovTev, 14 eirpo^riTevaev Se /eat TovToi<i. 
 2 Pet. 2^^^ OVTOI, he to? aXoya ^oaa, 2^' odroi elaiv irrjyal avvhpoi. 
 Used of others, Jude i>. 7 toi/ o/iocov Tpoirov rovToi<i (the fallen 
 angels). 2 Pet. l'-^ ovt6<; iariv 6 vio's fiov (of Christ). 
 
 (6) Substantival (neuter) Jude 10 oa-a i-jritrTavraL, iv tovtoi? 
 (jjBeipovTai. 2 Pet. 1^", 3^ tovto irpmTov yivwa-Kovre';, 3^, 3* tovto 
 \avddvei, '2P tovto) SeSovXatrai, 1^' *■ ^"j 3^* ravra, 1* Bia tovtcov, 
 
 J12^ 316 ^gpl TOVTCOV, 1^^ T^I/ TOVTWV /JLV^fiTjU, 3^^ TOUTWl' \V0/JLeV(OV, 
 2^" TOUTOt? 6/i7rA,aK6l'T69. 
 
 (c) Adjectival, Jude i;. 4 (retrospective). 2 Pet. 1^^ 3\ 1^ 1'^. 
 
 eKeivo<i substantival, with emphatic reference to preceding 
 subject. 2 Pet. 1^® t7J<; exeivov p,eyd\ei,6TrjTo<;. 
 
 For aiiToi; and eavTov, see Index under these and under I'Sto?, 
 eavrovi; is used of the 2nd person in Jude 20 and 21. 
 
 TotouTos is not found in either epistle, though common in other 
 parts of the N.T. Toi6(7Be, found in 2 Pet. 1" alone in the N.!*., 
 retains its classical prospective use, as it does in Ezra 5^ roidSe 
 eltrev avToif, and in Josephus Ant. ii. 2. 1 al oi|r6t9 roiaiSe ^erav, 
 xvii. 13. 3 'Apj^eXao? ovap roiovSe eKSi,r)yeirai, repeated in § 4. 
 
 o? /j,ev . . . OS Se used as demonstratives,-]- Jude 21, 22. 
 
 Belative. 
 
 o?. Attracted : Jude v. 15 irepl TrdvTwv t&v epycov dae^eia<; 
 avT&v &v ( = a) rja-i^Tjaav koI irepl irdvToav tSsv aKkrjpwv &v 
 eXaXtjaav. 2 Pet, 2^^ iv ot<; ( = iv tovtoi<! a) dyvoovcriv /SXao-- 
 <l>ri/iovvTe?. 
 
 With ambiguous antecedent, 2 P. 1* Si' &v referring to the 
 immediately preceding So^rj koX dper^ but misunderstood by many 
 editors; 3® Si,' mv 6 rare k6(t[jlo<; dnrmXeTO, where various 
 antecedents have been suggested, but where I^;fchink we should, 
 read Sv ov, see note. A similar ambiguity is found in the use of 
 the demonstrative, cf. note on Jude v. 4 tovto to /cpifia, and 
 2 Pet. 2^^^' ^^ <f)epova-iv kut aiiTMv . . . iv ttj <^6opa avTwv, ib. 1^ t^? 
 6el,a<i Swd/ieeo<! avTov- 
 
 Eeplaced by demonstrative in second clause, 2 Pet. 2^ oh to 
 Kpifia ovK dpyel, Koi ij dirwXeLa avTOiv ov vvcrTd^ei, cf. 1 Cor. 8^ e^ 
 ov TO. irdvTa Koi ■^fiei^ eh avTov, Winer, p. 186, Jelf § 833. 
 
 Elliptical : 2 Pet. 1^^ eax; o5 (sc. xpovov) ^/lepa Siavydarj, 3* dtj)' 
 ^S (sc. '^/iipa?) oi 7raT6joe? eKoi/jbijdrjaav. 
 
xlii INTRODUCTION 
 
 For o? ixev . . . &? he see under Demonstratives. 
 
 oo-Tt9 : 2 Pet, 2^ o'lrive'i 'irapei,ad^ovaiv,-\ ' men that will bring in 
 heresies.' 
 
 o<7o<! : Judeu 10 oaa ixev . . . oaa Be . . . iv rovroi<;. 2 Pet. 1^^ 
 6^' oa-ovf (sc. jf^povov) elfu iv Tovrp tw erKr/vcofiaTi. 
 
 Interrogative : tc's, Trocroi, Troto? do not occur in these epistles. 
 TTOTaTTo?, 2 Pet. 3"- 
 
 Indefinite : emphatic Jude v. 4 rti/es dvffpeoTroi. 2 Pet. 3® ws 
 Tti/e? ^paBvTrjra rjyovvTai,, ih. fir) ^ov\6iMev6<s Tiva<s diroXiadai. 
 
 Adjectives. 
 
 Neuter Plural as Object. Jude v. 15 a-KXrjpa eXaXrja-av, v. 16 and 
 2 Pet. 218 ^„^gj vTrepoyxa. 
 
 Neut. PL followed hy Qen. 2 Pet. 2-^* virepoyKa fiaraioTijToi;, 
 see above p. xxxvii. 
 
 Comparison of Adjectives. In later Greek the proper force of 
 the comparative and superlative is very much lost. The latter is 
 chiefly found in the ' elative ' sense, as i\dxia-T09 in James 3*, 
 though it retains its proper superlative force in 1 Cor. 15®. 
 Possibly this may explain the combination of /jbiyia-ra with ri/ua 
 in 2 Pet. 1*. J. H. Moulton goes so far as to say that fieyia-Toii is 
 ' practically obsolete in Hellenistic/ p. 78. It occurs however in 
 Job 26^ rivi iiraKoXovBTjo'ei's ; oiix ^ p-eyio'Tq Bvvafii^ ; and 31^ 
 dvofiia rj p^ey'iinr). In the same page he gives an example of the 
 comparative p-eb^mv used, in the elative sense, which would account 
 for the omission of the gen. after p,ei^ove<s in 2 Pet. 2^^- 
 
 Special Uses of some Common Adjectives. 
 
 Tra?. Qualitative : Jude v. 3 iraaav trTrovBrjv iroiovp.evo's, 2 Pet. 
 . 1\ cf. James 1^. -Traaa . . . ov = ovBep.ta 2 Pet. l^". 
 
 eT6/>o?. Qualitative : Jude v. 7 direX6ov<j-at oiria-ca a-apKO^ 
 eripav, cf. Acts 2* XaXelv eTepai^ yXdxra-ai^. 
 
 iBio^, iised without the article, see above p. xxxii f., with avT&v 
 added, see p. xxxiii. Cf. J. H. Moulton, Prolegom. pp. 87 foil. 
 
 Verbs. 
 Moods and Tenses. 
 Mixture of Tenses in prophetic utterance : Aor. for future, Jude 
 w. 14, 15 iirpo^riTevaev 'Ej/wj^ Xiyoav 'IBoi) ^XOev Kvpio<i irotfjo-at 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xliii 
 
 Kpiffiv. Varying use of fut. aor. and pres. in 2 Pet. 2^ eaovTac 
 ■\JrevSoBiBda-KaXoi, 2^" 86^ai ov rpifiovatv, 2^^ (jidapi]<rovrac, 2^^ 
 iir\avri6riaav, '2?-'' ovToi elaiv, 2^* BeKedi^ovaiv, 3^ iXevaovraL 
 efiTraiKTai, 3^ Xavddvei avTovv, 3^^ ovpavoi Xvdrja-ovTai Koi aTOi')(eia 
 TTjKerai {al. Tax'^a-erai or rij^erai).^ 
 
 Imperfect Indicative used without av where condition has failed, 
 2 Pet. 2^^ KpeiTTOv riu\ auTol<s fir) eirerfvaKevai, cf. Moulton, pp. 199 f. 
 and, for Latin parallels, references under Indicative in my Index to 
 Cic. N.D. 
 
 Future : Doubt as to 2 Pet. 1^^, where most MSS. read fieW'^a-co 
 del vfia<; v7ro/iifj,vi]a-Keiv, translated in R.V. ' I shall be ready 
 always to put you in remembrance.' In the note I have argued 
 in favour of Field's reading fie\rj(r(o* ' I shall take care.' 
 
 Aorist answering to English Perfect : ^ Jude v. 4 irapeLa-Svrjaav 
 'there are certain men crept in privily,' R.V. J. v. 11 rfj oSm tov 
 VLalv iiropev6r)(jav Koi . . . i^ex^vOijcrav Kal . . . cnrdoXovTO. This 
 is not prophetic, but a statement of fact as in v. 8. The R.V. 
 translates ' they went in the way of Cain, and ran riotously . . . 
 and perished,' but as this verse is interposed between two 
 verses in which the present is used, we cannot, I think, doubt 
 that the writer means the aorists to be understood as equivalent 
 to the completed present. Moreover, the verbs here used are 
 rarely found in the perf. pass. 2 Pet. 1^'' o dyaTrrjTO'; fiov 
 0UT09 ia-TLv eh ov iyo) evhoKfjaa ' in whom I am well pleased,' 
 R.V. I believe that no instance of the perf. of this verb has been 
 discovered. The aorist is used of God in Mt. 3^^ 12i8, 17^, 
 Mk. 1", Lk. 3^, and in every case R.V. has the perfect rendering 
 ' is well pleased.' It is a statement not referring to the past, but 
 to the 'eternal now.' In Jude u 15 iXij^at toik; aae^eh irepl 
 Twv epymv &v rja-e^'qaav Kal . . . i^dXrjcj-av the aorists, as they 
 refer to a time previous to that denoted by iXey^ai, seem to have 
 the force of pluperfects, cf. Joh. Gr. pp. 335 foil. 
 
 Aor. Imperative is sometimes used not of momentary action, 
 but to express urgency, Jude v. 21 Trjprjaare. In v. 17 p,vrta6r)Te 
 
 1 Zahn (Eitil. vol. II. pp. 85 foil.) explains the differences of tense by the sup- 
 position that the dangers against which P. warns his readers, as still future, 
 were already visible in other churches. 
 
 = See Moulton, Proleg. pp. 135-140; Abbott, Joh. Or. pp. 324 foil, and 581 foil., 
 where he points out that some perfects were avoided owing to their inconvenient 
 form. The fact that Latin has one and the same form for the perf. and aor. was 
 likely to influence the usage of Greek speakers under the Empire. 
 
xliv INTRODUCTION 
 
 t5)v prjfiaTav, it is perhaps better to translate ' call to mind,' 
 rather than ' remember ' with the R.V. The present imperatives 
 in m. 21, 22 iXiyxere, aat^ere, eXeare prescribe a course of conduct. 
 So in 2 Pet. 1® ewixopriyija-aTe, 1^°, 3^* ffvovMaaTe have the 
 quality of urgency,^ while the present imperatives in 3* iiri 
 XavdaveTO), 3^^ ■^yeiade, 3^^ <fiv\daaea-de, 3^® av^dvere have a 
 continuous force. 
 
 Aor. Subfundive is correctly used in 2 Pet. 1*, S^'' after iva 
 (while in other books of the N.T. the indicative is often used 
 after this and other particles, which would be followed by the subj. 
 in classical Greek, see Winer, pp. 360 foil., Joh. Gr. 123) ; and after 
 oil fiT) in 1^^" (for which the fut. ind. is sometimes used in other books 
 of the N.T., see Blass 209, Joh. Gr. 205) ; and e®? ov in l^^ eaxs ov 
 fjnepa Siavyda-rj xal (f)coa-(j)6po<i dvareiXr] (this classical construction 
 is common in Lk. and Acts). The subj. is not found in Jude, and 
 the pres. subj. is not found in 2 Pet. 
 
 Aor. Opt. : In the N.T. this mood is comparatively rare except 
 in Lk., see Blass, pp. 37, 219, J. H. Moulton, pp. 194-199. It is 
 used to express a wish in Jude v. 9 eiriTifiija-ai a-oi Kiz/Jto?, and 
 in V. 2 6\eos •tfKrjdvvdeLtj, repeated in 2 Pet. 1^. Usually the verb 
 is omitted in the salutations of the Epistles, as in Rom. 1' vapii 
 vjuv aiTO @eov TroT/ao?. 
 
 Aor. Inf. is contrasted with Pres. Inf. in Jude v. 3 iraaav 
 <Tirovhi)v iroiovfievois ypd(peiv . . . dvdyKTjv ea-)(pv ypd-sfrai, the 
 present implying continuous action, the aorist a momentary act, 
 so in 3 Joh. 13 ttoWo, ei-xpv ypdyjrai croi 'I had much that I 
 wanted to say,' dXX' ov 6e\to Bia fiikavov koX xakd/iov aoi ypdAeiv 
 ' but I do not care to be writing to you by pen and ink,' v. 5 
 VTrofivr]crai v/jid? ^ovXo/jLat ' I wish to give you a reminder,' v. 24 
 TOO Svi'afievtp vfidv (j>v\d^ai dwrai<rTov<; Koi arrja-ai dfiwfiovi : 
 here aTrjaai denotes a momentary act, but the act of guarding 
 might seem to be continuous. The aorist however shows that it is 
 not regarded as such (cf. ijtvXa^ev in 2 Pet. 2*), but as an action 
 now to commence, with a particular end in view, viz. a-Tfja-ai. In 
 2 Pet. the present infinitives iroieladai V^, v-irofii,fivT]<7Keiv l^^, 
 Sieyeipeiv 1^*, ixdaroTe exeiv . . . iroieladai V^ are all continuous. 
 Similarly pveadai, and rrfpelv in 2*, and virdpxeiv in S^^. On the 
 other hand vTrotrrpeyjrai 2^^, fivrjadfjvai ' call to mind ' 3^ aTroXe- 
 
 ' Cf. J. H. Moulton, Prolegomena, p. 172 f. 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xlv 
 
 a6ai, ympv'^f-i' (' to arrive at ' not ' to keep going '), 3* aa-iriKoi, 
 evpe07]vai 3^*, all denote a single act. 
 
 Unusual constructions of Infinitive: After verbs of motion, as 
 Jude V. 15 ?i\dev iroifjirai Kplaiv; so Mt. 2^ rfKOofiev Trpoa-Kvvrjerai, 
 11^ Ti i^tjXdare ISelv ; Mk. 2^^ ovk ?fKdov KoKecrai SiKaiovi;, 
 Lk. 3^^ fiXdov fiaiTTKrOTJvai, 2^ eiropevovTo aTroypd^ea-dai, Gen. 
 25^^ TTopevofiai reXevrdv. For exaniples in late Greek see Jannaris, 
 Gr. p. 575. It is occasionally found in classical writers, as Soph. 
 Oed. Gol. 12 fiavddveiv y^p ^KOfiev, Eur. Medea 1303 ifi&v 8e 
 iraihmv rjXdov iicaSxTai ^lov, where some read the more regulai' 
 eKo-foamv. After verbs of knowing, 2 Pet. 2^ olBev Kvpio^ evae^eh 
 pv6<T0ai, dSiKovi Se rripelv, cf. James 4-'^^ elSai<; /caXov •koiv.v, 
 Mt. 7^^ otSare ayaOa SiSovai, Mt. 16^ to fiev irpoatoTrov rov ovpavov 
 yivd>(TK€Te SiaKpiveiv Phil. 4'-^ olBa Trepuraeveiv, 1 Th. 4*, 1 Tim. 3' ; 
 also found in classical writings. After e^to = Bvvap.ai, 2 Pet. 1^^ 
 aTTovSda-O) €-)(ei,v vfiais /jLvijfirjv iroieia-dai. Infinitive of Besult 
 2 Pet. 1^* atrovhdam e'^eiv vp,d<i, 2 Pet. 3-'^' ^ Sieyeipco v/i&v iv 
 virofiv^a-et ttjv Bidvoiav, fivriffdijvat tSjv pr/fidreov, cf. Acts 5* Sid 
 rl i-TrXijpaxTev 6 Xaravd^ rijv KapSiav aov, ■^eva-aa-Oai ere ; Apoc. 
 5* eviKrja-ev 6 Xeav . . . dvol^ai to ^tj3Xiov, Col. 4^ 6 Xoyoi dXuTi 
 rjpTvp.evo'i, eiSevai v/id<i ttws Set dvoKpiveaOai, also in classical 
 writings, e.g. Thuc. vi. 69. 3 /la'^ovfievoi i^dpovv irepl t^? 
 dXXorpiav, oixecav a'j(elv. 
 
 Infinitive as suhfect : 2^^ KpeiTTov ^v firj iweyvcoKevai r] iiriyvova-iv 
 virocTTpe^av. 
 
 Infinitive vnth Article is not found in either of these Epistles. 
 This construction is in fact very rare in the N.T. ' outside the writ- 
 ings which were influenced by the literary language, namely those 
 of Luke and James ' (Blass, p. 233). The latter has seven examples, 
 see p. cciii. of my edition. 1 P. however has four examples. 
 
 Accusative vnth Infinitive. This use is greatly restricted in the 
 N.T. by direct speech (see below under Substantival Glauses) or by 
 employing Xva and oti. The following exx. are found in 2 Pet. 1^^ 
 a-irovBdam eXetv vfia<i rr/v tovtwv /.ivij/J/rjv troielcrOai,, 3'-' ^ Bieyeipto 
 vfi&v Trjv elXcKpiprj Bidvoiav fivr](TOi]vai t&v prffidrcov, 2>^ p-r) ^ovXo- 
 p,ev6i Tiva<i aTToXea-dai, 3^^ irorairoixs Bel virdpxeiv vp.d<s, 3^^ Ttjv 
 Tov Kvpiov fip,&v p,aKpo6vp,iav a-ooTrjpiav (elvai) Tjyeia-Oe. It is not 
 used at all by Jude. 
 
 Participle : Joined with a finite verb, the general force of the 
 
xlvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Aor. Part., as contrasted with the Present or Perfect Participle, is to 
 express priority of time, as in Jude v. 5 aira^ awaaf dTrdoXecrev 
 ' after once saving destroyed,' ' once saved and then destroyed.' 
 2 Pet. 1 * iva yevrjcrde 6eia<; Koivmvol [(J3verea}<; aTro(j>vy6vTe<; ri]<; 
 4)6opa'i ' after escaping from,' ' that ye may escape from (f>0opd and 
 thereby become partakers of a divine nature.' 1^ a-irovSriv Trapeia- 
 eviyicavTei eTrtXopjj'yjjo-aTe ' contribute all diligence and so add 
 energy to faith.' 1^^ ov fiv9oi<; i^uKoKovOija'avTe^ iyvoopiaafiev rr/v 
 ■n-apovaiav, dXX' eirowrai, yevrjOevre^ ' it was not from any reliance 
 on fables but from eye-witness that we were empowered to declare 
 the second coming.' l^^'" Xa^mv ri/ji.'^v kol So^av, ^wz/^? ive')(6eia'q<; 
 TotaaSe . . . '^Kovarafiev k.t.X. (the last words standing here by anaco- 
 luthon for the logical apodosis i^e^altoaev tov irpot^rjri.K.ov Xoyov) 
 ' when he received honour through the voice that came from heaven, 
 he confirmed the truth of prophecy in us who heard it.' Here the 
 finite verb follows as a consequence on the Tifii], which itself was a 
 consequence of the <j)covrj. 2* (reipai<; TapTapcoaaf TrapeScoKev ' he 
 cast them down to Tartarus and then delivered them to chains.' 
 2® Nw6 i(f)v\a^ev KaraKXvcr/jbov iTrd^a^ ' when he brought a flood 
 upon the earth, he saved Noah.' 2* re^paiaa<s Karacrrpocfyy kute- 
 Kpivev, first came the showers of ashes, then the earthquake which 
 overthrew the cities, see ; explanatory note. 2^^ KaraXetVoz'Te? 
 o^ov itfKavriOTiaav, where some MSS. have the aorist, which would 
 mean ' they forsook the road and wandered,' the force of the 
 present being ' they strayed from (literally ' leaving ') the road.' 
 2^^ i^dey^dfievov eictoKvcrev 'it spoke and so hindered,' lit. 'by 
 speaking it hindered.' 3® 6 Koa-fio^ Karaic\va6el<; diraiKero ' the 
 world perished by the flood.' 3" Xva fir/ ry irXdvy avvaiTa'xjBivre'; 
 eKirea-rjTe tov arrfpiyfiov ' that ye may not be involved in their 
 error and so fall from your steadfastness.' So when the part, is 
 in agreement with the object, e.g. 2 Pet. 1^^ <f>mvr)v ■^Kova-a/j.ev i^ 
 ovpavov eveyOil&av ' we heard a voice that came from heaven.' 
 2* dyyeXtov dfjLapTrfa-dvTtov ovie i<jieLcraTo ' spared not angels when 
 they sinned,' R.V. A good example of the succession of time in 
 a series of aorist participles is to be found in Mk. 15^^ hpafimv Be 
 Ti<S, yefMttra^ (nroyyov, irepiOelt; KaXdfiqi, iiroTi^ev. 
 
 I have thought it worth while to bring together these examples 
 because a different view of the participial sequence has been taken 
 by some interpreters, as in Dr. Bigg's note on 1" ' The temporal 
 relation of the participles is not to one another, but to the main verb. 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xlvii 
 
 See Thuc. iv. 133 o vem T?js"H/)as KareKavdr], Xpuo-^So? rijs iepeiav 
 Xvxvov riva deia-r]'} ■^fjLfievov tt/oos to, are/ifiara kuX iiriKajahap- 
 Oovarfi;. Chrysis did not fall asleep before she set the lamp near 
 the garlands. Here there is no «at between Xa^dtv and ivexOeiarji;, 
 but this makes no difference.' Surely Thucydides leaves no doubt 
 as to the sequence : the verb expresses the final result, the 
 preceding participles the conditions -which caused it, viz. (1) the 
 proximity of the lamp, and (2) the subsequent falling asleep. So 
 Alford on 2^^, where he reads KaraXiirovre^, ' the aorist part, and 
 the aor. verb are contemporary,' and again on 2^* ' aor. part, 
 contemporary with aor. verb.' It is the present part, which 
 expresses contemporaneousness, as in Jude 3 airovhifv iroiovfievoi 
 . . . eypa-^a, v. 4 Trapeia-eBvrja-av . . . fieraTidevTeis . . . dpvovfievoi, 
 V. 8 ivvTTVia^ofievoi, fiiaivovcriv, v. 9 hiaKpivofievo^ SieXeyeTo, v. 14t 
 itrpo^^reva-ev Xer^mv, v. 21 eavToixs rripjja-aTe nrpoaSexofievou 
 2 Pet. l^''^ viro Trvevfiarov ^epofievoi iXaXrja-av ' spake under 
 inspiration,' ' as inspiration came to them,' 2^ BiKaioi ivKaroiK&v 
 ■\frvx,vv e^aa-avi^ev, S^^' ^^ eypa-yfrev . . . XaXui; irepl tovtcov ' he 
 wrote touching this matter,' 1^" tuvtu iroiovvTe^ ov fj,r) 
 TTTaia-rjTe ' while you do this.' So too when the part, agrees with 
 the object of the verb, as 2^ Awr KaTairovovfievov epvaaro ' saved 
 Lot under his sufferings.' ^ 
 
 The aorist participle is sometimes equivalent to a perfect 
 especially where the verb is in the present tense, as in Jude v. 7 ai 
 TToXet? eKiropvevaaaai -Trpo/ceivrat Sety/jta ' the cities having given 
 
 ' Dr. J. H. Moulton in his recent Or. of the N.T. (Prolegomena, p. 131)i 
 supports the view that the aor. part, and the main verb sometimes denote 
 coincident or identical action ; for which he quotes (Mt. 22^) airoKpiBeh ehev, 
 (Acts 10^) Ka\as iirolrjcras 'irapayev6ii.fVos. He adds that ' the latter puts into the- 
 past a formula constantly recurring in the p^yri . . . ei irot^iffeis Sois ' you will 
 oblige me by giving,' si dederis in Latin. I should have no objection to admit 
 ' coincident action ' in this sense, which allows antecedence, whether temporal or 
 logical to the aor. part. The phrase ' you did well to come ' implies that the fact 
 of the coming was first in the speaker's mind, and that it was followed by the 
 approving judgment. So in the phrase ' B answered and said,' the first speaker 
 (A) is aware of the fact of B's answering, before he has heard all the words that 
 make up the answer. So in Phil. 2^ kavrhv iKevutrtv /uopi^V Soi\ov Kafidv means 
 'He put on the form of a servant and thereby emptied himself.' Kfvdaas e\o/8c» 
 would mean ' he emptied himself and then took the form of a servant.' In some 
 cases, in which the aor. seems to have a present or even a future force, as in 
 iwijveira, irenTuira, ri oiiK aireKptvaro ; ( Jelf, § 403, 1 and 3), this force has to be 
 e^lained by the rapidity of Greek thought. The moment the thought was on 
 the point of utterance, the Athenian had already anticipated it, and approved or 
 condemned accordingly. And so in his eager impatience he cries, not ' Why does 
 he not answer ? ' but ' Why did not he do so the moment he had a chance ! ' ' Why 
 has he not answered already ? ' Cf. Thuc. iii. 38 &mayavii6fLevoi rois \4yovtriv nit 
 Strrepoi &Ko\ov9ri)rai SoKetv rp yv^fiig, i^eas S4 ti \4yarTos vpoevaireaai. 
 
xlviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 themselves over to fornication are set forth as an example,' R.V. 
 ■V. 12 ovToi eiaiv . . . SivSpa . , . St? airodavovTa e/epi^a>0evTa 
 ■* trees twice dead, plucked up by the roots,' where the relation 
 ■of the participles to each other is much the same as that in v. 16 
 .Kara ra? einOvfiicK} iropevofievoi,, dav/id^ovTe^ trpoamira, and v. 20 
 ■eTrocKoSofiovvTe^ . . . irpoa-ev^ofievoi. 2 Pet. 1^ rots la-orifiov 
 \a')(ovaiv iriaTLv (subaud. 'ypd(f)ei) ' to them that have obtained a 
 like precious faith,' R.V. 2^^ iirXavridrjaav e^aKoXovdija-avrei rfj 
 6S^ Tov BaXadfi, 'having followed the way of Balaam,' R.V. 
 1* TU(^\os eartv, X^drjv Xa^mv 'is blind, having forgotten,' R.V. 2^" 
 «t <yap d-TrofjjvyovTe^ rd fiidafiara tov Koafiov, towto*? Se irdXiv 
 eiiirXaKevre<; rjTT&vTai ' if, after having escaped the pollutions of the 
 world, they are again entangled in them and overcome by them.' 
 
 A remarkable feature in the use of participles in 2 Pet. is 
 -the sequence of present participles in 2^' " dSiKovfievoi . . . ^yov- 
 jMevoi . . . evTpv<l)&VTe<; avveveo'xpvfievoi, . . . 6<f>daXfiov9 evovrei 
 /jiea-Tovi fioixdXiSo^ . . . SeXed^ovT6<! ■x/tvt^^? . . . icapSiav yeyvfiva- 
 jTfieirqv 6;j^ovt6?. I am inclined to think that these suspended nomin- 
 atives are intended to have something of the effect of the historic 
 infinitive in Latin, giving, as it were, in successive scenes, charac- 
 teristic qualities or actions, apart from the particular circumstances 
 in which they occur. Compare what is said above as to the 
 omission of the article. Blass (p. 284) refers to St. Paul's free use 
 ■oi the participle instead of the finite verb, quoting 2 Cor. 7* 
 x)vSefiiav earxr)Kev dveaiv fi trdp^ 7)fiS>v, dXX' iv Travrl dXi^ofievoi, 
 Rom. 12*'°'^" rj dydirrf dvviroKpiToi;, d-n-offTvyovvTei to irovripov, 
 KoXXmfievoi t£ dyad^ . . . irporiyovfievoi , . . feovTes . . . Sou- 
 ^euoz'Tes K.T.X. See 1 Pet. ^'^ ofioicoi! ywaiKe^ viroTairao/ievai, S'- * 
 Lightfoot on Col. 3^" BiSdaxovTei;, J. H. Moulton, Prolegomena, 
 -pp. 180-183, 222-225. 
 
 Participle used instead of Infinitive 2 P. 2^" ov Tpifiovaiv 
 ^^Xaa-^rifiovvT6'i, where see note. 
 
 A participial clause is changed into a finite clause in Jude v. 16 
 ■oi)Toi elaiv yoyyvaTui . . . iropevofievoi, xal to aTOfta ainrnv XaXel 
 virepoyKa, Oavfid^ovTe's irpoacoira. 
 
 Voices, 
 
 Active for Middle 2 Pet. 1^ airovBriv irapei<T€v4yKapTe<; instead 
 •of the usual airovhrjv eia-eveyKdfievoi} 2^ itrdyovTei eavTolf 
 1 The aor. mid. of (pepai does not seem to occur in biblical Greek. 
 
GRAMMAR OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER xlix 
 
 airmKeiav instead of iwayofjievot. 2 Pet. l'^^ avovSdam for the 
 classical erirovSdao/jiai, cf. aKova-a Mt. 12^*, 13^*, d/iapTTja-o) 18^^, 
 diravTrjam Mk. 14^^, Blass, p. 42, So we find fieTairefiiro) for 
 fjLeTaTrifiiroiJiai in Thuc. i. 112. 3, iv. 30, vi. 52, etc., also 
 IMerayeLpi^to, X'i}i}^o> quoted in Poppo's n. on i. 13. See Blass, 
 pp. 183 f. ; Moulton, pp. 154-160. 
 
 •jToielv act. Jude v. 15 "Troirja-at Kpicriv 'to execute judgment* : 
 2 Pet. 1^^ KoX&i; iroieire Trpoa-e-)(pvre<!. -Koieladai, mid. with peri- 
 phrastic force Jude v. 3 airovSrjv 7roi.ovfievo<s ' hasting ; ' 2 Pet. 1^" 
 fie^aiav ttjv K\rjcnv iroieladai ' to confirm,' V-^ fivi^fir/v iroielcrdai 
 ' to call to mind ' or ' to mention.' 
 
 BiaKpive<r0ai 'to contend.' Jude u 9 t«3 Bia/3oK<p Scaxpivofievo^, 
 V. 22 iKiyx^ere BiaKpivofiivov^. The latter might also be taken to 
 imply 'hesitation.' I think both senses are deriv.ed from the 
 passive. See my n. on James 1® firjBev SiaKpivofiepo^. 
 
 ^deipecrdai pass. Jude «>. 10 iv tovtoi^ ^OelpovTui 'in these 
 things they are destroyed ' or ' corrupted ' (' they corrupt them- 
 selves ' A.V.) : 2 Pet. 2^^ iv r^ ^Oopa avrmv koX cfjdapi^a-ovTai, see 
 Appendix, p. 177. 
 
 e^exu^iycai' pass, with middle force, see note on Jude v. 11. 
 
 p,vi]a-dr]T6 pass, with middle force, Jude v. VI, 2 Pet. 3^. 
 
 SeStoprjrai deponent, perhaps used with passive force 2 Pet. 1* 
 though SeBcop7}fi6vr]<i has an active force in 1*, see quotations in n. 
 and Winer, pp. 324, 325. 
 
 ^aaavi^co, active used with an equivalent to the reflexive 
 pronoun instead of the passive, 2 Pet. 2^ i^v)(rjv hiKalav av6(ioi<; 
 epyoKs i^aa-dvi^ev. Cf. J. H. Moulton Prol. p. 87 and J. A. 
 Robinson there cited. 
 
 ^TTTjrat true passive followed by dat. 2 Pet. 2^*- ^''. 
 
 iKoi/M^Orjaav pass, with middle force 2 Pet. 3*. 
 
 TTjKerai (al. raKija-erai or Trj^erai) pass. 2 Pet. 3^^. 
 
 Xovo/juai, 2 Pet. 2^ S? \ova-afievr], the middle does not exclude 
 the passive sense. 
 
 Compound Sentence. 
 
 (1) Substantival Clauses. 
 
 (a) Direct Statement subordinated to verb of saying, Jude v. 9 
 elirev 'ETririfiija-ai croi K-vpio^, v. 14 Xeymv 'ISov ?i\dev K.vpio<;, 
 V. 18 eXeyov . . . eaovrai, i/jLiraiKrai. 2 Pet. 1^'' <f)cov'!]'i ive'xOela'rj'i 
 TOiaaSe . . .'O vt'o's /lov ot/TOi; iariv, 3* Xeyovre^ Hov iarlv 
 7) iirar/yeKla ; 
 
1 • INTB0DI7CTI0N 
 
 (6) Indirect Statement introduced by on, Jude v. 5 virofivijaai 
 vfia<s fiovXofiai OTi Kvpioi a-rrmXeaev, vv. 17, 18 fivija07jTe oti 
 eKeyov. 2 Pet 1^* elSaxi on, l^", 3* ycv(oaKovTe<i on, 3^ S* \ai>- 
 davereo on. 
 
 (2) Adjectival Clauses introduced by relative, Jude v. 10, v. 13, 
 V. 15 Us, 2 Pet. 1\ P, 11^ 1", li», 212, 215, 2", 2" 3\ 3«, 3i», 3^^ 3i^ 
 31* 6is. 
 
 (3) Adverbial Clauses. 
 
 (a) Temporal (a). Local (yS), Modal (7). 
 
 (a) Jude u 9 ore SieXiyero. 2 Pet. 1^^ ew? oS ^/tepa Stavydarj, 
 3* a^' ^? eKOifirfO-qaav, V^ €<}>' oaov el/ii. 
 
 (^) 2 Pet. 2" oirov ayyeXoi ov <f)ipov(riv (tropical force). 
 
 (7) Jude V. 7 m at "jroXen irpoKeivrat. 2 Pet. 1^* Kadcaf iSr}- 
 Xwaev, 2^ &<s ev vfitv eaovrat, 3® w? Tivet ^yovvrai. 
 
 (6) Causal, Jude t;. 11 oval aurots on iiTopevdi]<rap. 
 
 (c) Final, 2 Pet. 1* SeSmprjTai "va yevrjaOe, 3^' ^vXaaaeaOe 'iva 
 fiT) eKirearfTe. 
 
 (d) Conditional, 2 Pet. 2* el 6 @eo<; ovie i^eiaaTo . . . olSev 
 evae^ei<s pveadai, ahUovi Se Trjpelv (irregular apodosis), 2^ ei 
 ^TTCovTai . . . yiyovev avrol<i. 
 
 No other form of the conditional clause occurs in either epistle. 
 edv, av, orav are not found either here or in 1 Pet., except idv 
 once in 1 Pet. 3«. 
 
 Negatives. 
 
 There is nothing unusual in the use of ov in either epistle, 
 except that ttS? . . . ov = ovhel<s, 2 P. 1^", ov . . . 7roT6= outtotc 
 ih. 1^1. It occurs twice only in Jude w. 9 and 10. It is found after 
 el in 2P- 2*'* el yap 6 0eo? dyyeXcov ovk e^eiaaro — koI dpyaiov 
 Koapov OVK i^eta-aro in accordance with the predominant use in 
 the N.T. See Blass,p. 254, and my note on James 1^. For p,^ see 
 Index. It is used with the relative where qui would take subjunctive, 
 as in 2 P. 1* &> p,r} irdpeanv, 1 Job. 4^ "jrav irvevpM o p-r/ opoXoyet, 
 Tit. 1^1 hiZdffKovre<! a pt) Sel. More commonly the relative is 
 followed by ov as in Job. 4^ irpoaKwelre h ovk otSare, Lk. 14^' 
 oanf oil /SaTrrtfet. As a rule ptj is used with the participle, as in 
 Jude i>. 19 •Trvevp.a p,r} ^x^ovTei, 2 P. 3® p,aKpodvp^l p.r) ^ovXopsvov 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER li 
 
 Ttra? airoXea-Oai,. The exceptional cases in which oi is used 
 with the participle are given in Winer, pp. 609 f. and J. H. Moulton, 
 pp. 231 f. 
 
 The prohibitive use of ov firj is not found in biblical Greek. The 
 negative use is common in the LXX. ; and J. H. Moulton {Prole- 
 gomena 190 foil.) states that it occurs 93 times in the N.T. 
 generally in quotations from the O.T. and in the Gospels and 
 Apocalypse. It is most often joined, as in 2 P. 1^° ov /itj TTTaiarjTe 
 and in classical Greek, with the aor. subj., but is also found with 
 the future indicative, as in Mt. 26^^ oi fiij ae apvrja-ofiai, and in 
 Aristopb. Banae 508 ov /it] tr irycb irepio'^ofji.ai. 
 
 Other Adveris and Particles. 
 
 aWd is used twice in Jude, six times in 2 Pet. always to 
 contrast a positive with a negative conception. In 2 P. 2*'^ the 
 opposition is varied : in the former verse aXkd contrasts the 
 verbs, the object remaining the same el lyhp 6 ©eo? arfyeXavovK 
 i^eicaTo, aXka aeipal<s nrapehcoKev ; in the latter it contrasts the 
 objects as well as the verbs, Ka\ ap'x^aiov Koa-fiov ovk 
 ed>el<7aTo, dXka Nme SiKaioa-vtnji; KrjpvKa icj)vXa^ev, thus preparing 
 the way for the general apodosis olSev Kw/?to? evo-e/Set? pveaOai, 
 dSiKov<s Se Ko\a^ofievov<! TTjpelv. Here the strict logical sequence 
 would have been el 6 ©eo? ayyeXcov ovk e(j>eieraTo, aXKa ffei/oat? 
 irapehooKev, Kal dpj(aiov Koafiov ovk i^eiaaTO, dWA KaTaK\v<r/J,ov 
 eirrj^ev, oySoov Nwe o-wcra?, with some such apodosis as ttw? tovtwv 
 ^eiaerai ; 
 
 yap is used once in Jude, 15 times by 2 Pet. 
 
 Sio three times in 2 Pet., not in Jude. 
 
 fiiv-Bd, Jude vv. 8, 10, 22, 23. In w. 8 and 23 Se is repeated. 
 /liv is not found in 2 Pet. though it occurs five times in 1 Pet. 
 
 Se occurs 21 times in 2 Pet. twice with kui, 1^ airovBda-co Be 
 Kal, 2^ iyivovTo Be Kal, which is also found in Jude v. 14. Rarer 
 uses in 2 Pet. are Kal avro rovro Be 1^ and the repeated iv Be in 
 1^''^, where see notes. 
 
 ^817. The idiomatic use of ijBr) with the numeral is found 
 in 2 Pet. 3^ Tavrrjv rjBr} Bevrepav ypd<J3m eTriaro'Krjv, where see n. 
 
 Kadatf* 2 Pet. 1", 3l^ once in 1 Pet. 
 
 KaL See Index, re not found in 2 Pet. or 1 Pet., once in 
 Jude V. 6 Tovi fit) iria-TevcravTai; airdoXecrev, dyyeXov^ re reTTjprjKev. 
 
 Kalirep. 2 Pet. 1^^ Kalirep etSdxas.t 
 
lii INTRODUCTION 
 
 /eaXws. The idiomatic koKSx; iroielre occurs in 2 Pet. 1^' ; cf. 
 Moulton, pp. 228 f. 
 
 fievroi used with its proper force ' nevertheless ' Jude v. 8. 
 
 ovTioi, idiomatic, 2 Pet. 3* -n-avra ovtox; Sia/ievei — in statu quo : 
 cf. Joh. 4« iKadeKero ovtoxs, ib. 13®, Abbott Joh. Gr. pp. 26 f. 
 
 iraKai. Jude v. 4 oi jraXai Trpoyeypa/ifiipoi, 2 Pet. 1' t&v 
 iraXai ainov d/iapTi&v. 
 
 €Kird\ai. Used in 2 Pet. 2*, 3® alone in biblical Greek. Lobeck 
 (Phryn. p. 47) quotes Philo M. 1 p. 323 raii 6fioXoyT]0ei<rai<i 
 eKiraXai irapBevoiii e? ofiiXiav ipxifievoi,, Plut. V. Aristid. p. 328 F 
 efiraXav irpoi ttjv fidxvv cnrapy&v, V. ITiem. p. 127 A "Trapea-KevaKwi; 
 eKvaXai Tiva<i a-7roicT6vovPTa<i, Josephus A.nt. xvi. 8. 4 eKTraXai 
 /lev avvehpevcav avrS irpoaeKei/ro. See also Wetstein's n. on 2*. 
 
 irov. Rhetorical use.f 2 Pet. 3* -irov i<n\v tj iirar/yeXia rfji 
 irapova-ia^ ; cf. Isa. 33^ ttov elaiv ol ypa/i/iaTiKoi ; Ps. 42***" 
 irov iariv 6 ©eo? aov ; Eur. fferacl, 369 irov ravra KoX&i av elrj 
 irapa y ev ^povovaiv ; where Paley quotes Elmsley ' Particula 
 interrogativa irov non sine indignatione negat, ut saepe apud 
 tragicos,' cf. AU. 1075, Phoen. 548 ttou 'ariv^Siicrj ; Soph. Aj. 1100 
 irov (TV a-Tparriyel<i roSSe ; Oed. T. 390 irov <rii fidvTit; el fra<f>^i; ; 
 Sibyl, viii. 75 irov Tore aoi to KpdTo<; ; 
 
 m<; with gen. abs., 2 Pet. 1* to? irdvTa t^9 0eia<! Svvdfieax; 
 SeSa)pr]fievj)ii, following xdpi'i vfuv TrXrjOvvdeiri, where the subject- 
 ive force almost disappears. If the sentence had run ' I pray that 
 you may be blessed through the knowledge of God, seeing that 
 the Divine Power has granted us all good through the knowledge 
 of Himself,' cu? would have kept its usual force. Winer (pp. 770 f.) 
 and others prefer to connect the gen. abs. with the imperative 
 67rt;(;o/w;7j;o-are in v. 5, but this involves us in greater difficulties. 
 See explanatory note. For the other uses of «»? see Index. 
 
 Ellipsis. 
 
 Of Verb in the Salutation, Jude v. 1 'lovSa^ toi<! kXtitoU sc. 
 Xaipeiv \eyei, so 2 Pet. 1^ IleTpo? rot? \axova-iv. Of the substan- 
 tive verb in the Ascription, Jude v. 25 0em So^a sc. earto, so 2 Pet. 
 3^ aiiTW 17 So^a, and 3^ ttjv /iaKpo6v/iLav a-coTTjpiav (elvai) 
 Tiyeiade. Of Noun in agreement with relative 2 Pet. V^ e<o<s ov 
 {XPovov), 1*2 e^' ocTov {"xpovov), 3* d^' ^9 (^/iepa<i) ; of Antecedent 
 understood from relative 2 Pet. 1* eS /t^ irdpevTiv javra {ovto<s) 
 
GRAMMAR OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER Uii 
 
 tv(J)K6<s ia-Tiv, 2'-^ iv oi<s ayvoovaiv ^Xaacfirj/iovvrei by attraction for 
 iv tovtok; a dyvoova-iv. Noun or pronoun expressed with one verb 
 and understood witb another, 2 Pet. 1^ ravra vfiiv iiirdpypvTa ovk 
 dpyovi (w/ta?) Kadiariij<rbv. 1 Pet. 2^ irpoa-Koinovaiv tw \6'y<p 
 direidovvTe<s (t^ \6y(p). Verb of subordinate clause understood 
 from the verb of the principal clause, 2 Pet. 3^" (IlavXo<; eypa^Jrev) 
 ft)? Kal iv irdaai'i rats eTna-roXalf {ypd<f)6i). Participle understood 
 in a later clause from a preceding clause, 2 Pet. 3* fx,rj ^ovKofievo^ 
 Tiva<s dfroXeadai dWh (^ovXofievos:) Trai/ra? 6i? fierdvoiav 
 •X^coprja-ai, 2^ kvcov iirioTpei^a^ eiri to 'iStov i^epafia Kal 5s Xovcra- 
 ftivri (ivia-Tpe^aa-a) el<s KvXia-fiov. Also kvcov is without a verb, 
 which may be thus supplied, o vdXiv ifi-n-XaKeh (v. 20) earlv m 
 Kvmv. 
 
 Pleonasm. 
 
 Jude V. 3 vfiiv repeated after ypa>^ai; v. 5 u/ua? repeated 
 emphatically after etSdra?; v. 4 avdpcoiroi, after tiv€<;, after 
 do-e/Set? 2 Pet. 3' ; redundant pronoun after I'Stos, 2 Pet. 3* Karei 
 tAs ISia^ i'iri6vp.la<i avr&v ■jropevo/ievoi, 3^® irpo^ tjjv ISiav avrStv 
 dirwXetav ; in resumption of preceding noun 2 Pet. 3^^ iv •n-dcrai's 
 Tai<s iTria-ToXaig {ypd^ei) TmX&v iv avTai<; irepX tovtwv. Compare 
 the similar redundant use after a relative (Blass, p. 175). The 
 fourfold repetition of ira? and of the cognates of acre/S?;? in Jude 
 V. 15 is emphatic.^ So the phrase used for eternity in Jude v. 25. 
 
 Intensification of the meaning of the verb by repetition through 
 the cognate noun or participle, as in Gen. 27^^ i^ea-rr) 'laadie 
 EKo-Taaiv fieydXrjv, Lk. 22^® iindvfiia iireOvfiijcra, James 5^' 
 ■Kpoaevyfj irpoarjv^aro, where see my note, also Vorst De Hebraismis 
 pp. 610-635. Two remarkable instances are found in 2 Pet. 
 where iv is joined to the dative, viz. "iP iv tj} (jydopd avT&v xal 
 <f>0api]<rovTai, where avrmv appears to refer to the preceding 
 dXoya ^ioSa, and iv implies that their destruction will be shared 
 by the libertines ; and 3* iXevvovTai iv i/iTraiy/Jbovy i/nraiKrai, 
 where iv ifiTraiyfiovfj is equivalent to the participle, as in Lam. 1^ 
 KXaiovaa exXavffev. 
 
 Peeiphrasis. 
 
 With e^eiv, Jude v. 3 dvdr/Kriv ea-xpv ( = rfvayKaadriv) ypd'<^at 
 vpTiv, 2 Pet. V-^ exofJi-ev ^e^aiorepov rov \oyoi' = perfect of ^e/Saioco, 
 2^^ eXey^iv ^a-)(ev •trapavonla<! = riXeyx&''l ""ept tt., 2" Kaphiav 
 yeyvfivaanivriv TrXeove^ia'} exovreq = yeyv fivafffievoi irXeove^ia^, 
 
liv INTRODUCTION 
 
 TTOteio-^ffit.f 2 Pet. 1^" jSe^aiav rriv tcKr^aiv •iroielaOav^ ^e^aiovv, 
 \^ rovTOiv /jLvij/ir/v iroieladai = rovrwv fivTjaffrjvai, Jude v. 3 airov- 
 Sr)v ■7rocov/ji,evo<; = cnrevBasii. Xafi^dvetv, 2 Pet. 1^ Xrjdriv Xa^eov = 
 i7ri\ad6fievo<;, 2 Pet. V Tui^mv rifiijv = Ti/ir}0ei<i. 2 Pet. 1^, 3^ 
 Sieyeipeiv vfid^ iv inrOfi,v'^trei = v7rofivfjaai. 
 
 Hendiadys. 2 Pet. 1^* rrjv tov Kvplov Svpafuv koI irapovaiav 
 = T^v iv Svvdfiei irapovalav, see Mt. 24^" and Mk. 9^ quoted 
 in explanatory note. 
 
 Anacoluthon. 
 
 Jude V. 16 ovTol elaiv r^oy^vcnal, icard ra? lindvfiLa'i 
 iropevofievoi, ica\ rb a-rofia avr&v XaXei virepoyxa, 0avfid^ovTe<i 
 Trpoa-anra. Here the construction would have been regular, 
 if we had had &v to crro/jLa, instead of koI to a-TOfia avT&v. 
 Even the latter would in itself have been an ordinary construction, 
 if it were not for the added participial clause in agreement with 
 the general subject. By strict rules of grammar the participle 
 should have been in the genitive case to agree with ainmv, but 
 this would have implied a close connexion between the two latter 
 clauses, whereas they are really inconsistent, the first clause being 
 that with which the last clause is really connected. The nomi- 
 native of the participle is often freely used where another case 
 would be strictly correct : see Blass, p. 285, and the instances from 
 2 Pet. 31 below. 
 
 2 Pet. 117-19 \a/3a)v . . . Bo^av, (fxovfji ivexdela-qf ToidcrSe . . . Koi 
 TavTijv TTjv ^cavfjv riKovaafiev . . . Koi ey^ofiev ^e^aioTepov tov 
 \6yov. Here Xa^oav prepares the way for such an apodosis as 
 i^e^aieaa-ev tov Xoyov, but the interposed clause of v. 18, dwelling 
 on the importance of the evidence referred to, causes the writer 
 to lose his construction. 
 
 2 Pet. 2*^ el yap 6 0eos . . . ov/c ii])ei<raT0, dXXd irapeBatKev . . . 
 Kai, . . . ovK i(f>ei<raT0, dXXa . . . i^vXa^ev, . . . Kal iroXen . . . kutS- 
 Kpivev, . . . KoX BiKaiov . . . ipvcraTO, . . . olBev K.vpiov evtre^ei^ 
 pveadai, dBiKovs Be . . . Trjpelv. The natural apodosis to the first 
 protasis would be tovtwv ov ^eiasTai, but the multiplication of 
 protases showing mercy joined with judgment requires a mixed 
 apodosis, which is further postponed by the interposition of v. 8 to 
 explain KaTaTrovovfievov. 
 
 2. Pet. 3^'* Bieyeipm vfi&v t^v Bidvoiav, fivrjadrjvai t&v prffidrcav 
 TOV Kvplov, yLvd)a-KovT€<s oTi iXeverovTai e/nraiKTai. Here we 
 
GRAMMAR OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER Iv 
 
 should have expected yivu>a-Kovra<! to agree with the subject of 
 the infinitive fivr)ffffr}vai, but the writer ends his sentence, as if he 
 had begun, as Jude does, with fivrjaOrire. See explanatory note.- 
 
 Asyndeton, confirmatory, where we might have expected a 
 genitive absolute, 2 Pet. 2^* eXeY^tK eaxev irapavofiia^- vvo^vytov 
 a<j>a)vov eKmXvffev rriv tov 7rpo<j)'^TOV Trapa^poviav. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 Further Remarks on the Style of Jude and of 2 Peter 
 
 A marked feature of the style of St. Jude is his fondness for 
 triplets. Thus in v. 2 we find eX-eo? xal elprjinj kuI aydin] 
 
 12 3 
 
 irXrjOvvBect). In u 4 ' the men who were designed for this judg- 
 ment ' are described as aae^eh, Trjv tov @eov XO'PI-T''' iierariOevTeii 
 
 1 2 
 
 et? aaeXyeiav, tov fiovov Sea-'jroTrjv apvov/ievoi. In w. 3—7 three 
 
 3 
 
 examples of punishment are adduced, Israel in the wilderness, the 
 angels who sinned, the overthrow of Sodom. In v. 8 the libertines 
 a-dpKa fiev jjuiaivovaiv, KvptOTijra Se dderovtriv, S6^a<; Se ffKaa^rj- 
 fiovatv. [In 'jw. 9, 10 we have two couplets ovk eTokfirja-ev — 
 aWa eiTrev : otra fiev ovk o'iSaaiv — ^\acr(f)7]fiov(riv, o<ra Se — 
 ^OeipovTui.] In v. 11 we return to the triplet, Cain, Ealaam, 
 Korah. [In w. 12, 13 we have a quintet of metaphors, hidden 
 rocks, rainless clouds, dead trees, turbid waves, falling stars. In 
 u 15 again two couplets iroiijaai, Kpitriv — iXey^ai, irepl irdvTtov 
 &v ^aejSrjo-av — &v eXd\r)a-av.^ In v. 16 we return to the triplet 
 iropevo/jLevoi — XaXovvreq (disguised in the form wal to (tto/ui XaXet 
 virepoyKo) — dav/j,d^ovre<;. So in v. 17, the word — the Apostles — 
 the Lord. v. 18 does not admit of subdivision. ■». 19 has the 
 triplet atroSiopi^ovre^, i^vjfiKol, irvevfia fit) ej^oi/res. w. 20 and 21 
 have a double triplet eTroiKoBofiovvTei; — irpoa-evy^^o/ievoi — irpoa- 
 Sey(6/ievot and irvevfia ayiov — ©eo? — 'Itjo-oS? Xpto-To?. v. 22 has 
 the marked triplet ous fiev — ovs 8e — ot<! S^. v. 24 has a couplet 
 ^vXd^ai — a-rijaai. v. 25 has a quartet Bo^a, fieyaXcoavvr), Kpdro^, 
 i^ovaia, followed by the triplet irpb iravTo<! tov al&vo^, xal vvv, 
 KoX ell TrdvTais Toy's almvai, thus closing with a septet. Compare 
 the stress laid on the fact that Enoch was seventh from Adam, 
 V. 14. 
 
 There are some traces of the triplet in St. James, as in l^*" 
 
STYLE OF JUDE AND OP 2 PETER Ivii 
 
 €Kaa-TO<! "Treipd^erai vtto t^? iBia<; iiriOvfiiaii^elTa 19 i'Tidvfiia 
 TiKTec a/iapTtav, rj Se dfiaprla dvoKvei ddvarov, v. 19 earco Se Tras 
 dv0pm7ro<s raj^ixs el<; to aKovaat, ^paSim eh to XaXrjaai, ^paSixt 
 et? opyrjv, 2^ iTriaTevaev 'A^padfi t^ ®ew, kuI iXoyiffOr) avT^ 64? 
 BiKaioavvrjv, Koi ipiXo^ @eov eKXTjdrj, 3® ^ ryX&acra rj tnriXovaa, kuI 
 (f>\oyi^ovcra — Kal ip\o<yi^o/Ji,ivr], 4* iyyia-aTe t& @em — KaOaplffUTe 
 ■)(eipa<i — dyvicraTB leapBia^, so 4*, 5^''' *^- Perhaps we may find a 
 septet in the beautiful description of heavenly wisdom (3^') nrpwTov 
 fiev dyvq, CTretxa elprjviKi^, eVtetKJjs, einreiBij';, /xeaTrj eXeov? xal 
 Kapiruv diyaO&v, dBidxpiTo^, dwiroKpiTO^. But the distinctive 
 mark of St. James' style is ' paronomasia ' passing at times into 
 such a climax as we find in V-^^^ quoted above and in 1^'* to 
 SoKifiiov vfiStv Tij? iria-Teux; KUTepyd^eTai inrofiovrjv, rj Be VTro/jiovr) 
 epyov Tekeiov e-)(eTto, iva ?iTe TeXeioi. See pp. ccxxiif. of my 
 edition. 
 
 There is something analogous to this last in 2 Peter, as in 1^"^ 
 where faith is represented as the root, out of which the seven 
 virtues spring, each growing out of the one before it (e-irixoprjy^a-aTe 
 iv Ty iriffTei vfi&v ttjv dpeT^v, ev Be Ty dpeTy ttjv yvaxriv, ep Be 
 Ac.T.X.).^ I have suggested (p. 192) that the writer may have had 
 in his mind the mystical ogdoad, which includes and completes the 
 sabbatical hebdomad, and that he may have intended to mark 
 this by substituting Noah the eighth (2 P. 2^) for Jude's Enoch 
 the seventh (J. v. 14). A less elaborate refrain, if we like to call it 
 so, is found in 2 P. S^"'-*^^ o v p a v ol nrapeXevaovTai, a t o i 'y^ela 
 Be K av a- o V fi ev a Xv 6 rj a- eTai KaX y rj irvp a 6 ij a- eT a iC?). 
 TOVTdav Xvofievcov iroTairov^ Sei virdp'x^eiv vfid'i . . . airevBovTai; 
 Tr)v irapovaiav . . . Bi rjv o v p av oi irvpovfievot Xv 6 rj a ov- 
 T ai Kal (TTotj^eta k av <r ov i^eva Tij^eTai (?). Not unlike 
 is the intensive force of the reduplication of i/MTraiKTrjis in 3^ 
 eXevaovTai iv ifiiraiyfiovfi ifnraiKTai, and of ^dopd in 2^^ yeyevvq- 
 fieva eh aKooatv Ka\ (j>0opdv, . . . ev Ty <f)dopa avT&v xai 
 ^daprjo-ovTat. The same idea is dwelt on 1^ diro^iiyovTeis t^? ev 
 TOO Koa-fi^ ev eiriOvfiia (j>6opdq, 2^^ BovXoi virdp')(pvTe<i Tri<; tpOopd^. 
 These examples lead us to suppose that the reiteration of the 
 same words throughout the epistle does not necessarily arise from a 
 limited vocabulary, — an explanation which seems hardly consistent 
 with the occasional use of very rare words on the part of the 
 writer — but either from a liking for recurrent sounds, or from a 
 ' Cf. a similar climax in Wisdom vi. 17-21. 
 
Iviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 desire to give emphasis by the use of ' line upon line ' or from 
 both. Such repeated words are airaikeia in 2^ "n-apeurd^ovacv 
 aipea-ei<; aTrcoKeiat . . . iirdyovTei eavToi<; ra')(ivr]v airtoXeiav, 2* ^ 
 d-TrooiXeia avraiv oii vva-rd^ei, 3^^ tt/sos rijv IBiav avT&v aircaXeiav, 
 and diroWvfii in 3* 6 Kocrfio^ d-K<o\eTo, 3® firj ^ovX6fj,ev6<s Tiva<i 
 d-TToXiadai. So we have the word iiriyvataK; four times, yvaiaii 
 twice, eiriyipdxrKO) twice,^ iindvfiia four times, KoXa^ofievov<s 
 TTjpeZv twice, rovro irp&Tov yivd)aKovTe<i twice, Sieyeipeiv iv 
 virofivija-ei twice, {nro/Li/jivija-Km once, fivij/irfp voieladai once, the 
 tropical use of the rare i^aKoXovOeca thrice, the rare ddea/ioi; 
 twice, <nrovBd^a> thrice, ^e^ato<; twice, eirayyeXia twice, 
 ivdyyeXfia twice, itrdyto twice, "Trdpei/ii twice, Kplai<; four times, 
 ^aa-<f>r]/jteiv .thrice, fiXda-(j>r)fio'} once, eiciraXat twice, irpoaSoKda 
 three times, 6S6<; (tropical) four times, Koa-fio'; four times, -rrapovaia 
 thrice, eirtxoprjyeio twice, acoTtjp four times (of Christ), arripll^td V^, 
 da-TijpiKTo<; 3^^ (TTripiyfiov 3^'. It is worth noting how frequently 
 the repetition occurs in the same sentence, as in 1^* cos Trdvra 
 rjfuv T^9 6eia<i Svvdfieax; SeBwpr}fiev7i<s ... Si' wj/ to, rifiia eirayyeX- 
 fiara SeSdyprjrai (where the verb seems to be used first as middle 
 and then as passive), li3>i* g'^' Saov elpX iv rovrio t£ aKtjvcoftaTt 
 ... 77 dir66e<Tii tov a-K7]vd>/iiaT6<; /iov, l-''' ^^ Xa^cbv 86^ av, 
 <j) (o vi] ^ i V e')(0 e c a ij <! d-Tro rrji; fieyaXoTrpeTrovi S o ^ ?; ? ... 
 ical TavTTjv T^v <p covTj V TjKovaaiiev i^ ovpavov ive^Oeiaav, 
 2'' ^ h i K a lov Aft)T i p V (T UT o, ^Xefi/ian yap Kal aKoy S i- 
 Kaio^ ■<^vyi}v B i k a i av e/3aadvi^ev, in the next verse comes 
 p V e a a I, 2^^ rjBovrjv ^yovfievoi rrjv iv Vf-^Pf t pv <}> 171/, ivT pv- 
 <f>& VT e <; iv rat? dirdTaii;, B^ov^paSvvei &<; Ttve? ff p a B v- 
 Tfjr a Tjy ovvrai. There is the same impressive fourfold repetition of 
 dae^eia and its cognates in Jude v. 15. We also meet with pairs 
 of synonyms, as 1' iv Be ry <fttXaSeX(l>ia ttjv dydmjv, 1^° kXtjitiv xai 
 iKXoyjjv, 2^^ inrlXoi, KaX fiw/ioi, 3^* da-iriXoi xal a/ito/iTjToi. The 
 only triplets I have noticed in 2 Peter are the three examples of 
 judgment in 2*'^ and the constituents of the Cosmos {ovpavoi, 
 a-Toix^ia, yff) in 3^" 
 
 I have alluded to the influence of rhythmical considerations on 
 the choice and order of words in my edition of the epistle of 
 St. James (pp. ccxxvi foil.). As examples of fine rhythm I would 
 cite 2 P. Ii8>i7 oi yap a-ea-o^ia-f^voi^ v-vOon i^aKoXovd^a-avres | 
 
 ' See the quotations in the Index. 
 
STYLE OP JUDE AND OF 2 PETER lix 
 
 iyva)pi<rav.ev v\f.lv ttjv tov Kvplov '^f.wv | Bvvav-iv kuI irapowlav 
 II aXK eiro-iTTai yevrjOevres | rrjs sKeivov neyaXetoTJjros || ^ 
 "Kaptov yap | irapa @60t) irarpos ^ Ti\ivv leal So^av \ ^(ovfJ9 
 ivexOeitrrji ToiatrSe uiro tjJs ^eyaXqirpeitovs So^ijs || 'O vlos 
 nou I o ayairtjTos [lou | outo's itrriv, where the alliteration in m, j) 
 (/8, <^), and s may be noted. An equally fine rhythm is to be found 
 in 119-21 Koi exofiev Pe^aiorepov 'tov irpo^rjTiKov \6yov [ cS «a\.w? 
 irot6tT6 irpoai')(pvTe<i \ <»S ^wp^v^) ^aipovTi iv av'^^fjbrjpw tottu) | eta? 
 ov Tffiepa Siavydaji | /cat ^a)a^6po<; avareikrj | ei/ rat? Kaphlait 
 ifi&v ||. It will be observed that in this and the following verses 
 the rh)d;hmical effect is enhanced by the alliteration in p and I. I 
 cannot go into further details here, but those who have an ear for 
 beautiful rhythm should read aloud 2*'^ and 3^^; also Jude 
 w. 20, 21 u/U6(9 Be &yatrr}Toi | eirotKoSofiovvre^ eavroii^ rfj 
 ayimrdTii vfi&v irt'o-ret | iv wev/ian ayim irpoaevxpfievoi, \ 
 kavTov<i iv iydirr) ©eot) Trip-qcrare \ ••rpoaZe'ypfievoi, to eXeo<i tov 
 Kvpiov rjii&v I 'Iijo-ow "KpiaTov \ et? ^(ofjv alwviov ||, where there is a 
 marked alliteration in p, as also in v. 3. Another peculiarity in 
 Jude is the rhyme in v. 8 adpKa /jiev fiiaiv o v cr iv, icvpiOTrjTa 
 Se aOeT a v a- iv, So^a^ Be ^\a<7cj)rjfi ovaiv, and in ot. 10 and 11 : 
 ocra fi£v OVK olB acr iv, ^Xaa^rjfx, ov or bv, oaa Be . . . ivl- 
 a T a V T a I, iv TOVTOig (ftdeip ovt ar oval avToii otl . . . eVo- 
 pev 0r) a av Koi . . . e'f 6% v rj cr a v. We may compare the 
 occasional iambic fragments to be found in 2 P. as 1^^ tov 
 vpo(j)7]Tiic6v \6yov, iv aij^ftripm Tovea, '^/nepa Btavydarj, 2* et? 
 Kplcnv Tijpovfievov^, 2* i^fiipav i^ ^fiepat, y^vyrjv Bixaiav, '2?^ 
 KvXiafia ^opl36pov, as to which see a note by Canon E. L. Hicks 
 in C.B. iv. 49, Dr. Bigg's Commentary, p. 227. Cf. also Deane's 
 Book of Wisdom, p. 28. 
 
 Criticisms on the Style and Vocabulary of 2 Peter considered. 
 
 We have seen that in some respects, notably in the use of the 
 article, the style of 2 P. is more classical than that of most of the 
 books of the N.T. So also as to the use of the genitive absolute, 
 of the negatives, the attraction of the relative, and such idiomatic 
 phrases as KaXS)<; iroielTe 'trpoak')(pvTe<i V-'^, koX uvto tovto Be 1^, 
 rifiepav e^ ijfiepa^ 2*, Tci tt/so? ^eoijv 1*, to t^? •irapoifiia<; 2^\ ea><! 
 ov Stavydarr] l^*, a(f>' ^s iKoifii]di]a-av 3*, e'^' oaov el fit 1^^, and 
 
 1 I use the half stroke, the stroke, and the double stoke to mark an ascending 
 scale of the rhythmical pause. 
 
Ix INTRODUCTION 
 
 the subjunctive after 'Iva and ov fi^q. Generally speaking, I think 
 the writer's command of grammar is quite up to the usual level of 
 the N.T. On the other hand, his style suffers from such defects as 
 the non-use of the particle fiev, and of the articular infinitive ; but 
 I do not think it deserves the severe censures that have sometimes 
 been passed upon it. Dr. Chase, who is more moderate than 
 others, condemns, as solecisms, P.'s use of ^i/i/ia, KavaovaOai, 
 lieKKi^aio, fivrjfirjv iroieladai, irapet<rt})epa>, <j)a)V'>]. Taking these 
 in order, we must allow that, if we retain the old reading, and the 
 old translation of 2^, ^Xefifiari yap koX b,Koy 6 BiKaio<! iyxaTotic&v 
 ev auTot? . . . -t^vyrjv Stxaiav dvofioii 6/07069 i^acrdvi^ev (' For that 
 righteous man dwelling among them vexed his righteous soul, in 
 seeing and hearing, with their unlawful deeds '), fiXefifiuTt will bear 
 a sense for which no precedent can be found ; but, if we omit the 
 article before SiKaio<: with WH. and B, and translate aspectu et amiitu 
 Justus with the Vulgate, we get rid of the difficulty. The objec- 
 tion to Kavaoofiai is that it is elsewhere used only of fever, but 
 the same objection might be made to the word Kav/iaTi^co, which 
 also is commonly used of fever in profane Greek, but occurs four 
 times in the N.T. (Mt. 13«, Mk. 4«, Apoc. le^'*) of external 
 heat, as in Epict. i. 6. 26 ev 'OXvfivia S' ov Kavfiark^eade ; ov 
 (rTevoj(a)p6lade ; A similar explanation may be given of 
 fivjjfirjv iroieia-Oai in l^'. If we translate this with the 
 A.V. 'to have these things in remembrance,' we give an 
 unusual, but (as I have endeavoured to show in my note) 
 not an impossible sense to the phrase. I think however 
 that we may take it in its ordinary sense ' to practise the mention 
 (or ' to make your mention ') of these things after my death.' With 
 regard to /teWijo-oj {V^), I agree with Dr. Field in thinking that 
 it makes no sense here, and that it has probably been written by 
 error for the rare /leXijaa) ' I will take care to.' Two objections 
 are taken to the phrase atrovhrjv irapeia-eveyKavrei (1) that the verb 
 regularly used in periphrasis with o-TrovSiyi; is the middle ela^e- 
 peadai, and (2) that, in the compound irapeiai^epto, irapd must mean 
 ' secretly,' as in "Trapeia-eSvijerav Jude v. 4 and irapeiad^ovaiv 2 P. 2*. 
 As to the second objection, irapd in composition is not limited to the 
 meaning ' secretly ; ' cf. Rom. S^" i/6/ios nrapeurfiXeev ' the law came 
 in beside,' and see Schweighauser Lex. Polyb. under vapeiadytu. 
 Compare also the compounds •n-apeia^dWo), •jrapeiaSixo/Jiai, 
 •n-apeia^peo), •n-apeiv)(em and other compounds quoted in my note on 
 
STYLE OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER Ixi 
 
 2 P. l^. As to the voice, in Hiellenistic Greek the force of the middle 
 was very much forgotten, as we may see from the forms a-irov- 
 haaw aud irirdyovTe<i quoted above (pp. xlviii f.) from this epistle ; 
 and the parallels there adduced show that even writers of the best 
 period did not shrink from using the active, where later Atticists 
 insisted on the middle. The objection made to ^wv^ is that, 
 whereas it properly means 'an irrational cry,' it is used in 
 2 P. 11^ of the divine utterance at the Transfiguration. This 
 account of ijicavi] however only applies when it is contrasted 
 with \6yo<s, as in Ignat. Bom. 2 : by itself <jx(ovi] stands not only 
 for the bare sound, but also for the significant utterance, as in the 
 Homeric «j dpa (fxovrjo-ev, and even for the thought apart from 
 the utterance, as in Plato Protag. 341 B ttjv Xi/icoviSov ^mvijv 
 ' the saying of Simonides,' Epict. iv. 1. 32 (after a quotation from 
 Diogenes) tovt ea-Tiv iXevOepov avSpo(; <jicojn], Pint. Mor. 106 B 
 evravda dv rt? eXxvaeie Trjv tov "ZaKpuTov^ KJxovriv, ei avveiaeviy- 
 Kai/j,ev 6ts TO Koivbv ra'i drvj^ia^ asare SieXeadat to Xaov exaa-Tov, 
 aafjievovfs av Toii<s irXeiovs to,^ eavT&v \a^6vTa<; direKdelv, So 
 Acts 13^ ar/vor)a-avTei TCfi ^tuva^ twv '7rpo<f)7jT&v Ta<} kuto, irav 
 ad^^aTov dvcLyiveaa-KOfiiva^, Gen. id^'' Sie/SoijffTj rj ^(ov-q (E..V. 'the 
 fame thereof) et's tov oIkov ^apam, XeyopTe^ oti "Hicaa-iv ol 
 aheK^oi 'Icoa-^cj). 
 
 Another word which has caused offence is p-vwird^mv. It is 
 certainly not a common word ; and if the use of uncommon words 
 is to be imputed as a crime, then the author of 2 P. must be found 
 guilty of this crime along with many of the greatest writers of all 
 ages and countries. But such criticism is surely somewhat 
 pedantic. What Englishman, writing naturally, ever stops to ask 
 whether the word which occurs to him is to be found in a 
 dictionary ? Knowing himself to be a living embodiment of his 
 native tongue, not bound by any external code, he fearlessly uses 
 whatever expression may be needed to make his meaning clear to 
 himself and to his readers. In the next place our record of the 
 Greek of the first two centuiies is very far from complete. Hence 
 all we have to ask in reference to any unusual expression is simply 
 (1) Was the idea worth expressing ? (2) Could it have been better 
 expressed in any other way ? In 2 P. 1" tv^X6<; ia-Tiv iivoDird^wv, 
 the last word defines or limits the first : he who is without the virtues 
 mentioned in 1^"' is blind, or, to put it more exactly, is short-sighted ; 
 he cannot see the things of heaven, though he may be quick enough 
 
Ixii INTRODUCTION 
 
 in regard to worldly matters. Cf. what is said of the libertines in 2^^. 
 
 The same characteristic is noted in Plato Bep. vi. 508 C afi^\v(OT- 
 
 rovat, KoX iyyvi (jfalvovrai TV(f)\&v, but fivooird^av gives a more 
 
 exact expression of a finer thought, A similar criticism has been 
 
 passed upon what appears to me an even more effective phrase, 
 
 oiftdaXfioi)^ ^Xovref /lea-Tovif /Mi'x^aXlSoi (2^*). In the note I have 
 
 compared the saying of Timaeus ovk ecjyr] Kopa^ ev roii Sfifjuitrip 
 
 exetv, aWh, iropvat;, which gives the origin of fioixa\lSo9 in 2 P. ; 
 
 and the quotation from Arcesilaus, ' oculos inlecebrae voluptatisque 
 
 plenos,' which supplies the remaining words 6(j)0a\fiov9 (learovt 
 
 in the phrase of 2 P. Other words of extreme rarity are 
 
 •irapa^povla, i^epafia, Taprapoco, icv\icTfi6<! on which see explanatory 
 
 notes. The first is an irregular derivative from Trapd<f>pa>v instead 
 
 of the ordinary vapa^povrjaK;. It was probably used in 2 P. 2^® 
 
 for the sake of the assonance with irapavofiia {(^Xey^iv ia-^ev I8ia<i 
 
 •Trapavofila^' vtro^vyiov a<f>a>vov . . . i/cooKvaev ttjv rov tt^o^tom 
 
 vapa^poviav). The second takes the place of e/ierov in the 
 
 quotation from Prov. 26". The verb e^epaw is used by Aquila in 
 
 translating the same word, and the cognates dwepda, i^epdca are 
 
 comparatively common.^ The simple verb Taprapota occurs 
 
 elsewhere only in Amphilochius (A.D. 370), the compoxmd Kara- 
 
 raprapoca is found in Sext. Empir. The substantive rdprapog 
 
 occurs more than once in the LXX, and in Philo and Josephus, and 
 
 is not unfrequent in later Christian writings. Kv\iafi6<! is found 
 
 in Theodotion's version of Prov. 2^. 
 
 One reason for the use of these out-of-the-way forms may have 
 
 been the desire of euphony, as irapa^povia to correspond with 
 
 TTapavo/ila. So e^epafia gives a better rhythm than efierov, and 
 
 KvKia-fiov than KvKiaiv in 2^, Kv<»z/ lirurrpkr^wi k-rrX to tBiov 
 
 e^ipafia, Kat 'T? Xovcrafievr) eh KvXiafibv ^op^opov. So too the 
 
 word rapTapwaa^ contributes greatly to the fine rhythmical 
 
 effect of 2*'* What should be our judgment as to this attention 
 
 to rhythm? If it involves disregard for the thought, if it 
 
 endangers exactness and clearness of statement, or weakens 
 
 the expression of emotion, simply in order to gratify the ear, 
 
 we must allow that, in matters of importance, such a want of 
 
 seriousness would very much lower our opinion of the writer : 
 
 1 If the late Bp. Wordsworth is right in su]>poBing that the proverb in 2 P. 2^2 
 is an inexact quotation of two iambic lines 
 
 eis Xtiov i^ipa/i iwitrrpirfiat iciuv, 
 
 Xf\ovfi4i'ii S' 2> rif KOKtffna Popp6pov, 
 this wooW account for two out of these rare words. 
 
STYLE OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER Ixiii 
 
 but take such a case as our English Prayer book, who could dispute 
 that the thought is made more, not less impressive, from the per- 
 fection of the rhythm ? There is no inconsistency between the 
 two. Noble thought naturally tends to clothe itself in noble form, 
 as we see in the fifteenth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinth- 
 ians, and in St. James (see p. ccxxviii of my Introduction to the 
 latter). The difficulty which many of us have found in using the 
 Revised Version arises just from this cause, that the form does not 
 correspond to the thought. The general effect is at times weakened 
 or destroyed by too close attention to insignificant detail, and by 
 the erroneous assumption that every word or construction in one 
 language must have an exact correspondence in another. 
 
 It may be worth while just to run through the rest of the words 
 which are found in 2 P. and in no other book of the N.T. Some 
 of these are common in ordinary Greek, such as aXfflo-t?, afiadrjt;, 
 aTro(f>ev'Ya), apyem, ^opfiopo'}, ^pahvTi^^, eKaa-TOTe, eTra/yyeXfia, 
 eTTOTTTiys, KaTaxXv^o), Xridrj, fieyaXoTrpeTT^^, /ieyto-TO?, fiiaafia, 
 fivrjp,7), 6filj(\7i, Trapavofiia, TrXao-TO?, aeipd, roioaSe, S?, <j)a>(T(j}6po<!, 
 the wonder being, not why they are used in 2 P., but why they are 
 excluded from the rest of the N.T. Some are classical but rare, 
 as evKaroiKem, ToX/irjT^i. Others are fairly common in post- 
 Aristotelian Greek, as a6e<riio<i (Diod. Plut. Mace), dKaTaTrava-To^ 
 (Polyb. Plut.), Siavyd^aJeKTraXai, ivrpv^dw, e^aKoXovOioo, eiriXvai's, 
 IffOTifioi;, Trapeia-dyco, o-7rt\o9, Taxi'Vof, Te^poco. Some bear an 
 unusual sense, as aiixp-vpof' usually ' dry ' and ' squalid,' used (not 
 in 2 P. only) for ' dark ' ; ft,&p,o<s an old word for ' blame,' used 
 in 2 P. in the sense of ' blemish,' which it bears in the LXX. ; so 
 a'/ico/iijTos, used in Homer and elsewhere for ' unblamable,' means 
 'unblemished' in 2 P ; o-Tpe/SXom^an old word meaning to 'twist' or 
 'wrench,' used here metaphorically of wilful misinterpretation; 
 aTr]ptyfi6<} used of planetary stations (Diod. and Plut.), of rhetorical 
 pauses (Dionys. H.), is used metaphorically of moral steadfastness 
 in 2 P. Among very rare words found in 2 P. may be mentioned 
 da-TijpiKTpi, apparently found elsewhere only in Longinus ii. 2, 
 but its use is really involved in that of a-TrjpL^oi, just as much as 
 that of any particular part of the verb would be ; BvavoriTO'i Luc. 
 and Diog. L. ; eXey^i<i LXX. and Philostr. ; ifj/iratyfiovrj anr.Xey. ; 
 u,i,aapM<i found elsewhere only in Wisdom and 1 Mace, Test. Levi 
 17, Test. Benj. 8 ; oXLyaxi occurs only thrice elsewhere ; poi^r/Sov 
 twice, see notes ; ^jrevSoStSda-icaXoi; apparently first used in 2 P., 
 
Ixiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 found in later writers. If we read fiekriao) with Dr. Field in 
 2 P. 112, ^g jja,ve another extremely rare word to add to our hst. 
 We have also to take account of such rare constructions as diroi^evya 
 with the genitive in 1*, though it is joined to the ordinary accusa- 
 tive in 2^^ and 2^"; ^paSvvat followed by iirayyeXiai (3*) and 
 aKardiravaro'; followed by afiapTLa<; (2"), both being classified 
 above under the 'genitive of the sphere.' The combination of 
 positive and superlative in 1* to, Tifita Kal /liyia-Ta is rare but, as 
 is shown in the note, not unparalleled in classical writings. 
 
 Looking back on this list, we must certainly allow that 2 P. has 
 an unusual percentage of out-of-the-way expressions. Of these some 
 appear to me to be justifiable and convenient, such as o^araTravcrTo?, 
 da-TripiKTo<i, Bv(rv6rjT0<s, eXey^K, iJi.of)(aXi<i, a-Trjptyfioi}, yjrevSoBiSd- 
 a-KaXo'i ; some to be unnecessary, such as the Hebraic ifiiratyfiovij 
 and perhaps KavaovaOai, which however does not read to me like 
 an invention, but rather like a colloquialism or provincialism. 
 pot^TjSov is a poetical word, which may be compared with the phrase 
 vTrepoyKa fiaraioTrjToi; (2^*) and was perhaps borrowed from Lyco- 
 phron, or possibly from some Jewish or Christian poet of the time. 
 I confess I see nothing in these peculiarities which should much 
 affect our view of the value of 2 P., or which would in the least 
 degree determine our judgment as to the merit of some new 
 papyrus from Egypt, if they had been found there for the first 
 time. 
 
 In any case we find many parallels to these peculiarities of 2 P. 
 in the list given below (pp. Ixx f.) of words occurring in 1 P., which 
 are not found elsewhere in the N.T. Such are dWoTpioeiriaicoiro's, 
 dvd')(V<n,<;, dvexXdXrjTO^, dirpoaioiro'KijfnrTa)^, teho^aafihrq, iytcofi- 
 ^oofiai, i/iTrXoKf], eirepdarvifia, irepiOecrii;, avvirpea^VTepo^. And 
 the same holds good of St. Paul and of the epistle to the Hebrews. 
 If these latter neologisms cause no diflSculty, why should 
 those of 2 Peter ? The truth is.'each neologism must be tested 
 and judged by itself It is not the part of wisdom to refuse to 
 listen to a prophet, or indeed to a poet or a philosopher, because 
 he may not confine himself strictly to the language of common life. 
 
 What must, I think, be regarded as a fault is the vagueness and 
 ambiguity which run through so much of the epistle, pai'tly in the 
 use of pronouns, of which I have spoken above, partly in particles, 
 e.g. a)? in l^, which in my opinion refers to what precedes ; but 
 there is something to be said for putting a full stop at the end of 
 
STYLE OF JUDE AND OF 2 PETER Ixv 
 
 the preceding verse, and a comma at the end of the 4th verse. So 
 in the use of prepositions, we have eV eTriyvwaei in (1^, 2^"), Bia 
 T^? ewtyvcaa-eai^ (1^), eh ri^v i-Triyvaxriv (1^) where it may be 
 puzzling to catch the precise shade of meaning. If we read with 
 WH. Sia So^jj? in 1*, we have a succession of four phrases introduced 
 by Sid — Sia 1-59 eTriyvaxremi; tov KaKiaavro<i riiia<i Bia So^jj? kuI 
 dperfj^, Bi a>v to, fiiyia-ra iirayyiX/iaTa BeBmprjTai, iva Bia 
 TovTiov yivrjo-de 6eia^ koivwvoI ff>v(7-eo)<;, and it is difficult to get a 
 clear conception of this quadruple causal relation. In the next 
 clause aTTotjivyovTe'; tjj? iv tcS Koa-fi,^ iv eiridvfiia <^9opa<s, the first 
 ev has a local, the second a causative sense. Again, the sense 
 varies in 1^^ BiKaiov fjyov/iai, i(j)' oaov elfil iv Toiirp rm a-Krjvm/iari, 
 Bieyeipeiv vfj.d'; iv vTro/J,vr]a-ei, 2^^ iv ol<s dyvoovaiv ^XaaiprjixovvTe^, 
 iv Tjj <^6opa avT&v <f>dap'>ja-ovTai, 2^ BeXed^ovaiv iv eTnOv/jLiaii 
 Tou? iv irKavri dva(TTpe<])Ofievov<s, S^ (eTTtfTToXa?) iv als Bieyeipto 
 vfi&v iv vTTo/ivijaei Tr)v Sidvoiav. The force of the repeated iv Be 
 in 1^"' is not clear. So the meaning of Bid in 3^'® ovpavol ^a-av 
 eKiraXai koX 717 i^ vBaTO<; Koi Bi vBaTO<; avve<n5)<Ta tw tov ©eoO 
 Xoyai- Bi &v 6 Tore Koa-fio^ vBari KaTaK\va-0el<} dirwXeTO is not 
 easy to make out. I think that in the former verse it is equivalent 
 to fiera^v, in the latter the plural wv is so ambiguous that it seems 
 necessary to read ov, referring to the preceding Xoyp. In 1^'' 
 ^(oviji ivexjSeia-i)'; v-ko t^? fieyaXo7rp£irov<; Bo^t)^ we should 
 probably read ostto. In 3^ Blass thinks it necessary to insert Bid 
 after t^?, ' the Lord's command given through the apostles.' In 
 3* the repeated d-n-o gives two superior limits, the disappearance 
 of the ' fathers ' (itself a very ambiguous term) and the foundation 
 of the world. The excessive and sometimes not very perspicuous 
 use of prepositions and the predilection for long complicated 
 sentences are not confined to 2 P. Both are marked features of 1 P. 
 and of the Pauline epistles, especially those to the Romans and 
 Ephesians. 
 
 There is much dispute as to the meaning of a-Toixela in 3^"'^^, of 
 dperij in 1* and 1^, and as to the force of raxivrj in 1" and 2^, whether 
 it should be translated ' sudden ' or ' speedy,' also as to the allusion 
 contained in the words xaOcat 6 Kvpioii iBijXacrev fioi. In 1* are 
 we to take BeBmpijrai as passive or middle? The latter is in 
 accordance with SeSioprifievr]'; in 1^, the former makes better sense. 
 In 1^ is o KoXeaai to be understood of God or of Christ ? How 
 are we to understand ra? 'Konrd<i ypacfyd^ (3^®) ? In 1^^^ iv Ty 
 
 f 
 
Ixvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Trapovcrr) dXrjOela should we read TrapaSodeicry with Spitta ? In 
 2^^ how is roii^ oXiycoi diro^evyovra^ rov<i iv ifKavr) dvaarpe^o- 
 fievovi related to the words which follow (2^"), aTro^wyovre? to, 
 fiida-fiara tov Koa-fiov ? 
 
 I must refer to my notes for the questions which have been 
 raised as to the interpretation of 1^ rots la-orifiov Xaxova-iv iria-nv 
 iv hiKaioavvri rov @eov rjfimv, 2^ tov di^opdaavTa avrov<s ZeairoTTjv 
 dpvovfievoi, 2^" So^a? /8\acr^77/toi)z/Te?, V^ exofiev fie/Saiorepov tov 
 Trpot^riTiKOV Xoyov, V-^ eta? o5 ij/ispa Siavyda-rj koI (j)Ciscr<j>6po<i 
 dvaTetXrj, S^^ eh r^jxepav ala>vo<}. 
 
 Sometimes the difficulty lies in determining the construction, as 
 in 2^*, SeXea^ovtTiv iv eVt^u/itat? crap/coi aaeXyeiai^ : does aapKo^ 
 depend on the preceding or on the following word.? In 3^ XavOdvei 
 avToiii TOVTO 6e\ovTa<; is tovto subject to \av6dvei or object to 
 deKoVTat; ? In 3^ Tediia-avpia-fiivoi elcrlv wpl Trjpovfievoi, el<; f]fi.epav 
 Kplcrewi, on which of the participles does irvpl depend ? The 
 difficulties"culminate in 2^°'^^, which might seem to be intentionally 
 left obscure. For an attempt to deal with them I must refer to 
 my notes, but I will add a further remark about the remarkable 
 antithetical phrase dBiKovfievoi fiKrObv aSt«tas. This evidently 
 refers on to Balaam in 2^^, who was tempted to do wrong by the 
 rewards offered by Balak, but afterwards missed those rewards 
 on account of his failure to curse Israel. It must however 
 have some connexion with 2^^, which speaks of brute beasts 
 born for capture and destruction, and it would seem that the bait, 
 which brings about their death, is compared to the pleasures of 
 sin by which the libertines are tempted to their own ruin (cf. 
 SeXed^ova-iv in 2"'^®). The instinct of animals leads them to be 
 caught and killed by other animals or by man. Man, the rational 
 animal, definitely aiming at pleasure, wealth, or power, by doing 
 what he knows to be wrong, is cheated of the reward of his 
 iniquity, like Ahab or Macbeth, by the inevitable law of retribu- 
 tion : ^ i-TTidvfMia (rvWa^owa TiKTet d/iapnav, t] Se dfiapTta 
 diioTeKea-Oela-a diroKvei QdvaTov. The meaning of the words 
 dSiKla, dBiKew is a little forced for the sake of the antithesis. 
 
 I am far from saying that there is nothing to counterbalance the 
 obscurities of our Epistle. Perhaps no part of it has given 
 occasion for more discussion than the passage on prophecy, espe- 
 cially those words of deep meaning which Dr. Arnold has made the 
 foundation of his lectures on the subject, vaa-a wpo^rfTeia ypai^rj(i 
 
STYLE OF JTJDE AND OF 2 TETER Ixvii 
 
 iSiai eTTtXwcreaj? oil yiveraf ov yctp deXrj/jiaTi dvOpcoirov ^vex&f] 
 irpo^rjTeia irore. For brevity and for profundity, it seems to me, 
 these words are not unworthy of the Apostle in whose name they 
 are written. So other phrases to which objection has been taken 
 as obscure seem to me full of instruction for those who will take 
 the pains to think over them. I would instance especially !*■*, 
 where the calling of the Lord is said to have come through the 
 goodness which shone out in His life and character, and which is 
 the living source of all the promises. 
 
 /2 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 Relation between 1 Peter and 2 Peter 
 
 Jerome remarks on the diEference between the two epistles 
 which bear the name of St. Peter in his Script. Eccles. 1 : ' Scripsifc 
 Petrus duas epistolas quae catholicae nominantur, quarum secunda 
 a plerisque eius esse negatur propter still cum priore dissonantiam ' ; 
 and again in his letter to Hedibia (JEpist. cxx. cap. 11): 'Duae 
 epistolae quae feruntur Petri stilo inter se et charactere discrepant 
 structuraque verborum. Ex quo intellegimus pro necessitate 
 rerum diversis eum usum interpretibus.' That Peter made use of 
 an interpreter is asserted by Papias, who reports {ap. Eus. H.H. 
 iii. 39) that John the Elder used to say Map«o9 filv epfirivevTrj(; 
 Tlerpov yev6/ievo<; oaa ifivrjiiovevae aKpL0&<s eiypa-^ev, ov fiivTot 
 rd^ei Th virb "KpiaTov rj Xexdevra rj TTjoa^^ei/ra" ovre yap 
 rjKov<T6 Tov Kvplov 0UT6 iTapTiKoKoiiOriaev axnw. So Irenaeus iii. 1 
 (after the death of Peter and Paul in Rome) MdpKo<s, 6 /iadrjTii<! 
 KoX epfJbrjvevTr](; JleTpov, kuI auTO? t^ VTrb HeTpov Krjpvaa-Ofieva 
 iyypa^&i; rjiiiv TrapaSeBtoKe. To the same effect Clement of 
 Alexandria in the Sixth Book of the Hypotyposes (ap. Eus. Jff.U. ii. 
 15) says tootovto S eireXafi'yjrev rat? r&v aKpoarmp tov HeTpov 
 hiavoiai'i eva-e0eia<s ipiyyo';, cos p,r] tt) elcrdira^ iKavrnt eyeiv 
 dp/ceta-Oai aKofi /irjBe Tjj dypdi^ip tov 6eiov Ki^pvy/iaTOt BiSatrKaXia, 
 irapaaX'^aecn Se iravTolai'; M.dpKov, ov to evayyeXiov (f>epeTat 
 aKoXovBov 8vTa HeTpov Xnraprjaai w^ &v Kai Bid ypa(f)i)^ inr6p,vr]p,a 
 TTJi; Sid \6yov irapaBodela-r)<i auTot? KaTaXeiyjroi (? KUTdXei-^ai) 
 BiSaaKaXiai;, p,^ irpoTepov re dveivai ^ KaTepydaaaOai tov dvBpa, 
 Kal TavTj} aiTlovf yeviaOai ttj? tov Xeyofievov kutu MdpKov 
 evayyeXiov ypa(f)fj<; (of. 2 Pet. l^^). And Tertullian (Adv. Marc. 
 iv. 5): 'Marcus quod edidit Evangelium Petri afifirmatur, cuius 
 interpres Marcus.' We read of another interpreter of Peter named 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixix 
 
 Glaiicias, by whom Basileides claimed to have been taught (Clem. 
 Al. Strom, vii. § 106). 
 
 Do the facts then confirm the idea that, on the supposition of 
 both epistles being written by the same person, the author in 
 writing them made use of different interpreters to put his ideas 
 into Greek, whether by way of revision of his own rough draft, 
 or in regard to the entire Greek rendering of what he may have 
 uttered or written in Aramaic ? We will begin with instances of 
 likeness in the vocabulary employed- 
 
 2 P 1^ Xa/sts vf^tv Kal eiprivr} nrXriOvvdeirj, is found also in 1 P 1^- 
 2 P 1^ Tov KaXiq-avToi; rifid<; IBid Bo^y may be compared with 
 
 1 P l''^ Kara rov KaXecravra rjfia^ ayiov, ib. 2^ tov iic aKorov; 
 vfia<; KaXe<TavTO<i 6t9 to Oavfiaa-rov avTov (^w?, ib. 2^-^, 3® eli tovt6 
 eKKrjOiqTe, ib. 5^" o /eaXeixa? u/ta? 6ts rr/v almviov avTOV Bo^av. 
 
 2 P 1^" ^epaiav vfi&v rijv KXi]<nv kuI exXoy^v iroieiaOai, cf. 1 P 1^ 
 iKXeKTo2<; TrapevtSijfioii;, 2* Trapa @ec3 6«\6«tos, 2* yivoi iicXeKTOv. 
 2 P V^ oil yap deXij/iaTi avdpdirov rjve-^ddri -rrpo^Teia irore, aWa 
 .. . . i\aXrj(Tav awo ®eov avdpwTTOi, cf. 1 P '2?^ outoj? ia-rlv to 
 dekrrffia tov @eov, 3^^ el 6e\oi to de\i]fia tov ®eov, 4^ ffeXTJ/nan Oeou 
 TOV eiriXonrov ^imcrai xpovov, 4^® kuto, to 6eXrifj,a tov @eov. 2 P 2^^ 
 SeXed^ovcriv iv eTTidv/jiiai'i crapKO's acreXyeiai<;, ib. 2^ ttoXXoI 
 e^aKoXovdijaov<riv avT&v Tal<; aaeXyeiaii;, cf. 1 P 4* TreTrop€Vfj,evov<} 
 iv da-eXyeiai^, iiriOvfiiaii;. 2 P 1^® iiroTTTai, yevrjOevje^ t^9 
 eKeivov fieyaXeioTrjTO';, cf. 1 P 2^^ 'iva sk t&v koXoov epycav ivonrTev- 
 ovTef Bo^daoxTi tov @e6v, 3^ eiroinevovTe^ Ttjv dyv7}v dva(TTpo(f>riv 
 vfiaiv. 2 P 3^* aa-TnXot, Kal dp.cofJ,r)Toi,, 1 P 1^^ dficofjio^ Kal dcr-jriXo^. 
 2 P 2" aKaTaira^a-TOvi d/jbapTia<;, cf 1 P 4^ ■rreiravTai, dfjt,apTia<!, 
 
 Other resemblances may be more summarily given. 
 
 dyairdco 2 P (1), 1 P (4). dfydirv 2 P (1), 1 P (3). dyairriTO'} 
 2 P (6), 1 P (2). dyio? 2 P (6), 1 P (8). dSeX^o? 2 P (2), 1 P (1). 
 d£St«os 2 P (1), 1 P (1). del 2 P (1), 1 P (1). alciv 2 P (1), 1 P (3). 
 atcovioi 2 P (1), 1 P (1). dXi^eeia 2 P (2), 1 P (1). aX^j^T?? 2 P (1), 
 
 1 P (1). d^apTia 2 P (1), 1 P (6). dfiapTdvco 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 
 dvaarpi^ofiai 2 P (1), 1 P (1). dvaaTpo^Tj 2 P (2), 1 P (6), only 
 five times besides in the whole N.T. dv6pa>7ro<s 2 P (4), 1 P (5). 
 a7r60ea-i<s 2 P (1), 1 P (1), nowhere else in N.T. airoXXvfic 
 
 2 P (2), 1 P (1). dpeTi] 2 P (3), 1 P (1) pi., only once besides in 
 N.T. dae^i^<: 2 P (2), 1 P (1). dcriXyeta 2 P (3), 1 P (1). 
 da-7nXo<; 2 P (Ij, i P (1), only twice besides in N.T. av^dvto 
 2 P (1), 1 P (1). fi^aa^np-m 2 P (3), 1 P (1). yv&ait 
 
Ixx INTRODUCTION 
 
 2 P (3), 1 P (1). ypa<l)ij 2 P (2), 1 P (1). ypdifiO) 2 P (2), 1 P (2). 
 SeffTTOTJ?? 2 P (1) of God, 1 P (1) of man. BrjXoco 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 
 Sidvoia 2 P (1), 1 P (1). Sl/catof 2 P (4), 1 P (3). Siicaioaijvv 
 2 P (4), 1 P (2). Bto 2 P (3), 1 P (1). S6^a 2 P (5>, 1 P (10). 
 SovXoi 2 P (2), 1 P (1). SiJi/a/its 2 P (3), 1 P (2). elfyi^vv 2 P (2), 
 
 1 P (3). eWtW© 2 P (1), 1 P (1). iXevOepia 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 
 iiriev/ila 2 P (4), 1 P (4). iirta-Tpi^io 2 P (1), 1 P (1). epyov 
 
 2 P (2), 1 P (2). ^o-xaros 2 P (2), 1 P. (2). eipiaKOfiat 2 P (2 ?), 
 
 1 P (2). f<B^' 2 P(l), 1 P (2). fifiipa 2 P (11), 1 P (3). diXytfui 
 
 2 P (1), 1 P (4). eiXw 2 P (1). 1 P (2). Uioi 2 P (7), 1 P (2). 
 laxv<i 2 P (1), 1 P (1). Kadoxi 2 P (2), 1 P (1). KoXico 2 P (1), 
 IP (6). «ap8/a 2 P (2), IP (3). /cXeTrrijs 2 P (1), 1 P (1). koi,vwv6<; 
 2 P (1), 1 P (1). Ko^i^ofiai 2 P (1 1), 1 P (2). «oo-/ios 2 P (5), 
 
 1 P (3). /cpetTTov 2 P (1), 1 P (1). Kpifia 2 P (1), 1 P (1). Kritn^ 
 
 2 P (1), 1 P (1). XaXeco 2 P (2), 1 P (2). Xafi^dvco 2 P (2), 
 1 P (1). Xaoi 2 P (1), 1 P (2). X6yo<! 2 P (4), 1 P (7). fiaxpo- 
 dvfiia 2 P (1), 1 P (1). olha 2 P (3), 1 P (2). S(rTf9 2 P (1), 
 
 1 P (1). oi>hi 2 P (1), 1 P (1). oipav6<} s. 2 P (1), 1 P (2), pi. 
 
 2 P (5), 1 P (1). oSto)? 2 P (2), 1 P (2). 64)daXfi6-; 2 P (1), 
 
 1 P (1). 'n-apaSiSco/Mi 2 P (2), 1 P (1). irapepxofiai, 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 
 ireipaer/jLOi; 2 P (1), 1 P (2). Trla-TKi 2 P (2), 1 P (.5). irXavdofiai 
 
 2 P (1), 1 P (1). nTXr,e6voy 2 P (1), 1 P (1). irveviia 2 P (1), 
 1 P (8). iropevofiai 2 P (2), 1 P (3). iroTe 2 P (2), 1 P (3). irov 
 2P(1), 1P(1). 7r/307ti'wo-«« 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 7rpo^7?T»?s 2 P (2), 
 
 1 P (1). irp&Tov 2 P (2), 1 P (1). TTvp 2 P (1), 1 P (1). pnt^a 
 
 2 P (1), 1 P (2). adp^ 2 P (2), 1 P (7). ff«0T09 2 P (1), 1 P (1). 
 (TTTipi^to 2 P (1), 1 P (1). avix^aivw 2 P (1), 1 P (1). awTrjpia 
 2 P (1), 1 P (4). riKva 2 P (1), 1 P (2). ri/i^ 2 P (1), 1 P (3). 
 rifiio-! 2 P (1), 1 P (1). iiScop 2 P (2), 1 P (1). vio's 2 P (1), 
 1 P (1). ^atVft) act. 2 P (1), m. 1 P (1). ^epofiai 2 P (4), 1 P (1). 
 <f)iXa8eX<l)ia 2 P (2), 1 P (1). x^P''<: 2 P (2), 1 P (10). Total 100. 
 
 Words used m 1 P not in 2 P.^ 
 
 cLyaBo'i (7), dyaOoiroiio) (4), *dya0o7roiia (1), * dya6o7roi6<; (1), 
 dyaXKida (3), dyid^at (1), ayia<rp,6<: (1), dypi^a (1), dr/vot 
 (1), dyvoia (1), dyvtoaia (1), *aSe\^0T»;9 (2), dSiKa)<i (1), *dSoXo^ 
 (1), d0ifiiTo<i (1), dl/jia (2), *at<r;^poK6jo8ft)? (1), alax^vofLai (1), 
 alreto (1), dxpoyaviaioi (1), aXXTfX.o)!' (4), *dXXoTpioewiaKoiro^ 
 
 ' Words to which * is prefixed are not found in the N.T. except in 1 P. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxi 
 
 (1), *d/iapdvTivo<i (1), *dfidpavTO'i (1), dfiapriiuXo'} (1), diilavTo<i 
 (1), a/ii/os (1), dficofioii (1), ai/a77e\\<ii) (1), *dvar/6vvdm (2), 
 *dvayKaa-Ta>^ (Ij, *dva^a)vvvfj,i (1), *dvaiTavo/jiai, (1), avda-Taaii 
 (2), dva<fiepa) (2), *ai'a;j(;i;o-J9 (1), *az/e/«:\a\57TO? (1), aVcu (2), dvj^'jO 
 (3), dvdlaT'nfii (1), aj/5o? (2), dvOpw-mvo^ (1), avrt (1), dvTihiKO<i 
 (1), *avTt\o(SojOea> (1), dvTirdaaofJLai, (1), dvTlrviro<; (1), dvvtroKpirofs 
 (1), «7raf (1), direidem (4), aTretXeco (1), aTreKSixo/iai (1), direx«> w-. 
 (1), aTTtffTeffl (1), *dTroyivo/JLai (1), dirohihtofii (2), dirohoKifidl^ca 
 (2), dirodvya-Kto (1), airoAcaXuTrTO) (3), diroKdXvyjn^ (3), diroKo'yia 
 (1), *d'iroveiiO) (1), aTroo-reWw (1), diroTidefiai, (1), *dirpoa-a)vo- 
 \ij/jLTrTO»i (1), dpyvpiov (1), dpKeT6i(l), dpri (2), *dpTtyevvr)TO<s (1), 
 *dpxi'Voi/J.r]v (1), dp'x^ofiat (1), dadevq<i (1), da-trd^ofiai (2), dtTCOTla 
 (1), d<f>pcov (1), d<^dapTo<s (3), ^dima-fia (1), ^aaiXev^ (2), 
 ^aaiXei,o<i (1), *^io(o (1), ^ovXrjfia (1), 0pe<f)o<} (1), yaXa (1), 
 761/0? (1), yevofiai (1), yX&craa (1), yoyyva-fio^ (1), yprjyopim (1), 
 7i;i'7j (3), *yvvaiKeloi} (1), ymvla (1), BirjerK; (1), Seoi/ (1), Se^^ta 
 (1), StaySoXo? (1), ZiaKoveto (3), Biaairopd (1), Stacrco^ft) (1), SiKaia)<} 
 (1), StoTi (3), SimKO) (1), SoKifjid^a (1), SoKt/Mov (1), So\o? (3), 
 So^d^co (4), 6'77t'^tB (1), iyeipco (1), *iyKOfi^6ofjLai (1), e^z/os (3), 
 elSeoXoKarpia (1), etre (2), eKaarof (2), eKSl/cfjcri'; (1), eK^rjTico (1), 
 eKKkivoo (1), eVXewTOS (4), eKovcrlcoi; (1), *eKTevi]i (1), eKrei'ft)? 
 (1), eXee'o) (2), e\eos (1), e\eu^6/>o? (1), eXTrt'^ta (2), e'XTrt? (3), 
 *efnr\oK^ (1), *ev8vcn<i (1), iy/ioirTco (1), evvoia (1), evrL(io<s (2), 
 evdnriov (1), *i^ayyeWa) (1), *i^epavpdea (1), e^ovaia (1), e^as6ev 
 (1), eiraivo<i (2), eiraKoKovOeo) (1), *e'7repd)Trifj,a (1), iTrrjped^co (1), 
 eirieiKi]!; (1), eirtdvfieoi (1), eVfKaXetB (1), *6'7nicd\vfj,fia (1), 
 *eVt'\ot7ros (1), *iirifiapTvpeeo (1), iiniroOeoi (1), kinpi'into 
 (1), iviaKOTrea) (1), eiriaKoirrj (1), iiritrKoiro'i (1), eVtTeXew (1), 
 iwoiKoSo/jiea) (1), *iiroTrTev(o (2), epavvdat (1), eroifioi (2), eTot'/iw? 
 (1), eiayyeXi^o/J-ai (3), eiayyiXiov (1), evXoyim (1), evXoyrjTO^ (1), eu- 
 Xoyia (1), einrpoaSeKTOi; (1), e{;<r7r\a7p^z/os (1), fata (7), fr/XwTij? (1), 
 ^tjTea) (2), ^moTTOieco (1), ^yefidtv (1), rjavx'-O'i (1)) Oavaroco (1), ^aw- 
 fiaa-TOi; (1), defieXiom (1), 6pi^{V), 0va-ia{l), idofiai (1), *iepdTev/ji,a 
 (2), Iftdrtov (1), la-T'ij/ii (1), (/!(;z/os (1), /ea^o (1), Kaip6<s (4), Ka/cia (2), 
 KaKOTTOiica (1), KaKOTroi6<s (3), KaK6<; (4), Ka/eoo) (1), Ka\o? (3), 
 /eaXi/TTTOJ (1), Kara^oXi] (1), KaTaia')(vvo) (1), KaTaKvpievm 
 (1), /earaXaXeo) (2), KaraXaXla (1), Karairivco (1), Karapn^m (1), 
 Karaa-Kevd^o) (1), Karepyd^ofiai (1), KepBaLvco (1), Ke^aXi] (1), «»j- 
 pvnam (1), Ki^arof (1), *«\60s (1), KXrjpovofiico (1), KXrjpovofjila (1), 
 KX^pos (1), Koivcovem (1), KoXat^i^w (1), Koa-fiico (1), *KpaTai6<i (1), 
 
Ixxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 KpUTO<i (2), KpivfO (4), KpVTTTOl} (1), *KTl<TTn^ (1), KW/10? (1), XeWV (1), 
 
 Xt'^ov (5), Xoyi^ofiai (1), XoyiKot (1), Xoyiov (1), XoiSopeco (1), 
 XoiSopia (1), \u7re'ft> (1), Xwtt?; (1), Xvrpoofiai (1), /jMKapio^ (2), 
 fidpTv<i (1), fidraiov (1), /ieXet (1), /iei/w (2), /lipt/Mva (1), /itjjSe 
 
 (3), /MjSet's (1), /JLtJKeTI, (1), /toXtS (1), /iOl/OK (1), *(JiO)\t01^ (1), 
 
 veKp6<i (4), x/609 (1), j/7;<^a) (3), fei'tfa* (2), fevo? (I), ^vfpalvco (1), 
 fuXov (1), olK^Tr]<i (1), oiKoSojj,ia> (2), oiKovofjioq (1), oZko? (2), 
 *olvo(^\vyia (1), oKTca (1), okiyo<; (4), ofiola^ (3), *6fi6if>piov (1), 
 ovetBi^ca (1), ovofia (2), *6irXi}^ofuii, (1), ottw? (1), opaw (1), oa<pv<s 
 (1), oS? (1), Trddrjfia (4), irapaKaXeio (3), irapaicvTrTO) (1), wapaTi- 
 Bri/JLI (1), TrapeTriSrj/jLOis (2), Trapoixla (1), •jrapoiKO'! (1), -rrdajfiio (12), 
 *maTpo'irapaZoTOii (1), Trauta (2), irefiinu (1), •irepiej(to (1), 
 *-7repi0ea-i,<s (1), ■n-epiirareo) (1), irepiiroirjo-K (1), irirpa (1), iria-Teva 
 (3), TTttTTo? (3), ttXij^o? (1), TTVeV/iaTlKO^ (2), •yroiKiXo'} (2), 
 iroifiaivw (1), iroifii^v (1), nroifiviov (2), TTOto? (2), TroXwreXi;? (1), 
 ■jToXvTi/JLoi; (1), *7roTo? (1), irpavq (1), irpavTq<; (1), vpea-^vrepog 
 (2), irpo^arov (1), irpoyvcoait (1), *'7rpoffvfito<; (1), *7rpofiaprvpofiai 
 (1), irpoadiyoo (1), •irpoaep-)(pp.ai, (1), •Trpoa'KoiJ.fia (1), irpoaicoirTco (1), 
 irpoatowov (1), irporepov (1), "Trpo^rjTevoo (1), *7rTo?7o-t? (1), irvpcatrK 
 (1), pavTurp.6<; (1), *pviro<s (1), a-apKixo^ (1), *<T6ev6ca (1), aKavhaXov 
 (I), cr/eeCo? (1), o-«o\i6? (1), *<Tiropd (1), o-re/aeos (1), a-Te^avoi 
 (1), cTTopM (1), aTparevofiai,, (1), *av/jbwadiJ9 (1), a-vveiSr)a-i<i (3), 
 *o-i;i'e«\6/CT0? (1), a-vvicXripov6fj.o<i (1), *avvoi,Keto (1), *a-vvirpea- 
 fivTepo<s (1), crvva-'xri/iaTi^op.at (1), a.vvTpej(<o (I), craj^o) (2), a&fia 
 (1), aaxfypoveo) (1), xaTretvo? (1), Taireivo^poavvq (1), *Ta'rreiv6^pav 
 (1), TaTreti'da) (1), rapdaaat (1), *Te\6t6)? (1), t6\o? (4), ripAw (2), 
 TovvavTiov (1), TUTTOS (1), viTaKorj (3), viraKovco (1), viTepej(w (1), 
 iirepijifyavo^ (1), *V7roypa/j,fi6<s (1), viroKpiai^ (1), *v'rroXiftirdv<o (I), 
 virofievat (2), virordiram (6), viro^epco (1), vyjroco (1), (ftavepoto (2), 
 ^BapTo^ (2), ^66vo<i (1), *<l>CXdZeX^o<i (1), ifio^iofiai (3), <f)6^oi 
 (5), <])ovev<s (1), t^povpito (1), ^vXaKij (1), <^w? (1), %ai'/)ft) (1), X*/"" 
 (1). X"/"""/** (1)> Xet'^o? (1). X«''P (1). X°PVyea) (1), ^opro? (3), 
 ')(p7)a-T6<i (1), 'KpiaTiavoi (1), y^povoi (4), ^pvtriov (3), *copuofiat (1), 
 tSo-re (2). Total 369, of which 59 occur only in 1 P. among the 
 writings of the N. T. 
 
 Words used m 2 P mo< m 1 P. 
 
 dfyvoeto (1), dyopd^co (1), dSt/ceo) (1), dhiKia (2), *d0ea/j,o<i (2), 
 aJJoeo-t? (1), d.Kap'jro'} (1), *dicaTdiravaTO^ (1), d/eoj; (1), axovo) (1), 
 dXoyoi (1), *aX«affis (1), •d/ia^ifs (l),d/itd/jTJj/ta(l), *dftmffi]To<; (1), 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxiii 
 
 avaTeXXa (1), avofjLo<! (1), dvvSpov (1), airdrr] (1), *dTro<f)evyu> (3), 
 avrnXeca (5), *ap'y6a) (1), ajoyo? (1), apveofiai (1), apxcuo<i (1), 
 "PX*? (1). *«<'"'"»7/3t/CTO? (2), aiddSr)!; (1), *ai;;^(iiJ7/309 (1), a'<^toj/o(r (1), 
 ^aa-avl^to (1), ^aaiXeia (1), ,8e^aio^ (2), ^Xda-^rjfio^ (1), *^XefiiJba 
 (1), *^6pl3opo<; (1), ^ovXafiai (1), ^paUvm (1), *^pahvTri<; (1), 
 yevvao) (1), 7?) (4), yivaxTKO) (2), r^vtopi^m (1), yv/xvd^a> (1), Set (1), 
 Bevrepo^ (1), Siafievco (1), *Siaii76i^(B (1), Sieyeipto (2), SonXota (1), 
 *Sv(Tv6rjT0<! (1), SoipeofJtai (2), el\iKpivri<s (1), el? (3), ei'o-oSo? (1), 
 *e«ao-TOTe (1), exXoyj] (1), *e'«7ra\at (2), eXaureo (1), *eXey^ii; (1), 
 e/io? (1), *efnrai,yfiop]j (1), efiiraixTTji; (1), ifiirXeKO) (1), *ivKaToi- 
 Kem (1), eVroXj; (2), *evTpv^dw (1), *e^aKoXovdeco (3), *i^epafjLa (1), 
 6^0809 (1), ivayyeXia (2), iiraiyyiXXofiai (1), *i'rrdyyeX/ii,a (2), 
 eTrdr/io (1), itriyivaxrKO) (2), eVtyi/tBo-t? (4), *iTriXvai^ (1), iiriaToXri 
 (2), iiri'xppriyiai (2), * iiroiTTq's (1), ep^ofJ^ai (1), ero? (2), evBoKea 
 (1), ei^u? adj. (1), evae/Seia (4), evae^ri<; (1), eais prep. (1), 5'o'<^o? 
 (2), foooj' (1), Tfyiofiai (4), ^St; (1), rjSovrj (1), ■^/ew (1), ■^TjdofJ.ai, (2), 
 ^etos (2), drja-avpi^co (1), *lcr6Ttfi09 (1), Ka9apicrfjL6<; (1), /cadiaTtjfit 
 (1), /caivo's (2),[icaiTrep (1), KaXcos (1), *KaTa«Xu5'<«' (1)) KaraaXvafioi 
 (1), KaruKpivto (1), KaToXeiirio (1), KaTatroveo) (1), xardpa (1), kutu- 
 arpo^ (1), Karacftpovem (1), KaToiKeca (1), *Kava6o/u,ai, (2), Krjpv^ 
 (1), AcXijffts (1), KOifidofiai (1), AcoXafw (1), KpiaL<; (4), *KvXiafi6'i 
 (1), A;va)i> (1), xcoXvoi (1), Xayj^avw (1), Xai/^aj'ta (2), X67<b (1), 
 *Xi]0r) (1), XotTTO? (1), Xouw (2), Xi;;;^;j'os (1), Xi^ft) (3), fiaKpo6vp,ea> 
 (l),/iaX{aTa (1), /iaXXoi' (1), fiaTctioTT)!; (1), fieyaXeiorrj^ (1), *fieya- 
 Xoirpeirri'i (1), *fieyi(rTO^ (1), fMel^cov (1), fiearo'; (1), fierdvoia (1), 
 */iiaa-/jba (1), *fiiacrp,6<; (1), /MfivijcrKOfiai (1), fji,iad6<; (2), *fivi]firj 
 (1), fioi'xaXl'i (1), (ivdoi (1), * fiv<oird}^(o (1), */i.ft)/ios (1), i/no-Ta^'* (1)> 
 oiySoo?(l), 080? (4), *oXtyQ)s(l), *6fiij(X7j (l),o7r('o-ft)(l), 07rou(l),o/30? 
 (1), oo-o? (1), TraXat (1), irdXiv (1), *irapavofiia (1), *'irapa<J3povia (1), 
 irdpeifii (2) *7rapeia-dy(o (1), *'7rapeia<j>epeo (1), irapoip.ia (1), irapov- 
 cria (3), TTJjyjf (1), TrXdvrj (2), *irXao-Td9 (1), irXeovd^oo (1), TrXeove- 
 ft'a (2), TrXovaiaxs (1), TrdXi? (1), TroraTrd? (1), Trpoeipri/j,evo<i (1), 
 vpoaSoKato (3), Trpoae'x^ro (1), irpocjjrjTeia (2), Trpo^ijTtKo? (1), 
 TrpftiTO? (1), TTTaico (1), irvpoca (1), *poi^r]S6v (1), pvofiai (2), 
 *tfeipd {al. <r6ip6<i) (1), aKrivto/ia (2), a-o(j>ia (1), a-o^i^o) (1), o-TreuSo) 
 (1), a-iriXo<s (1), o-TTOuSafo) (3), airovhrj (1), *aT'r}piyii6<i (1), ffTOt- 
 ^etoi/ (2), *aTpel3X6eo (1), avvanrdyta (1), (rvveva>xeop,ai, (1), 
 avvia-rrifii, (1), acorijp (5), *TapTap6a> (1), raxivoi; (2), *re^p6(0 (1), 
 *TrJKO/j,ai, (1), *T0tdo-8e (1), *ToXfirjTT]'i (1), totto? (1), totc (1), 
 rpifKo (1), Tpv(f>t] (1), Tt;0Xd? (1), inrdpxo) (3), viroBeiy/ia (1), 
 
Ixxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 viro^vyiov (1), VTrofii/ivrja-Ka) (1), vTrofivrjai^ (2), viro/iovtj (2), vrro-' 
 aTpetjiw (1), *5? (1), ^eiSofiat, (2), ^deyyofiai {2),(^6eLpfo (1), i^^o/aa (4), 
 (fyvXaaaco (2), ^vaiKO'i (1), ^vai<i (1), ^wv*; (3), *(j>oya-^6po<! (1), 
 ■)^eiptov (1), ■yatpetd (1), *'^et;SoSt8ao-«a\os (1), ■\jrevSo-7rpo<l>ijTr]<s (I). 
 Total 230, of which 56 occur only in 2 P among the writings of 
 the N.T. 
 
 It will be observed that, as regards the vocabulary, the number 
 of agreements is 100 as opposed to 599 disagreements, i.e. the 
 latter are just six times as many as the former. And if 
 we examine some of the latter, we shall find much to confirm 
 Jerome's view that, whatever may be the case as to the subject- 
 matter of the two epistles — a question which will be shortly 
 considered — at all events the Greek of the one is not by the same 
 hand as the Greek of the other. This is especially shown by the 
 dififerent terms used for the Second Advent — which occupies so 
 large a space in both epistles. In 2 P the term irapova-ia is 
 used for this in 1^*, iyvapiaafiev vfilv rr/v rod Kvpiov 7)fi5>v Bvva/iiv 
 Kol irapovcriav, i.e. it formed the subject of the Apostles' teaching ; 
 in 3* it is said that in the last days scoffers shall appear who will 
 make a mock of the promised Advent, asking irov iaTcv rj iirayyeXia 
 TVS irapova-ia^ avrov ; and in 3^^ the disciples are bidden to look 
 forward to and to hasten ttjv irapovaiav t^? tow ©eou '^/lipa^. 
 The same word is used four times in Mt. 24 of the Coming of the 
 Son of Man, in James 5'- *, in 1 Job. 2^, and by Paul in 1 Cor. 
 15®, and six times in the Epistle to the Thessalonians. It is also 
 the word commonly used by later writers. On the other hand, 1 P 
 uses airoKoKv^i^ for the Advent in 1'' that the trial of your &ith 
 may be found for praise and honour and glory iv aTroKaXvyfrei 'It/o-oS 
 Hpia-Tov; in 4^, where it is said that the joy of sharing in the 
 sufferings of Christ leads on to the joy iv ry airoKaKv-<^ei t^9 So^t 
 avTov; in 1^^ iXwia-aTe iirl ttjv <f>epoiiiv'qv ifiiv ^apii' iv aTroKaXvyjrei 
 'Irjo-ov 'X.pia-Tov, where the revelation is not limited to that of the 
 Day of the Lord, in Hort's words 'The grace is ever being brought, 
 and brought in fresh forms, in virtue of the continuing and pro- 
 gressing unveiling of Jesus Christ.' Cf 1*, 'kept through the 
 power of God ' ets atoTripiav eroifiijv airoKoXvt^B^vai iv xaip^ 
 iay^dro), 5^ o t^9 /JbeWova7}<! airoKaKvirTeaBai, So^rj^ Koivavoi. 
 Hort adds that the phrase goes back to our Lord's words in Lk. 17'* 
 ' In the day when the Son of Man is revealed.' It is used by St. 
 Paul in the same sense 1 Cor. 1^, 2 Th. 1^ There can be no doubt 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxv 
 
 that, of the two, airoKd\v\ln<; is the finer and richer phrase, imply- 
 ing, in Hort's words (on 1 P 1^), that 'Eevelation is always in the 
 strictest sense an unveiling of what already exists, not the coming 
 into existence of that which is said to be revealed.' If 2 P pre- 
 ceded 1 P, we might suppose that the writer subsequently adopted 
 the superior phrase, but, as we shall see, the facts of the case are 
 decidedly in favour of the priority of 1 P. 
 
 Another word used for the Second Advent with much the same 
 force as diroKaXvTrTO) is ^avepom in 1 P 5* <^avep(o6evro'; tov 
 ap'x^tTroifievo'i KOfiielaOe tov afiapdvTivov rfj<i B6^7i<! aTe<j)avov. It 
 is also used of the First Advent in 1 P 1^". 
 
 It is perhaps worth noting that while dyadot, dyadovoto'i, 
 dyadoiroieo), dyaOoiroiia, and kuko^, Kaicla, KaKota, kuko- 
 iroioi, KaKoiroUm are found in 1 P, no representative of 
 either group occurs in 2 P. Other words denoting good 
 quahties which are found in both epistles are dyioi, SUaio^ 
 SiKaiotTvvr], eKevOepia, /xuKpoOvfiia, yv&a-t^. Found in 2 P only 
 are eva-ej3rj(;, evai^eia, eytcpaTeia, iiriyvwcTiis, fierdvoia; aoi^ia, 
 aT't}piyfi6<i. Found only in 1 P are dyvof, dwiroicpiTo^, dyaX- 
 Xidofiai, i-TTteiKij^, evairKay'Xvo';, evXoyeco, ■^avxtoi, KaX6<;, vij(j)a), 
 ofiocjypcov, 'jrio'TO';, inaTe.v(o, irveviMaTLKOi;, 7rpav<i, TrpavTijv, 
 irpodv/jLO)';, cTTepebi ry iriaTei, avfiiraOrii;, a-ax^poveoo, avveiSrjo-i.'; 
 dyadr), TaireLvo'i, TaTreiv6(f>peav, ra'7reivo<f)po(rvvri, vtraKorj, viroTaa- 
 aofiai, <^6^o<;, yaipm, ')(apd, '^dpiap.a, y^prjaroi, "K-piariavoi;. Words 
 denoting bad qualities found in both are d/jLaprdvto, dfiapria, 
 dSiKO<!, d(7e^i]<!, daeXyeia, ^\a(T<f>rjfMim, eiriOv/jLia, a-dp^. Found 
 in 2 P only are dyvoeo), dBiKia, dSiKem, d6ecrfj,o<;, aipeai<i, 
 dfiaOrji;, d/idprrj/Ma, avofioi;, diraTr)', dirmXeia, dpyoi;, -em, aarrj- 
 piKTOf, avddB7]<;, ^Xda-<f>r]fioi, efj,Traiyfi6vr), ifiiraiKTriv, fivtoira^av, 
 trapavofiLa, -jrapa^povia, irXeove^ia, ToXfirirtj^, rpv^rj, ivrpvi^ato, 
 rv^Xoii, <j}dopd. Found in 1 P only are dyvoia, d6efiiTo<;, dtreiOeoi, 
 diriaTeo), dyvma-ia, d(f>p(uv, dfiapTtoX6<;, AXXorpioe'iria-KO'iro'!, 
 ala-jfpoKephm^, dacaria, yoyyvarfio'i, elSeoXarpia, iirrjpea^m, /cara- 
 XaXeo}, -XaXia, KepSaiveo, K&fio^, XoiBopeco, -pia, Xvjrem, otvo- 
 (f>Xvyia, 'TTOTo?, TrpocrKOfM/ia, irpoa-KoirTm, Tno'qtn'i, pviro^, aapKiKO'i, 
 (TKavhaXov, ffKoXi6<;, rapdaaco, vrreprji^avofi, viroKpiaKS, ^6ovo^, 
 ^ovev<s. Many similar contrasts might be obtained from the lists 
 given above, but I will only mention one more, i.e. the predilection 
 of 1 P for compounds in avv, such as a-vfivadijii, <rvveiBri<n<s, 
 o-vveKXeKTog, avvKX7)pov6fio<i, avvoiKem, o'vi'o-^^i/AtaTifo/taj, aw- 
 
Ixxvi mTRODUCTIO]sr 
 
 ■7rpecr0vTepo(i, awTpeym, while 2 P has only avvaTrayo), 
 avvevoiyeoiji.ai and <Tvvi<TTr}fjLi, of which the last has lost its proper 
 power. 
 
 Some of the words in the above lists are more or less synonym- 
 ous ; the use of others betrays a difference of feeling, or character, 
 or experience, in the writers. Examples of the former are adea-fio<s 
 2 P for adefiiTO(; 1 P; i^aKoKovOem 2 P for etraKoKovBeo) 1 P; 
 e-rrixop'Tiyem 2 P for yop'^ykm 1 P ; riyioiiaL 2 P for Xoyi^ofiai 1 P ; 
 ■fffiipa 2 P for fifiepa, Kaip6<i, and ■)(p6vo<; 1 P ; dyopa^a> 2 P for 
 Xvrpoo/jLat 1 P ; ott' dpT(r]^ Kricrew^ 2 P with Mk. for irpo Kara- 
 Po\fi<i Koafiov 1 P with Paul ; iiroirriij's 2 P for fidprv; 1 P ; 
 VTToSeiyfia 2 P for v-jr6ypafj,fjLo<; 1 P ; ai irakai aiiaprtai 2 P 
 for al irporepov iiri6v[jilai, 1 P ; iroTairo'; 2 P for •rrolo's 1 P ; 
 irraLa 2 P for irpoaKoinm 1 P. Words significative of a 
 difference of mind and feeling are eXTrt's and iXiri^to in 1 P, 
 which are inadequately represented by virofiov^ and TrpoaSoKaa) 
 in 2 P ; as also words and phrases referring to the pattern set 
 before us in the earthly life of Christ, to His atoning sacrifice. 
 His visit to the spirits in prison, His resurrection and ascension. 
 His throne of glory in heaven. Such phrases are pavTitrfib^ 
 aifiaToif 1 P 1^, rifiiov alfia to? a/j,vov dficofiov 1^®, eiraOev virep ■^fiStv 
 1 P 2^^, Trepi dfiapTi&v UTreOavev, hlKaio<s virep aSiKcov S'^, iradr)- 
 liaTa (cf. especially 1^^'-, 2^"^, 3^^ 4^' ^*, 5^), ava<Tra(Ti.<i ek vsKpStv 
 P, cf. V^ 6 iyeipa<! airov sk veicpcav koX Bo^av avrm Sow?, 3^ 
 01 ava<TTdaeoi<; 'Irjaov ^piarov, 3^^ 09 iariv ev Se^ia &eov 
 TTopevdeii; ets ovpavov, {nroToyevrtov avTw dyyiKtov Kal i^ovtriav. 
 
 Sometimes we have particular scenes in our Lord's life, or 
 sayings of His called up before us. Thus the phrase ava^axrd- 
 fj-evoi rd^ oa^va'i t^? Siavoia^ (IP) reminds us of Lk. 12'^ 
 ea-TcotTaf vfi&v al 6ad>ve<; •jrepte^coafiivai, while that most 
 picturesque and remarkable phrase eyKo/jifi<o<raa-0e Taireivo(j}po- 
 tTvvi\v (5^) reminds us of Christ's girding himself before washing 
 the feet of His disciples (Job. 13*) and of His injunction 
 to them to follow His example (13"). The word dpyLiroLfhtp, 
 with its accompaniments, iroip.aLvm, iroip.-riv, irolfwiov, irpo^ara, 
 reminds us of the parables of the Lost Sheep and the Good 
 Shepherd, and of the charge to Peter iroifiaive rd irpo^aTid fiov. 
 Perhaps avrbv (nrjpi^ev in 1 P 5^", and the cognate words in 2 P 
 may liave a reference to another charge in Lk. 22^^ a-T^pia-ov tov<s 
 dBeXfJiovi. And the phrase hv ovk t8oi»T6? dyairare, eh ov dpri 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxvii 
 
 /JLT] 6p&vT6<i iria-revovrei} Se ayaXXidre (1 P 1^) naturally recalls the 
 words addressed to Thomas, ort ea>paKd<; fie TreTrCa-revKa^ ; 
 fiaKapioi, ot /if) tSoi/res Kal Triarreva-avTei;. When we read 
 VTroTdyTjTe irdarj avOpmirCvr) Kricrei Sta tov K.vpiov ... to? ®eov 
 SoOXot (1 P 2i8"i^), our thoughts naturally go back to the rule laid 
 down by the Master in Mt. 17 ^*'' as to the payment of the 
 half-shekel, and the words in Mt. 22^^, ' Render therefore unto 
 Caesar the things that are Caesar's and unto God the things that 
 are God's.' So when we read 1 P 5® vq-yjrare, yprfyop^a-aTe, ort 6 
 dvTiBiKO^ v/jL&v Sid^o\o<; Trepivarei, ^ijt&v Tiva KaraTrieiv, we 
 naturally think of our Lord's warnings in Lk.. 22^^ and in Mt. 26", 
 yprjyopeiTe Kal •jrpoaev'Xea'de, Iva /irj elaeKOrjTe et9 ireipaafiov. 
 The words KXripo'i, KKrjpovofieo), KXrjpovo/iia (1 P 1*), a-vvicXrjpo- 
 v6fj.o<; bring to our minds Mt. 19^^ ^(oijv almviov KXrjpovofiija-et, along 
 with 5^ and 25^- So dvayevvriaa<i 1 P 1^, dvayeyevvrjfiivoi ovk sk 
 a-rropat ^Oaprrj^, aSXa a^ddprov 1 P l^*,.and to? dpTiyevvr]Ta ^pi^r) 
 TO XoyiKov aBoXov ydXa eTrnro&tjcraTe 1 P 2^ suggest a reminiscence 
 of the words recorded in Joh. 1^^ ot ovk i^ aifidrmv ovSe ex deXrjfjbdro^ 
 aapKO<; ovBe ex OeX'qlMaro^ dvSph<!, aXX' e/c ©eoO iyevv'^07]<TCf,v, and 
 3* idv fJ-r] Tt? yevvrjOrj avtaOev, ov hvvarai ISeiv rrjv jSaa-iXeiav tov 
 @eov foil., taken with 1' Joh. 3^ 7ra? o yeyevvTjfievoi; eK tov @eov 
 dfiapTiav oil Troiei, oti <nrep/j,a avTov iv avTm fievei, and Lk. 18^' o? 
 av fiT/ Se^rjTai ttjv ^aa-iXeiav tov @eov co? TraiSbov, ov fir/ eiaeXOrj elf 
 avTTjv. 1 P 4^* ei oveiBi^eade iv ovofiaTi X.pia-Tov,fiaKdpioi reminds 
 us of Mt. 5^^ fiaKapioi ia-Te OTav oveihiamaiv vfiat . . . eveKev efiov 
 (cf 10^^ 19^^) ; 1 P 1® e'l* o5 dyaXXf,d(r0e oXiyov XvTrrfdivTe^ k.t.X. 
 of Mt. 5^^ ')(aipeTe Kal dyaXXida-ffe, oti 6 fiiado<; iroXii^ iv Tot? 
 ovpavoif. 4^® 01 •irda-')(pvTeq KaTa to OeXrjfia tov @€ov TricrTdS' 
 KTiaTrj irapaTiOeaOmaajj tA? ■\{rv)^d<;, recalls Lk. 23*^ HuTep, eh 
 Xeipdi; (TOV trapaTidefiai to irvevfid fiov. So 3^* fjbrfhe TapaxdrfT? 
 recalls Joh. 14^'^'. 4^" eKaa-To<; q}<; eXa^ev X"'P''°'/^<^> <^'> KaXol 
 oiKovofioi recalls Lk. 12*^ rt? iffTiv 6 Trto-ro? olxovofio^ 6 ^povifiot, 
 and the Parable of the Talents. When Peter tells his readers that 
 • ' if they are buffeted for doing well, when they take it patiently, this 
 is pleasing to God ' (2^"), who can doubt that he had in his mind 
 the scene which he had witnessed in the palace of the high-priest, 
 and of which we have the record in Mk. 14^^ ? Again 5^ firjS' o)? 
 KaTdKvpievovTe<; tcov KXrjpcov recalls Mt. 20^^ oi dp^ovTe^ t&v 
 idvMv KaTaKvpievova-iv avTOiv . . . ovx oi/t(b? iaTlv iv ifiiv. So 
 2^^ 'iva iK TOiv koX&v epyav iiroirTevovTe<} So^damcri tov @e6v seems 
 
Ixxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 to be a reminiscence of Mt. 5^* oiJtws XafiyfraTO) rb ^w? v/m&v 
 efiirpoaOev t&v avdp(0'rr(ov, oiroiii thoaaiv vfiwp ra KoXa epiya xai, 
 ho^datocnv tov iraTepa vfimv top iv rot? oipavoi<! : 1^^ aWrjXovi 
 dyairrjaaTe, o( Job. 13^, 15^^: 1^" Trepl ^i atarijpia^ e^e^'nTtjaav 
 Kal i^rjpavvrjaap irpo^riTai, of Mt. IS^''. 
 
 The quotation from Ps. llS^Mn IP 2*"^ was also used by our 
 Lord (Mt. 21*2), ^jjQ specially applied the word airoZoKifiA^ca to 
 his own treatment by the Jews, after Peter had made his great 
 confession (Mk. 8^^); and by Peter himself in Acts 4P: The 
 thought of the living stones which are to be joined to the corner 
 stone and built up into the spiritual temple (1 P 2* foil.) must 
 have been associated in the mind of the Apostle with the commission 
 laid upon him by the Lord in the name IXeVpo? (Mt. 16^). 
 
 Similarly the quotation from Isa. 8" in 1 P 2* must have been 
 connected in the writer's mind with many sayings of Christ ; cf. 
 Mt. 11«, Mk. 1427, Job. 681. ^t^^ tj^g quotation from Lev. 11** in 
 1 P li« as compared with Mt. .5*8 ; that from Isa. 10^ in 1 P 21^ 
 iv ■fifiepa i-TTia-KOTrrjii compared with Lk. 19**; that from Ps. 110® 
 in 1 P. 322 compared with Mt. 22**, 26«* and Acts 2^\ 
 
 It may be said that we have similar reminiscences in 2 P., such 
 as the account of the Transfiguration, of which the writer was a wit- 
 ness on the holy Mount (li«-i8) and the use of the words e^oBo^ and 
 a-K^vcofia in the preceding verses (l^s-i^) reminding us of words 
 then spoken ; the warning as to his own approaching death (1") ; 
 the stealthy intrusion of false prophets (2^, cf. Mt. 7^^, 24"), 
 denying their Lord (2^, cf. Mt. 10^) ; the parable of the Return 
 of the EvU Spirit {2^, cf. Mt. 12*^); ^fet vfiipa Kvpiov ws 
 KXeTTTJj? (31°, cf. Mt. 24*^'**). But these references are few and of 
 a far less intimate nature than those in P. They are chiefly con- 
 nected (as are the other allusions to our Lord) with His power and 
 majesty (Svvafii^ and fieyaXeioTrj'i 1^^), His judgment of sinners 
 (2^*12'"), the terrors of His second coming (S^'i*"^*), the danger of 
 falling away (2^'^^) ; though their severity is modified, as compared 
 with that of St. Jude, by the announcement of His long-suffering 
 (3®'i^), and of His care for the righteous (2^). How different is 
 the tone in which our Lord is spoken of in 1 P. What a warmth 
 and intensity of feeling is shown throughout the whole epistle, 
 especially in such passages as 1^ ' Whom, not having seen, ye love ; 
 on whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing ye rejoice 
 greatly with joy unspeakable and full of glory ' (^apa aveKkaXriTta 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxix 
 
 KoX SeSo^aerfiivrj) ; 1^ ' Knowing that ye were redeemed, not with 
 corruptible things from your vain manner of life, but with precious 
 blood, as of a lamb slain without blemish and without spot, even 
 the blood of Christ • ' 1^^ ' Love one another from the heart fervently ' ; 
 22,3 ' ^g new-born babes long for the spiritual milk which is with- 
 out guile, that ye may grow thereby unto salvation; if ye have 
 tasted that the Lord is gracious ' ; 2^ ' Ye are an elect race, a royal 
 priesthood, an holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that 
 ye may show forth the excellencies of Him who called you out of 
 darkness into His marvellous light.' 1^^ ' Beloved, I beseech you 
 as sojourners and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war 
 against the soul.' 2^^ ' Hereunto were ye called ; because Christ 
 also suffered for you, leaving you an example that ye should 
 follow his steps . . . who his own self bare our sins in his body 
 on the tree, that we having died unto sins might live unto righteous- 
 ness.' 4^^'' ' Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery 
 trial among you, which cometh upon you to prove you, as though 
 a strange thing happened unto you : but insomuch as ye are 
 partakers of Christ's sufferings, rejoice ; that at the revelation of his 
 glory also ye may rejoice with exceeding joy. If ye are reproached 
 for the name of Christ, blessed are ye, because the Spirit of glory 
 and the Spirit of God resteth upon you.' 5^'" 'The elders among 
 you I exhort, who am a fellow-elder, and a witness of the sufferings 
 of Christ, who am also a partaker of the glory that shall be 
 revealed : Tend the flock of God which is among you, exercising 
 the oversight not of constraint but willingly . . . neither as lord- 
 ing it over the charge allotted to you, but making yourselves 
 ensamples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall be 
 manifested, ye shall receive the crown of glory that fadeth not 
 away. Likewise, ye younger, be subject unto the elder. Yea, all 
 of you gird yourselves with humility, to serve one another. . . . 
 Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that he may 
 exalt you in due time ; casting all your care upon him, for he 
 careth for you.' 
 
 I think none who read these words can help feeling that, not 
 even in Paul, not even in John, is there to be found a more beautiful 
 or a more living description of the secret of primitive Christianity, 
 of the force that overcame the world, than in the perfect quater- 
 nion of faith and hope and love and joy, which pervades this short 
 epistle. No one could make the same assertion with regard to 
 
Ixxx INTRODTJCTION 
 
 2P: thoughtful and interesting as it is, it lacks that intense 
 sympathy, that flame of love, which marks 1 P. No doubt these 
 feelings were especially called out by the persecutions under which 
 the readers of 1 P were suffering, while 2P is largely a warning 
 against heretical teachers; but no diange of circumstances can 
 account for the change of tone of which we are conscious on passing 
 from the one epistle to the other. This impression is confirmed by 
 a consideration of the vocabulary of 2 P where it di£Fers from 1 P. 
 We find, for instance, such expressions as 6Bo<s aXij0eia<!, oSoi 
 hiKaioa-vvri<!, eiOela 6h6<;, the Gospel is spoken of as the imoXri 
 Tov Kvpiov, r) irapaSoOelira ar/ia evToKij ; airatKeia occurs five 
 times, a-TToWv/it twice ; the warning against forgetfulneas is often 
 repeated, as in 1* ^^' ^- ^' 3^ (the last of which, Sieyeipm vfi&v 
 iv VTTOfJLv^crei rifv eikiKpivrj Sidvoiav, may be contrasted vrith 
 1 P l'^^, ava^coaafievoi ra? 6(rif>va<; t^5 Siavoia<i v/i&v, v^^ovre^ 
 reXeiax} i\7ria-aTe), also in 2 P 3*' ®. I have before referred to the 
 ' reverential periphrases ' to be found in 2 P, as deia (fyvati;, Oeia 
 SvvafiK, fjueyoKeioTriii, fieyaXoirpe'jr^'i Bo^a, Kvpiorrii ; and to the 
 frequent recurrence of i7riyva>iri<{, lirirfivatvKm used especially of 
 our knowledge of God. These things may be good, but they lack 
 the personal tie that marks the first epistle, the devoted afiection 
 which binds the disciple to his Master and the penitent to his 
 Saviour, as well as the tender sympathy shown not merely for his 
 own countrymen, but for churches which lay outside his own special 
 sphere of work. I venture to think that the distinction which 
 Dr. Bigg draws between the 'disciplinarian* Peter and the 
 ' mystic ' Paul would be more appropriate if used to contrast James 
 or 2 P with 1 P. Another difference between the two epistles 
 is the amount of space given in 1 P, as in Eph. 5^"^ 6**, Rom. 
 13^"*, to the exposition of relative duties between husbands and 
 wives, rulers and subjects, servants and masters, elder and 
 younger. This however is easily explained by the difference of 
 circumstances in which the two were written. 
 
 So much for the difference between the tone and the subject- 
 matter of 1 P and 2 P. Is it possible to trace any Ukeness in 
 these respects, as we have done in respect to the vocabulary, in 
 spite of a preponderance of unlikeness ? 
 
 One of the most prominent topics in both epistles is the 
 Second Coming of the Lord. In 2 P it is described as the day of 
 judgment (2*, 3^) when heaven and earth shall be destroyed by fire. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxxi 
 
 when evil men and angels shall be finally judged and punished, 
 while the righteous will be admitted into the eternal kingdom in 
 the new heavens and earth, in which dwelleth righteousness 
 (1^^, 3^^). To this day of God they are urged to be continually 
 looking forward (3^^). In 1 P we read of an inheritance in- 
 corrtiptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in 
 heaven for those who by the power of God are guarded through 
 faith unto salvation ready to be revealed iv Kaipm ia-xaT^ (1*'^) J 
 their tried faith will eventually redound to praise and honour and 
 glory in the revelation of Jesus Christ (1^) ; at the revelation 
 of the glory of Jesus Christ they will rejoice with exceeding joy 
 (413) ; when the chief shepherd appears, they will receive the 
 crown -of glory which fadeth not away (5*) ; the God of grace has 
 called them to his eternal glory in Christ (5^"). The wicked shall 
 give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead 
 (45,i8)_ The thought of this Coming should cheer believers in their 
 trials, and at the same time make them sober and watchful, given 
 to prayer (4^ ; remembering that the end of all things is at hand 
 (4t'). On the contrary, 2 P tells us that the continued delay in 
 the Second Coming had led some to scoff at the idea of any future 
 Coming. He seems himself to look forward to its being put off for 
 an indefinite period (3*"^). 
 
 Another topic which is common to both is that of Noah's 
 being saved from the Flood. 2 P mentions this with reference to 
 the changes which have come over the face of the world, showing 
 that there is nothing incredible in the prophecy of its final destruc- 
 tion by fire (3^"'^) ; and in 2^ he refers again to the destruction of 
 the ancient world, when God brought a flood on the world of the 
 ungodly, but spared Noah, the eighth, a preacher of righteousness. 
 In 1 P 3^®"^^, 4^ the allusion to Noah is connected with the thought 
 of baptism and with the mysterious doctrine of the Descent into 
 Hades. Christ after his crucifixion went in the spirit to preach to 
 ' the spirits in prison, which aforetime were disobedient when the 
 long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the Ark 
 was being prepared, wherein few, that is eight souls, were saved 
 through water, which also after a true likeness doth now save you 
 (o KoX vfJMf clvtLtvjtov vvv a-m^ei), even baptism, not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation {iirepm-rqiia) of 
 a good conscience toward God.' We will first notice some points 
 of connexion with 2 P. The /laKpoOvfiia of God, which is here 
 
Ixxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 said to have been at work in the first destruction of the world by 
 water, is spoken of in connexion with the second destruction by 
 fire in 2 P 3^'^^. The object of this fia/cpoOvfiia is to give oppor- 
 tunity of repentance to all, and the writer even goes so far as to bid his 
 readers hold fiaKpoQvfiia to be equivalent to crcorrjpLa, a statement 
 illustrated by the story in 1 P of the preaching to the spirits in 
 prison, which had once refused to listen to the preaching of Noah. 
 
 1 have pointed out in a previous chapter the connexion between 
 the eight souls saved in the Ark in 1 P 3^', and Noah the 8th in 
 
 2 P 2K The former writer takes the deliverance from the flood 
 by means of the Ark sailing over the waters to be typical of the 
 deliverance from final condemnation of all who were united with 
 Christ by the baptism of the Spirit. The same typical character 
 is ascribed to it in Mt. 24^'"^^ &<nrep yhp al Tj/iepai, tov Nwe, oi/to)? 
 earai tj irapova-ia tov vlov tov avOpanrov. See also the comparison 
 of the cloud and the sea to baptism in 1 Cor. lO^'^ ol iraTepek 
 17/Awv.- TToi'Te? VTTO Trjv ve^eKr)v rjaav koX 7rdvTe<; Bid t^? daXdaarfi 
 StrjXdov KoX •trdvTe's et? tov Mffluo-^i/ i^aiTTia-avTo iv t§ veifteXt] Kal 
 iv Ty 6aXd<7(Tri. In this last passage there appears to be a play on 
 the meaning of the preposition Sta, which is used first of the 
 passage through the Red Sea, and then suggests the use of water 
 in baptism ; so 1 P speaks of the Ark, et? ffv oktco ■^vxal 
 Siea-mSrja-av Si vSaTo<i, translated in R.V. mg. ' into which eight 
 souls were brought safely through water.' This suits the allegoriieal 
 reference to the Church, 'into the shelter of which they were 
 brought by baptism.' The text of the R.V. however has ' wherein 
 eight souls were saved through water,' taking et? in its later sense, 
 as equivalent to ev (see Blass, p. 122). The question then arises, 
 How are we to understand St' vSaTo<s in its application to the 
 Flood ? Some take it of ' escaping through the rains and the 
 flood which had already begun before Noah got to the Ark ; but 
 this contradicts the account in Gen. y*'^'^"'" which certainly implies 
 that the windows of heaven were not opened till Noah was safe in 
 the Ark. Others understand it in the sense that water was the 
 means of saving them, since it bore up the Ark ; but the Ark was 
 safe enough by itself: the only danger which threatened it was 
 from the water. I am rather disposed to take 8id in the sense 
 /leTa^v, which it seems to bear in 2 P 3^ ef vSaToi koI hi uSaros 
 avveaToxra. In my note there I have explained it of the position 
 assigned to the earth by Jewish tradition, between the waters of 
 
RELATIOIsr BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxxiii 
 
 the deep and of the firmament. Similarly in 1 Cor. 10^ Sid is 
 strictly ' in the midst of the sea ' which rose up as a wall on one side 
 and on the other. So in 1 P Si vSaTo<; would refer to the ark 
 threatened by waters above- (the windows of heaven) and below 
 (the fountains of the great deep), between which it rode secure. 
 Allegory is not particular as to a word being understood in the same 
 sense in the type and in the antitype. 
 
 Whence did the writer obtain this remarkable and most signifi- 
 cant story of the Gospel being preached not only to those who 
 perished in the Flood (3^*) but also to the dead generally {¥) ? 
 Probably the reference to those who were lost in the Deluge is due 
 to P's allegorical treatiflent of the story of the Ark. If that is a 
 type of the Church, then those who were not in the Ark are 
 a type of those who are outside of the Church. In Acts 2'^'''^^, 
 Peter applies to our Lord the words of Ps. 16, 'Thou wilt not 
 leave my soul in Hades.' And we cannot doubt that the sub- 
 ject must have been much in the thoughts of the disciples. It 
 seems to me that the most natural explanation of its appearance 
 here is that it was communicated to Peter by our Lord Himself, 
 perhaps with some injunction as to its being kept secret for the 
 present, such as follows the account of the Transfiguration and the 
 confession of Peter in Mt. 16^". Other early allusions to the 
 ' Harrowing of Hell ' are Test. Levi. 4, where amongst other ac- 
 companiments of the Judgment Day — Trao-i;? /cTio-em? K\ovov/j.ivri<s 
 Kot Tcov aopdrcov •jrvev/jidTtov TrjKOfievcov -^we read rov ^Sov 
 a-KvXevofjiivov eVi too •jrddei rov v'^icttov ; perhaps Mt. 27®^'' iroXKct 
 crmfj-ara t&v KeKoi/Jurifjievoav dyicov rjyepdrjo-av, Ka\ i^e\ff6vTe<; i/c 
 TMv fivrjfieicov fiera rrjv eyepaiv aiirov ei<rfj\dov et? rr/v dyiav ttoXiv 
 Koi evecj)apta-0r)<rav ■jtoXXoi's^; certainly Ignat. Magn. ix. ov (Irjo-ov 
 'K.pia-rov) 01 TrpofjtrJTai fiadrjToi ovrei; tc3 Trvevfian ws SiSdcricaXov 
 avrov irpocreSoKtov, ical Sih toOto, ov SiKaim^ dvepsvov, iraprnv 
 fiyeipev avTov<; ew veicpmv, where Lightfoot says : ' Here our Lord 
 is assumed to have visited the souls of the patriarchs and prophets 
 in Hades, to have taught them the truths of the Gospel, and to 
 have raised them either to paradise or to heaven. . . This belief 
 appears in various forms in early Christian writers. Justin Dial. 
 
 1 Eusebius connects this with the Descent of Christ in his Demonstr. Evcmg. x. 
 S. 64 b fiev yotp iirl ffarnjpiif rau iv ^dov i^vx^v ^ap^ei, ^/c /iaxpov aiauos t^v &tpi^Ly. 
 abrov ■jrepLfi.evovaau, Koi Karjjet ye 06pas X'*^'^"* avvrplf^av . . . koX robs trplv 
 Sefffilovs qSov e\evB4povs hvi\iTiiSv. % KoX yeyovev, Hre ttoWoi adifiatTa rav KiKOi/iTj/i.ii'uK 
 aylw avaardvra <rvvei<rri\Oov avrf eis rifv a\ii6as ayiav rov @«(iu 'aiiKui. 
 
 ^2 
 
Ixxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 72 (p. 298) quotes a passage from Jeremiah, ifivija-dr] S^ Kvpioi; 6 
 0€os dirb {al. 6 ayio^) ^laparjX r&v vexpav avrov tmv KeKoifirjfievmv 
 et9 yijv x^f''CtTo<!, Kal Kare^rj irpo^ ainov^ evayyeXiaaadai avroi^ to 
 trruTijpiov avTov. He says that the Jews had cut out this passage 
 from their copies ; and it does not appear in the extant MSS. of the 
 LXX. . . Irenaeus quotes it several times. . , Even Marcion 
 accepted the descent of Christ into Hades, though (unless he is 
 misrepresented) he maintained that the righteous men and 
 prophets under the old dispensation, as being subjects of the 
 Demiurge, refused to listen to His preachiag, and that only such 
 persons as Cain . . , listened and were saved.' 
 
 Another allusion is to be found in the Gospel of Peter probably 
 written before A.D. 150. It occurs in § 10, ed. Robinson and 
 James 1892, (The soldiers watching at the tomb) ^oji^? fjKovov ex 
 T&v ovpav&v \eyov<rrj<! 'FjKijpv^ai ToT<i Koifiat/ievoi^ ; Kal viraKor) 
 ■fjKOVeTO OLTTO Tov (TTavpov oTi Nat, 
 
 A third topic common to the two epistles is prophecy. In 1 P 
 we read that the inspiration of the prophets was owing to the 
 spirit of the Messiah which was in them (1") ; in 2 P 1^ that no 
 prophecy ever came by the will of man ; but men spake from God 
 being moved by the Holy Spirit. In 1 P the subject of prophecy 
 is said to be salvation, the grace that should come upon believers 
 in Christ, whether Jew or Gentile; Christ's sufferings and the 
 glory that should follow; in a word, the Gospel preached by 
 Apostles speaking under inspiration of the same Holy Spirit. In 
 2 P the Transfiguration is said to have been a manifestation of 
 the power and Coming of our Lord Jesus Clirist; and the voice from 
 heaven ' This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased ' is 
 quoted in confirmation of the word of prophecy, implying that 
 such was the essence of the prophetic teaching. As to the 
 meaning which the prophets attached to the message they 
 conveyed, — whether, as Philo believed, they were merely un- 
 conscious channels of the prophetic spirit within them ; or spoke, 
 as St. Paul desired for himself, with the spirit and the under- 
 standing also, — 1 P tells us that, while the message intrusted to 
 them transcended their own powers, and had a siguification which 
 they could only vaguely surmise, a meaning not limited to their 
 own day, but reaching far into the future, still by diligent search 
 they were able to learn ' what manner of time the spirit of Christ 
 which was in them did point unto.' To the same effect, 2 P says 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxjcv 
 
 that prophecy is like a lamp shining in a dark place, to which we 
 must give diligent heed if we would understand its teaching ; that 
 it is not limited to any one particular interpretation, but declares 
 the mind and will of God extending through all time; that, if 
 rightly used, it prepares us for the full light pf the Gospel and fpr 
 the inner witness of the Spirit. Much the same is the teaching 
 of Peter in Acts 3^^'^^ ' The things which God foreshowed by the 
 mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should sufi'er, he thus 
 fulfilled,' ' until the times of restoration of all things, whereof God 
 spake by the mouth of his holy prophets ' ; cf. the words of Paul 
 in Acts 26^^'^ ' I stand unto this day, saying nothing but what the 
 prophets and Moses did say should come ; how that the Chiist 
 must suffer, and how that he first by the resurrection of the dead 
 should proclaim light both to the people and to the Gentiles.' 
 
 One or two slighter resemblances may be noted. The idea of 
 growth in 1 P 2^ 'iva iv avr^ ai^rjOrJTe et's acoTtipiav appears also 
 in 2 P 3^* av^dvere iv ■xapiri koI yvtoaet tov K.vpbov r/fiSiv, which 
 may be compared with Eph. 4^^ and Col. 2^'. The reference to 
 angels in 1 P 1^^, where it is said of. the mysteries of the Gospel 
 649 a eTrtOvfiovtriv ayyeXoi irapaKV'^p'ai, and in 3^^ vTroToyevTcav 
 avT^ dyyiXmv ical i^oyaiSiv Koi Bwdfiecov, may be compared with 
 those in 2 P 2^ dyyeKtov duaprqaavToiv ovk e^eio-aro, 2^^ ayyeXoi 
 la-xyi Kol Svvd/J,ei fjLeL^ove<s oVre? ov <j)ipov<riv kot avTwv ^\da-(f)r)- 
 fiov Kpiaiy, in all of which the word dyyeXoi is anarthrous. In 
 2 P 2* the reference is to fallen angels, who appear to be also 
 referred to under the name Bo^ai in 2 P 2^°. 
 
 We have seen that 1 P differs greatly from 2 P in the number 
 of allusions to the Gospel history. We will now compare them as 
 regards the allusions to the O.T. Hort (Appendix, p. 179) reckons 
 31 quotations in 1 P against 5 in 2 P. They are as follows : 
 
 1 P 1^" ay 10 1 ea-ea-6 e on iy a> dyio<;, taken from 
 Lev. 11« 19^ 201 1" el iraripa i-rriKaXel a- e from 
 Jer. 3^^ iraTepa KoKeaete /j,6. 1^^ oii <^6aprol<i, dpyypitg fl . 
 Xpva-ia> eXvTpd>6 rj re, from Isa. 52* ou /lera dpyvpiov XvTpcaOij- 
 aea-0e. 1^ Sia \6yov ^mvt o^ &eov k al fievovr o<i, from 
 Dan. 6^* avTOS eVrt ©eo? i^&v ical fiivav et's toiks alS>va<}. 1^ 
 •n-da- a aap^ w? Xo/aros Kal ir a a a B6^ a avTfj<i w 9 
 dv6o<i ■)^6pTov e ^rj p dv 07] 6 %6/3tos Kal to dv0 of 
 i^eirea-ev to Be p rj /i a KvpLov p,eve i ei<; tov a t&va 
 
Ixxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 where the words spaced are quoted exactly from Isa. 40*"^ 
 2* el iryevaaade on %pj;<rTO? o Kupto?, from Ps. 34* 
 yeva-aa-de xal tSere on k.t.X. 2*' ^' ''• X i o p ^avra virb dvffpcovav 
 fikv airoSeSoKifiaa-fiivov, Trapa Be &e£ i K\e ktov 
 . . . IB oil Tidr/fM iv "% latv \id o v i xXe ktov ok po- 
 ry av lal ov ev t i fiov, k al 6 IT L (y r ev <ov eir avrm ov firj 
 K arai a- x^ V0 ■ff. vfilv ovv f] TLfM) rot? inaTevovtriv, atriaTovaw 
 oe\L0o<}op aireBo K i fiaa av oi oiKoBofiovvTe^, owto? 
 eyevtjdr] ei? Ke<f>a\r]v y<ov ia<;, from Ps. 118^^ \l0ov ov 
 OTTeBoKi/iaaav ol oiKoBofiovvTet owto? eyevrfOr) elg xe^aX^v yonvitvs, 
 and Isa. 28^* IB oii eyoa i/i^aSXio et? to, BefiiKta %i,cov Xl0 ov 
 TToXvTeXrj e K\e kt ov a k p oy osv talov ev r i fiov, et? to, 
 0efie\ia awr^?, xal 6 tt i a re v cov o v fir) k a t a i a %vv y, 
 2^ KoX \ 10 01 vpoaKO/jbfiaTO^ xal v ir pa aKavSaXov, from 
 Isa. 8^* Kav eir avr& treiroi0oD<! 59, earai eroi to? ayiaa-fia Kal ov^ 
 o)9 Xl0ov TTpoaKOfifuiTi avvavT^<Tea-0e ovBe w<} irerpai TndapMTi. 2® 
 vfiel<i Be yevo<i i kXbkt 6 v, ^atriXeiov iepdrev/ia, 
 e0 V o <; ay t ov, \ao? £4? w e p nr o Lt] a iv, ottoj? t a 9 
 d /) 6 T a 9 e^a/yyeCXrjTe, from Isa. 43^' ^ woria-ai to yevo<s fiov to 
 exKeKTov, Xaov /lov bv irepieiroifia'dfiriv Ta9 dpeTd<; fiov BiTjyeZaffeu, 
 Exod. 19*'* eae<T0e fiot \ao9 7re/>toi5<rt09 . . . ^aaiXeiov iepdrevfui 
 Kal e0vo<s dyiov, ib. 23^, Deut. 7^ 2i" 01 iroTe ov X a o 9, vvv Be 
 \ao9 & eov, oi ovk ■^Xer/fievoi, vvv Be iXerj evTei 
 from Hos. 1*'* xaXetrov to ovo/ia avTfj<s Ovk ■^Xerj/ievr) . . . KoXetrov 
 TO Svo/ia avTov, Ov \ao9 p^v, ib. 2^ etiraTe t£ dSeX(f>£ vfiStv Aao9 
 pov, Kal Ty dBeXifrff v/imv 'ilXerip,evri, ib. v. 28. 2^ TcapaKotJSt ix; 
 ira po C Kov 1 Kal trapeiriBrip.ovi;, from Ps. 39^^ irdpoiKO<; 
 eym elp,t iv Ty yy Kal irapewiSripMii Ka0a)<s irdvTe<i ol ware/se? /tou. 
 2^ iv fj fjuepa eirnTKom-fi<;, from Isa. 10*- 2" tov & eov 
 <}>o^ei €r0e, tov fiaaiXea TipMre, from Prov. 24^ (f>o^ov tov 
 &ebv Kal ^aaiXea. 2^ 09 dp-apTiavovKeToiriaevovBe 
 evpe07)B6Xo<; iv t m a- to fiaT t avT ov, quoted exactly 
 from Isa. 53*. 2^ 09 to,'; dp,a p t ia^ ■^/i&v avToi; dvi\vey Kev 
 . , . ov T m p,a>Xa)iri ld0r)Te, from I'sa. 53^ awT09 dpapriof; 
 iroXX&v dvrjveyKev, ib. v. 5 tcS fuoXcairi avTov Tfpsi<; idj0rfp,ev. 2® 
 ^T6 yap <B9 IT po p aTa irXav a> p,ev o i, from Isa. 53* woin-€9 
 tB9 irpo^aTa i'irXavri0rfpsv. 3* "Zappa virriKovev t«3 'Afipadp,, 
 Kv piov avTov KaXova-a, from Gen. 18^- 3*/t^ <f) ofi ovp.ev ac 
 fiTjSefiiav VT or) a-iv, from Prov. 3^ ov il>ofiri0i]try ■nrorja-iv 
 eTreXOovaav. 3^*"^^ 6 y ci p eX a) v ^ a i}v dy air av k a\ IB elv 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER Ixxxvii 
 
 ri^fiepa^ ayaOa'i "jr a v <t a t a rr/p yXma-aav airo kukov 
 K al y^eiXri tov fii} XaXrj a ai BoXov, i kkXiv dr co Se 
 diro KUKOV ical troiija-dra) dyaOov, ^rjTrjo-dTO) 
 elpijvrjv Kal Bim^aTa avr^v. otl 6^6 aXfiol Kvpiov 
 iirl Sf/caious Kal cot a air ov et? B irj cr ip avruv, 
 IT po a (o IT OP Se Kwptow bttI it o iovpt a<; ku Ka, from 
 Ps. 34^^'^® Tt9 io'Ttv dpOpmiroi; 6 OeKmp ^wrjv, dyair&p 7)fiepa<; iheiv 
 dya6d<; (where the reading dyair&p should perhaps be restored in 
 1 P). The remainder, of the quotation is ekact, except that the 
 original has the 2nd instead of the 3rd person. 3i*>i5 t},p g^ ^6j3op 
 avT&p fiTj ^o^rjOrjTe firjBe TapaxOr^Te, Kvpiop he rov Xpia-Top 
 dyida-are, from Isa. 8^^' ^ top Se (po^op avrov ov fir] (fio^rjdrJTe ovBe 
 fir) TapaxOfJTe. Kvpiop avrov dyiderare xal avTO^ ecrrai aov 
 ^6^o<;. 2P' 09 eo-Tti/ ip Se^ia ©eoO, from Ps. 110^ elTrep 6 Kvpio<; 
 Tm Kvpic^ fiov, K.d9ov Ik he^iwv fiov. 4^ op/dirrj KdKvtrTei -irXrjOo'i 
 dfiapTimp from Prov. 10^^ ' Love covereth all transgressions ' (R.V.), 
 where LXX. has tov'; fir) ^iXoveiKovprag Kokvirrei cfyikia. 4^^* el 
 opeiSi^eade . . . fiaKapioi, oti ...to tov ^eov7rvevfiai(f)' 
 vfia<; dp airav eT at. Hort reckons this as a quotation from 
 Ps. 89^"'-, but the connexion is very slight. It seems to me to be 
 a distinct quotation from Mt. 5^^^ ; see above, p. Ixxvii. For the latter 
 part of the verse Hort compares Isa. 11^ dvairavaeTai, eir ai/rov 
 iTPevfia TOV @eov. 4^'^ Kaipoi; tov dp^acrdai to KpLfia d tt o rov 
 oi K o V TOV & e o V, from Ezek. 9^' ^ dwo rmv dr/Lwp fiov dp^aade 
 . . . Kal elirep Trpo? avTov<; yiidvare top oIkop. 4'* el o BiKaioi; 
 ftoXig cTCo^eTai, 6 dae^fj^ Kal dfiapTaiXo<s irov (fsapeiTat ; quoted 
 exactly from Prov. 11^^. 5^06o? v ir e pr)(f) dp ot<; dp t it da- 
 creT a I, t aireiv oi<i Se B iBco cr ip x^- p tp, from Prov. 3^* 
 with the change of Ku/3tos into Geo?. 5'' tt) v fie p i fiip ap 
 vfiSsp i IT I p p i'^ av T e <s e ir aiiTov, oti avTw fieXei irepl 
 vfi&v, from Ps. 55^^ eTrvppiyJrop iirl Kvpiov Tr)v fiepifipdv aov, Kal 
 aiiToi (re Btadpi'yjrei. 
 
 Perhaps we may add to these, as probably in the mind of the 
 writer, 1^ elprjvrj ttXtjO v pd e ir), from Dan. 4^- (3^^) and 6^^. 
 1* d<f>dapTov Kal dfiiavTOP Kal dfidpavTop : ' These three words 
 are all absent from the LXX. and are all found iu Wisdom 
 (121, 18*, 31^ 42, 820, 612)' Hort. 1^ Xva to BoKificov vfi&p 
 rr}^ TTto-reo)? iroXvTifioTepov x P '^ "' '' ° '^ '''"^ diroXXvfiivov, Bid 
 irvpo^ Be B o K ifia^ofievov evpedfj et? erraivop, from Zech. 
 13® irvpdxrco avTOVis <b9 irvpovTai to dpyvpiop, Kal BoKifioo 
 
Ixxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 avToiKs m SoKifid^eTai to ypvaiov. 1^"'^^ VepL ^? a(0Tif)pLa<} 
 i^e^rjTrja-av . . . irpo^rJTai . . . ipavvS)VTe<} el<s rtva . . . xaipov 
 iSijXov TO irvevfia 'trpofiaprvpofievov r a et? "K. p vo-t o v 
 IT aO rj fiaT a kov rai /lera ravta So^ai;, . . . et? a eiriOvfiova-iv 
 ^yeXoi irapaK^^lrat, from Dan. Si^-is, 924-26, 126-0, Isa. 52i3-53i2, 
 1" KpivovTa KUTa to eKaaT ov epyov, from Ps. 62^^ 
 trii diroSmaeii} eKaaTtp KUTa to, epya avTov. V-^ see above, and 
 add Ps. 49^ 1^^ a,/j.vov dfim/iov, from Lev. 22^^ d[ia[iov earai 
 elaBeKTov, ttS? fiwfid? ovk ea-Tat iv avTw. 2P''^, from Gen. 
 chapters 6 and 7. 4^^ see above, and add Jer. 25 (32)29 h> irokei 
 iv y d)vofida-6ri to ovop-d fiov iir avTrjv eyw dp)(pp,ai KaK&crai. 
 4^9 iricTTm KTiaTTi TrapaTidea-dma-av Ta<; ■\}rvy(^di}, from Ps. 31^ et? 
 'yelpd<i crov irapadija-op.ai to wevp,d jmov iXvTpdxrco fie K.vpie 6 
 @6os Trj<; dXrjdelai;. 5* d dz/TtSt/co? vfi&v SidfioXo'; . . . irepiiraTel 
 ^r]T&v Karainelv, from Job. 1^ diroKpideX^ 6 Std^oXo<; etire, TlepieX- 
 6cov TTjv yijv Kol i/JLirepfiraTTJa-a^ ttjv vtt' ovpavov nrdpekfu, ib. 2^. 
 
 In 2 P Hort reckons the following as quotations : 2^ Si o S s 17 
 6Bb<i Trji; dXrjdeia^ ^\a(r^rip.r)driaeTai, from Isa. 52^ St' 
 vp.d<; ... TO ovo/id p,ov ^Xaaiprjp^eiTai, iv toI's edveai. 2P^ Kvcav 
 iiruTTpe^a^ iir I to iStov i ^ e p a p. a, from Prov. 26^^^ aavep 
 Kviov OTUv iiriXdr] eVl tov eavTov ep,eTov koX p,i<71]t6^ yivrfTai, 
 ouTWs d(j)pa)v Ty eavTov kuklo. dvaaTpeyj/a<; ctti tt/v iavTov dpMp- 
 Tiav. 2>^p,[a^p,ipa'irapd K.vp[a) tu? '^iX la e ttj, koI 
 'XiXia 6TJ7 to? f)pepa p,la, from Ps. 90* X'^** ^'''V ^^ 6(f>6aX/ioi<; trov 
 tt>? V ffjiepa ^ ix^^'i ^Tif} SirjXOe. 3^^ o v p av ol irvpov/ievoi 
 XvdrjcrovTai, ital aToix^la icavaovpsva t ij k e t a i, from Isa. 34* 
 Kal TaKrj(7ovTai irdaai al Bvvdp,ei<! 't&v ovpavSsv, koI iXiyrjaeTai 6 
 ovpavoi} (B? 0i^X[ov Kal irdvTa Ta daTpa ireveiTai. 3^* Kaiv oiif 
 he ov p av o i) s Kal y rj v Kaivrj v irpoa-hoKWfiev, from Isa. GS''^ 
 eaTai ydp 6 ovpavoi Kaivb<i Kal rj yij xaivi], ib. 66^^ Perhaps we 
 may add the following : I2 tv^Xo? ia-Tiv p.vco-ird^(ov, compared with 
 Isa. 59^" 0)9 ov^ v-Trap^ovTcov 6<f)0aXp,c!>v ■^Xa^riaovai. V^ to3 
 Xoy (p Trpoa-e)(pvTe<i m <; Xvy(v a> <f> a iv ovti iv av yp,rj p£ 
 TOTTip, of. Ps. 119"^ Xvyyo<i Tol<i iroa-L fiov 6 vofiof aov, 2 Esdras 
 12*^ tu nobis superasti ex omnibus prophetis . . . sicut lucerna in 
 loco obscuro. 2^ ^ 6S6<; ttj^ dXTjOeia'i, cf. Ps. 11 9S*. 2* o-etpai? 
 l^o^ov Taprapmaai irapiSoaKev et? Kpiatv Tr)pov/iivovii, cf. Wisdom 
 17^® p.ia dXva-ei <tk6tov<s irdvTe^ iBedrjaav. 2* saving of Noah, 
 cf. Gen. chapters 6 and 7. 2^ TrdXet? toB6p,cov Kal 
 To p^oppai T e(l> p(l)a- a^ k aT aaTp o(j>ij KUTeKpivev, viro- 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETEH AND 2 PETER Ixxxix 
 
 Bety fia fieWovToiv da-e^e<riv Te0€i,Kco<{, cf. Gen. 19^'' K.vpiois 
 e^pe^ev iirl 'ZoSofia koI T6/ioppa delov Koi irvp iraph &eov 
 i^ ovpavov, Kol Kareo'Tpeyp'e tA? TroXet? ravra^ Kal iraaav 
 rrjv irepLxiopov, Numb. 26^" (of the destruction of Korah) koX 
 iyevi]6r]a-av iv a-rjfieiai. 2^'* saving of Lot, cf. Gen. ch. 18, Wisdom 
 106.7 216.16 Balaam, cf. Numb. 2221-28. 39 oi ^paUvei KV? 
 Tij? iirayiye\[a<;, &<; Tive<; ^paSvTTJTa ■^yovvrai, aW^ /jtaKpoOvfjuei, 
 cf. Sir. 3518 KOL 6 Kv/3t09 oil /jltj ^paBvvy ovBe fi^ fiaKpodvfirja-rj eV 
 avToi^. 3^ fiTj ^ov\6fJLev6<i Tiva<i diroXecffai aX\A iravra's et? 
 fierdvotav 'xmpfiaai, cf. Ezek. 18^^ Wisdom 11^* eXeets Se iravTW!, 
 OTi iravTa Svvaaai, koi Trapopai; dfiaprrffiwra dvOpcoirtQV eh fierd- 
 voiav. It will be seen that the points of contact between the 
 O.T. and 2 P are not only much fewer in number, but also of a 
 far less intimate nature than those between the O.T. and 1 P, so 
 that this difference would by itself suffice to prove that the two 
 epistles did not proceed from the same author. 
 
 We have still to compare the grammar and style of the two 
 epistles, to see how far they confirm the conclusions already arrived 
 at from a comparison of the vocabulary and the subject matter. 
 
 Unusual Inflexions. 
 
 1 P has the aor. inf. ^laxrai (4^), found also in Aristotle and 
 Plutarch, instead of the classical ^imvai. The fut. pass. KepSrj07j- 
 aovTui is found only in 1 P 31, KepBrjato occurs in James 41^, 
 i/j^opevaofj^ffa xal /cepS'^a-op.ev (where see my note), and the aor. 
 iicephri<ra is common in the N.T. The form KepSavSt (WH.) or 
 KepSdvw (Blass) occurs after Zva in 1 Cor. 9^1. 1 P has three examples 
 of the form iyevrjdrjv (li^ 2', 3^). It keeps the classical irpoaayar/ri 
 in 318 as contrasted with i-ird^a<; in 2 P 2^ In 21^ WH. (Intro- 
 duction § 410, App. p. 166), read ^ifiolv with }< comparing 
 KaTuaKrjvoiv read by BD in Mt. 13^^^ ijy g Jq ]\I]j_ 432^ ^q^ diroBexa- 
 Toiv read by BD in Heb. 7^, while Ti, Treg. read ^ifiovv with the 
 other MSS. Moulton Proleg. p. 53 favours the ordinary reading. 
 
 Article. 
 
 In this respect there is a great similarity between the two 
 epistles, both exhibiting the same mastery of the fully formed 
 articular phrase, combined with the frequent use of the anarthrous 
 
xc INTRODUCTION 
 
 noun.i Of the former we have examples in 1 P 1^ Toiig iv 
 Svvdfiet @eov (j)povpov/jievov<s, 1^° ol irepl t^9 eU Vila's xapiro^ 
 TTpo^rjTevaavTei;, I''* rai<i irporepov ev Trj ayvoia vfimv itn0ufiLai<;, 
 3^ T^i' iv 0O/8&) dyvrjv dvaarpoifirjv vfiMp, 3^ o e^mdev ifnr\oKfi<; 
 Tpi,j(5)v Kal irepiOiaecot; ^puo-twi' rj ivSva-eax; ifiaritov Kotrfio<;, 3^® 
 Tr/v dr/a6r]v iv "K-piaTm dvaarpo(f>riv, 4^ et? to firjKeri dvdpdyjroov 
 iTndv/j,bai<; dWd OeXrifiaTi @eov rov iir'iXoi'KOv iv arapKl ^caxrai 
 Xpovov, b^ 6 KOi Trj<; fieX\ova"r}i diroKaXviTTea-dai S6^rj<; koivcovo<;, 
 5* Tov dfiapdvTivov Trj^ So^ij? errecfiavov, 5® t^ iv rm Koafia vfiStv 
 dSeXfjsoTrjTi. Of the latter in 1^ iv dyiaa-fiiS 7rvevfiaT0<;, et? 
 pavTia-fiov aifiaTO<;, 1^ St' dvatxTda-eeoi; 'irjcrov X.pi<rTov ix veKpwv, 
 1^ eV Bvvdfiei ©eou, iv Kaipm ia-)(dTa), 1' iv diroKoXv^ei 'Irjcrov, 
 1^^ (evayyeXicrdfievoi) vfid(; irvev/ian dyia diro<rTd\evTi air' 
 ovpavov, 1^" TTjOO «aTa/3oX^s Koafiov, \'^ Sid Xoyov ^S)vto<; @eov icai 
 fievovTO<!, 3^^ ov aapKO<i dirodea-i'; pvirov, dXKa crvveiSijaea)!; 
 dyadrj^ iirepmTrjfMa, 2® Trepii'x^ei iv ypacj^y (cf. 2 P 1^" irdaa •7rpo(J3rj- 
 reia ypa<f>r]<;),4i^Xpi,(rTOV';ra06vTog aapKi, 4^ eh ro fiiqKeri dvdpeoTrtav 
 iTn6viiLai<;, dWd deXijfiari @eov ^i&a-ai, 4^" olKov6fJi,oi TrotKiA.??? 
 XdptToi; ®eov, 4^* iv ovofiari Kpiarov, 5* d ai/riSt/co? vfiMV Sta/SoXo? 
 •jrepiiraTei, 5^^ iTn/iaprvpav ravrrjv elvai dXrjOrj ^apu' tov ©eoO, 3''^ 
 Trpoa-WTrov K.vptov iirl •Koiovvra's xaxd. We find also in 1 P 
 examples of the looser constructions which we have seen in 2 P, 
 e.g. 1 P l'^^ Ta? 6c7(j)va'; Tr)<; Siavoia^, 1^^ tov iyeipavTa avTOV ix 
 v6Kp5)V, 1^^ TTj viraKofj t^? dXr/Oeia^, 2^^ to 6eXr)fia tov ®eov, 4^ to 
 ^ovXrjfia Twv iOvSiv, 4^^ iv Ty d'iroKaXv'>^ei T'^s S6^7)(;, 4^'^ d-Trb tov 
 oiKov tov @eov : of the ' appositional ' form in 1^^ to pfjixa to 
 evayyeXiadev, 1^" Tr/so^'ijTat ol irepX tiJ? et? vfidt; 'x,dpiT0<; Trpo^ij- 
 revo'avTe'; : of the ' semi-compact ' in 1^ Toirs iv Bwd/iet OeoO <^pov- 
 povfjiivovi; Sia 7rto"Teft)9 et? atOTrjpiav eToi,f//r]v diroKaXv^dfivai iv 
 Kaipw icrxdTO), 1^' toz' dirpoo'COTroXijfnrTco'; KpivovTa KaTa to 
 exda-TOV 'ipyov, V-^ Tr)v (jjepo/ievi^v v/miv %a/3tv iv diroKaXv'^ei, 
 'IrjtTov 'KpiaTov, V-^ t^s fiaTaia<s vfimv dva<7Tpo<lifj<; TraTpoirapahovov, 
 4^^ Tfi iv vfuv -irvpaxrei irpo'i •jreipaa-afiov vfuv yivopjivrj. 4^* to t^?- 
 Sdfjy? Kal TO tov @eov irvev/jia is an exception to the general rule 
 that the repetition of the article implies a plurality of subjects ; 
 see above, p. xxxv. The rule is observed in 5^ d (rvfiirpea^vTepot 
 Kal fidpTVi. 
 
 ' See for 2 P above, p. xxvi foil. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER xci 
 
 Cases. 
 
 Accusative. We find the Adverbial Accusative in 1 P 3^ to 
 TeXo? Travre? 6fi6(f)pov€<!, 3* rovvavriov, 1^ oKbjov ; the Ace. of 
 Duration of Time in 1^^ ev <j)6^ip rbv t^s trapoiKia^ xpovov 
 avacrrpd^r}Te, 4^ tov iiriXoiirov ^i&aai 'X,p6vov ; Cognate Ace. 
 in 3^ ^o^ovfievai firjSefiiav irT&qaiv, 3^* tov (fio^ov air&v /i'fj 
 ^o^rjdfJTe, 4^ oirXiaaa-Oe evvoiav (some take these as Accusative 
 of the Object). Double Ace. in 3^^ alrei u/ias 'Kojov.'n-epl eXTrt'So?. 
 Of Prepositions which take the Ace. el<; is the commonest in 1 P 
 as in 2 P, the former having 42 examples as compared with the 
 11 of the latter: Bid 1 P (4), 2 P (4); eVi 1 P (5), 2 P (2); Kara 
 1 P (9), 2 P (3) ; fierd 1 P (1), 2 P (1) ; -Trpo-; 1 P (3), 2 P (2). 
 Especially noticeable are the following: 1 P 3^* et? fjv 
 {ki^wtov), SieacoBTjaav, 1^^ Trca-Toi: el<s @e6v, ib. rtjv iricrnv etvai. ei? 
 @e6v, 5^^ ets ^v a-Trjre ; 1^^ ra eh l^pia-rqv iraO'^fiaTa ; 1^® Kara tov 
 KaXia-avTa i/iai; ayiov koX avroX ayioi yevijffriTe, and 4® 'iva KpiOSxri 
 fiev KaTh dvOprnTrov;, ^&ai Se KaTci %e6v, which are unlike 
 anything in 2 P with the exception of eh in 2 P 1^^ eh ov 
 iyo) evBoKTjaa. So 1^^ iXiria-aTe eiri Trjv xdpi-v, is copied from the 
 Hebrew use : see Hort's n. 
 
 Genitive Possessive. 1 P 1^ aTroo-ToXo? "KpicTov, 'irapeiriBrip,oi<i 
 Biaa-TTopdi HovTov ; 3* 6 KpuirTO^ ttJ? KapBtw; dvOpwiro'i (not 
 Gen. of Apposition, as Alf.). Subjective 1^ irpoyvmaiv %eov, 
 d^ia<Tp,o<i irvev/jLaToi;, 1^^ ttj v-rraKofi Trj<s dXrjdelat; (see Hort's n.), 3^^ 
 a-vveiB'q<reco<; dyadrj<i i'TrepmTrjfia. Objective 1^ pavTi<r/ji,b<s aifiaTo^, 1' 
 BoKifuov Tij? TTitTTeo)?, 2^* eKSiKTjai? KaKOTTOimv, 3^ evBvcri'i ifiaTieov, 
 ifiTrXoKri Tpij(&v, S^ dtrodea-if pvirov, 4* AcrmTia^ dvd')(ya-i^. After 
 CompdrativeV TroXvTi/jLOTepov ^(^pva-lov. Hebraistic 1^* Texva vTraKor}^, 
 2* Xidoi; 7rpocric6fifiaTO<!, ireTpa <TKavBdXov, '2P ev 7}fiipa i'TriaKOTrrj^. 
 Gen. of Material ' consisting in ' 3^ o ifiirXoKri'i TpiX&v K6irfio<;, 
 S' x"'P'''> ?*''7?j 5* TOV TTif Bo^ri^ a-Te^avov. Gen. of Quality 5^" 
 d @eo? vda-rji; xd-piTa. With Verb 4^ ireiravTai d/j,apTiai; (al. 
 dfiapTi,ab<i) cf. 2 P 2-^* dicaTd7rav<TT0^ dfiapTiai, 2^^ dire'yea'OaC 
 ewidv/iicav, 2^^ KaraXaXov(7iv vfi&v, 5* KaraKvpievovTe<; t&v KXripmv. 
 Gen. of Purpose {Infinitive) 8^" •jrava-dTco %6t\?7 tov fif) XaXija-ai 
 BoXov. Gen. Absolute 3^* KaTaaKeva^ofiivT]^ ki^utov, 3^^ viroTa- 
 yevTav avrm drfyiXeov, 4^ 'K.pio-Tov iraOovToi, 4* fir] avvrpeXovTwv 
 vfjiMv, 5* (fyavepmdevTO^ tov apxtTroifievoi;, 4^^ m<; ^ivov ervfi^aivov- 
 T09. Of prepositions which take the genitive, dvTL occurs twice in 
 
xcii INTRODUCTION 
 
 1 P, never in 2 P ; avev twice in 1 P, not in 2 P ; airo occurs five 
 times in 1 P, thrice in 2 P (or four times if we reaxi utto in 1^') ; 
 iK 1 P (8), 2 P (5) ; Sid 1 P (15), the most remarkable being 5^^ 
 Bi oXiymv eypayjra, and 3^" Biea-a>6i]aav Si vSaroi, 2 P (5), or 6, 
 if we read Sta So^rj^ in 1^, the most remarkable being St' vSarot 
 avvear&aa. iwl, 1 P (1), 2 P (1) ; eVwTrtov 1 P (1), 2 P (0) ; &? 
 
 1 P (0), 2 P (1); Kurd 1 P (1), 2 P (1) ; fj-erd 1 P (1), 2 P (0) ; 
 ■jrapd 1 P (0), 2 P (1) ; ottio-oi 1 P (0), 2 P (1); irepi 1 P (5), 2 P 
 (2); 7rp6 1 P (2), 2 P (0); iirip 1 P (2), 2 P (0); vtto 1 P (1), 
 
 2 P (5) (or 4, if we read aTro in 1^'). 
 
 Dative. iTidirect Object 1 P 1^ 6/«;Xe«Tots TrapeinSij/noii (Xiyei 
 Xctipetv), cf 2 P 1^, 1^ X"-P'''^ vfilv irXriOvvBel'q, 1 P V^ o?s direKoXv^dr) 
 on ifuv SirjKovovv avra a vvv avriyyeXi] vfiiv, 1^ rifv ^epofievrfv 
 vfilv %a/3ti/, 121, 56 after SuScofii, 2^^' ^, S^- «' 22, 5^ after vTrordacro- 
 fiat, 2^' vfiiv vwoXifiTrdvcov v-Troypafifiov, 2^ iiraKoKovdelv rot? 
 txyeaiv avrov, 2^ irapeSiSov rm KpivovTi, S^, 4^' dveiOeiv Ta3 X6y(p, 
 3" i/TD^Kovaev tw 'Aj3padfi, S' tc3 yvvaiKeici) {a-Kevei) dirovifiovTei; 
 Tifiijv, 31* Toi<i TTvevfiaaiv exijpv^ev' 4° dwoSaxrovaiv Xoyov reo 
 KpivovTi, 4^ veKpol<; evrjyyeXLadr] , 4}^ vtaTm KTiarg irapaTide- 
 adwaav ra? •^v^a?, 5* aWi^Xot? t^i/ Taireivo<l>poavvrjv eyKOfi^co- 
 a-aade, 5^ virepri^dvoi's dvriTdaaeTai, 5® ou dvTta-njTe, to, aiiTO, ry 
 aSeX^OTrjTi evneXelTai, 3^^ iva v/ta; irpocrcuydyri rm @ew, 2* 
 einrpoaSeKTOi ©eflS, 3^^ ttjOo? diroXoyiav t«3 alrovvri ; with et/t(, etc., 
 411 oS eo'Tti' ^ So^a, 412 Trpo? weipacrfibv vfilv yivofievy . , , ^hiov 
 v/uv a-Vfi^a'bvovTOi;, 2^ vjuv (earlv) rj rt/ii], 5^^ ainm to Kpdroi; 
 (eo-TO)), 5^ avra fiiXet irepl Tj/iSiv. Dat. of Reference 2^* tW Tat9 
 afiapTi,ai,<i diroyevojJbevov Ty hiKaioavvy ^rjatafiev, 4^ iriiravTat 
 dfj,apTiai<s (al. dfj,apTia<i) ; with compound verb 2^ irpoaKOirTeiv rw 
 Xoyw, l^'^'jrwa-xrif^a'Ti^ofievoi rat? iiridvfiiaii;. Dat. of Instrument 
 1^2 evayyeXia-d/ievoi, Trvev/jiaTi ar/icp, V^ Tifj,L(p aifiari iXvrpmdTjre, 2'^ 
 ov t£ /jLcoXotTTi iddr^re ; Dat. of Cause 4^2 fit] ^evi^eade ry irvpcoaei ; 
 Dat. of Respect 4^ iradmv a-apKu, 4^ Iva Kpiffmai /lev a-apKu, ^a>ai 
 Se TTvevfiUTi, 31* OavaTtodeU p-iv aapKL, ^(uoTroii^del; hk irveviiaTi, 
 41^ KoivaveiTe rots iraQrip.aaiv, 5* arepeol ry Trio-ret; Dat. of 
 Manner 1^ dr/aXXiare x^-P^ dveKXaXyTtp, 4^ fiyKeri dvdpcoirav 
 iTTiOvficaiis, dXXa 0eXi]fiaTi @eov ^i&aac. With Prepositions ev 
 1 P (49), 2 P (44), eVt 1 P (1), 2 P (0), wapd 1 P (2), 2 P (2), avv 
 1 P (0), 2 P (1). The most noteworthy examples in 1 P are iv 
 Xpiar^ (3), 41* oveiSi^eirde iv 6v6/iaTi Xpiarov, 4^® Sofafero) tov 
 ®e6v iv Tofl ovo/iari TovTcp, 5" dairdaaa-de iv (piXijfiari. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER xciii 
 
 The accumulation of prepositions is even more noticeable in 1 P 
 than in 2 P, hardly less than in Romans, e.g. 1^ aTroo-roXo? kotA 
 irp6yvtO(riv 4v aytaa-nm els viraicoijv, 1^ o Karol to eXeos avayevvT^aaii 
 r]fia<i tls eKtrtha ^mcrav Si' dvaa-rda-eai} 4k vexprnp As Kkrjpovofiiav 
 TeTr]pr}fiivr)v ev ovpavol'i «ls ^/ua? tou? «v Bvvdfiei @eov ^povpov- 
 fievovi Sii, TTt'o-Tems «ls a-<OTrjptav eroi/iTjv Iv Kaipm e<Tj(ar(p. Cf. 
 2 P 1"' 'X,dpt<; vfitv ifKTjQvvOeir) h> iirvyvdia-ei, tov @eov, w? irdvTa 
 •fffilv T7J5 ^eia9 Svvdfiea)<; avrov to, irpbs ifffl^v SeSwpiy/iei/Tjs 8ia t^? 
 i-m/Yvaxreaxs rod Ka\iaavTO<! '^fid^ Sid So^?;9 (a^. t'Sta ^o^rj) koX 
 dpeTrj<;, 8i' eUi' t^ rt/iia xal fieyicrTa eTrayyeXfiara BeSdoprjTai, iva 
 8ia TovTCOv yevqaOe 6e'ia<i Koiwvol <^vcreco<; diro<^vy6vTe^ rrj^ 4v reS 
 Kocrfio) «v eiriOvfiia <j)dopa^. and Rom. !"• IlaOXo? di^mpiafievo'; els 
 evayyeXiov @eov, o irpoeirqyyeiKaTo 8id twi' 7rpo<f>r]r&v iv ypa<j)ai<; 
 diytai^ irepl toO utoO toO yevofiivov Ik airepfiaro^ AaveiS Kara 
 (rdpKa, rov opiadevro^ viov @eov Iv Svvd/Jiei kotA irvevfia e£ ava- 
 ardaewi veicp&v, 8i' o5 ekd^ofiev xdpiv «ls inraKoijv iria-rew; Iv 
 iraaiv fririp toO ovo/uitoi; aiiTov, kv ol<i ecrre /cal vfieii, trd(nv rot? 
 oSaiv Iv 'Pm/MT} ^ajot? dirb @eoO. 
 
 Number and Gender. 
 
 We find an irregularity where nouns, differing in gender, are 
 joined to the same adjective, as in 2^ d-TTodefievoi iraaav icaKiav 
 Koi irdvra Sokov Koi viroKpiaiv koX ^d6vov<; Kal Tracra? KaToXdKiai;. 
 Here it would have been easy to make the construction regular by 
 putting irdvTa So\ov after virofcpicrip. WH. give viTOKpiaei<i in 
 the margin, which seems to me the better reading, and this is sup- 
 ported by NC etc. The plural would be easily assimilated to 
 the preceding singulars. In 4^* (eeao-ro? leaOox; eka^ev xdpca-fia) 
 ek eavToixs ScaKovovmef we have a mixture of singular and plural, 
 depending upon the imperative am^povrjo-aTe in v. 7. This would 
 be regular if the phrase in brackets had been placed after Siuko- 
 vovvrei. 2^ also affords examples of the Plural Abstract in <f>06vov9 
 and /caTaXaXCa<}. So we find So^ai 1^\ daehr/eiai ¥. 
 
 Pronouns. 
 
 Demonstrative. As 1 P is not controversial, it has no example 
 of the denunciatory use of oStos which is so common in 2 P. The 
 most characteristic use here is the prospective, where it serves as 
 
xciv INTRODUCTION 
 
 a pivot for a following explanation, as in 2^^ rovro x«/3*? "' S'« 
 a-vveiSrja-tv viroi^epeu ti<; Xvira^, 3® eh tovto eic\ri6rfT6, "va Kkripo- 
 vofiriar)Te, 4® el<; tovto evTiyyeXia-dr), Xva KpiOaaiv; and so with 
 ovT(o<i in 2^^ ovT(o<s ia-Tiv to 0e\r]fia tov @eov, followed by the 
 appositional infinitive ar/adoTroiovvTa^ <f>ifwvv. The pronoun is 
 retrospective in 2^"' ^^ tovto j^apt? vapa @eS, et? tovto lyap 
 eK\ri6r)Te, 2' \Ldo<; ov aireSo/cbfiaa-av . . ovTo<; k'ievqdr) el<s Ke<f>a\rip 
 ymviaf. And so ovtox; in 3^ ovtox; yap at ayiai yvvaiKet eKoa-fJiovv 
 iavTai' 
 
 Neither oSe nor eKeLvo<; occurs in 1 P. 
 
 eavTov<i is used in 4* Trjv eh eavTov<! aydirriv eicTevf} exovTei, and 
 in 4^" for aW'^\ov<i, as in Col. 3^ '^api^o/ievot eavToh, and 
 elsewhere both in the N.T. and in classical writers. It is curious 
 that it is coupled with a\X'r]\ov<; in 4^ <j)iX6^evoi eh dWijXovi, as 
 in Col. 3^^ avexo/ievot dWijXcov. It keeps its usual reflexive 
 sense in 1^^ 3*- 
 
 There is a remarkable use of to, avTo, followed by a geni- 
 tive in 5® elSoTei to, aiiTo, tS>v TraOrj/uiToov Ty iv KoafMo vfiav 
 dSeXifjOTrjTi etriTeXeia-dat 'knowing that the same sufferings are 
 accomplished in your brethren who are in the world' (R.V.). 
 Dr. Bigg writes about this, much as others have done about 
 unusual constructions in 2 P : ' It is impossible to see why St. 
 Peter did not write to, avTo, iradiqiiaTa, if these words would 
 convey his meaning. He was not a scholar, but there are some 
 errors of expression which no man would make.' I must confess, 
 I do not feel quite at ease as to the reception which a Greek 
 of the second century would have given to these sweeping asser- 
 tions. Was Ovid no scholar when he wrote (F. i. 46), !Non habet 
 officii lucifer omnis idem'.? There was nothing to prevent him 
 from writing the more commonplace ' officium.' Are we sure that 
 no Greek would have written iirl to avTo 7^9 dvaia-xvmias 
 e^daaev tw ©epcrtTj;, or to, avTo, t&v dXi>^e(ov avTXijaavTe^l 
 I do not mean that the last is exactly equivalent to Ta<i auras 
 ^\ti/r6ts : it is rather ' the same sort of persecutions,' there was an 
 identity in the persecutions they had to endure. 
 
 Belative. Sometimes the antecedent is not clearly defined, as 
 in 1* iv w ayaXXida-de, where some find it in KaipiS, some in @ew, 
 some in the general sense of the preceding clause ; i^ iv a ^evi- 
 ^ovTM, where it sums up the preceding clause; 2* eh o koX 
 iTe6r}a-av, where the antecedent is suggested by the preceding 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER xcv 
 
 •n-poa-KOTTTovcnv. Eeplaced by demonstrative in second clause, 2'^ 
 o? afiapriav ovk iiroLrjaev ovhe evpeOr) BoXo^ iv tw (TTOfiaTt avrov. 
 hcTTi'i occurs once, '2P- avi^ecrdai t5>v eiriOvfuSiv aXTt,ve<; crTpaTev- 
 ovrat, Kara rij? ■\lrv)(rj<i ' whose nature it is to war against the soul.' 
 A common feature of 1 P is the repetition of relatives, as in 
 222'- (XptffTO?) 09 ajxapriav ovk eTroirjaev ... 09 \oihopovfJbevo<i 
 OVK dvTeXoiSopei ... 09 t^<; dfiapria^ rjiiStP avro^ dvijveyKev 
 . . . ov Tw ficoXcoTTi IdOrjre : 1^ hv ovk IS6vt£<s dyairdre, el<s hv dpn 
 fii} 6pS)vre<; ina-Tevovrei Be dr/aWtdcr0e : 1^^ oh dTreKd\v(l)Orj on 
 ovy^ eavTol<i vfuv 86 Sir/Kovovv aiird, & vvv dvrjiyyeXr} vfuv . . . eh 
 a iTTidv/jLovaiv dyyeXoi irapaKvyJrai : S^^^^ ev m Tvevfiaa-t ixijpv^ev . • . 
 KaTa<7Keva^ofievr]<; ki^wtov, eh f)p okiryoi Siea-didrja-av Bt' vBaT0<;, o 
 KOL rjud'i aa^ei. Attraction, 2^^ "iMl eV ^ ( = ev tovtoi o) kutoXu- 
 Xovcriv vfi&v . . . Bo^dtTcoa-i rov @e6v, 3^^ iva ev a KaTaXdXovaiv 
 vfjMiv . . . KaTaiaxwdSxyiv. ocro<; does ifot occur in 1 P. 
 
 Interrogative, rh and 7roto9, 3^^ Tt9 d KaKcocrtov vfid'i ; 4^^ t'l to 
 Te\o9 ; l-*-^ ipavv&VTe<} el<! rLva fj irolov 'xpovov eB-^Xov. irorairo';, 
 found in 2 P, does not occur in 1 P. 
 
 Adjectives. 1 
 
 Neuter used as a substantive (1) with article 3* to d^dapTov 
 Tov rjavxiov irvevfiarot;, (2) without article 1^" eV icrj^dTov rSiv 
 Xpovav, 3P- eKKXivdrm aTro KaKOV kuI •jroir}(rdT<o d^adov. lBioi is 
 preceded by the article without avraiv in the two places where it 
 occurs (3^' ^). The distributive 7ra9 is found with the article in the 
 singular, 3^^ iravrl toS alrovvn. 
 
 Veubs. 
 
 Tenses. Futttre Indicative after tW, 3-'^ iva etrivei; direiOova-tv 
 . . KepBrjOijaovTai, cf. Blass, pp. 211 f. 
 
 Aorist Indicative answering to English Perfect. 1^^ a vvv dvrjy- 
 jiXr) ' these things which have now been announced unto you ' 
 (R.V.), 2^ iirearpd^riTe vvv iirl tov iroifiiva ' are now returned ' 
 (E.V.), 2^ el eyevaaaOe oti ;;^/37jo-ro9 d Kvpioi ' if ye have tasted 
 that the Lord is gracious ' (R.V.), 2^^ ^re 109 wpo^aTa irXavcofieva 
 dXX' eirecTTpd^riTe vvv ettI tov TroifMeva ' ye were going astray . . . 
 but are now returned ' (KV.), 3^ ^9 iyevijdrjTe TeKva dyaOoiroiova-ai, 
 
 I See below under ' Participles.' 
 
xcvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 ' whose children ye now are if ye do well ' (R.V.). We have two 
 examples of what is called the Gnomic aorist in 1^ i^pdvffri 6 
 •yppTOfs, TO avdo<s e^eireaev. 
 
 Aorist Imperative (of urgency). Much commoner than the 
 present in 1 P., the latter being used nine times, the former 
 twenty-four. In 2^^ we have them combined, irdvrtKs Ttfnja-are, 
 TTjv aSe\ff>6TriTa arfairaTe, tov @eov <j>o^ei<T0e, rov ^oaiKea nftdre. 
 Hort rightly explains the reason for the variety ; ' St. Peter begins 
 - with the aorist imperative as the most forcible tense for the 
 exhortation on which it was his present purpose to insist . . . the 
 other exhortations might be taken more as a matter of course.' 
 There was nothing startling to Gentiles in the command to honovir 
 the king (i.e. the emperor), to fear God, to love those to whom they 
 were united by a tie of brotherhood ; but that honour was due to 
 all, to the publicans and sinners, to the ignorant and debased, was 
 indeed taught by our Lord's example, but it was a hard saying, 
 not only to Greek philosophers and Roman statesmen, to Jewish 
 priests and Pharisees in the first century, but is still so to the 
 immense majority of civilized and Christian mankind in the 
 twentieth century, 
 
 Subfunctive is used in final sentences in the N.T. even though 
 the governing verb may refer to past time ; cf. 1 P 3® et? tovto 
 ixX'^drjTe iva xKripovo/i'^aTjTe, 3^' Xpto-TO? aireOavev Xva ^fid^ 
 irpoa'cvyarfy t£ ©ew. After oi ftij 2*. 
 
 Optative. The true optative occurs in 1 P. 1^ elp^vij irXriOvvdeiri, 
 as in 2 P. 1^. Its use to express a pure hypothesis is rare in 
 the N.T., but is found in 1 P. 3" et irda-xotre . . . fjuiKopioi (iare), 
 3^^ /cpeiTTOV (ia-Tlv) arfa6oirou>vvra<i, el BeKoi to 0eKri/ta tov Seov, 
 •7rd<rx,eiv ^ KaKOTToiovvTo^. The latter parenthetical use may be 
 compared with 1 Cor. 14^' ToaavTa, el tvj^oi, yevr) ijxuv&v eialv, 15*^ 
 aTreipei<! . . . yv/ivov kokkov, el Tvy(pi. Luke is more free in the 
 use of the optative than the other writers of the N.T. ; cf. Acts 
 24^® 0W9 eSet . . . KaTtjyopelv ei Tt, ej(ptev irpo<; ifte, ih. 17^, 20^*, 
 27l^ etc. 
 
 Infinitive after verb : l'^ iirtdvfiova-iv irapaKw^ai, 2^^ irapaKaKSi 
 d'iri')(e(T6ai, 5^ /leKXovaa a-rroKaXv-irTeaOai, 5* ^tit&v tcaTatnelv. 
 Accusative with infinitive 5' etSore? to, avTo, einTe\eia6ai ' know- 
 ing that the same things are accomplished.' As the more usual 
 construction of olSa in this sense is that which we find in 1^* 
 elSoTC? oTt oi <f>0apToii eXMTpmdrjTe, some understand olSa in the 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER xcvii 
 
 sense in which it is used in 2 P. 2^ olBev Kvpioi eva-e0ei<} pveaOai, 
 but Blass (p. 231) prefers the usual translation which he illustrates 
 from Luke 4*^ ySeia-av tov Xpta-rov avrbv elvai. Another example 
 of ace. with inf. is 1 P. 5^^ iTrifiaprvpuv ravTr)v elvai dXridfj xo-ptv 
 TOV @eov. Infinitive after adjective : 1^ eToi/io<! diroKaXvcpdijvai,, 
 4* dp/cero? o •)(p6vo<i KaTeipyda-dai. 
 
 Epeaxgetic Infinitive. 2^ olKoSofieia-de . . . et's lepdrevfia ayiov 
 dveviyKai 6vaM<;, 2^^ ovtox} ia-rlv rb 6iKv}fia rov @eov, dyadoiroi,- 
 ovvra^ <f>i/iovv. After ma-re 1^^. 
 
 Infinitive with Article : 4^^ o Kaiptx; rov ap^aadai, 3'' el? to /*v 
 eyKOTrreaOai ra? irpoaev^h'i vfimv, 4^ eh to /jbrjKeTi ^iSxrai, 3^" 
 TravaaTco rrjv yXCxraav diro kukov koI ')^elXr] tov (jlt) \a\jjo-at 
 hokov, where the genitive implies purpose, as in Mt. 13^ e^rjkOev 
 6 airelpoav rov aireipeiv, see Blass, pp. 284 f. 
 
 Infinitive as subject without article : 3^^ icpeiTTov dyadoTroiovvTai 
 Trdcrxeiv fj KaKOTroiovvTa<;. 
 
 Participle used for Imperative 2^^ (following imperative Ti/jLare 
 in V. 17) 01 olKeTai viroTaa-a-o/ievoi toi<; SetrTTOTat?, 3^ ofJLolax; 
 r/vvaiKe<; viroTaaaofievai rot? iSiot<; dvSpdtriv (no imperative in the 
 preceding eight verses) ; 3" (following imperative eaTOD in v. 3) 
 at di/Spe<i ofioimt avvoiKovvTe<! Kara yvmtnv, 3* fi-q d7roZiZ6vTe<i 
 KaKov, 4® (after vq-^are in v. 7) Trpo irdvTcov Be ttjv el<i eavrov'; 
 dr^dvrjv eKTevfjexovTe<;, 
 
 The adjective is sometimes used for a participle, as in 3^^ tov 
 l^picTTOv dyideraTe erotfioi (oz/re?) tt/so? diroXoyiav, 4'"^ vij-^fraTe . . . 
 T^v dydtrijv i/CTevrj e^oz/re? . . . (fyiXo^evoi (ovre's) et? aXXjfXof?, and 
 thus gains an imperative force in 3®'* to Be Ti\o<i TravTes 6fi6^pove<; 
 a-vfiiradeli;, <}>iXdSe\(f>oi, eva-irXay^voi,, TaTreiv6<^pove<;, fir/ diroBi- 
 B6vTe<i KaKov. 
 
 We have a remarkable instance of the combination of the aorist 
 and perfect participle in 2^^" o'i trore ov Xaot, vvv Be \ao<! ®eov, ot 
 oii/c ^\er)fievoi, vvv Be i\eri9evTe<;, where it might seem, on a first 
 glance, that the perfect, that is, the completed present, should have 
 gone with vvv ; only that vvv is joined with the aorist in two other 
 passages of 1 P., viz. 1^^, 2^^ The R.V. has ' which had not obtained 
 mercy, but now have obtained mercy,' giving a pluperfect force 
 to the perfect participle ; and so Hort, ' the contrast of tense is 
 that between the long antecedent state and the single event of 
 conversion which ended it,' and he illustrates it from Rom. 11^", 
 mairep yap vfiel<; iroTe riTreiOrjo-aTe Tm ©e^S, vvv Be rjXeriOriTe. For 
 
 h 
 
xcviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 other instances of the perfect participle used with pluperfect 
 force, see Joh. 2'ot SiaKovoi ySeia-av ol '^vrXrjKore^, Acts 18^ evpoDv 
 'lovBaiov . , . irpoer^aTax; ikrjXvdoTa airo rrji; 'IraXuKi, Heb. 2* 
 Tov Sk ^paxii trap' ayyeXov; rpCKaTrcofievov ^eirofiev 'lr]a-ovv . . . 
 iare^avcofievov, quoted by Winer, p. 430. 
 
 Voices. 
 
 Instead of the classical ar/dWo), -o/iai, the N.T. has ar/aWcda>, 
 -ofiai, the middle being the form in most common use, as in 
 1 P. 1*, 4^- In 1^ however WH, read ayaXKiare xapa ave-KKoKryra, 
 and this 'form occurs also in Lk. 1*^, Apoc. 19^. Perhaps the 
 distinction which I have drawn between alreiv and alreladai in 
 James 4^ may be applicable here. The subjective middle gives 
 prominence to the feeling, the objective active to the action in 
 which it shows itself. The active i-n-ixaXeiv is used in the N.T. 
 in the sense of ' to call by name,' as in Mt. 10^ el tov olicohea-iroTrjv 
 BeeXje^SoiiX eireKaXeaav, the middle in the sense ' invoke,' as in 
 1 P. I''-' el irarepa eiriKoXelaOe tov airpoa-mTroX^fjuTrTcoi; Kpivovra 
 ' if ye invoke as Father,' or, as Dr. Bigg prefers, ' invoke the 
 Father,' iraTrjp being frequently anarthrous ; cf. 3^ 'Kvpiov Se tov 
 "KpuTTov ayidcraTe. The active XvTpoco is not found in the N.T., 
 the middle being used in the sense ' to ransom,' Lk. 24P; Tit. 2^*. 
 The passive eKvTpmOriTe is used in 1 P. 1^^ in the sense 'were 
 ransomed.' Similarly the middle evayyeXi^o/uu (very rarely the 
 active evwyyeXl^ca) is used with the accusative either of the thing 
 or the person, in the sense to ' preach good tidings to,' as in 1 P. 1^^ 
 ol evar/yeXi<Td/ievot r)iJLa<;, and the passive is used of the word 
 preached in 1 P. 1^, 4*. Another passive of a deponent verb is 
 lddr]Te 1 P. 2^, The verb einaTpi^co bears the same sense ' to turn ' 
 or ' to be converted ' in the active (2 P. 2^), middle, and passive 
 (1 P. 2®). The passive forms viroTd/yV'^ ^^^ TaTretvcodrjTe have a 
 middle force in 5®'*, 
 
 Two curious uses of the active voice are found in 1 P., one where 
 weptexo) might be thought to have a passive force (2*) irepiexei iv 
 ypa<l>y. The original phrase is rrrepUxei v yp<'^V tovto 'the Scripture 
 contains, has, this,' which is easily changed into the impersonal 
 ' it has in Scripture,' just as ' Scripture saith ' is changed into ' it 
 says in Scripture.' The same passive force attaches to ^ trepioxv 
 Trjt ypaff>^<i. In 2^ we find the unique irapeSiSov tw xpivovn, 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER xcix 
 
 where we should have expected -rrapeSiSov eavTov. We may 
 compare the use of irapixoi in Plato Gorg. 456 B ovxl iOeXovra 
 fj TEfielv fi Kavaai irapaaxelv t«3 larpm, 475 D rfevvaiax; tw X6y^ 
 mairep larp^ irapixeov aTroKpLvov, 4S0 C, Protag. 348 A, Theaet. 
 191 A, and the full construction in Apol. 33 B ofiolax; xal irKovaim 
 KoX "jrivriTi irapixa €/jmvtov ipmrav. 
 
 Compound Sentences. 
 
 (1) Substantival Clauses. 
 
 (a) Direct Statement, subordinated to verb of saying, l^^ yeypa- 
 TTTttt [oTt] "Ayioc eaeaOe on iym ayio<;, 2^ wepiixei iv ypa^y Ihoi) 
 TiOrjfii \i6ov. 
 
 (b) Indirect Statement. 1^^ dTreKaXv^Or/ on ovx eavTok SirjKo- 
 vovv avTCL, V-^ eiSoTei; on ov ^OapToii eKvrpmdrjTe, 2* eyevaaaOe 
 on j^jiwjo-Tos o Kupio?. 
 
 (c) Indirect Question. V-^ ipavv&vre<} et? nva Kaipov iS'^Xov to 
 wevfia. 
 
 (2) Adjectival Glauses, introduced by relative, too numerous to 
 mention. 
 
 (3) Adverbial Glauses. 
 
 (a) Gausal Glaim. introduced by hion V-^' ^\ 2^ by on 2^^' ^i, 
 
 39, 12, 18 ^1, 8, 17, 55, 7_ 
 
 (b) Temporal (a). Local (fi), Modal (7). 
 
 (a) 3^° ore aire^e^exeTo, fi) does not occur, (y) 4^^ Ka0m<; 
 Koivcovelre p^ai/aere, 5^^ tt t tr t 6 9, tas Xoyi^o/iat. 
 
 (c) Final Glause. After oirwi, 2® vfiel<s Xao? eh Trepivoitjo-iv 
 (e<Tre), ottws tA? dpeT^i i^ayyeiXtjTe ; after iva, P \v7n)divTe<s . . . 
 "va TO BokC/jliov . . . evpeOy, 2^ yaXa eTnirodi^craTe, 'iva . . . ai^rjBfJTe, 
 2^^ dva<TTpo<j)r]v eX0VTe<; KaX'^v, 'iva So^da-eoa-i, 2^ X/sto-TO? evaOev 
 . . . 'iva i-TraKoXovBija-riTe, 2^* rd^ dfiaprCa^ dvrjveyKev . . . 'iva 
 ^T^aafiev, 3* el<s tovto eKXrjdrjTe, 'iva /cXrjpovofi'qa-ijTe, 3^® (dryida-aTe) 
 . . . 'iva KaTaicrXwOibaiv, S^ dvedavev . . . 'iva raid's trpoa-ar/d/fri, 
 4® et's TOVTO evr)yyeXi<T6ri, 'iva xpiO&aiv, 4^^ (hiaKovetTCo) &<} i^ 
 lax^of 179 x'^PVy^^ ^ ©609, 'iva Bo^d^r]Tai 6 @609, 4^* irad^fuia-iv 
 XaipeTe, 'iva Kal iv Trj dvoKaXv^ei ^a/s^re, 5* raireivrndrfTe . . . 'iva 
 vfid<s v'^d>cry. It will be noticed that in all these cases 'iva is 
 followed by the subjunctive, eyen though the principal verb may 
 
 h 2 
 
c INTRODUCTION 
 
 be in the past, the final optative never occurring in the N.T. In 
 3^ "va is followed by the future indicative /eepSrid'^a-ovTai, as in 
 Apoc. 3* iroirjato Xva r\^ovai,v, and even in Gal. 2* o'lrtve<t irapeia- 
 rjXdov . . . "va ■fjfia'i KaraSovXcoaovcnv. and Acts 21^ hairdvija-ov 
 iir avTol<i "va ^vprjaovTai, ttjP Ke^aK'qv. 
 
 (d) Conditional Clause, ei with ^present ind. loth in 'protasis and 
 apodosis : 2^® tovto x°'P''^ (ia-Tiv), el v-TTo^ipei rt? \iJ7ra?, 4** el 
 oveiSi^eade fiMKapiot (ia-re) ; with pres. ind. in protasis and fut. 
 ind. in apodosis, 4^^ el irp&Tov (apxerai) a(f>' vfi&v ri to T6X.09 
 (effTai) ; 4i^ el 6 BiKaioi; fioXK aml^erai, 6 aa-e^ij<! irov ^aveirai ; 
 pres. ind. in protasis and imperative in apodosis V-'' el irarepa 
 eiriKoXela-Be . . . iv <}>6^(p ava^Tpd^rjre, 4^* el Sk ox; 'Kpia-rtavoi 
 (jrda-)(eL), fi^ alax'^veada ; fut. ind. both in protasis and in 
 apodosis, 2^" iroiov KXiov {earai), el d/iapTdvovTe<s virofieveiTe ; aor. 
 ind. in protasis, imperative in apodosis, 2^ el iyeva-aa-de, iirnrod'^a-aTe, 
 With pn-es. opt. in protasis, pres. ind. (understood) in apodosis, 3" el 
 Kal irda'XpiTe fiaKapioi (iare), and where the apodosis is dependent 
 on the principal verb as in 3^' Kpeirrov (iariv) dr/adoiroiovvTai;, el 
 0e\oi TO diXtj/ia tov Qeov, irda')(ei,v fj KaKotroi,ovvTa<i. Here 
 if we liberate the dependent clause, we should have, in the 
 classical construction, el QeXoi to QeXrffia, •trda'Xpi-iiev av, which sub- 
 ordinated to KpetTTov eaTiv, becomes ira<T%elv. A similar case of 
 dependence is 1* oXlyov dpTi el Seov XvirrjOevTeii, where the condi- 
 tional sentence, if freed from its surroundings, would be el Seov 
 i<7Ti,Xvirr]6riaea6e; but the apodosis is subordinated as a participle 
 to the principal verb dyaXXiaa-ffe. 
 
 edv with suifunctive in protasis andfitt. ind. in apodosis, 3^ rt? 
 o KaKmaoav vfidi {eaTai), edv tov dr/a0ov ^rjXooTal yivrjaffe ; 
 
 Negatives. 
 
 fiT^ is used with the imperative in 3" p^ (f>ofii]dr)Te, cf. 4^^- ^*' '* ; 
 with participle or adverb in imperatival sentence, as 3* p-i/ diroBi- 
 S6vTe<i Kaxov, following to Se TiXo<i •trdvTe's 6p^(f>pove<i {eaTcaaav), 
 \^*' (iXiruraTe) <»? p-rj o-wo-XTj/iaTiJo/^vot, 2^* w? eXevOepoi Kal pi) 
 0)9 eiriKaXvp.pM ej(pvTe<i . . , dXX' m? SovXoi 0eoi) Traj/ro? Tip/qaaTe, 
 5^ TTOiptdvaTe eiriaKOirovvTe^ p,r] dvarjKaaT&'i . , . p,T}Sk alaypoKepr 
 hS)<; . . . p.r)S' &<; KaTaKvpievovTei tS>v KXrjp&p ; also with participles 
 where there is no imperative, as in 1* hv ovk tSoi/re? dyavaTe, ei? 
 &v p.ii 6pmvTe<i, •KKTTevovTe'i hk dyaXXiaade, 'whom, not having 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER ci 
 
 seen, ye love ; on whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing 
 ye rejoice' (R.V.), where ov denotes a fact, infj a concession; 4* 
 eV w ^evi^ovrat fi-q awTpeXovTcov v/iwv, where /iij denotes the 
 cause ; 3® ^<s eyevrjdrjTe rexva . . , fi-q if>o/3ovfievai (irihefitav 
 iTToriabv ' if ye are not put in fear ' [for the double negative 
 compare Mk. 11^* iirfKen e/c <rov fir/Bel^ Kapirov <j>dyoi] ; with 
 infinitive 3^ et's to /i^ iyKoiTTea-dai, 4^ et? to firfKeTi ^i&aai. 
 
 Sometimes we find ov where the principal verb is in the imper- 
 ative as in 1^^' ^^ aWi]\ov<; otyairija-aTe avayeyevvrjfiivoi, ovtc e'« 
 <Tiropa<i <f)6apTrj<; aX\a d^ddprov, 2^^ oi olxeTac viroraa-trofievoi 
 Tots Secriroraii;, ov fiovov rot? dr/adol<s, dXKa KaX rots <7«o\f ots, 3* 
 aiv etrro) ov% 6 e^eodev Kocfio'; . . . dXk' 6 tcpvirro'} avQpco'iTO's. In 
 these cases ov negatives, not the principal verb, but a word or clause 
 dependent upon it. It is also used with a participle in 2^" ol 
 ovK '^Xerj/iivoi, vvv hk iXerjdivTe'}, and so with the article or relative, 
 when it simply negatives a fact, as in 2^" oi irore ov Ttao's, and 
 2^ o<s d/iapriav ovk evoirjaev. 
 
 ov (j.ri is used with the subjunctive in 2^ o ina-Tevcov ov fir) kut- 
 aia-xwdy with the negative sense as in 2 P. 1^°. 
 
 Other Adverbs and Particles. 
 dXKd is generally used to contrast a positive with a negative 
 conception as in 1^^ fii) o-wtr^ij/iaTtfo/iei'ot . . . dXKd, 1^® ov 
 ^dapToii . . . dXKa rifiip aifian, 1^ ovk ex aTropa<i <^6aprr)<; dXKa 
 d(f>ddpTov, 2^-* /irj tt)5 iiriKaXv/jL/ia ej^ovre? ttjv i\ev0epiav dW' wv 
 @eov BovKot, 2^^ oii fiovov . . . dXXd Kal, 3* ouj^ o e^mdev Koa-fiov, 
 dXX' 6 KpviTTO's, 3^^ oil aapKO% diroQeaiii . . . aWa crvv6i8j]<rea)<i 
 eirepcoTtjfia, 4^ firfKen iiriOvfitai^, dXKd dekijfuiTi @eov ^i&aai, 
 4^?' ^ fjurj ^evi^eaffe . . • dWd XaLpeTe, 5^' ^ fir) dvayKaa-T&i, dWd 
 eKovcricoi;, ib. firjBe ala'XpoKepBw'i, dWd irpodvfiw^, firjBe w? xara- 
 Kvpievovre^ , . , dWd tvitoi yivofievoi. The negative side is less 
 prominent in 2^ trolov kXeo^ el dfiapTdvovTe<s xal KoXatfu^ofievoi 
 virofievelre ; dW' el dyaSoTroiovvTe^ virofievelre, tovto %a/Jt9, 
 which is equivalent to ' suffering when guilty is not praiseworthy, 
 but suffering when innocent is praiseworthy.' In 3^^' ^* ti? 6 
 KaKtoatov vfid<s, edv tov dyadov ^ifKoiTal yevrfcOe ; dXX. ei Kai 
 irdcrXoiTe Bid Siicaioavv7)v, fiaxdpiol {ea-re), the opposition is not 
 the simple contradictory • not this, but that,' but the contrast of a 
 higher with a lower stage, not a mere escape from evil (rt? o KaKm- 
 qmv), but positive l)lessedness (ftaKapioi). With the cop.tradictory 
 
oii INTRODUCTION 
 
 ovK — aXKd may be compared the contrasting jiev — he, which is com- 
 mon in the Gospels, the Acts, the Epistles of St. Paul, and that to 
 the Hebrews, but is not found elsewhere in the N.T. except once 
 in James, thrice in Jude, and in the following passages of 1 P., l^" 
 {eXvrpmdrjTe aifian X.piaTov) Trpoeyvcoa-fiivov fiev vpo KaTa^6\,ij<; 
 Kocrfiov, ^avepa)6evTo<; he eV eax^'Tov t5>v "xpovwv, 2* \b0ov viro 
 avdpoiicav fiev aTroSeSoKCfiair/iivov, irapa he ®e(p eKKeKTOv, 2^ o'l 
 ■jrore oil Xab<;, vvv he Xao^ ®eov, ol ovk rjKerifievoi, vvv he eXerjOevre'}, 
 3^* ffavuTcodeU fJ^v a-apxl, ^cooiroirjdeh he irvevfiacn, 4* "va KpiOaxri 
 /lev Kara avOpmirov; aapKb, ^&ai he Kara @eov ■jrvevfiari. Some- 
 times fiev is omitted, as in 1'' Xjouo-iow tow diroWv/iivov, hia ■rrvpo's 
 he hoKifia^ofievou, 2^* {weiiirofiivoi,'}) eh eKhixTjaiv KUKOTroiSiv, 
 e-n-aivov he dyaOoirotSiv, cf. Jelf § 767. In 1 P. we, not unfre- 
 quently, find he opposed, as a weakened aXKd, to a preceding 
 negative as in 1^ eh bv dpri firj opavres, TntTTevovTe'} he wyaXKidre, 
 "V^ ovy(^ efituTot?, iifiiv he hurfKovovv, 2^* ovk riireiKev, irapehihov he tw 
 KpivovTC, 3" firi diTohlhovTe'i XoihopLav, rovvavriov he eiXoyovvreii, 
 314, 16 .j-^j, (f)6/3ov avT&v fir] (^o^rfOrfre, K.vpiov he rov ^piarov 
 ar/ida-are, 4^® fir] alcrXw^a-Oa, ho^a^erto he rov @e6v. Occasional 
 examples may also be found in the Acts 12* ovk jjhet, . . . ehoKei 
 he, 12^* OVK fjvoi^e . , . elcrhpafiovaa he, and in some of the 
 Epistles, as Eph. 4^^, 5^^ fii] . . . fidWov he, but not in 2 Pet. or 
 Jude. he Kat is not found in 1 P. 
 
 rydp is used 10 times in 1 P., 15 times in 2 P. 
 
 KaL in the sense of ' also ' or ' even ' occurs 16 times in 1 P., 
 8 times in 2 P. 
 
 irov occurs once in 1 P. 4^^ o dae^r]ii irov <f>aveiTai ; where it 
 has the same rhetorical force as in 2 P. 3*. 
 
 Dr. Bigg has called attention (p. 4) to the ' refined accuracy ' of 
 the use of ox; in 1 P. 1^* tos dfivov dfimfiov /cat aatriKov "Kpiarov, 
 'i?-^ irapaKoka) «&? irapoiKovi direXeaOai {vfid^) r&v aapKiKwv 
 eruOvfiiSiv, 3^ <TVvoiKovvre<s ws do-devea-Tipm aKevei tw yvvatKeio) 
 (cTKevei), 2^* fir] tos eiriKaXvfifia exovre^ tj}? KaKla<} rr]v eXevOepiav, 
 in all of which the comparison precedes the thing which is 
 compared to it. He illustrates this from Heb. 12^ eo? viols vfiiv 
 vpo<r^epeTai 6 @eo? and Plato Leffff. x. 9G5 B cos ev /caTOTTTjOot? 
 Tat? irpd^ea-iv, where Stallbaum cjuotes Rep. iii. 414 E ta? irepX 
 firjTp6<; Trj<! Xfopa? ev § ela-\ ^ovXeveadai and other examples. 
 The more usual order of words is found in 1 P. 2^^ KaraXaXovaiv 
 yji&v 0)? KaKovomv. In 4^^ w? is used with the gen. abs. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER ciii 
 
 ehe—ehe is not found in N.T. except in the Epistles of Paul 
 and in 1 P. 2^^' i* viroTo/fqre irdtrri avdpmirLvrj KTia-ei, ehe ^aaiKei 
 . . . ehe riyefiomv. The phrase is properly used with a finite 
 verb, as in 2 Cor. 1^ ehe ffXi^ofjueBa . . . e'ire TrapaKoXov/ieOa, but 
 the verb is more frequently omitted, both in the N.T. (as in 1 
 Cor. 3^^'' irdvTa yap v/imv iaTiv, e'ire Jlav\o<i e'lre ' A.iroXKm'i), and 
 in classical Greek. 
 
 wo-re followed by infinitive 1 P. 1^^, by imperative 4^® wo-re oi 
 •irda-)(pvTe<i . . . ■n-apariOeardma-av tA? ■^V)(a<;. 
 
 Ellipsis. 
 
 Of verb, elfxi : 2^" irolov Kkeoi (eariv), el virofieveiTe ; 3^^ ti? 6 
 KaKwa-atv vfia^ {earlv) ; 3-^* el xal irda-xoire fiUKapiot (effre), i^'' 
 Kaipoi (e'ffTt) Tov ap^aadai, 4'^* el oveiM^eaOe fiaKapioi (eerre), 3^^ 
 o^OdKfiol K.vpLOV eVt SiKaiov<s (elcrtv), 1^ eii\oyrir6<i (eariv) 6 @eo?j 
 2^ vfiel<i Se yevo<; eKKeicTov (eine). 
 
 Of other verbs. 1^ Tlerpo's eKKeKToi<i (j(alpeiv Xeyei), 4^^ et tk 
 XaXei, o)9 \6yia (XaXetTOj), et rt? SiaKovei, cos i^ la-xyo<; ^9 '^ppriyet 
 6 @eo9 {SiaKoveiTco), 4^^' ^® /lij yap rt? iraa'^krw m? govern . . . el Se 
 o)<! l^picmavo'; {■irda-)(ei), fir) al<T')(yvia-6(o, 4''-' d Katp6<s (eaTiv) tov 
 dp^aa-ffac . , . el Se irp&TOv a^' '^fi&v {dp^erat) ri to TeKo<s (etrTai) ; 
 
 Of noun (subject of infinitive). 2"- irapaKokSi {vfjudi) dire'xea-Oai, 
 (of object) 2^ irapehlZov {eavTov) too KpCvovn, 3^ w<; daOeveaT^pai 
 cFKevet, rm yvvaiKeim (ffKevet) dirovefiovre's rifiriv. 
 
 Pleonasm. 
 
 3^^ el 6eKoi to OeXrj/jia tov ®eov, cf. James 3* oirov r) opfif/ rov 
 ev6vvovTo<i ^ovXeTai, 4:^^ et? tovs al&vaf t&v alcovtov, cf. Jude v. 25- 
 
 Anacoluthon. 
 
 1 p. 2^^' ^^ dyairrfToi, irapaicaXSi &)s irapoiKov^ . . . d-Trey^ea-dai t&v 
 crapKiK&v eiriOv/j.i&v . . . ttjv dvacTTpoi^rjv vfimv eXovTe<} KoX'qv. 
 Here we should have had exovTat to agree with the (understood) 
 subject of direxecrdai ; but the periphrastic imperative irapaKaXm 
 dtrexeo'Oab suggests the simple imperative direxecrde, just as in 
 2 P. S'-'* the periphrastic hieyeipa vfjL&v ttjp Sidvoiav fivr]a-0rjvai, 
 suggests the simple /ivrjaBijTe and is followed by the nominative 
 yivioa-K0VTe<!. 
 
civ INTRODUCTION 
 
 Asyndeton, confirmatory, 1 P. 5* ypriyop'^a-are- 6 avriZiKO'; -rrept- 
 iraTel ^ijr&v KaraTnelv, where some MSS. insert on. 
 
 Keiteration.* 
 
 As in 2 P. so in 1 P. we find a marked liking for iteration Thus 
 airoKoXv-TTTO) and atroKokv^^i'i occur in l^'-iZiis^ ^ airoKoXv^i's 
 Trji So^rji; in 4^^ cf. 5^ ; BoKifuov and SoKifia^o/juivov in 1' ; Sofa 
 in l'''^\ SeSo^atr/jiivri in 1^; acor'^pta in is.wo. i^epavvda in l", 
 epavvdo) in l^'^; aytos four times in l^^-^*, also in 2^-^; dva- 
 <npo<f>^ in Ii6'i8, 212, 31.2,16. ^Xvk (3), iX-irl^a (2); di/avewao) 
 (2); d/iapTia (6); Xoyo? (7); X'^/"' (10); dyadoi (7); d<f>6apTo<s 
 (3) ; i-n-oTTTevto (2) ; evayyeXb^ofiai (3) ; lepdrevfia (2) ; KaKoiroi6<i 
 (3) ; AT/otva) (4) ; Xt^o? (5) ; vj7(/)<b (3) ; veKp6<; (4) ; oXiyo<s (4) ; 
 "irdcrxo) (12); a-vveiSrjai'} (3); t4Xo? (4); viraKorj (3); inroTaacrco 
 (6) ; </)6ySo9 (5) ; ^o^iofiac (3). 
 
 Rhythm.^ 
 
 Perhaps no other book of the N.T. has such a sustained stateli- 
 ness of rhythm as 1 P. I take as an example 1®'^ eii oS dyoKKidaOe 
 I 6\lr/ov dpri | et Seov | \vin]8evTe^ | ev wot^iXof? ireipaa-fiol^ \ 'iva 
 TO hoKifiiov ifi&v T'^? triaTeco^ \ tcdkuTifioTepov ^/avo-tou toO airoXXu- 
 fievov I Stfli irvpoi Be SoKi/ia^ofiivov | evpeOrj \ eh eiraivov Kal io^av 
 KolTi/irjv I 61/ dieoKa\v^ei'\ria-ov'Kpi,arov \\ov \ ovk iSoj/re? | dya- 
 irdre I et? oj/ | dpn /jltj oprnvre's \ irttrreuoi'Te? he | ayaXXtaTe | X'''Pf 
 aveKkdhfjT^ Koi Seio^aa-fievij \ KOfii^ofievoi to Te\o<; Tr}<; irio-Teo)? | 
 amTrfpiav ■'^vx&vW. The reader will notice here the repetition of 
 I (14),^ (12), d (8), and of the syllables in aTroWniJi^vov, Boki/jm- 
 ^Ofi^vov, 8v, eis 8v, tS<5vTes, o/?fflvTes, TTto-Teuovres, dyairan, dyaKXlAn. 
 
 What do we gather froni this survey of the grammar and style 
 of the two Epistles in respect to identity of authorship ? There 
 can be no doubt, I think, that the style of 1 P. is on the whole 
 clearer and simpler than that of 2 P., but there is not that chasm 
 between them which some would try to make out. As to the use 
 of the article, they resemble one another more than they resemble 
 any other book of the N.T. Both use the genitive absolute 
 
 > See pp. Ivii f. ^ For notation, see note on p. lix. 
 
RELATION BETWEEN 1 PETER AND 2 PETER cv 
 
 correctly. There is no great difference in their use of the cases, 
 or of the verbs, except that 1 P. freely employs the articular 
 infinitive, which is not found in 2 P. The accusative with the 
 infinitive is found in both. The accumulation of prepositions is also 
 common to both. The optative is more freely used in 1 P. than in 
 2 P. In final clauses 2 P. conforms to classical usage in attaching 
 the subjunctive to iva, while IP. in one place has the future 
 indicative. 2 P. is also more idiomatic in the use of such elliptical 
 forms as ew? ov, i<f)' oaov, d^' ^i. On the other hand 1 P. shows 
 special elegance in his use of ft)9 in comparisons, and emphasizes 
 the contrast between the aorist and the present imperative by 
 coupling Ti/Mija-aTe with Tifiare in 2'. 
 
 Nor is 1 P. quite free from the ambiguities and the difficulties 
 which are objected to in 2 P. Compare what is said above as to 
 the relative and its antecedent, the construction of irepui'xm and 
 irapahthtoni, not to mention phrases such as 2^ to XoyiKov aSoXov 
 yoKa, 3* fir) cf)oj3ovfievai firjSefiiav nnoria-iv, 3^°'^^ Siea-codrja-av Si 
 uSaros" o koi v/j,a<; avTirvirov vvv a-m^ei /SaTTTia-fia, ov aapKoi; 
 dw66eat,<; pvirov, dWa (rvve(,Si]crea}<; d^aOrji} iirepooTrifia ei's @e6v. 
 In the last I am disposed to agree with Hort that we should read 
 m (or else o5) for the MS. o. The latter gives an extraordinarily 
 complicated expression, ' which thing (water), an antitype, now 
 saves you, viz. baptism,' which we may seek to explain as follows, 
 'which thing, in the form of an antitype, now saves you,' but 
 what we want is ' the antitype to which (sustaining water of the 
 Deluge) now saves you, viz. baptism.' Again the last verses of the 
 Epistle teem with difficulties, arising in part no doubt from our 
 ignorance of the circumstances alluded to. Such are tov 'ttio-tov 
 dSe\<f)ov, ws Xoyt^o/iac, which seems to suggest that the writer was 
 not quite sure how far Silvanus was to be trusted ; iiri/MapTvp&v 
 TavTiqv eivat, dXrjdfj x°-P''^ '''°^ @eov, which is, I think, rightly 
 explained to mean ' testifying that Paul's teaching, embodied in 
 this letter, is the true grace of God'; but the expression is far 
 from clear. And the phrases that follow, jJ ev Ba/SvXaivi avveK- 
 XeKTtj KoX M.dpKo<i 6 v'i6<i fiov, are still matters of controversy. 
 
 On the whole I should say that the difference of style is less 
 marked than the difference in vocabulary, and that again less 
 marked than the difference in matter, while above all stands the 
 great difference in thought, feeling, and cha,racter, in one word of 
 personality. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 Comparison between" the Petee of the Gospels and Acts 
 AND THE Peter of the Two Epistles 
 
 The author of 1 P. is steeped, as we have seen, in the Gospel 
 story, which possesses his mind and heart. Almost every sentence 
 he has written calls up in our minds some word or some scene, in 
 which His Master is concerned. No one could say this of 2 P. It 
 may be interesting however to go further and inquire whether the 
 character of Peter as we know it from the Gospels agrees with the 
 character of the author of 1 P., as it is shown in that epistle; 
 because it is perhaps conceivable that 1 P. might have been 
 written by some other disciple who had had Peter's experience and 
 yet was not Peter himself. But is it really conceivable that any 
 other could have shared Peter's very unusual experiences ? And 
 looking at the question from the other side, is it consistent with 
 the deep eai'nestness, the intense affection, and the transparent 
 simplicity of 1 P. that it should be written by one who was not 
 uttering his own genuine experience ? In the present day we find 
 no difficulty in supposing that the drama of Job was written by a 
 man who was not Job, and that the book of Wisdom was written 
 by one who was not Solomon, though he claims as his own in 
 chapters 7 and 9 the experiences ascribed to Solomon in the 
 historical books of the O.T. We see nothing to be surprised 
 or shocked at in the appearance of pseudonymous writings 
 of Peter in the second century. Supposing that the evidence 
 should eventually lead us to conclude that what we know as 
 the Second Epistle of St. Peter was one of these pseudonymous 
 writings, would that prove it unworthy to hold a place in our 
 canon ? This question wjll come on for consideration in another 
 
PETER IN THE GOSPELS AND IN THE EPISTLES cvii 
 
 chapter. At present I will only say that, while in my opinion 
 the author is an eminently wise and good man, and the writing 
 itself one that deserves our careful attention, yet the voice does 
 not sound to me like the voice of the author of 1 P., nor does the 
 teaching agree with my idea of a genuine product of the 
 Apostolic age. But though we may feel satisfied that 1 P. is a 
 sufficient guarantee for its own authenticity, still it will be inter- 
 esting to compare our impressions of the Peter of the Gospels 
 and the Peter of the Epistle ; and it seems to me all the more 
 necessary to do this in some detail because the picture given of 
 the former by the latest editor of the Epistles is not, to my mind, 
 in harmony with the facts of the case. Dr. Bigg says (p. 54) that 
 St. Peter 'was a married, uneducated labourer. Such men . . . are 
 tender-hearted but slow. They have seen too much of the hard 
 realities of life to be greatly elated or greatly depressed . . . 
 St. Peter is often spoken of as ardent and impulsive, but our Lord 
 called him Cephas " Rock," and the fiery apostles were James and 
 John. He was often the first to speak, because he was the leader 
 and mouthpiece of the Twelve.' ' We may imagine Peter as a 
 shy, timid, embarrassed man, apt on a sudden emergency to say and 
 do the wrong thing, not because he was hasty, but because he 
 was not quick.' 'His defect had been want of readiness and 
 decision.' 
 
 If this is really a true picture of St. Peter, how are we to 
 explain the fact that he was chosen by our Lord to be ' the leader 
 and mouthpiece ' of the Apostles ? I must say that there is 
 scarcely a single point in this character-sketch which agrees with 
 the impression I have myself formed of the man Peter, an 
 impression which is, I think, shared by Bible students generally, 
 whether learned or unlearned. 
 
 Take first the phrase ' uneducated labourer.' Peter was a fisher- 
 man, an occupation fitted beyond all others to call out energy, 
 promptitude, courage, and comradeship, a life full of adventure and 
 vicissitude bringing him into contact with a great variety of races 
 and characters, Jews and Gentiles, Greeks and Romans, in fact a 
 life the very opposite to that of our ordinary agricultural labourer. 
 Next as to education. The Jews of that time seem to me to have 
 had a better system of elementary education than we have yet got in 
 England, perhaps better than we shall ever get. Those who lived 
 -in the neighbourhood of .the .Sea of Tiberias .had .the further 
 
cviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 advantage of knowing two languages,^ Above all, as we see from 
 the discourses in the Acts, Peter was well trained in the history 
 and literature of his own country, had a mind open to all high 
 ideas, and was ready at once to act upon them. He had also, as 
 Dr. Bigg allows, a most tender and affectionate heart. So far &om 
 the dull stoicism which he is supposed to share with the labourer, 
 he was a man of very quick sensibilities, as we may see from his 
 behaviour after the miraculous draft of fishes (Lk. 5^, his walking 
 on the water (Mt. 14^*'-), his refusal to allow his Master to wash 
 his feet (Job, 13'), his bitter tears after his denial, and that most 
 touching answer ' Lord, thou knowest all things, thou knowest that 
 I love thee.' I come now to the most paradoxical part of the whole 
 description. St. Peter was 'shy, timid, and embarrassed.' 
 Omitting the middle epithet, we may perhaps allow that the other 
 qualities might be ascribed with some plaunbility to a Moses or a 
 Jeremiah, but to Peter ? Peter, who was always so prompt and ready 
 in thought and expression, at times indeed too ready to speak 
 without due consideration; but whose hastiest word was always 
 the outcome of a noble and generous nature ? ^ 
 
 The remark that Peter was ' apt on a sudden emergency to say 
 and do the wrong thing ' is hardly to be reconciled with the fact 
 that on two of the most critical moments of the life of our Lord, 
 when many were tempted to go backwards, it was Peter who 
 answered the appeal to the disciples, 'Will ye also go away?' 
 (Job. 6% • Who say ye that I am ? ' (Mt. 16"), by the prompt word 
 of loving trust, in the one case, ' Lord, to whom shall we go ? Thou 
 hast the words of eternal life,' in the other, ' Thou art the Christ, 
 the son of the living God,' the last response drawing &om the 
 Saviour HLs highest commendation 'Flesh and blood hath not 
 revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.' If I 
 were called upon to analyse St. Peter's character I should say that 
 he was perhaps the most human of all the Apostles, natural, large- 
 hearted, impulsive, spontaneou.s, with none of the cramping self- 
 consciousness of the shy man, and without a particle of guile. 
 Though capable of pondering over what was said to him, he more 
 often spoke and acted on the spur of the moment at the prompting 
 of his own generous heart. He was full of initiative, full of 
 confidence, easily elated, but really humble, quick to. own where 
 
 ' See my Introduction to St. James, p. xlii. 
 ? See my edition of St. James, p. 20L 
 
PETER IN THE GOSPELS AND IN THE EPISTLES oix 
 
 he had been in the wrong, but never despairing; a reverent and 
 devoted, yet a thoroughly free-spoken follower of his Master, as 
 well as a loved and trusted leader of men. Our first introduction 
 to him (Job. 1") shows him to be one who was looking for the 
 Messiah. He is quick to lay his doubts and difficulties before 
 Jesus : ' How oft shall my brother sin against me and I forgive 
 him ? ' On hearing the words ' Whither I go, ye cannot come,' he 
 is the one to ask ' "Whither goest thou ? Why cannot I follow thee 
 now V He is not abashed or silent in presence of Moses and 
 Elijah on the holy mount. He even ventures to rebuke Jesus 
 when He foretold His approaching death, just after He had 
 commended Peter's confession 'Thou art the son of God.' His 
 positiveness, combined with docility and readiness to be corrected 
 and instructed, is seen in Joh. 13^, ' Lord, dost thou wash my feet ? 
 Thou shalt never wash my feet'; and then, on hearing the 
 explanation of Jesus, ' Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands 
 and my head.' So in Acts lO^^S on hearing the voice ' Eise, Peter, 
 kill and eat,' he breaks out with ' Not so. Lord ; for I have never 
 eaten anything that is common and unclean.' But his behaviour 
 to Cornelius shortly afterwards shows how thoroughly he had 
 imbibed the spirit of the words ' What God has cleansed, make 
 not thou common.' His self-confidence is seen in such words as, 
 ' I will lay down my life for thee,' ' Though all men should be 
 offended, yet will not I,' ' Even if I must die with thee, yet will I 
 not deny thee.' Nor was this mere empty boasting. When the 
 armed band of the chief priests appeared, he drew his sword and 
 attacked them. How was it, then, that his courage so soon failed 
 him ? We must remember the circumstances of the case. A few 
 days before, Jesus had entered Jerusalem in triumph amid the 
 Hosannas of the multitude. He had spoken mysterious words 
 about the coming of the kingdom of God : he had warned his 
 disciples to provide themselves with swords. But now he bids 
 Peter put up his sword into its sheath : he tells his disciples to 
 leave him alone with the powers of darkness. And at the word 
 they all forsook him and fled, two only venturing to follow at a 
 distance into the Judgment-Hall, Under these circumstances, is it 
 right to regard the denial as proving timidity in Peter ? Is Elijah 
 to be called timid because he fled from Jezebel, and was for a 
 brief space inclined to despair of the triumph of right ? Both 
 Elijah and Peter were suffering from reaction : the spirit was 
 
ex INTRODUCTION 
 
 willing, but the flesh was weak. It is as if soldiers whose courage 
 had been strained to the highest pitch at the prospect of leading 
 a forlorn hope were suddenly told that their captain had 
 changed his mind, and that they were now to surrender to the 
 enemy. Despair and bewilderment would succeed to high- 
 wrought courage, and so it was with Peter. But one look of 
 his Master's was sufficient to recall him to himself. His deep 
 repentance was followed by no false shame on his own part, 
 and by no reproaches on the part of his fellow-disciples. He 
 is the one to whom the Magdalene first brings the news of the 
 empty tomb. He and John are the first of the Apostles to visit 
 the tomb. At the sea of Tiberias we find Peter as usual taking 
 the initiative, and the others as usual following, ' I go a fishing,' 
 ' We also go with thee.' Impetuous as ever, on hearing that it 
 was ' the Lord,' who had foretold the miraculous draft of fishes, 
 Peter leaps into the sea and makes his way to Jesus on the shore. 
 One phrase, in our Lord's colloquy with him, suggests his 
 energetic, independent character: 'When thou wast young, thou 
 walkedst whither thou wouldest.' The question about John, which 
 followed immediately afterwards, shows how quickly he resumed 
 his usual tranquillity and his thought for his friends. 
 
 The beginning of the Acts shows Peter in a position of unques- 
 tioned authority, even before the day of Pentecost, in regard to the 
 election of Matthias. When he denounces the Jews for having 
 crucified the Holy and Just one (cf. 1 P. 3^^), the Prince of Life 
 (Acts 2^*' ^, 3^*), his tone is as decided and unflinching as that of 
 the Baptist. At the same time he uses in their behalf the plea 
 uttered on the cross ' I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did 
 also your rulers ' (3^^), reminding them (as Joseph reminded his 
 brethren in Gen. 45^) that God had made use of their evil action 
 to fulfil His eternal purpose declared by the prophets, that Christ 
 should suffer and be raised from the dead and received up into 
 heaven till the time of the restoration of all things. He calls 
 upon them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ 
 for the remission of sins, and to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit 
 sent down from heaven. He testifies before the Sanhedrin that 
 the miracle done to the impotent man was done in the name of 
 Jesus of Nazareth, whom they, the rulers, had crucified, but whom 
 God had raised from the dead. When the Apostles were charged 
 to keep silence, and when they were brought again before the 
 
PETER IN THE GOSPELS AND IN THE EPISTLES cxi 
 
 Sanhedrin for disobedience, it was Peter who on each occasion 
 answered ' We must obey God rather than men : We cannot but 
 speak the things which we have seen and heard': 'We are 
 witnesses of these things, and so is the Holy Ghost, whom God hath 
 given to them that obey him ' (Acts 4^®, 5^^"^^). 
 
 I pause here for a moment to consider how far this early 
 teaching of Peter agrees with that which we find in 1 P. It will 
 be seen at once that the main features of both are the same. 
 The Apostles are sent to witness to the fulfilment of prophecy 
 in the sufferings and death of the Messiah, in his Resurrection 
 and Ascension, and in the coming of the Holy Ghost (1 P. 5\ Acts 
 18, 22_ 232, 3i5_ i039-«). ' The promise is to the Jews, and to all that 
 are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call. We may 
 notice one or two minuter agreements, e.g. 5*^ eiropevovro j^aipovrei 
 OTi KaTrj^icoffrjaav vmp rov ovofiaro^ aTifMaerdrjvai compared with 
 1 P. 4^2"i^: and the quotation from Ps. 118^^ in Acts 4^^ which is 
 repeated in 1 P. 2^. 
 
 Returning to the Acts we find in the story of Ananias and his 
 wife a severity which we might be inclined to think more after the 
 spirit of Elijah than of Christ (cf. Lk. 9^^). But a different light 
 is thrown upon it by 1 Cor. 5^, where St. Paul speaks of a judg- 
 ■ ment ' in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, ye being gathered 
 together and my spirit ... to deliver such an one unto Satan for 
 the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day 
 of the Lord Jesus.' It is plain how necessary it was to guard the 
 purity of the early Christian community from the idea that God's 
 favour could be purchased by gifts ; how necessary it was to instil 
 into them the opposite idea, that the Father must be worshipped 
 in spirit and in truth. In the same way the idea of the perfect 
 holiness of God was taught to Israel of old by the command ' If 
 even a beast touch the mountain it shall be stoned.' But the later 
 history of the Church shows plainly that such power could not be 
 safely entrusted to any but Apostles. A similar severity is seen 
 in the story of Simon Magus, where Peter's indignation at the 
 proposal to buy the gifts of God for money breaks out in the words 
 ' Thy silver perish with thee,' ' thou hast neither part nor lot in 
 this matter.' It may have been his recollection of this conduct on 
 the part of one who had just been baptized, which led Peter to 
 distinguish so carefully between the a'ir66e<n<i pvwov and the 
 ivepmTtjfia ffweihrttreax} aya6rj<} in baptism (1 P. 3^^). I have 
 
cxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 already referred to the story of Cornelius in Acts 10. Particularly 
 deserving of notice are v. 28 aBefitrov ia-riv avBpl 'louSatp 
 Ko\\d<r0ai aK\o<f)v\a, compared with 1 P. 4*, the only other 
 passage in the N.T. in which the word ade/jHTOi occurs ; and the 
 succeeding words of the same verse, 'God hath showed to me 
 that I should not call any man common or unclean,' which may 
 be compared with 1 P. 2^^ ' Honour all men.' Again Acts 10^ 
 e7r' aXr)6e'i,a<; KaraXafi^dvo/jiai on ovk scttiv irpoa-wiroXrjfj.irrri^ 
 6 ®609 may be compared with 1 P. 1^' el iraTepa eirtKoXeia-Oe tov 
 awpoa-miroXrifi.'irTai's Kpivovra Kara to eKaarov epyov ; and 10*^ ' This 
 is he which is ordained of God to be judge of quick and dead ' with 
 1 P. 4® airohataovaiv Xoyov rm eTotfimf eXovri Kpivai ^covTa<s koI 
 veKpov<}. The phrase la-orifiov iriariv in 2 P. 1^ may be illustrated 
 by Acts 10*^ ' Who can forbid water, that these should not be 
 baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?' also 
 with ll^^' 1', 15*. The last place in the Acts in which mention is 
 made of Peter is ch. 15 where he supports the action of Paul and 
 Barnabas, and speaks of the obligation of the Jewish law as ' a yoke 
 which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear. But we 
 believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus we shall be saved 
 even as they' (the Gentiles). This is the first occasion on which 
 we find the word xapts used by Peter. It was no doubt borrowed 
 by him from Paul, and occurs frequently in 1 P. The view of 
 the Law as a yoke is also Pauline, and agrees with the absence 
 of any mention of law in either epistle, but is hardly reconcilable 
 with the description of Peter as a disciplinarian. 
 
 To these references in the Acts we must add one from Gal. 2" '°''- 
 Shortly after the meeting of the Council at Jerusalem, Peter was 
 stapng at Antioch, mixing freely with the Gentile converts and 
 sharing their meals ; but when certain members of the Jewish 
 Church came there, professing to speak with the authority of 
 James, Peter with the other Jews, including even Barnabas, 
 separated himself from the Gentiles ' fearing them that were of the 
 circumcision,' and was severely rebuked by Paul for dissembling 
 his real views. There can be little doubt that Paul was in the 
 right here ; yet there was no surrender of essentials on the part 
 of. Peter. There was nothing in his action here to contradict 
 his declaration that God made no difiference between Jew and 
 Gentile, both being alike saved by faith, through the grace of our 
 Lord Jesus Christ. His fault was that he failed to see the full 
 
PETER IN THE GOSPELS AND IN THE EPISTLES cxiii 
 
 consequence of this acknowledgment. Probably be regarded the 
 eating with Gentiles as a question of expediency, and endeavoured 
 to decide it by acting on the Pauline principle of becoming all 
 things to all men. If Paul was ready to abstain from meat for 
 fear of offending the weak brother, was it so very wrong of Peter 
 to abstain from eating with Gentiles for fear of hurting the con- 
 science of the Jewish converts ? 
 
 To sum up again the main features of St. Peter's character, as 
 they are presented to us in the rest of the N.T. We have seen that 
 he is distinguished from all the Apostles by his simplicity and 
 naturalness and by the strong and ardent feeling, which shows 
 itself especially in his intense affection for his Master. How does 
 this agree with what we gather from the two Epistles ? We should 
 expect that the writing of such a man would be characterized by 
 a natural and simple eloquence, not entering into elaborate argu- 
 ments, as St. Paul does, but appealing throughout to the hearts of 
 his readers, dwelling upon the salvation wrought by Christ, and 
 holding up before them His life as the example which they should 
 follow. This is exactly what, it seems to me, we find in 1 P. His 
 mind is fixed on the sufferings of Christ : they form the subject of 
 prophecy (1^^) ; it is through them that the Christians to whom 
 he writes were redeemed from their vain manner of life handed 
 down from their fathers (1^^); servants are to suffer patiently 
 because Christ suffered for them, without reviling or threatening 
 ^221-2*) J it is better to suffer for well-doing than for evil-doing, 
 because Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the 
 unrighteous, that he might bring us to God (3^''' ^^) ; since Christ 
 suffered in the flesh we should arm ourselves with the same 
 mind (4^) ; we should rejoice if we are partakers of His sufferings 
 (4^^) ; as a fellow-elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, 
 as well as a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed, the writer 
 exhorts the elders to make themselves examples to the flock (o^'^). 
 Turn now to 2 P. : neither style nor matter can be called simple. 
 It is not altogether without eloquence, but the eloquence is elaborate 
 and often artiflcial, as in the octave of virtues (1^"^). In many 
 passages the thought is too subtle to be easily followed, as in the 
 introductory verses. Nothing is said of joy, which is so conspicuous 
 in 1 P. (xapd, 'xaipm, ar/aXKidw) ; instead of it we are urged to aim 
 at knowledge and further knowledge of God and Christ (yv&a-K; and 
 iirlr/vci)a-t<;), while in 1 V, yvma-i's alone is used, and that only once in 
 
cxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 3^, where it is equivalent to practical good sense. Again 2 P. 
 shows a preference for the general and abstract above the concrete 
 and particular; and this often leads to ambiguity, as in 2^'>-^. 
 Even where he goes into further particulars than 1 P. he does not 
 always gain in impressiveness. Thus 1 P. says nothing in regard 
 to the physical accompaniments of the second Advent; but his 
 allusions to the inheritance incorruptible and undefiled reserved 
 in heaven for you, who are guarded by the power of God through 
 faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time (1^) ; his 
 reference to the joy unspeakable and full of glory, produced 
 by the consciousness that they were already receiving the end of 
 their faith, the salvation of their souls (1*) ; his earnest warning to 
 his readers to be sober and watch unto prayer, because the end of 
 all things is at hand (4^), suggest far stronger motives than the 
 passing away of the heavens, the dissolution of the elements, and 
 the destruction of the earth by fire, on which 2 P. dilates (S"*' ^^). 
 It is only when we pass away from the earthquake and the fire to 
 the still small voice in 3^, ' according to his promise we look for 
 new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness,' and 
 again in 3^*, ' Grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and 
 Saviour, Jesus Christ,' that we recognize an appeal as powerful 
 as that in 1 P. 
 
 Speaking generally, I think we may say that, as the Apostle 
 Peter stands in an intermediate position between the Bishop 
 of Jerusalem and the Apostle to the Gentiles, so the Fii-st 
 Epistle, which bears his name and is instinct with his spirit, is 
 intermediate between the Epistle of James and the Epistle to the 
 Komans ; while the second Epistle shows signs of careful study of 
 1 P. and of the Epistle of Jude, but has very little afiBnity with 
 the Peter of the Gospels and the Acts.^ 
 
 1 Hamack {Gesch. d. cUt-Chr. Literatur, part ii. vol. i. p. 451), if I understand 
 him rightly, disputes the authenticity of 1 P. mainly, if not solely, on the 
 ground that one who had been guilty of denying his Master could never have 
 dared to speak of himself as ' a witness of the sufferings of Christ and a partaker 
 of the glory that shall be revealed' (5'). I do not see how such an objection 
 can have any weight with those who accept the story of the renewed commission 
 given by the Lord to the penitent Apostle, and of the latter's unhesitating 
 leeidership of the infant Church. With equal reason it might be alleged that he 
 who felt himself unworthy to be called an Apostle, because he had persecuted 
 the Church, could never have dared to hold his o\vti against the authority of the 
 pider Apostles, 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 autresticity of the epistle of jude and of the second 
 Epistle of Peteu considered ^ 
 
 External Evidence. 
 
 Both Epistles were recognized as canonical in the Third 
 Council of Carthage, A.D. 397 (Westcott on the Canon, p. 566), 
 with which agree Jerome (Westcott, p. 580) and Augustine 
 (i?e Doetr. Christiana ii. 12). Jerome however {De vir. ill. iv.) 
 mentions that, owing to the use made of the apocryphal Enoch, 
 the epistle of Jude a plerisque reiicitur. So Eusebius H.E. ii. 23, 
 ' Not many old writers have mentioned the Epistle of James, nor 
 yet the Epistle of Jude, which is also one of the seven so-called 
 Catholic Epistles, though we know that these have been publicly 
 used with the rest in most churches.' lb. iii. 25, ' Among the 
 controverted books, which are nevertheless well known and recog- 
 nized by most, we class the Epistle circulated under the name of 
 James and that of Jude.' Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 386 A.D.) 
 acknowledged both Jude and 2 P. In Asia Minor both Jude and 
 2 P. were recognized as canonical by Gregory Naz. (d. c. 391). In 
 Alexandria Didymus (d. 394) wrote commenting on the Catholic 
 Epistles, especially defending Jude from the attacks made upon 
 him as having- made use of apocryphal books. Athanasius 
 (d. 373) in his list of the books of the N.T. ' agrees exactly with 
 our own Canon ' (Westcott, p. 520). Origen (In Matt. x. 17) 
 says of Jude eypayfrev eirurroKriv, oXip/oo-tlxov ftkv, iretrK'r^pmyiikvryv 
 Se T&v T7J<; ovpavcov ')(apno^ ippcafiiviov Xorymv. In the same 
 treatise (xvii. 30) he quotes Jude 6, adding words which signify 
 that it was not universally received, el Se koi ttjv 'lovBa irpoa-oiro 
 
 ' For further details compare Dr. Chase's excellent articles on Peter and Jude 
 in Hastings' D. of B. 
 
 i 2 
 
cxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Tf? iiria-ToXijv. Clement of Alexandria commented on Jude in his 
 Hypotyposes (Eus. H.E. vi. 14) — the comment is still extant in the 
 Latin translation — and quotes him by name (Faed. iii. 44, 45) with 
 commendation, BiSaa-KoXiKcaTaTa i/cTlderai Tag et/covag t&v 
 Kpivofievcov. He quotes him again Strom, iii. 11, and, without 
 naming him, in Strom, vi. 65. Tertullian {De Cult. Fern. 3) says 
 ' Enoch apud Judam apostolum testimonium possidet.' It appears 
 in the Muratorian Canon {r. 170 A.D.), 'Epistola sane Judae et 
 superscripti Johannis duae in catholicis habentur.' Theophilus of 
 Antioch {ad Autol. ii. 15) seems to allude to Jude 13 in the 
 words quoted in my note on that verse. Athenagoras (c. 180) 
 speaks (§ 24, p. 130 Otto) of the fallen angels in a manner which 
 suggests acquaintance with Jude v. 6, dyyiXovg roins /jltj rr/pij- 
 <ravTa<i rrjv eavrmv apxw- (Of the angels some) efieivav eif>' ol? 
 avTov<; iirolrjo-ev Koi Stera^ev 6 ©609, oi he ivv^pia-av koX ttj rri<s 
 ova-LWi inTocndaei, koI rfj dpxfi, and he adds that he asserts this 
 on the authority of the prophets, which may perhaps refer both 
 to Enoch and Jude. The form of salutation used in Jude 2 e\eo9 
 Kol elprjvrj koi ar/dtrr) -jrXridvvOeiri is found in Mart. Polyc. Inscr. 
 and Polyc. ad Fhil. The earliest reference however to Jude 
 is probably to be found in 2 Pet., which, as we have seen in the 
 preceding Chapter I, is largely copied from him. There appears 
 also to be an allusion to it in BidacM ii. 7 ov fiia-jja-eii; irdvTa 
 dvOpairov, oKKa ovi /Jiev iXey^ei(i, irepl Se 6i>v irpoaev^n, 0&9 he 
 dya-n-jjcTeii}, cf. J. v. 22. Jude's epistle was included in the Old 
 Latin Version, but not in the Peshitto. 
 
 The evidence in favour of 2 P. is far more scant}'. It is not 
 found either in the Old Latin or in the Old Syrian Version, 
 both . of which must be combined, says Westcott (Ganon, p. 294), 
 in order ' to obtain a complete idea of the judgment of the Church.' 
 ' By enlarging our view so as to comprehend the whole of 
 Christendom, and to unite the different lines of Apostolic tradition, 
 we obtain, with one exception, a perfect New Testament:' that 
 exception is the second Epistle of St. Peter, which 'wants the 
 earliest public sanction of ecclesiastical use as an Apostolic work.' 
 Westcott points out (p, 288) that ' if it was at once received into the 
 Canon like the first Epistle, it would in all probability have been 
 translated (into Latin) by the same person.' ' When, on the con- 
 trary, it appears that the Latin text of the Epistle not only exhibits 
 constant and remarkable differences from the text of other parts of 
 
AUTHENTICITY OP THE TWO EPISTLES cxvii 
 
 the Vulgate, but also differs from the first Epistle in the rendering 
 of words common to both : when it further appears that it differs 
 no less clearly from the Epistle of St. Jude in those parts which are 
 almost identical in the Greek : then the supposition that it was 
 received into the Canon at the same time with them at once 
 becomes unnatural.' ^ 
 
 Dr. Chase (in Hastings' B, of B. p. 804) draws a similar argument 
 from the double sections, an older and a later one, contained in the 
 Vatican codex. This twofold division is found in all the Catholic 
 Epistles excepting 2 Pet., from which we conclude that the ancestor 
 of B, to which these sections were first attached, did not contain 
 2 Pet.2 
 
 The judgment of Eusebius as to the canonicity of the writings 
 attributed to St. Peter is given in H.E. iii. 3: TLeTpov /lev odp 
 eTTKyToXT] /j,ia rj XeyopelJif): avTOv irpoTepa arJ'cofj.oXoyrjTaf ravry Se 
 Kal oi TTokai irpea^vTepoi to? a,va/i<J3i\eKTa) ev Tots a^Siv uvtSiv 
 KaTaKeXpVfTO-i' o-vryyipiipfiaa-i. ttjv Se (pepofievrjv aurov SevTepav 
 ovK evSidOrjKov fjbev elvai TrapeiX'^tfiafiev, ofico^ Se •koXXoi^ y^p'^aifio'i 
 <\)avelaa f^era roitv aXXwv ecrvovSaadrj 'ypa<p&v. to ^e firjv tmv 
 iiriiceKXrjfj.evcov avTov Upd^ecov Kal to kut avTov mvopLaafievov 
 EvayyeXiov, to Te Xeyofievov K.ijpvy/ia koI ttjv KaXovfJ.ivqv ' KiroKa- 
 Xv^iv oiS' oXco^ ev Ka6oXtKoi<; 'iia-/j,ev irapaSeSofieva, on fiijre 
 apxctiyiov fJLTjre t&v kuO' ^/id<; ti<s eKKXrjcnaa-TiKo^ a-vyypa(jiev<; rat? 
 e'f avr&v avvexp'^caro futprvplai^ . . , dXXh rd jMev ovoixa^ofieva 
 TLeTpov, cov fiuav fiovqv yvrjatav eyvwv iiria-ToXriv Kal Trapd Tot? 
 irdXai irpea-^VTepoi^ ofioXoyovfievrjv, ToiavTa. 2 P. is included in 
 the catalogues (quoted by Westcott pp. 572-575). of Greg. Naz. 
 (d. 391), of Cyril of Jerusalem (d. 386), of Athanasius (d. 373). 
 The last (Dial, de Trin. i. 164) quotes (1^) ISia So^y kuI dpeTtj as 
 from the Catholic Epistles ; and (1*) ^eta? kocvcovoI ^uo-eeu? in 
 
 ' In his note Westcott gives examples (a) of ' Differences from the general 
 renderings' of the Vulgate: koivuiv6s ■\consors (1*); iyiepareia iabstinentia (1^); 
 apxciios Horiginalis 2^ {$) ' Differences from renderings in 1 Peter : irKitBuvscrBai 
 adimpleri (V), midtiplicari (1 P. I'') ; iinSun'ia concupiscentia (1*, 2^", S'), desider- 
 ium (1 P. 1", 2'\ i'.^) and in 2 P. 2'*; Tiipe7v reseroare (2'''^", 3'), conservare 
 (1 P. 4*). (7) Differences from the translation of Jude, &\oyos ■ffirrationabilis 
 (2^^), mutus (J, 10) ; ipBilpeadai perire (2'^), corrumpi (J. 10) ; avvtvax^taBiu 
 IvMiria/re vobiscum (2^^), convivari (J. 12) ; 5(<|ai sectae (2^°), majestates (J. 8) ; 
 6 (i<l>os Tov axiTovs caligo tenehrarum &'■''), prroaeUa tenebrarum (J. 13). 
 
 Words marked f occur nowhere else in the N.T. Vulgate : those marked +t 
 occur nowhere else in the whole Vulgate.' 
 
 ^ Vansittart'a suggestion {Journal of Philology iii. p. 357), derived from his 
 study of the corruptions of the text of 2 P., that its existence 'depended for 
 many years on a single copy,' is worthy of note. 
 
cxviii INTROBTTCTION 
 
 Orat. c. Ariav. ii. 1. 133. There is also a catalogue, considered by 
 Tischendorf and Westcotfc (Canon, p. 578 m.) to be earlier than 
 the fourth century, which is contained in the Codex Claromon- 
 tanus of the seventh century. It recognizes the seven Catholic 
 Epistles as well as the Shepherd of Hermas, the Acts of Paul, and 
 the Apocalypse of Peter (cf. N.K pp. 157-172). 
 
 Didymus (d. 394) wrote comments on all the Catholic Epistles, 
 fragments of which have come down to us in the Latin 
 translation. The comment on 2 P. ends with the words ' Non 
 igitur ignorandum praesentem epistolam esse falsatam ( = 
 voffeverai), quae licet publicetur, non tamen in canone est.' This 
 unfavourable view seems to be due to his dislike to the doctrine, 
 promulgated in 2 P. S^*"-, of the total destruction of the earth by 
 fire. In a later treatise (De TrinitateyDidyvans quotes repeatedly 
 from 2 P. : cf Migne Pair. Gr. vol. xxxix, pp. 304 B, 409 B, 415 A, 
 453 A, 512 c, 644 c, 688 A. 
 
 Adamantius the friend of Origen in his Dialog^ie, contained in 
 Lommatzch's ed. of Origen, vol. xvi, p. 309, quotes 2 P. 3^ by 
 name, and in p. 291 refers to 2 P. 2^®. 
 
 Methodius, a bishop of Lycia at the end of the third century 
 quotes from 2 P. 3^ in a fragment of his de Resurrectione cited by 
 Dr. Chase (Hastings' D. nf B. p. 804) "x^tKia he enj t^? fiaa-iKeCai 
 wvofiaaev, tov airepavTov alwva Sia t^? j^tXtaSo? &/\ftjv yiypa^ev 
 yap 6 aTToa-ToXo's II^t/oo? ore fiLa ^fUpa irapa TLvpim m? j^iKia en] 
 KaX xiXta err) w? '^/lepa fila. Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea in 
 Cappadocia, a friend and pupil of Origen, writing to Cyprian in 
 256 A.D. (included in Cyprian's Letters, No. 75) refers to 2 P. in 
 the following words : ' Stephanus adhuc etiam infamans Petrum et 
 Paulum beatos apostolos . . . qui in epistolis suis haereticos 
 exsecrati sunt et ut eos evitemus monuerant.' As 1 P. has no 
 allusion to heretics, this can only be understood of 2 P. Origen 
 speaks doubtfully {In. Joh. v. 3, Lomm. i. p. 165) : IleT/w? e^' eS 
 olieoSofieiTai fj 'Kpunov eKKKr^iria . . . fitav eiriaroKrfv ofwKoyov- 
 fievrfv KaraXeKoiirev ea-ra Se icaX Sevrepav a/Jufyt/SdWerat yap. 
 There are several references to 2 P. in the Latin translation of 
 Origen, which are thought doubtful by Dr. Chase and others, 
 because of the license elsewhere taken by the translator, Bufinus. 
 Westcott however notes that some of these passages are very 
 characteristic of Origen, especially the allegorical use made of the 
 fall of Jericho before the blasts of the trumpets {Horn, in Jos. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES cxix 
 
 vii. 1, Lomm, xi. 62) : Dominns noster mittit sacerdotes, Apostolos 
 suos, portantes tubas . . . Sacerdotal! tuba primus in Evangelic 
 suo Matthaeus increpuit . . . Petrus etiam duabus epistolarum 
 suarum personat tubis. Jacobus quoque et Judas . . . Novissime 
 autem ille veniens, qui dixit " puto autem nos Deus novissimos 
 Apostolos ostendit," et in quatuordceim epistolarum suarum 
 fulminans tubis, muros Jericho et omnes idolatriae machinas et 
 philosophorum dogmata usque ad fundamenta deiecit.' 
 
 It is usually denied that there is any reference to 2 P. in Clem. 
 Al., which is hardly consistent with the statement of Eusebius 
 {H.E. vi. 14) and Photius {cod. 109) that Clement commented on 
 all the Catholic Epistles. Dr. Bigg cites the following : Protr. § 106, 
 p. 83t^i/ ohov Tri<i a\r}6 eLa<i as taken from 2 P. 2^ ; Sir. 
 i. p. 374 o-ajO/cos aTTO^efft? {ci. ih. iv. €36 reXeto? Ka9 ap la- fib^ 
 ... ^ St' vtraicorjq •jrdcrrji; dyveLa <tvv Koi rj} air o6 e a e i twv 
 KoafiiK&v ell Tr)v . . . ev')(api<TTOv tov a ktjv ov <; diroSocnv) as 
 taken from 2 P. 1^* ij diroOeai^ tov o-KrjvooiMaTO^ fiov ; Paed. iii. 
 p. 280 Ivos 86 v-TT oS e i y fiar o <; fivqadrjcronat, . . . to XoSofitTuiv 
 Trd6o<; Kpl(ri<; fiev oBtK'^aacnv, TraiBaymyia S^ uKova-aaiv. As 
 Clement quotes Jude by name in the following §§, it might 
 be supposed that the reference here was to Jude v. 7, X6So/j,a kuI 
 VofjLoppa . . . TrpoKetvTai Seiyfia ttu/oo? aleovlov, but there is a much 
 closer resemblance to 2 P. 2^ TroXet? XoSoftcov koI Top,6ppa<; . . . 
 KaTSKpivev, v'TToSeiy/Ma fieXKovTcov dae^icnp TeBeiKciti;, Kot hitcaiov 
 AwT KaTairovovfievov ipvaaTO k.t.X. Eel. Proph. 20 dyopd^ei 
 Be Tjfidii K.vpio<; Ti/j,Ccp a'lfiaTt, BeairoToiv irdXai t&v 
 irLKp&v diraXkdaacov dfiapriav is like 2 P. 2^ tov dyopdaavTa 
 avToiii; SecTTroTrjv dpvovfievot and 1 P. l'^* eXvTpmOrjTe . . . Ttfitu) 
 aifiaTt ; Sir. ii. p. 458 ^ a a av L f o) v Be i<j> oj? rjp,aprev t r] v 
 eavTov yjr V XV V dyadoepyei like 2 P. 2^ ■yfrv^vv BiKalav dv6fioi<i 
 epyoi'i i^aadvi^ev, though the verb seems to me to have a different 
 force in the two passages. In my notes on 2 P. 1^' * I have further 
 called attention to resemblances in such phrases as deia Bvvafj,L<s, 
 Beta <l)vcn^, deia dpeTJj and the doctrine of man's participation in 
 the Divine nature ; but these probablj belong to the philosophical 
 thought of the time. There is a closer resemblance in Strom, vi. 
 p. 778 ireiria-TevKev Bid re t^9 tt p o (jtrj t e u a i; Bid re t i) 9 
 TT a pov a La's reS fir) •\^evBop,ev(p @6o3 . . . koX to Tekof t^? 
 eTrayye\ia<i yS e /8 a i w 9 xaTelXTj^ev 6 Be Trjv ev ol<i iaTi kutu^ 
 (XTaaiv /3 e ^ ai av KaTdXrjyjriv 618019 St' dydirrj^ irpoairavTa to3 
 
cxx INTRODUCTION 
 
 fieXXovTi, where faith is said to rest on prophecy, and on the 
 actual manifestation of Christ, whereby the promises of the 
 Gospel are confirmed, as in 2 Pet. 1^*"^" iyvwpla-aiiev vfuv ttjv 
 Tov KvpLov rjiMav Svva/Mv Koi •jrapova-iav. . . Kav kxofiev 
 ^e^aiorepov tov tt p o <}>r] t i kov \ 6 y op, /c.t.X. There 
 seems to be an allusion to the same passage in Sir. v. 663, 
 17 /u,ev 'EWrjviK^ ^iKotTO<l>la rfj ex rr}^ OpvaXKiSoi; eoiKev 
 XafiTTTjSovi, ^v avdirrovaiv dvdpwiroi. irapa rfKlov KKe7rTovTe<: ev- 
 rey^veo'} to <f>a>^- Krjpv^QevToi; Se tov Xoyov irav iiceivo to ayiov 
 e^eXaf/,yjrev, where philosophy is compared (like prophecy in 2 P. 1^^) 
 to the light of a candle which disappears before the sun. The 
 latter part of the verse, ew? ov rj/iepa Siavyda-r] koX <^ma^6po<; 
 dvaTelXrj ev rat? Kaphiai<; vfi&v, is illustrated in my note by three 
 quotations from Clement, of which I will only repeat the last here, 
 Prot. p. 89, Xa/iyjrdTto oZv iv Tm dtroKeKpviJLfiivm tov dvdpwirov, iv 
 Ttj KapSla, TO (f>a><;. The words ea>a-<f>6po'; and <j><i)a-(j)6pov occur in 
 the others. It must be allowed however that Clement makes far 
 less use of 2 P. than of 1 P., and that he omits references which 
 might seem appropriate to his purpose, such as 1* iva yevrjaOe deia^ 
 Koivecvol cjjva-eai;, which is often referred to by Didymus. 
 
 There appears to be a reminiscence of 2 P. l^^ in Eus. H.E. in. 
 31 liavXov Kol HeTpov . . . t^9 /iera ttjv aTraWayrjv tov ^lov t&v 
 a K7]v a /ji,aT cov dir off ecre co <; 6 ■x^pof BeSijXeoTai, and I£.E. ii, 
 25, speaking of the site where t&v elprjfiivmv dtroaToXwv to, lepa 
 a Kijvco/jbaTa KaTaTeOeiTai. In the same writer's c. Hieroclem. 
 c. 4 there seems to be an allusion to 2 P. 1^ tov KaXeiTavTo<i r)p.a<i 
 ISCa Bo^Tj Kul dpeTfj in the words ttj IBia 6 eoTrjT i, re kuI 
 dpeT^ Trdaav ea-axre ttjv oUovfj.evrjv ; and the same treatise 
 abounds in such phrases as 6eia Svvafu^, ^uo-t?, dpeTi] (see my note 
 on 2 P. l^' 4). 
 
 Hippolytus (d. 235) ffaeres. is. 7 (We resisted Zephyrinus and 
 Callistus, confuting them and compelling them to confess the 
 truth) oi 7r/jo? fiev mpav aiSovfievoi koi vtto t^? dXrjffeias 
 (Twayofievoi (? avvexop-evoi) wfjuoXoyovv, fisT ov voXi) Be e tt t tov 
 avTov 06p^opov dveicvXiovTo, cf 2 P. 2^2 and Clem. Al. 
 Prot. p. 75 ol Be Trepl TeXfiaTa Koi ^op^6pov<;, tA riBovfif pevfiaTa, 
 KoXivSovfievoi dvovriTOVi eK^oaKovTai rpo^d'i, vmBei<s Tcvh 
 avOpcoTTOi. i'e? yap, (pr/aiv, TjBovTai ^op^optp fidXXov f) KaOapm 
 iiBaTi. Hippol. X. 34 /j,t} it poo- e^ovT e<; a o<l> ia- fiacr iv 
 evTexvcov Xoycov /iijSe p.UTaioi.'i iirayyeXiai'i xXe^tXayav 
 
AUTHENTICITY Of THE TWO EPISTLES cxxi 
 
 aipe<remv, dW dXrideiaf aKOfitrov aTrXoTJjTt aefivrj, Si' ^9 
 iir lyv a) a e CO ^ i/cfjiev^ea-de eirep'XpiJievqv irv po^ k p L a e oa <; 
 aTreiXrjv koX raprdpov ^o<f>e pov o/ifia dcpcoricrTov, cf. 2 P. 1^^, 
 '2*'^'. hi Dan. iii. 22, a yap dv Ti<i viroTayfj, TovTtp 
 Be B o v\ a T a I, cf. 2 P. 2^^. Be Antichristo 2^ou yap e ^ 
 lSi.a<! Svv d fieco <; i^ iyy ovt o, ovSe direp avro] 
 e^QvKovTO Tavra eKrjpvrTov, dXKd . . . eKeyov ravra direp avTol's 
 rjv fi6voi<; vv o Tov @eov diro ks k pv fi [xev a, ci. 2V. l^"' ^^- 
 
 Clementine Literature. Recognitiones v. 12 unusquisque illius 
 fit servus cui se ipse subiecerit, cf. 2 P. 2^*. Homiliae, Epist. Clem. 2 
 eVei, 0)9 ehiZd-)(9riv diro rov fie dirocTTeLXavTO's KvpLov re koI 
 SiSaaKoKov 'Irjaov ^piarov, ai tov davdrov jjlov rjyyLKacnv ^fiepat 
 K.X'^/ievra tovtov eirLcTKo-rrov v/uv X^''POTovS), cf. 2 P. l-"^*. So, in 
 Ep. Petri ad Jac. 2, St. Peter complains that his own writings were 
 misinterpreted, and in § 2 prays "va tov t?}? dXridelai Kavova 
 irapaS&aiv, ep/ir]vevovre<; to, irdpra Trpoi ttjv irapdhoaiv ^fi&v koI 
 /Mr) avTol VTTO d fJuaO ta^ KaTaaircofievoi, dX\ov<; eh tov ofioiov 
 Tfj<; aTTtaXeia? iveyKcoa-i jSoOvvov, cf. 2 P. 3^® a ol dftadei^ 
 (TTpepKovaiv tt/so? ttjv IhLav dirmkeiav. 
 
 Apocalypsis Pauli 13 ra? t&v SiKaimv ical t&v dfiapTcoKav 
 e^6Sov<;; 15 decoprjaov ttjv ■\lrv)(riv tov dae^ov<; 7r&<i i^epx^Tai e/c 
 TOV (TK'qvafiaTO'; avTrji;, cf. 2 P. l^^'i^ j 18 irapaBod'^Ta) f) ^jrv^V 
 avTr) T a pT a povx<p d/yyiXm xal tf) vXutt ia co eo)? tt] <; 
 fieydXri<i rj fiepaf t^s k p Lcreax;, cf. 2 P. 2', 3^, 2*; 4 ^ 
 fiaKpo0vfiM fiov "TrdvTcav tovtcov dvixeTat ottws /jLeTavotjcroviTiv, 
 cf 2 P. 3». 
 
 Irenaeus (/. 180) iii. 1. 1, fieTci ttjv tovtcov (i.e. Peter and 
 Paul) e^oSov MdpKo<; to. vtto HeTpov Krjpvaa-oneva iyypacj)a)<} 
 ■fiixlv vapaZehooKe, cf. 2 P. l^^ : iv. 36 Noe juste dilvmiumiTvducens, 
 cf. 2 P. 2* KaraicXva/jLov eVaf as. Irenaeus has the same adaptation 
 of Ps. 90* x'^^ta eTT} iv 6(f)0aX/iol'; erov ax; rj fifiepa ■}] e'x^ey, as we find 
 in 2 P. 3^ nia fjfiipa irapd Kvpt,<p ax; ;!(;t\ta eTi], though he applies it 
 with a different reference, viz. to explain the non-fulfilment of the 
 warning against eating the forbidden fruit (v. 23, 2) and as 
 signifying that the millennium would begin after the completion 
 of 6000 years. We have seen that Methodius names 2 P. as the 
 source of this quotation, which occurs also in Justin Martyr 
 JMal. 81 (written about 145 A.D.) a-vvrj/cafiev koI to elprjfievov oti 
 'Efiepa Kvpiov dj? xtXta eTYj, which has, with him, the same double 
 application as with Irenaeus. So Barnabas (xv. 4) commenting on 
 
cxxli INTRODUCTION 
 
 Gen. 2^ avpereXeaev 6 0eo? ev rfj f]fiepq, rjj e/cTrj to, epya avTov, 
 explains it as meaning that eV e^aKiaxi-Xioi,!; erea-iv avvTekeaei 
 K.vpio<i TO, (TVfnravTa. ' 'H <yap fffiepa irap avTM %4\(a eTif avTO<; 
 Be fioi fiaprvpei Xeyav 'ISov (rijp,epov -^fiepa e<TTai to? yiXia errr). 
 And he proceeds to explain the rest of the 7th day to mean that 
 the Son will come to judge the wicked and change the existing 
 universe and put an end to rov icaipov tovtov, and will afterwards 
 rest on the 7th day. 
 
 It will be noticed that Barnabas uses the phrase irap' avrS (sc. 
 Kvpi^) which we find in 2 P., but quotes as his authority Ps. 90* ; 
 and there seems no doubt that the latter had been employed by 
 rabbinical writers before the birth of Christ to establish the idea 
 of a millennial reign of happiness and peace to succeed the six ages 
 of misery and conflict. See Spitta on 2 P. 3* and Dr. Chase in 
 Hastings' D. of B. iii. p. 80. 
 
 I go back now to Theophilus of Antioch (^. 170). In the treatise 
 ad Autol. ii. 13 there appears to be a reminiscence of 2 P. 1'® in 
 the words 6 \6709 air ov <f) a ivcov & a ire p A,u;j^j/o9 ev 
 o I Ki] fiar I <rvv 6')(_o p,ev (p e^ an la ev rf/v v ir ovpavov; 
 while ii. 9 ol rov % eov av patro i, •jrvevp.aTOffyopoi 
 TTvev /lar o<; dyiov Kal ■rr po<f>r]T a i •yevo/juevoi,, vir 
 avrov T ov ©eow efiTrvevadivTe^ iy^vovr o eo S C- 
 S a KT o I, and ii. 33 v-tto irv ev p,aT o<; a<y iov S iSa- 
 aK6p.e0a rov \a\i; crai/ro 9 ev T0f9 dyLoi<; ir po<f>'qTa i<i 
 remind us of 2 P. 1^^. 
 
 Justin Martyr (^Dial. 51) ev t£ fiera^ii Trj<i Trapovaiwi avrov 
 ('in the interval before His Second Coming') yepij<Tetr0at 
 a I pe<re i<; (MS. iepei<i) Ka\ ip- evS ott po (fuj r a<; iirl rm ovopMTi 
 avrov Tcpoefiijvva-e, (ib. 82) ovTrep he rpoirov Kal iJrevSo- 
 TT po fftTJr ai iirl r S)v rr a p v p-lv y ev o fievmv dy Lav 
 tr po<^r)r Siv rj cr av, Kal rr ap 7) p,lv vvv froWoL ela-i xal 
 yjr e V S o 8 i S a a- K a\ o t remind us of 2 P. 2^ eyevovro Se koI 
 ifrevSo'7rpo(})i]rai ev ra Xa£, (B9 koI ev vfuv eaovrai yjrevBo- 
 SiSdo'Ka'Koi. 
 
 Heracleon (c. 130) ap. Oriy. in Joh. torn. 13, rov<; ft,era\afi- 
 ^avovraf rov ava>0ev eTriXopiTYovfievov irXova-Lto^ koI 
 airov<! ex^va-at et9 rrjv erepcav aimv lov ^mijv rb 6 tt t X o- 
 priyovfievov avroi^, cf. 2 P. 1^^ ovrcof yap irKovaitixs 
 eirtxppr]yr}dria-erai v/uv 17 eto-oSo9 eh rT}v altoviov fiaaiKeiav rov 
 Kvpiov r)p,mv Kal amrffpof. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EtlSTLES cxxiii 
 
 Aristides (c. 130) Apol. xvi. 17 0809 t^9 aXrfO eia^ rjTi'i 
 rov<; 6BevovTa<; avTrjv eh rr/v almviov %6t/)a7<»76t ^ a a- 1- 
 XeLav, cf. 2 P 1,11 21 
 
 Epistle of the Gallic Churches (a.d. 177), ap. Eus. H.E. v. 1, p. 
 24, Hein. 6 Sia fieaov Kaipo<; ov k apybi; ovSe uk apiro <; 
 iyLvero, cf. 2 P. 1». 
 
 Polycarp Up. ad Phil. 3 KaTaKoXovdija-ai, t fi a- oif> [a t ov fia- 
 Kapiov UavXov,d. 2 P. 3". 
 
 2 Clem. Rom. (c. 150) 11 (a quotation from a TrpotjirjTC ko <; 
 Xoy oi;) T av T a ir dvr a rj k ov a a jiev Ka\ iwl t & v 
 IT ar e p CO V ■^ fi& v, rifiel<; Se rj p. ep av i ^ r) fie p a<; Trpoa-BeXo- 
 fievoi ovSev tovtcov e g) p a k a /* 6 v, cf. 2 P. 1 1*, 2,^ 3 * ; *&. 16 
 epx^rat ^Srj ^ ^ fi ep a ttj <; xp [a etoi to? KXC^ava Kaiofievof;, 
 KaX T a Krj a ovT a L ai Bvv d fi e if t m v o v p av S>v k a i 
 irava r] ryij dyf fi6Xv^So<; Trf k6 fi ev o<s, Koi Tore ^avqaeTat t a 
 Kpv^ia xai (f)avepa e p y a t&v dv pcoir (ov. Cf. 
 2 P. 37-10.12. 
 
 Hermas (c. 140) Vis. iii. 8 ck t^9 tt [a-Teco <; yew arai 
 ey K p drei a, Ik t^9 iyKpareCa^ dirXoTrj^, ex t'^9 ... e tt t o- t ij- 
 fi7}<i dydtrri; a similar climax occurs in Mand. v. 2. 4, cf. 
 2 P. 1^ ev Ty irLcTTei Trjv dperijv, k.t.X.; Mand. xi. 12 o Sok&v 
 TTvevfta ej(eiv in^ol eavrov koX dvaiSi]<s iaTiv KaX ev t pv (fi ai<s 
 7roXXai<i dva<TTp6<j>o/ievo<; Kal iv erepaiH TroWat? air dr ai <;, koi 
 fi laO ov<! Xa/i8dv€t rrj <; 7rpo<f>r)reLa<; avTov, cf. 2 P. 2^^. 
 
 Clement of Rome 9 T6\ei®9 XetrovpyqaavTa'; rfj fieyaXoirpeirel 
 So^Tj aiiTov, cf. 2 P. l^^. lb. 35 dycovio'cop.eda evpedfjvai, iv rm 
 dpi6fiw T&v vTTOfievovTcov avTov, 0776)9 fieraXd^afiev r &v i tt rj y- 
 y eX fiev a v Bco peatv. ttw? Be earai rovro, dyairr/TOb ; iav 
 iaTT} p ly fi evTj y 19 S idvo c a vp,&v Bid 7rtcrTe&)9 •7rp6<; tov 
 060V . . . edv iirireXicrmfiev rd dvrjKovra rfj d p. a p,(p ^ovXijaei 
 avTov Kal d KoXo V 6 7] (T <o jM ev t y oBw tt] <i dXrj 6 e i ai;, 
 cf. 2 P. 3'i*'l"2 22. 76.27 iv Xoy'as Tfj<;^ /ieyaXQ)a-vvr]<s avrov 
 a>v V eaT r\<T ar Ta irdvTa Kal iv X6 y a Bvvarai aird Kara- 
 arpeijrai, cf. 2 P. 3°'^. Ih. 23 iroppm yevea-Qto dtj) rjp,5)v 17 ypa<f>T) avrr) 
 OTTOV Xeyei TaXaiircopoi elcriv . . . ol XeyovTe<:, Taura rjKov- 
 ffa/iev Kal iirl t&v iraTipasv rift&v Kal IBov 
 yeyr) paKa fiev Kal ovBev fj fjulv tovt cov av p. ^ e ^r) Kev, 
 cf. 2 P. 3* and 2 Clem. Rom. 11 quoted above. 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 Internal Evidence. 
 
 Making allowance for the possibility that many of these 
 resemblances may be accounted for by the general similarity of 
 thought and speech in the early Church, still I think that, if 
 we had nothing else to go upon in deciding the question of the 
 authenticity of 2 P. except external evidence, we should be 
 inclined to think that we had in these quotations ground for 
 considering that Eusebius was justified in his statement that our 
 epistle 7roWo49 %/o^o-tyLio? (j)aveiaa /lera t&v aXKcov ea-irovSda-ffr) 
 ypa<f>&v. Our previous investigations however seem to me to 
 show conclusively that the epistle is later than that of Jude 
 (see Introduction, cb. i.) and that it was not written by the 
 author of 1 P., whom we have every reason to believe to have 
 been the Apostle St. Peter himself (see above chapters iv. and v.).^ 
 We conclude, therefore, that the second Epistle is not authentic ; 
 but was written by some one who made use of the honoured 
 name of Peter, as was done by others in the second century, 
 with a view of commending to the Christian reader views which 
 he regarded as important, and which he believed to be in 
 accordance with St. Peter's teaching. The production of such 
 pseudepigrapha was common both among the Greeks, as in the 
 case of the Platonic Epistles, some of which are ascribed to Plato's 
 immediate disciples, and among the Jews, as Ecclesiastes and the 
 apocryphal books of Wisdom, Esdras, Baruch, Enoch, and the 
 Sibylline Oracles. Their example was naturally followed by 
 Christian writers, as eajly as the second century, in the form of 
 Gospels or Acts or Epistles or Revelations or didactic treatises. 
 Sometimes these were used for the purpose of putting forth new, 
 perhaps heretical views, as in the Gospel of Peter, which was read 
 in the churches of Cilicia in the second century, but the use 
 of which was forbidden (c. 200) by Serapion, bishop of Antioch, 
 on the ground that it favoured the heretical views of the Docetae. 
 At other times they were of the nature of romances, as the Acts 
 of Paul and Thecla, though this, like many other productions of 
 the time, was written (or revised) in the ascetic interest. The 
 aiithor of 2 P. probably desired to emphasize the warning against 
 
 ' None have felt more strongly the difficulty of assigning the two epistles to 
 the same author than Spitta, who in order to support the genuineness of 2 P., 
 found himself driven to deny the genuineness of 1 P, 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES cxxv 
 
 antinomian heresy contained in the little known epistle of Jude, 
 while omitting the references contained in it to the suspected 
 book of Enoch and to the Jewish Haggada, as less suited for 
 Gentile readers ; and at the same time to recommend the Chris- 
 tian teaching to philosophers who were accustomed to speak of 
 Divine Power and Virtue, and of man's participation in the 
 Divine Nature. Apparently he wished also to impress upon his 
 readers the consistency of the teaching of Peter and Paul, while 
 warning them of the misinterpretation to which the latter had 
 been subjected, and to explain the meaning and use of prophecy 
 and the lessons to be derived from the Transfiguration, as well as 
 to meet the objections raised by sceptics against the Coming of 
 the Lord to judgment.^ 
 
 Does the Epistle supply any hints from which we may infer its 
 date? 
 
 In 3* we have the sceptical argument against the promised 
 Coming of the Son of Man before the passing away of the first 
 generation of Christians. ' Since the fathers fell asleep all things 
 
 ' It is, I think, from not making due allowance for the judgments and 
 practices of a different age that some modem writers have argued in favour of 
 the genuineness of 2 P. on the ground that, if it is not genuine, the author must 
 have been guilty of deliberate forgery in claiming to have witnessed the 
 Tranfiguration. As I have said elsewhere, he is in this only following the 
 example of the author of the Book of Wisdom, who writes throughout in the 
 character of Solomon and professes to have gone through the experiences of 
 Solomon. In the same way the author of the Apocryphal Gospel of Peter says 
 §60 iyi) Se ^ifiuiv llerpos Kal 'Avdpeas d iLde\(t>6s fiov \a06vTes ra \iva airiiXBo/xev 
 els rijv Bd\a<r<ray, and tlie author of the Apocalypse of Peter giving his version of 
 a Transfiguration, says rj/xels ot SdSeKa fjMdrjral 4Se'l}6iJi:iev Sncos Sei^ri jjfiiv eva rSov 
 aieK^uv . . ruv i^e\66vTuv a-jrh Tov KSfffiov, iW XSafiev "TroTaTrol eiai t^v fiopip'fiv. 
 Similarly the author of the Fraedie. Petri speaks of the Apostles in the 1st person. 
 It does not appear that Serapion objected to the Gospel of Peter as spurious, but 
 as heretical ; and though TertuUian (De Baptismo xvii. ) tells us that the writer 
 of the Acts of Paul and Thecla was condemned g"Ka«» titulo Pauli de suo cwrmdans, 
 ' on the ground that he imputed to Paul an invention of his own,' yet the reason 
 of his condemnation seems to have been that he made Paul guilty of allowing a 
 woman to preach and to baptize. (This is also the view of Lipsius, Acta Apocry- 
 pha xcv.) In like manner the vehement warning against apocryphal writings 
 in the Apostolic Constitutions (vi. 16) is not directed against them simply qua 
 forgeries, — a charge to which all the books professing to give teachings of the 
 Apostles, independent of what is recorded in the N.T. were themselves liable, as 
 we may see from the curious list of names which stands at the head of the 
 Canones Ecclesiastici — but on the ground of their heretical teaching. When we 
 further call to mind that Eusebius (H.E. i. 3) quotes as genuine an epistle 
 purporting to be written by Christ to Abgarus, which epistle is now universally 
 allowed to be a forgery, it is evident that there were among the early Christians 
 good and pious men who had no scruple about impersonating not saints alone, 
 but the Lord of Saints Himself. We should gather the same from the readiness with 
 which the orthodox worked up and expurgated the religious romances by which 
 the heretics sought to popularize their doctrines. 
 
cxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 continue as they were.' Could this argument have been used, if 
 Peter himself and John and the other Evangelists were still living ? 
 It implies, I think, a date not earlier than the last decade of the 
 First Century. 
 
 In P® we seem to have a reference to the Gospel of St. Mark, 
 which suggests that the writer was acquainted with the tradition 
 that it contained the teaching of St. Peter. In 2^ the importance 
 attached to the number 8 may be thought to be inconsistent 
 with an early date. We find it first dwelt upon in the Epistle 
 of Barnabas, the date of which is a matter of dispute ; also in 
 Justin M. Dial. 138, where, after quoting as from Isaiah the words 
 iirl Tov KaTaKKva-fiov rov Nwe ea-coad a-e, he goes on to explain that 
 TO fiverTTjptov ra>v a-a^ofiivcov dvdptovcov iirl tov KaTaKKvtrfiov 
 yeryovev . . . those that were saved being eight in number cru/iySoXoi' 
 elj^ov T^? dpidfim fiev oySorii rifjLepa<s ev y i<f)dvri 6 ILpia-TO^ dirit 
 veicp&v dvaa-Tai; . . . Bi' vSaToi koI Trto-reo)? xal ^vXov ol fieTa- 
 V00VVT6V icf)' olt riiMapTov eic^ev^ovTai ttjv fiiXXova-av Kpiatv. And 
 so Irenaeus (i. 18. 3) in his account of the heresy of Marcus says 
 Ttjv rfft Ki^(OTov OLKOVofJLiav ev TOO KaTaK\,v<T/ji,£ ev y oktod dvOptoirot 
 SieamOtjcrav ^avepooTaTa ^atrt rrjv amTijpiov oyBodSa firjvveiv. 
 It would however naturally form a subject for discussion, as soon 
 as the Christians were called on to show a reason for their 
 observance of the Lord's day as possessing a superior holiness 
 to the Jewish Sabbath ; so I think we may fairly leave this point 
 out of consideration. In my note on 2® I have suggested that 
 the author may have been indebted to Pliny for his description 
 of the overthrow of Sodom, re^piuo-a? KaTa<rTpo<}>f} KaTexpivev. 
 If so, it must have been written after 80 a.d. In my note on 
 3^ I have assumed that the writer is included in t&v diroa-ToKtov 
 vfjMsv, but the passage would read more naturally, if the writer 
 could be regarded as making a distinction between himself and 
 the Apostles. So far as it goes, this tells against the authenticity 
 of the Epistle. Dr. Bigg considers that the absence of any 
 reference to the Millennium, which was connected with 2 P. 3^ 
 and with the passage in Ps. 90 (from which it was derived by 
 later Christians), proves the early date of the Epistle ; but we 
 learn from Justin Martyr {Dial. 80) that there were many 
 orthodox believers in his time who refused to accept it. 
 
 In my note on 3^^ I have argued that the phrase tA? XotTras 
 ypafds must mean ' the remaining scriptures,' which assumes the 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES oxxvii 
 
 existence of a body of writings called ypatpai, in which St. Paul's 
 epistles were included ; and we are told in the same verse that the 
 unlearned and unstable distort St. Paul's epistles — not merely one, 
 but all of them — as they do the remaining scriptures, to their own 
 destruction. This surely must be regarded as an anachronism on 
 the assumption that it was written by St. Peter, who is generally 
 believed to have been crucified before the death of Nero in June 
 68 A.D. It is certainly most unlikely that St. Paul's epistles could 
 by that time have been collected into a whole, and still more 
 unlikely that they should already have been placed in the same 
 category with the old Jewish Scriptures ; while, if we are to 
 understand by it our present scriptures, including the books of the 
 N.T., we should have to alter the received dates of the writings of 
 Luke and John. And the date must be still further postponed 
 to leave room for the misinterpretation of these scriptures. Taking 
 all these things into account I think 125 A.D. is about the earliest 
 possible date for 2 Peter. 
 
 If the consideration of these various arguments leads us to 
 postpone the date of 2 P. to the second quarter of the Second 
 Century, it of course compels us to reconsider our interpretation 
 of the resemblances noticed between 2 P. and any writings prior to 
 150. We shall now have to regard these as proofs that the author 
 of 2 P. borrowed from Clem. Kom. I., and possibly from Clem. 
 Rom. II., probably also from Barnabas, Heracleon, and Hermas. 
 We must also take into account resemblances which have been 
 noticed by others between 2 P. and certain non-Christian writings. 
 
 Other Possible I/Uerary Affinities of 2 Peter. 
 
 Dr. Abbott for instance {From Letter to Spirit, p. 459) lays great 
 stress on the resemblances to be found in the Preface to the Anti- 
 guities of Josephus as compared with our epistle. The latter, he 
 says, 'begins by saying (1) that all things are bestowed on us by 
 the divine power through the recognition of Him that called us 
 through His virtue that we may become sharers of the divine 
 nature. (2) The middle portion of it deals with the punishing of those 
 who will not thus recognize God. (3) Much of the third section 
 deals with the physical nature of the world (the earth being made 
 out of water and destined to perish by fire).' ' Josephus has the 
 same three thoughts in reverse order and gives them a logical 
 
cxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 connexion. People ask, he says (Pref. § 4), why the Law deals so 
 largely with (jivaioXoyia, i.e. the science of nature, inaaimate, 
 animate, and divine. To this he replies that Moses made it his 
 first object @ eov <f>v a iv^ Karavorjaai.' From this point it will 
 be more convenient to quote the Greek, xal t&v epycov raiv 
 eKsivov dearrjv rm vm yevofievov ovtco^ "rrapiiSfiyfia to -rravToov 
 aptarov fU/Meicrdai .... ovre yap avTiS vot av yeveerdai vovv 
 ayadov too vofioOeTrj ravTr)^ aTroXenrofievq) t^? 6ea^, ovre tcov 
 ypa<f)r]cro/ieva>v et? d perrj <i^ \oyov ovSep dTro/3r](Tea0ai toi<; 
 Xaj3ov(Tiv, ei fir) -irpo iravTO'; SXKov hi,hd')(deiev, on iravTiov warrip 
 re Kal hea ir oT-q <; 6 ©eo? &)v Kol iravTa eirL^XeTroov toIi; fiev 
 evofievoi^ avrtp SiStocriv evSaifiova ^lov, roi/^ e^a> Se ^aivovra's 
 d perij'! fieyd\ai<; irepi^dWei a-vfi<j)opat^. tovto Sij iraihevdai, 
 /3ov\,7j6eli; M(i>i/<7?5? to iraiSev/ia Toi)<! eavTov TroXtVa?, Trj(; twv voficov 
 6eaem<! ovk otto a-v/i^oXaccov xal rStv •jrpb'i aWiyXoK? SiKaicov rjp^aTo 
 Toi<s aW.oi<; -KapairKria-laKi, a\\' 67rl top ®eov /cat rijv tov Kocrfiov 
 KaTaa-Kevrjv tA? yvwfiai; avrmv dvayaymv Kal •/reia'a^, oti to)v iirl 
 7^9 epyoav tov ®eov KaXXiaTov eafiev avBpmirot,, OTe tt/oo? ttjv 
 e ii a ejS e t av^ ea-'x^ev inraKovovTai;, paBiw; •^Sr) irepl iravToiv 
 €irei6ev. ol p.ev yap SXXoi vo/J,o0eTai t ol <; p, v 6 o t, <;^ i ^ a k oX o v- 
 "9 rj a av T e^ tS>v dvdpcoirivtov dp.apTrjp.aTtov el<s tov<s deov'i too 
 Xoyw TTjv ala-'xyvrjv fieTeOeaav Kal TroXXrjv vvoTifirjo-iv Tot? 
 iTovqpol^ eSeoKav 6 S' ■^fiSTepo^ vop.oBeTrf'i dKpaitfivrj ttjv dp ctt] v 
 6 ^ovT a T o i> ©eoK* dTro<j)rjva<i w-qdr] Zelv toik; dv0pt!nrov(; 
 iK€ivr]<s ireLpaadai fieraXa/i^dveiv, Kal tov(; _p,T] Tavra <f>povovvTa<; 
 fiijBe p,r)v ■maTevovTa'i dirapaiTijTax! e k 6X a a- e.^ frpof TavTrjv ovv 
 TTJV vir66ea-Lv iroiela-Qai ttjv e^eTaaiv Toii? dvayvuxrofievov^ 
 irapaKaXS)- <j>avelTai yap cKOTrovp^evoi^ outws ovSev ovt' dXoyov 
 avToi<; ovTe tt/oos ttjv p, eyaX e i 6 t tj t a tov ® e o v'' Kal ttjv 
 (jjiXavdpeoTriav dvdpp,0(TTOv. 
 
 The connexion between this passage of Josephns^ and our 
 epistle does not seem quite so close as has been suggested. 
 The only reason for the reference to natural science in the last 
 chapter of 2 Peter is to meet the objection that the regularity and 
 unchangeableness of the course of nature forbade the expectation 
 of a great Day of Judgment. The author endeavours to disprove 
 
 1 2 P. 1*. 2 2 p. 13. 3 2 P. i". ■'2 P. ii". ' 2 P P 
 
 " 2 P. 2". '2 p. 1". 
 
 " Notice also the repetition of the words atiouSi (twice) and (nrouSofo) (thrice) 
 in the preceding sections of .Josephus, together with the words Seo-wifTjis, 6uire';8eio, 
 and i/zeuS?} irA.{i(7/*0Ta, 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES cxxix 
 
 this unchangeableriess by reference to the past destruction of the 
 world by water, and dwells on the features of its future destruction 
 by fire. This has little to do with Josephus' explanation of the 
 reason why the Law began with an account of the Creation. 
 And again, much has to be omitted from the first chapter of 2 Peter, 
 if we are to limit it to the manner in which we may become sharers 
 of the divine nature. It cannot however be denied that there is a 
 marked resemblance in the vocabulary and in many of the ideas 
 of the two writers, a resemblance which is natural enough in two 
 Jews trained on the old sacred books and familiar with later 
 Jewish writings, such as Philo. This resemblance is found in 
 other passages to which Dr. Abbott refers, e.g. Ant. iv. 8. 2 (Last 
 words of Moses) \e76t t o idhe^ dvSpe^ . . . tjJs /Ma/cpui; 
 K IV (ov ol^ raXai-ir(opia<!, STrel . . . j(povov irmv etKoat xal 
 exarov rivva/ievov Set /te t ov ^rj v air e\d elv,^ kui . . . 
 ov fieWoa* /Sojj^os vfiiv e<rea0ai, . . . S i k a lov^ rj lyrj a d fi rj v 
 /iriBe vvv iyKaToXi-rreiv tovijlov v-rrkp tjj? u/ierepa? evSaifiovia<!. trpo- 
 Ovfiov, aW' dthiov irpayfiaTevaac76ai . . . fivij firjv^ efiavrm . . . 
 fi^Te V o fiL fico V rasv tt apovr (ov'' dXKrjv TrpoTinria-rjTe Sidra^cv 
 fi'qT ei ae^e ia<;,^ ^? vvv irepl rov deov 6%eT6 (al. e;^oi'res), Kara- 
 <f) povq a avT 6<;^ et? aXKov fieTaa-r^arjo-ffe rpowov. TavTa Se 
 irpdTT0VTe<i ecreade . . . firjBevl rav i^dpav ev dXwr o i,^^ . . . Siv 
 {sc. Eleazar and Joshua) dxpoaaffe fir) ^aXeTrw?, jivdicrKovTe's oti 
 irdvTei} ol dpyecrdai koXS)^ ei B o r e<s^^ Koi dp^eiv eiaovraf 
 . . . Ti]v T iXev 6 e p iav^'^ riy et a- 9 e^^ fir) to irpoa-ayavaKTeiv 
 ol'i av v/ia? oi '^yefi6ve<s irpdrTeiv d^i&ai . . . ravra &' ovk 
 oveiSi^eiv vfias irpoedefJLijv, ov yap iir i^oSov^* toO ^fjv Bva-^e- 
 paivovra^ KaraXiirelv rj^iovv ets Tr}v dv dfivij a iv^^ (f>epa)v . . . 
 13 e 13 a I a^^ yap av oSTm<! iifuv vird p ^ e tev 17 tS)V dyaO&v 
 da^dXeia' iva Be fifi Bi' dp.ad i av^^ 57 ^vai<; v/i&v Trpo^ 
 TO vetpov aTTOvevarj, a v veff rj k a v /iiv xal v 6 fiov <;, v tt a- 
 yopevaavro^ fioi tov 6eo v.^^ In the same treatise xi. 6. 12 
 we find the phrase oh «a\ws Trofjjo-ere /jurj 'irpoae')(pvTe's, closely 
 resembling 2 Pet. 1^* m KaXws Trotetre irpo(re')(^ovT6<;. 
 
 Similar resemblances might be quoted from Philo (M. 1. 70) on 
 2 P. 1^ laoTi/Miv avTo r)yovfi6vo<i ■^vxf), ib. M. 1. 165 tov (ro(j>ov 
 iffOTLfjLov Koa-fup, so la-oTifiia in M. 1. 160, 2. 86 ; on dpeTr/ &eov 
 
 1 o p 117 2 2 P 1«. 2 2 P. 1". ^ 2 P. 1'^. " 2 P. 11-*. 
 
 6 2 p' 115' ' 2 P. V^. 8 2 P. 16, 3". » 2 P. 21". 1" 2 Pet. 2^2. 
 
 11 2 p' 2» 1^ 2 P. 2'^ " 2 P. 3". " 2 P. 11'. ^ 2V. V^. 
 
 16 2 p' 1" " 2 P. 31". 18 2 P. 1". 
 
 k 
 
cxxx INTRODUCTION 
 
 (2 P. 1% M. 1. 75, 222, 488, 489, 635 ; on ^eU (ftvaa (2 P. 1*), 
 M. 1. 51, 647, 2, 22, 143, 329,343; on TrXovaiox; imxopriyV^V- 
 a-erai (2 P. 1"), M. 2. 476 ; on tov irpo^riTiicov \6yov (2 P. li«), 
 M. 1. 95, 347. 
 
 Deissman (Bible Studies, pp. 360 f.) compares with 2 Pet. a de- 
 cree of Stratonicea in Caria in honour of Zeus Panhemerios and 
 Hecate, which begins by stating that rijv ttoXiv dvoadev rfj tmv 
 Trpoeartoraiv avTr]<s fiey i a t m v^ de&v [irpovola, Ato? Tllavrj- 
 fie[plov Koi 'E]KaT9j?, sk iroWSyv KaX fieyaXcov Kal avvex&v KivSvvav 
 aeaStadai, &v koL tcl lepa dcrvXa xal iKerai koi jj lepa ctvvkXijto^, 
 Soyfiari 'Sie[j3aaTov Kaiaapo<; eiriy ttj? tS)v kv p Imv 'Vtofiaitav 
 aleo V i o v^ ap^V'*' eiroirjaavTo irpo^avelt ivapyeia<}' Ka\<o^ 
 Sk e^ei IT a a a V a ir ovhrj v el(r(j>ep€<r0ai^et<! Tqv irpo^ 
 \avTov<i e V (7 e ^^ e I av ■ koi firjSeva /caipov irapaXiireiv tov 
 ev a e P elv ical Xiravevetv avrov<s' KadiSpVTUi S^ dyaXfiara 
 iv rw ae^aa-T^ ISovXevrrjpiqi t&v 7rpoeipr]/j,eva)[v OeStv eirKpav]- 
 ea-rdra^ irapexpvTa t^9 ei a <;^ Svv d fj. eca i d per a<f 
 St ' ® as KoX TO avvirav irXrjdo^ Ovet re Kal itnOvfiia (' offers 
 incense ') koX ew^erat koi evx^pia-rei d[el TottrJSe rot? ovraxi 
 eTn<j)aveaTdToi<! 0eoi<} kuk t^s hi,' vfivcohia^ irpocroSov Kai 0pr)a-K€ca<; 
 euo-e/Seti/^ avroixs [eWia-Tai]' eSo^e ry ^oyX^ k.t.X. 
 
 Deissman judges this inscription to be about 22 A.D. He refers 
 to the notice taken of an Athenian inscription by Paul ; considers 
 that this decree copies the common form of the religious decrees 
 of Asia Minor, just as expressions in the Pauline epistles remind 
 us of an inscription at Halicarnassus (Newton, Hist, of Discoveries, 
 vol. ii. p. 2). 
 
 I think that Dr. Chase is right in regarding the resemblances 
 noticed in this decree and in Josephus, as due in the main to 
 the diffusion of commonplaces of rhetorical study, set prefatory 
 phrases, and the like, which were employed by those who learnt 
 Greek in later life. 
 
 Apocalypsis Petri. 
 
 A much closer relation exists between the lately discovered 
 Apocalypsis Petri and our Epistle. The resemblances noted below 
 
 1 2 P. l«. 
 
 ■^ The words in brackets are Dr. Deiasman's conjectural fiUings-np of gaps iu 
 the inscription. 
 
 3 2 P. P». * 2 P. 1'. '2 P. 1>. " 2 P. 1*. '2 P. P, 3". 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES cxxxi 
 
 ave taken chiefly from Dr. Montague James' Lecture on the Revelation 
 of Peter, p. 52. 
 
 AfOC. § 1. 7roXA.04 6^ avTMV eerovrai yfrevSoTrpo^rJTai, (2 Pet. 2^), 
 ib. Boyfiara iroiKiXa rrji aircoXeta^ BiBd^ova-iv (2 P. 2'^), ib. 
 Kpivel T o v<; utous t^9 avo fji,ia(; (2 P. 2^* KaTdpa<; tskvo), 
 ib. Ta? yfrv-^h^ eavrSiv Boia/jid^ovTa<; (2 P. 2^). Apoc. § 2. The 
 twelve Apostles having gone up with the Lord ek to o po(s 
 (2 P. l'^^) desire to see one of the departed saints in his glorified 
 body, eBerjOrjfiev OTrto<; Bei^ri rnuv eva t&v dBeK(f>a)v tj/mmv tmv 
 BiKaiwv [twi/] i^eXffovTwv ('nrb tov Koa-fiov (2 P. V-^), 
 "va llBwfiev -rr OT air 1 (2 P. 2i^^) elcn tyjv /Mopcjiijv, Kal 
 6apai]<ravTe<i irapadapavvcofiev Kal tov<; uKovovra^ rjiiaiv. § 3 
 Ka\ ev'X^ofieveov ■^/j.&v d[(j)vco i^aiv\ovTai Svo dvBpe's ea-Ta)Te<; 
 efiirpocrBev rov Kvpiov irpo<i 6[co 0I9] oiiK iSvvr^Orjfiev dvTi^Xe\{rai- 
 i^ripyeTO yap dm t?)? [ojyjreax; avr&v uktIv <b? rjXiov, kuI i^wrivov 
 rjv av\TS>v 6\ov to] evBv/jLa. This answers to the account of the 
 Transfiguration in so far as it takes place on a mountain, as it 
 exhibits the glorified bodies of two saints, and so inspires the 
 Apostles with a confidence in the life to come, which they are 
 able to infuse into their hearers (2 P. 1^^ iyvrnpia-a/iev vfuv, 1*® 
 ey(Ofiev ^e^aiorepov). There ■ are however several points of 
 difference. The time is apparently after the Resurrection 
 (James, p. 54). It is the Twelve and not the Three to whom 
 the vision is manifested. There is no voice from heaven. The 
 two saints are anonymous, so that the whole passage might seem 
 to be rather a working up of the appearance of saints mentioned 
 in Mt. 27^^ than of the Transfiguration of the Lord. Further 
 resemblances are Apoc. § 6 elBov xal erepov t 6 ir ov av 'x^firj p ov 
 (2 P. 1^^) irdvv, Kal r/v r 6 tt <{ KoXdff e co ^ • k al 01 KoXa^o- 
 a e V o I i K el koI ol KoXd^ovTe<! ayyeXoi ckotivov el^ov avT&v 
 TO evBvfia KaTU tov aepa tov tottov (2 P. 2*), ib. (and § 13) 
 o i ^Xaa-(prj/ji,ovvTev t^ v 6S6 v t^s Bi,Kaio<rvvr]<;, 
 cf. 20 ol d^evTes t^v oBov tov &eov (2 P. 2^' ^^' 21). Apoc. § 8 
 Xifivrj ■KeirXripmiiivq^ ^o p ^6 pov (also in § 9, bis, § 16), ib. § 15 
 eKvXlovTo KoXa^ofLevoi (2 P. 2^^ and Acta Thomae 52 elSov 
 fi6p0opov . . . Kal 'xjrv^d'; ixei KvXiofieva';'). Apoc. § 9 to 
 /jbiaa/ia t^? iiot.')(eia<; and § 17 fitdvavTe<; Ta <Td>fj,ara eavT&v 
 a)9 yvvacKe<! dpaaTpe(j)6fievoi (2 P. 2^", 2"). Apoc. § 13 (and 
 S 15) iretrvpooiJLevo'i (2 P. 3^^). Apoc. § 15 dfieXijaavTe^ tj}? 
 ei>ToXrj<} TOV @ eov (2 P. 2^^ 3^). Fragm. I rj yrj irapaa-Tija-et 
 
 h 2 
 
oxxxli INTRODUCTION 
 
 irdvTa's Tc3 @ea> iv rjfiipa k p i a ea> <; Koi avrrj fieWovaa 
 Kplveadai crvv koX rw irepti'^ovTi ovpava. Fr. 2 Kat, TaKija-eTai, 
 iraaa Svva/^i^ ovpavov koX iXij^di^aeTai, 6 oipavof to? ^i^Xiov 
 /cal -ncivTa rh darpa irecreirai (2 P. 2>^'''^^). Ft. 5 irapa top 
 dea-fibv (d0ecr/j,o^ 2 P. 2', S'-'') t^? fiuKa p i a<! i k el i>rif 
 <!> V cr emi; rov @ eov (2 P. 1*). lb. KaracfjpovTja-avTe^ 
 TJ}s e'z'ToX^? (2 P. 2^", 2^^). Fr. 6 Sia ra? afiapTia'i eirpddr] 
 6 \a6^ (2 P. 2^^ o5 Tts rjTTqrai, Tovrq) hehovXcorai). The punish- 
 ment of sins against nature Apoc. § 17, 2 P. 2^' '^"^ '^. 
 
 These resemblances of subject and of language seem too marked 
 to be accidental. Dr. Sanday {Inspiration, p. 347) says : ' It is 
 no doubt possible that the writer of the Apocalypse may have 
 imitated the Epistle or that both may be affected by some common 
 influence. If there had been, on the whole better reason than 
 not for believing the Epistle to be the genuine work of St. Peter, 
 it would be natural to fall back upon some such assumption. But 
 as the balance of argument is really the other way, the question is 
 forced upon us whether it is not on the whole more probable that 
 the two writings are both by the same hand. This is at least the 
 simplest of the different hypotheses which are open to us.' 
 
 As regards the question of early recognition in the Church, 
 the Apocalypse is certainly in a stronger position than our 
 Epistle. It is named with the Apocalypse of John in the 
 Muratorian Fragment, Apocalypses etiam Johannis et Petri tantum, 
 recipimus, though it is added, quam (the latter ?) qtiidam ex 
 nostris legi in ecclesia nolunt. Clement of Alexandria is said 
 to have commented upon it in his Hypotyposes (Eus. H.F. vi. 14. I), 
 and in his Eclogae ex Script. Troph. he quotes from it several 
 times (§§ 39, 40, 41, 48, 49). In § 41 he quotes IleT/oo? eV rf, 
 'ATroKaXvip-ei and refers to it as ■^ ypa^ij. Methodius (Oonviv. 
 Virg. ii. 6) towards the end of the third century quotes from 
 a passage referred to by Clement, speaking of it as a ' divinely 
 inspired writing.' Eusebius {H.E. iii. 3. 2) classes it as spurious, 
 along with the Acts of Paul, the Shepherd, the Epistle of Barnabas, 
 and the Teachings of the Apostles. Sozomen in the fifth century 
 {H.F. vii. 19) says that it was still read in certain churches of 
 Palestine once in the year. 
 
 The portion which has come down to us appears to be about 
 half of the complete Apocalypse, some 160 out of the 300 lines 
 mentioned in the list of Nicephorus (James, p. 4,5). About 6 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE TWO EPISTLES cxxxiii 
 
 lines are devoted to the Second Coming to which may be added 
 7 from the Fragments. About 27 lines are occupied with the 
 description of the two glorified saints, 13 lines with the description 
 of the abode of the blessed, about 76 with the description of hell, 
 to which last section may be added some 35 lines from the 
 Fragments. It may be worth while to quote a portion of the 
 description of the glorified saints and of hell, in view of the 
 suggestion that it was written by the author of 2 Pet. Of the 
 saints it is said, to, atofiara ainwv ^v XevKorepa Trdarji; ytovo'; 
 KoX ipvffpoTepa TravTOS poBov, crvvsKeKpaTO Be to ipvOpov avr&v 
 Tco XevKm, Koi aTrXws oil Bvvafiai i^r/y^aaaffai to KriWos avTmv 
 rj re 7^/) KOfirf avT&v ovXr/ ^v Kal avdrjpa koi e-mirpe'jrova-a 
 {eTri,Tp4')(pvaa ?) aiiT&v tijI re "Trpoacoira) xal rot? cifiot,<;, aia-irepel 
 <TTe(pavo<; ex vapBocrTci^vo^ ireTrXeyfievo's koX -KoiKlXmv avdoiv, rj 
 ma-irep Ipi^ iv depi, ToiavTr) ?iv avTOtv rj ev-rrpi'Treid. It seems to 
 me that the whole tone of this has much more resemblance to the 
 puerility of the Erotici Scriptores than it has to the dignified and 
 serious tone of 2 Peter. Then take the place of torment. There 
 seems to be very little reason in the classification of sinners and of 
 their punishments. Those who blaspheme the way of righteous- 
 ness appear twice : in § 7 they are suspended by their tongues 
 over flames, in § 13 they gnaw their lips and are blinded with 
 red-hot iron. Besides these, there are persecutors, false-witnesses, 
 usurers, idolaters, apostates, murderers, the impure under various 
 heads, the pitiless rich, the unjust {uiroa-TpeipovTei; ttjv Bitcatoav- 
 vrjv). Comparing this list with that in the Apocalypse of St. John 
 (21®) we notice the absence of ' the fearful, the unbelieving, 
 sorcerers, and all liars.' Comparing it with St. Paul's ' works of 
 the flesh,' we miss witchcraft, hatred, emulations, seditions, 
 heresies, envyings, drunkenness, etc. (Gal. 5^"'). If the author of 
 2 Pet. had made out such a list, must he not have mentioned the 
 alpeo'ei's d'irca\ela<; and yfrevBoBiBdaKoXoi of 2^, the dpyia and 
 cLKapirla of 1^, the irXeove^la and falsehood of 2^, the proud, the 
 presumptuous, and rebellious of 2^", the boastful of 2^^ the back- 
 sliders of 2^", the mockers of 3^ ? And there is nothing in our 
 Epistle to suggest that its author would have allowed his fancy to 
 revel in the grotesque ugliness of the tortures depicted in the 
 Apocalypse called by his name. It appears to me therefore 
 very improbable that the author of our Epistle wrote the 
 Apocalypse, and I doubt very much whether he was in any way 
 
cxxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 indebted to it. On the other hand I think it highly probable 
 that the writer of the Apocalypse was acquainted with our 
 Epistle, and that the phrase KvXiafiov /3op06pov (2 P. 2^^, 
 Ps. 40^), along with the undying worm (Isa. 66^), the darkness 
 (2 P. 2*), and the unquenchable fire, formed the substratum of his 
 idea of hell. Thus the worm appears in §§ 10, 12 and Fr. 6 ; the 
 darkness in |§ 6, 12; the fire in §§ 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 18, 20 ; the 
 mire in §§ 8, 9, 11, 16; rolling or wallowing in § 15 iicvXiopro 
 eirl ■)(aKlKa>v ire-irvpiofievcov,' % 10 (murderers) -irXtjaao/ievovis viro 
 epireribv irovqpSiv koX aTpetpofiivov} i«el iv Ty KoXdaet, Tavrj), 
 § 20 <l}\ey6/i€voi koX xTTpe^ofievoi. On the other hand Dr. Bigg 
 has pointed out (pp. 207 foil.) that in many respects the descrip- 
 tion given in the Apocalypse agrees with that in the Aeneid (cf. 
 vi. 296 Turbidus hie caeno vastaque voragine gurges aestuat) ; 
 also that it shows signs of being written under stress of perse- 
 cution : cf. § 12 ovToi ■qcrav oi Biw^avTev tous SiKat'ovi, and the u.se 
 of the word Trjyapi^ofievoi, denoting a mode of torture referred 
 to in the Viennese letter (Eus. ff.JS. v. i. 38), to which there is no 
 sort of allusion in 2 Pet. Dr. James also points out its similarity 
 to the Sibylline Oracles, Bk. ii, the Vision of Josaphat in the 
 History of Barlaam, (James, pp. 59 foil.) and other Apocryphal 
 works. 
 
 The Apocryphal ' Acts of Peter and Simon ' contain certain 
 similarities to 2 P., as in ch. 20, Dominus noster volens me maies- 
 tatem suam videre in monte sancto ; videns autem luminis splen- 
 dorem eius cum filiis Zebedei, cecidi tamquam mortuus et oculos 
 mfeos conclusi, etc. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 Under what Circumstances were the Epistles written ? 
 
 This question has been to some extent answered already so 
 far as the 2nd of Peter is concerned. We have seen reasons for 
 believing that it was not written by the author of the First 
 Epistle, that it was written after Jude, that it was written at a 
 time when the first generation of believers had passed away, when 
 the hope of the second Advent was dying out, when St. Paul's 
 Epistles were united into one volume, and regarded as a part of 
 the inspired Scriptures. There are however other points which 
 call for consideration under this head. Is there anything in 2 P. 
 which may assist us to determine where and to whom it was 
 written ? It dififers from 1 P. in its address, which is general and 
 anonymous, rot? Icrorifiov rffuv Xa'Xftvaiv munv, whereas the 
 former is limited to the Christian communities of Pontus, Galatia, 
 Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, that is, to Churches which had 
 probably received the Gospel either directly or indirectly from Paul 
 and Silas, or, as he is called in 1 P. 5^^, Silvanus. The mention 
 of the latter in that Epistle suggests that Peter may have been 
 induced by him to write to the Christians of a region which, as far 
 as we know, Peter had not personally visited, in addressing whom 
 he might therefore be glad to use the name of Silvanus as an 
 introduction. It is easy to understand why Silvanus should have 
 wished to bring St. Peter's influence to bear on the Churches of 
 Asia Minor, if these, during the long absence of St. Paul, caused 
 by his imprisonments in Caesarea and in Rome, had been led 
 away by Judaizing teachers, who magnified the authority of St. 
 Peter at his expense.^ These Churches, as we learn from the 
 1 Cf. 1 Cor. 112, 415^ Gal. 2, 3, 
 
cxxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Acts, were made up of Jews and Gentiles, and the latter are 
 plainly alluded to in 1 P. 1^^, iKvTpmOrjTe e« t^? /ji,aTa[a<! vfi&p 
 avaaTpo<f>rj(; TrarpoirapahoTov. The vague language of 2 P. 1^ 
 seems to imply a similar division, with an assumption of higher 
 privileges on the part of the Jewish section, which made it 
 necessary to insist on the Icrorifiia of Jew and Gentile ; but the 
 most pressing danger seems to have been one which would probably 
 affect the latter more seriously than the former, viz. the anti- 
 nomianism which professed to rest itself on the authority of 
 Paul (2 P. 3^*). The phrase d'jro<f)vy6vTe<; to, /jutdcrfiaTa rov 
 Koa-fjLov in 2^° seems also more appropriate to Gentile than to 
 Jewish converts. 
 
 It has been argued from l'^*, eyvcaplcra/jiev vfuv rr/v rod Kvpiov 
 rjfiwv SvpafMv koX irapovaiav, that the writer must himself have 
 preached the Gospel to those whom he is addressing, and that he 
 must therefore be included among ' your apostles ' referred to in 
 3^- It would seem also from 1^^, i-7ro7rrat_ '^evqOevTe'i 77)9 eKevvov 
 fieya'KeioTrjTo';, that the Apostles referred to must have been those 
 who witnessed the Transfiguration. But is there any hint either 
 in the N.T. or in later Christian literature of any such joint 
 mission undertaken by Peter and the two sons of Zebedee ? It 
 seems better therefore to understand the plural as referring here 
 to a single person (cf. Blass, p. 166, where be quotes 1 Job. 1* 
 ravTa ypd^ofiep, Heb. 6^ •jroi'^aofiev, 6^ "KaXovfiev, etc.), and to 
 suppose the writer to refer simply to his own personal experience, 
 though we may still hold, in accordance with 3^, that he was not 
 the only apostle concerned in the evangelization of the Church or 
 Churches addressed. 
 
 We now come to the consideration of the mention in 2 P. 3^ of 
 a previous letter addressed to the same readers by the author. 
 The allusion has generally been taken to mean that 2 P. was 
 written to the Churches of Asia Minor designated in the first verse 
 of 1 P. But the result of our comparison of the two Epistles has 
 led us to ascribe them to different authors ; and this is confirmed 
 by the remarkable fact that, while the second Epistle implies 
 a long acquaintance between the writer and his readers, who 
 bad received the Gospel from him and his fellow-apostles (1^* 
 eyvmpicrafMev vfuv rrjv rov Kvpiov rj/jL&v 'Irjaov 'Kpiarov Svvafiiv 
 Koi Trapovcriav) and whom he felt bound to be continually remind- 
 ing of the teaching they had received from the holy prophets, and 
 
CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING cxxxvii 
 
 of the law of Jesus Christ in which they had been instructed by 
 their Apostles {V^'^^, S^'^), there is no hint in 1 P. of any previous 
 connexion between the writer and readers of that Epistle. On the 
 contrary, the writer seems to be indebted to Silvanus, a companion 
 of St. Paul's, for an introduction to St. Paul's old converts. And 
 yet there is a warmth and intimacy in the manner in which these 
 strangers are addressed, which contrasts curiously with the calm 
 intellectual-tone conspicuous in 2 P. Spitta and Zahn, who join 
 in upholding the genuineness of 2 P., suppose that the letter 
 alluded to in 2 P. 3^ has been lost, thus sharing the fate, as Zahn 
 thinks, of hundreds of other letters written by the Apostles. 
 Another of these lost letters he considers to be that of St. Paul, 
 referred to in 2 P. 3^^ Ka6a>^ koX 6 ar/aTrriTo<; rjfjL&v IlavXo? eypa-\}rev 
 v/uv. I have suggested in my note that the Epistle referred to is 
 that to the Romans, on the ground that KaOax} must be explained 
 by the immediately preceding admonition rrjv tov Kvpiov rifiStv 
 fiaKpoBvfiiav <Twrr}plav 'ffyeiaOe, which is more distinctly stated in 
 Rom. 2*, 3^^'^, 9^^ than elsewhere, though we find an echo of it in 
 other Epistles, such as 1 Cor. 15, 2 Cor. 4^, 6i, Eph. 2*8, 2 Th. 2i«- 
 If this is so, the writer of 2 P. intends us to understand that his 
 letter is addressed to Rome. 
 
 It may help to clear matters if I give here Bishop Lightfoot's view 
 of the Roman Church (taken from his introduction to the Epistle 
 to the Philippians) during the last years of St. Peter and St. Paul. 
 
 In considering the results of St. Paul's labours it will be necesary to view 
 the Jewish and Gentile converts separately. In no Church are their 
 antipathies and feuds more strongly marked than in the Roman . . . and a 
 generation at least elapses before they are inseparably united. 
 
 Several thousands of Jews had been uprooted from their native land and 
 transplanted to Rome by Pompeius. In this new soil they had spread rapidly, 
 and now formed a very important element in the population of the metropolis. 
 Living unmolested in a quarter of their own beyond the Tiber, protected and 
 fostered by the earlier Caesars, receiving constant accessions from home, they 
 abounded everywhere, in the forum, in the camp, even in the palace itself. 
 Their growing influence alarmed the moralists and politicians of Rome. 
 'The vanquished,' said Seneca bitterly, 'have given laws to their victors.' 
 Immediately on his arrival the Apostle summoned to his lodgings the more 
 influential members of his race, probably the rulers of the synagogues. In 
 seeking this interview he seems to have had a double purpose. On the one 
 hand he was anxious to secure their good-will and thus to forestall the 
 calumnies of his enemies ; on the other hand he paid respect to their spiritual 
 prerogative by holding out to them the first offer of the Gospel. On their 
 arrival he explained to them the circumstances which had brought him there. 
 To his personal explanations they replied, in real or affected ignorance, that 
 they had received no instructions from Palestine ; they had heard no word of 
 him and would gladly listen to his defence ; only this they knew, that the 
 
cxxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 Beet of which he professed himself an adherent, had a bad name everywhere. 
 For the exposition of his teaching a day was fixed. When the time arrived, 
 he 'expounded and testified the kingdom of God,' arguing from their 
 scriptures ' from morning till evening.' His success was not greater than with 
 his fellow-countrymen elsewhere. He dismissed them, denouncing their 
 stubborn unbelief and declaring his intention of communicating to the Gentiles 
 that offer which they had spurned. It is not probable that he made any 
 further advances in this direction. He had broken ground and nothing more 
 (pp. 14, 15). 
 
 But where he .had failed other teachers, who sympathized more fully witli 
 their prejudices and made larger concessions to their bigotry, might win a 
 way. The proportion of Jewish converts saluted in the Epistle to the 
 Romans, not less than the obvious motive and bearing of the letter itself, 
 points to the existence of a large, perhaps a preponderating, Jewish element 
 in the Church of the metropolis before St. Paul's arrival. These Christians of 
 the Circumcision for the most part owed no spiritual allegiance to the Apostle 
 of the Gentiles : some of them had confessed Christ before him ; many no 
 doubt were rigid in their adherence to the law. It would seem as though 
 St. Paul had long ago been apprehensive of the attitude these Jewish converts 
 might assume towards him. The conciliatory tone of the Epistle to the 
 Bomans — conci iatory and yet uncompromising — seems intended to disarm 
 possible opposition. . . . He had good reason to ' thank God and take courage,' 
 when he was met by one deputation of Roman Christians at the Forum of 
 Appius, by another at the Three Taverns. It was a relief to find that some 
 members at least of the Roman Church were favourably disposed tonards him. 
 At all events his fears were not unfounded, as appeared from the sequel. His 
 bold advocacy of the liberty of the Gospel provoked the determined 
 antagonism of the .Tudaizers. We can hardly doubt to what class of teachers 
 he alludes in the Epistle to the PhUippians, as preaching Christ of envy and 
 strife, in a factious spirit, only for the purpose of thwarting him, only to 
 increase his anguish and to render his chains more galling.* An incidental 
 notice in another, probably a later epistle, written also from Rome, reveals 
 the virulence of this opposition still more clearly.^ Of all the Jewish 
 Christians in Rome, the Apostle can name three only as remaining stead- 
 fast in the general desertion : Aristarchus his own companion in travel and 
 captivity, Marcus the cousin of his former missionary colleague Barnabas, 
 and Jesus surnamed the Just. ' In them,' he adds feelingly, ' I found comfort ' 
 (pp. 16-18). 
 
 Meanwhile among the Gentiles his preaching bore more abundant and 
 healthier fruit. As he encountered in the existing Church of Rome the 
 stubborn resistance of a compact body of Judaic antagonists, so also there were 
 doubtless very many whose more liberal Christian training prepared them to 
 welcome him as their leader and guide. If constant communication was kept 
 up with Jerusalem, the facilities of intercourse with the cities which he 
 himself had evangelized, with Corinth and Ephesus for instance, were even 
 greater. 
 
 Thus aided and encouraged the Apostle prosecuted his work among the 
 Gentiles with signal and rapid success. In two quarters especially the results 
 of his labours mav be traced. The praetorian soldiers, drafted off successively 
 to guard him, and constrained while on duty to bear him close company, had 
 opportunities of learning his doctrine and observing his manner of life, which 
 were certainly not without fruit. He had not been in Rome very long, before 
 he could boast that his bonds were not merely known, but known in Christ, 
 throughout the praetorian guard. In the palace of the Caesars too his influence 
 
 1 Phil. 1""8. 2 Col 410. ii_ 
 
CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING cxxxix 
 
 was felt. It seems not improbable that when he arrived in Rome he found 
 among the members of the imperial household, whether slaves or freedmen, 
 some who had already embraced the new faith and eagerly welcomed his 
 coming. . . . Writing from Rome to a distant Church, he singles out from the 
 general salutation the members of Caesar's household, as a body both 
 prominent enough to deserve a special salutation and so well known to his 
 correspondents that no explanation was needed (pp. 18, 19). Of the fact that 
 the primitive Church of the metropolis before and after St. Paul's visit was 
 chiefly Greek there is satisfactory evidence. The salutations in the Roman 
 letter contain very few but Greek names, and even the exceptions hardly 
 imply the Roman birth of their possessors. The Greek nationality of this 
 Church in the succeeding ages is still more clearly seen. Her early bishops 
 for several generations with very few exceptions bear Greek names. All her 
 literature for nearly two centuries is Greek. The first Latin version of the 
 Scriptures was made not for Rome, but for the provinces, especially for Africa 
 (pp. 19, 20). 
 
 The points to which I would call attention here are (1) the 
 division of the Christians of Rome into a Jewish and a Gentile 
 section, the former of which was more or less hostile to St. Paul ; 
 (2) the comfort St. Paul derived from the presence of Mark at the 
 time when he wrote the Epistle to the Colossians, perhaps in the 
 year 61 ; (3) Mark's intended visit to Colossae (Col. 4^") ; (4) the 
 reference to Mark in 1 P. 5^^ ao-Traferon v/^a? fj iv 'Ba^vXwvi, 
 ovveicXjeKTT] koI M.dpKO<; 6 vto? /iov, from which we learn that he 
 was then (that is probably in the following year) with St. Peter in 
 ' Babylon.' What are we to understand by ' Babylon ' here ? It 
 was a name used by the Jews, as Edom also was, to express their 
 hatred of the great world-power of that time : cp. Apoc. 14^, 16^^, 
 17^ etc. and also Orac. Sib. v. 143, where Nero is described as 
 
 T^? /ieydXiji; 'Pw/ii;! ^aa-iK6v<s fiiya'; . . . 
 otTTi'i Trafifiovaoa ^doyyco /j.e\ir]Bea<! vfivovi 
 BearpoKoirSiv airoKel ttoWou? avv firjTpl raXakvy. 
 ^ev^erac ix Ba/3v\<Si'os dva^ ^o^epo<s kuI dvaiBij^, 
 
 and V. 158, 
 
 <j>Ki^ei avTTjv Ba^vXwva 
 'IraXtrjii yaldv 6 , ^? eivexa ttoWoi oXovto 
 'E^paCav djioi ttio-toI kuI vao<i oK'qQ'q's. 
 
 That Rome was the scene of the joint labours of the two Apostles ^ 
 and of their martyrdom under Nero is established by very early 
 
 ' See Eus. H.E. ii. 15, and Chase, Art. on Babylon in Hastings' D. of B, i. 
 p . 213, 
 
cxl INTRODUCTION 
 
 tradition. Clement writing from the same place some thirty years 
 
 afterwards says (chapters 5 and 6) :^ 
 
 'Let lis come to the noble athletes of our own generation. Because of envy 
 the great and righteous pillars of the Church were persecuted and contended 
 unto death. Let us set before our eyes the good Apostles — Peter, who 
 endured many labours, and having borne his witness (fiaprvpria-avTa) went to 
 the appointed place of glory ; Paul who suffered much and journeyed far, and 
 having borne his witness before the rulers departed from the world, ... To 
 these men there was gathered a great company of the elect who ... by 
 reason of many outrages and tortures became a noble example among us.' 
 The Muratorian Canon speaks of the martyrdom of Peter in connexion with 
 the journey of Paul to Spain. Ignatius {Rom. iv.) gives the names of both 
 Apostles as having authority over the Church in Kome. Irenaens (iii. 1. 1) 
 says of the Gospel of Matthew that ' it was written among the Hebrews in their 
 own tongue at the time when Peter and Paul were preaching and founding 
 the Church in Kome. After their death Mark wrote down the teaching of 
 Peter.' TertuUian (Seorp. 15) writes : 'Orientem fidem Romae primus Nero 
 cruentavit. Tunc Petrus ab altero cingitur, cum cruci adstringitur.' 
 
 It may be well to add here a condensed statement of Dr. 
 Chase's Reconstruction of the later history of St. Peter taken 
 from D. of B. iii. 777, 
 
 It seems impossible to suppose that St. Peter had already worked in Bome 
 when St. Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans (1"'-, 15^*). The account of 
 St. Paul's arrival in Rome (Acts 281*'°") seems to exclude the possibility of 
 St. Peter's having been in the city at that time. This evidence is confirmed by 
 the negative evidence of the Epistles of the Captivity. We are led therefore 
 to the conclusion -that St. Peter's arrival in Rome must be placed after the last 
 of the epistles of St. Paul's first captivity, and long enough before the writing 
 of 2 Tim. to allow St. Peter to have left the city when that epistle was written, 
 after having worked there some considerable time. 
 
 It is hardly possible to suppose that after St. Paul had taken the Apostolic 
 oversight of the Church of Rome, St. Peter could, apart from St. Paul, have 
 planned a visit there. It is clear (1) that St. Paul's mind was set on averting 
 any rupture between Jewish and Gentile Christians, and on welding them 
 together into one Church (Hort Ecclesia 281 f.) ; (2) that in his view Rome 
 was the key to the evangelization of the empire ; (3) that he was keenly alive 
 to the need that Peter, the unique representative of one side of the Church's 
 work, should visit now the Mother Church at Jerusalem, now the Church in the 
 capital of the empire ; (4) that the, problem of reconciling the two great 
 elements in the Church presented itself to St. Paul in a concrete form in Rome 
 (Phil. 1^^ '•), and that in Rome lie grasped, as even he had never done before, 
 the greatness of the issues involved (Eph. 2''-4"). If the churches saw the 
 Apostle of the Gentiles and the leader of the Apostles of the Circumcision work- 
 ing together at Rome, they would learn the lesson of the unity of the Church, 
 as they could learn it in no other way. Moreover St. Paul was pledged to 
 distant journeys, so that the Church in Rome would be deprived of his 
 immediate guidance, and as the far-reaching needs of that Church pressed upon 
 him, he might well realize how manifold would be the gain resulting from the 
 presence there of St. Peter. Hence it is probable that St. Peter may have 
 arrived there at St. Paul's request in the spring of 61. His absence from Rome 
 when St. Paul wrote 2 Tim. we may perhaps explain on the supposition that 
 
 ' What follows is taken chiefly from Chase in D. of B. iii. 769 foil, 
 
CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING cxli 
 
 he had been summoned to Jerusalem in connexion with the appointment of a 
 successor to St. James.' He must have returned to Rome before July 64. 
 Dr. Chase suggests the following chronological abstract of St. Peter's labours. 
 35-44 Close of the ministry at Jerusalem; 44-61 work in the Syrian towns 
 with Antioch as its centre ; 61-64 work in Rome interrupted probably by a 
 visit to Jerusalem ; martyrdom in Rome July 64. 
 
 We may compare with this Zahn's view of the last years 
 of St. Peter and St. Paul {Einleitung in das N.T. ii. 17 foil.). 
 He thinks that the sphere of St. Peter's activity was limited to 
 Palestine and Syria, until St. Paul's first Roman captivity, and 
 that it was to these Churches that he wrote 2 P.^ about the 
 year 60, in order to warn them of the coming heresy. In the 
 year 63, after St. Paul had been released from prison, and had 
 commenced his missionary labours in Spain, St. Peter, probably 
 on the invitation of Mark, went to Rome to supply St. Paul's 
 place.^ In Rome (' Babylon ' 1 P. 5^^) he met Silvan us, and 
 was induced by him to write a letter of encouragement to the 
 Churches of Asia Minor, giving his entire sanction to the teaching 
 which they had received from St. Paul (5^^ iirifiapTvpSsv ravTrjv 
 elvai, rrjv aXrjdrj ')((ipiv tov ®eov' et? fjv tTTrJTe). St. Paul's absence 
 in Spain explains why there is no allusion to him.* Zahn thinks 
 that within a year, in the spring of 64, St. Peter was crucified ® 
 in the gardens of Nero. 
 
 After leaving Spain Paul returned to Asia Minor and from thence 
 to Rome, where his martyrdom took place probably in the year 66. 
 Zahn imagines that the lost letter of St. Paul mentioned in 2 P. 
 may have been an apology addressed to the Jewish Churches 
 during his imprisonment in Caesarea. But a letter of such import- 
 ance was hardly likely to be lost. 
 
 To return now to 2 P. If Dr. Chase is right in supposing that 
 Peter may have been called from Rome to Jerusalem to take part 
 in the election of the new Bishop, it would of course have been 
 quite possible for him to write a letter to Rome from thence. On 
 
 1 Cf. Eus. H.M. iii. 11. 
 
 " This seems very improbable, if we are right in supposing that the Epistle of 
 Jude was written to the same Churches. 
 
 ' If he had gone there sooner, he must certainly have been mentioned in the 
 epistles of the imprisonment. 
 
 * Dr. Hort (Introd. to 1 Peter, p. 6) suggests that, as Silvanua was the bearer, 
 St. Peter may well have left all personal matters for him to set forth orally. 
 
 ^ Not ' head-downwards,' which is merely a misinterpretation of &va>6iv in the 
 phrase which we find in the Acta Pauli cited by Orig. Tom. xx in Joh. HyaBtv 
 fieWa araupoiadai, itself borrowed from Heb. 6* ivacrTavpovVTas Ioutois rhv vlhv 
 ■TOV 0eoB. See Zahn Bird. ii. 25, O.K. ii. 846. 
 
cxlH INTRODUCTION 
 
 the otlier hand if, as we have seen reason to believe, 2 P. is a 
 spurious document written some fifty years after St. Peter's death, 
 it would be very natural for the writer to introduce a reference 
 to the generally recognized tradition that both Apostles had 
 preached and suffered in Rome (of. k<^va>plaayLev V-^, and t5>v 
 airoaroXiov vfi&v 3^). It may be said that the writer was not one to 
 have overlooked the certainty that, if Peter wrote to the Church at 
 Rome during the captivity of Paul, he must have sent some 
 message of condolence or comfort or congratulation. This 
 difficulty however is obviated, if he was aware that St. Paul was 
 then on a missionary journey in Spain or elsewhere. But such 
 hypotheses are not simply groundless, but altogether unnecessary. 
 There is no reason to suppose that the author of 2 P. any more 
 than the author of the Book of Wisdom desired to deceive his 
 readers. The object of both was the same, to put before them the 
 teaching which they supposed that Solomon in the one case, Peter 
 in the other, would have given under the same circumstances. 
 So far as they introduce historical or biographical allusions beyond 
 what was essential to the actual teaching, these were added only 
 by way of avoiding any startling disillusion. 
 
 In my note on 2 P. 1^^ I have suggested that allusion is there 
 made to the tradition that the Gospel of Mark embodied the 
 teaching of St. Peter. Zahn opposes this view (Einl. ii. 47) in the 
 following words : ' Selbst wenn der 2 P. um 170 geschrieben ware, 
 dtirfte man nicht an das Evangelium des Marcus denken ; denn 
 erst lange nach diese Zeit hat man gefabelt dass P. den Marcus 
 beauftragt habp sein Evangelium zu schreiben, und auch, nachdem 
 diese Meinung gebildet hatte, konnte man sie dem P. nicht mit 
 Worten, welche nur an eine religiose Leseschrift denken lassen, 
 als Absicht in den Mund legen ' ; i.e. ' Even if 2 P. were written as 
 late as 170 A.D. it would still be impossible to find in it a reference 
 to the Gospel of Mark, for the legend to that effect did not 
 originate till much later, and even after this view had established 
 itself, it could not have been referred to in language which implies 
 a book of religious instruction.' 
 
 Supposing this Epistle to have been written by St. Peter himself, 
 why might he not have referred to a forthcoming life of Christ, 
 as a treatise which would enable his readers to make mention of 
 the Christian virtues and graces of which he had before spoken ? 
 He had already refen-ed (1^) to Christ, as having called them 
 
Circumstances of writing cxiiii 
 
 IBia Sofj; /cal apery : surely nothing could be more appropriate, 
 more helpful to a godly life, than that he should leave behind 
 the picture of this So^a koL apeTrj drawn up from his own 
 recollection by his favourite disciple. And the following words 
 ov yap aeao^Lo-fiivoiii fiv0oi<! i^aKoKovdrjaavTe';, aXhJ iiroirTai, 
 yev'r]0evre<} seem to imply a statement of facts. Then comes 
 the objection that the story as to St. Peter's connexion with the 
 Gospel was later even than 170. Probably Zahn had in his 
 mind the words of Clement of Alexandria, quoted from the Sixth 
 Book of the Hypotyposes by Eusebius, H.E. ii. 15 : ' The hearers of 
 Peter in Rome were not satisfied with simply listening to his 
 preaching' (t^ aypa^ip rov Oeiov KrjpvjfiaTO^ SiBaa-KaXia), irapa- 
 Kk-qaeai Se iravroiai's MdpKov, ov to evayyeXiov <^epeTai,, olkoXov- 
 dovovra TleTpov Xtirapija-ai, ft)9 av koL Sia ypa<p!]<; inrofivij/ia Trj<; Bta 
 Xoyov irapaZodela-r}'; avToi<; KaToXeL-^oi hthaaKoXia^, imt} Trporepov 
 T6 dveivat rj KaTepydaaadai tov avBpa, Koi ravrrj alrLov<; yevierOai 
 T^? TOV \eyofjL6vov KUTa M.dpKov evayye\i,ov ypa^iji;. yvovTa Se to 
 irpa'XjSev <paaX tov diroaToXov, diroKoXv'^avTO'i avTm tov irvevfia- 
 T09, ffa-Orjvai rfj r&v dvSp&v irpodvfiia Kvp&aai re Tr]v ypacj)7jv eh 
 evTev^iv Tal<; eKKXrjaiaii;. KXifyttr/? ev eKTq> r&v "TiroTVirwa-efov 
 •n-apuTedeiTai Trjv l<TTopiav, o-vveTrifiapTvpei Se avTm /cal 6 'lepa- 
 iroXiTqi; hrl(TKO'Ko<; ovofiari JIa7ria<;. Much the same account is 
 given in Eus. IT.E. vi. 14, according to the traditions r&v dvexaOev 
 irpetT^VTepcav preserved by Clement, except that Peter is said to 
 have expressed neither approval nor disapproval of the action of 
 Mark. Irenaeus (iii. 1) says more briefly that after the martyrdom 
 of Peter and Paul in Rome Map/to? 6 fj,a6riTTj<; Kal ip/MTjvevTTj^ 
 THerpov Kal avToi; to, vtto Tlerpov Krjpva-irofieva iyypdtf>a)<i rj/uv 
 TrapaBeSoaKe. Similarly TertuUian (adv. Marc. iv. 5). These 
 testimoniSs may all be considered later than 170 a.d., and we have 
 seen that Clement varies to a certain extent in his account. 
 Eusebius however (S.E. iii. 39) gives us the exact words of Papias, 
 reporting the testimony which he had heard with his own ears 
 from TOV irpea^vTepov 'Imdvvov, an actual disciple of the Lord : 
 Kal TOVTO 6 7rp£<r^vTepo<{ eXeye. ' MdpKO^ fiev ep/jLrjvevTTji TleTpov 
 yevofievo<s Sera ifivrjfioveva-ev dKpi^&<; eypayfrev, ov fievTOi rd^ei to, 
 VTTO TOV 'Kpia-Tov rj Xs'^^devTa rj irpajddevTa. ovtb yap rjKovae tov 
 Yivpiov ovre TraprjKoXovQriaev aiiT^, voTepov Se, «? e(f>rjv, HeTpq), os 
 Trpot ra? y^peva^ iiroielTO ra? hihaa-icaXtat;, dXX' ov^ wairep avvTa^iv 
 T&v KvpcaK&v TTOiovfjievoi; Xoyoav wcrre ovSev ^fiapTev^dpKoii, ovTca^ 
 
cxliv INTRODUCTION 
 
 evia ypdyjra^ m? aTre/ivri/iovevcrep. evo<; yap eTroirjaaTo irpovotav 
 Tov /j/r)Skv &v rjKovae irapaXiirelv r) yfrevcraa-dai n ev avTol<;.' This 
 statement seems to me to have every mark of simplicity and truth, 
 and from it I think we should certainly infer, as Clement seems 
 to have done, that Mark made notes of Peter's teaching at the 
 time, and probably mentioned to him his intention of publishing 
 his notes at some future time. If this was so, it was very natural 
 for St. Peter to mention it in what he regarded as his last address 
 to his disciples. If it was not so, that is, if Mark never spoke of 
 his intention during Peter's lifetime, it was at any rate most 
 natural that the pseudonymous writer of 2 P. should draw the 
 same inference as Clement did from the words of Fapias, or the 
 tradition which they embody. 
 
 I take now one or two expressions in the Epistle which seem 
 to be more easily explained on the supposition of a comparatively 
 late date. If 1^^ was written by St. Peter, we naturally suppose 
 the allusion to be to the words of Christ recorded in Joh. 21^*, but 
 it is not easy to see how those words can be construed as implying 
 that Peter, writing some thirty years afterwards, was shortly to 
 die. Yet this must be the sense here, for it is given as a reason 
 for making the most of the short time which remained. If stress 
 is laid on the words oTav he yr)pday<i, old age in itself is a sufficient 
 warning of approaching death, so that there seems no reason to 
 recur to the ancient prophecy, the point of which lies not in the 
 nearness or remoteness of death, but in its character, a violent, as 
 opposed to a natural death. It is a far-fetched way of connecting 
 this idea with the nearness of death, to say that a violent death 
 is a sudden death, and a sudden death leaves no time to prepare 
 for death. It is much easier to understand it of a later warning, 
 such as we find alluded to in Clem. Horn, and other apocryphal 
 books. As St. Paul refers to his own approaching death in Acts 
 2022.26 and 2 Tim. 4*, so it seemed natural that a similar intimation 
 should be made to St. Peter. 
 
 The phrase to ayiov 6po<i (2 P. 1^^) seems to imply a later date 
 than the simple et? opo'i vsjrrjXhv (Mk. 9^, Mt. 17^) or et? to opo-; 
 (Lk. 9^), whether we interpret it of a known mountain which had 
 now become consecrated as the scene of the Vision, or whether we 
 take it allegorically of the Mount of God, the New Jerusalem, as 
 I have suggested in p. iv. 
 
 If TOV arfopdaavra avTov<i Sea-'jroTrjv (2 P, 2^) is to be under- 
 
CIRCUMSTANCES OF WRITING cxlv 
 
 stood of Christ, as I think it is by most commentators, this is 
 probably the first instance of its being so used. Some scholars 
 deny such a use previous to the fourth century. 
 
 In 3^ the writer reminds his readers of the command of the 
 Lord, which they had received through their apostles, i.e. through 
 those who had preached the Gospel to them. It is evident from 
 1^® that Peter himself is to be counted as one of these, and from 
 3^^ Paul would be another, together with the companions who 
 had laboured with him at Rome during his imprisonment. 
 
 The most important passage in Jude bearing upon the circum- 
 stances of its composition is v. 17, where the readers are bidden 
 to call to mind the words formerly spoken to them by the Apostles 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ (which would fit in with the suggestion 
 (p. cvi) that it was addressed to the Syrian churches) on ekeyov 
 v/ilv 'Ett' i<r)(,aTov "ypovov eaovrai efiiraiKTai, the latter words 
 showing that these communications of the Apostles had now ceased, 
 either by their death or by their removal from Jerusalem. Jude 
 recognizes that ' the last time,' of which they had preached, had 
 now arrived. The long retrospect which these words imply agrees 
 with the far-away note of v. 3, irapaKoXSsv iirar/wviJ^etrOai tSj 
 aira^ irapaBoffeia-g toi^ dr/ioiii TTio-ret, as contrasted with such 
 passages as Lk. 4^^ aijfiepov ireTrKijpcarai t) ypa^rj avTrj, though we 
 must not forget what has been pointed out in the comment (p. 61 
 below), that the idea of a Christian tradition is familiar to St. Paul, 
 and (p. 23) that there are other examples in the N.T. of the 
 objective use of •jricrTi^. 
 
 It has been argued that this epistle must have been written 
 before 70, or it would have contained some reference to the 
 destruction of Jerusalem among the other notable judgments of 
 God. We may grant that this is what we should have expected, 
 if the letter were written shortly afterwards, though even then it 
 is a possible view that a patriotic Jew might shrink from any 
 further allusion to so terrible a subject, beyond the reference to 
 the destruction in the wilderness (v, 5); but this difficulty is 
 lessened if we suppose the date of the Epistle to be nearer 80 
 than 70. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 The Author of the Epistle of Jude 
 
 Assuming for the moment the genuineness of the Epistle, what 
 do we know of the author ? 
 
 The name Judas ('lovSa?) was naturally in very common use 
 among the Jews at the time of the Christian era. It was dear to 
 them as having been borne not only by the Eponymos of their 
 tribe, but also by their great champion Judas the Maccabee. 
 Two among the Twelve bore this name, Judas Iscariot, and the 
 Judas not Iscariot (Jn. 14^*), who is also called Judas son of 
 James (o 'Iukco^ov, Lk. 6", Acts li») and Tliaddaeus (Mt. lO^, 
 Mk. 3^*, where some MSS. add Ae^^aloi). Besides these we 
 meet with a Judas among the Brethren of the Lord (Mt. 13®^" 
 Mk. 6^), Judas of Galilee (Acts 5^), Judas surnamed Barsabbas 
 (Acts 15^^), Judas of Damascus (Acts 9^^). It is therefore not 
 surprising that the writer should have added a note of identifica- 
 tion, SoO\o9 'IijffoO X.picrTov, aBeXcftov Se 'laxto^ov. The most 
 famous James in the latter half of the first century was the head 
 of the Church at Jerusalem and brother of the Lord, who also 
 begins his epistle by styling himself simply SouA-o? (&eov xal 
 Kvplov) 'Irjaov ^piarov. Hence it seems probable that the 
 addition was made, not merely for the purpose of identification, 
 but, like the addition of air6a-To\o<s Be in Tit. 1^, as giving a 
 reason why his words should be received with respect, since he 
 was brother of James and therefore one of the Brethren of the 
 Lord. In my Introduction to the Epistle of St. James (pp. 
 i-xlvii), I have endeavoured to show that the Brethren of the 
 Lord were sons of Joseph and Mary, that they did not join the 
 Church till after the Crucifixion, and that none of them was 
 included among the Twelve.^ 
 
 ' See ver. 17, where the writer appears to distinguish between the Apostles 
 and himself. 
 
THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE OF JUDE cxlvii 
 
 Other facts which we learn from the N.T. are (1) that Jude was 
 probably either the youngest or the youngest but one of the 
 Brethren of the Lord, as he is mentioned last among them in Mt, 
 13'^ ol aBe\<f)ol avTov 'Iukw^o^ ical 'Iwtr^? Kal X^fitov ical 'loiJSas, 
 and last but one in Mk. 6* aheK<f>o^ Be 'Iukco^ov kuI 'latri] koi 
 lovBa Kal ^ifi(ovo<; ; (2) that the Brethren of the Lord (of course 
 exclusive of James, who remained stationary at Jerusalem) were 
 engaged in missionary journeys like St. Paul (1 Cor. 9^), but that 
 they differed from him in the fact that they were married and 
 were accompanied by their wives, and also, as we may suppose 
 from Gal. 2', Mt. 10^, that their ministrations were mainly 
 directed to the Jews. In my edition of James (p. cxv) I have 
 argued that his epistle was addressed to Jews of the eastern 
 Diaspora and it seems not improbable that Jude, writing many years 
 after his brother's death, may have wished to supply his place by 
 addressing to the same circle of readers the warnings which he 
 felt bound to utter under the perilous circumstances of the new 
 age. His cousin Symeon, the son of his uncle Clopas, had suc- 
 ceeded to the bishopric of Jerusalem (Eus. ff.H. iii. 22, iv. 22, 
 quoted in my edition of James pp. viii foil.), and is said to have 
 been crucified A.D. 107 at the age of 120 (cf. Hegesippus op. 
 Euseb. S.E. iii. 32 aTtb tovtiov t&v alperiiewv KaTriyopovci Ttve<; 
 %vfie&vo'; ... ft)? 8vTo<; diro Aa^iS xai X.pia-Tiavov . xal ovTa><; 
 /Maprvpei erav &v eKarov etxocnv irrl Tipalavov K.a{aapo<; Kal 
 virariKov 'Attikov). 
 
 Eusebius {S.U. iii. 19) quotes again from Hegesippus an 
 interesting story of the grandsons of Judas : tov S' avTov 
 Aofienavov toii? airb yevovi; Aa^lS avaipeiadai •rrpoard^avTO'i, 
 TraXato? Karexei Xoyo^ t&v alperiK&v Ttva^^ KaTrjjoprja-ai r&v 
 oLTToyovtov 'lovSa (rovrov Se elvai dSe\<pov Karh adpua tov trmrfj- 
 po^) (B9 diro •yivovs Tvyxavovrcov AafflS Kal m? avrov avyjiveiav 
 TOV Hipiarov <j>ep6vTa)v. TavTa Se BrfKol KaTa Xe^iv &Se ttco? 
 Xeyiov 6 'Hy^cmriro^. (20) eVi Se Trepirja-av ol dirb yevovg tov 
 K.vpiov vlcavol 'lovSa, rov kuto, trdpKa Xeyajxivov avTOv dBeX(j>ov, obi 
 eSrjXaTopeva-av ^ a><; e/e yivovq ovTai Aa^lS, tovtov; B' 6 'lovoKa- 
 TOi * rjyaye irpo<s AofieTiavov 'K.alaapa. i^o^eiTO yap ttjv irapov- 
 criav tov 'KptaTov to? Kal 'UpmSrji. Kal iirripcoTTja-ev aiiTovi el e/e 
 Aa^iB ela-f Kal mfioXoyrjaav. TOTe rjptoTiqaev avTov<s iroaai 
 
 1 Perhaps provoked by this epistle of their grandfather. 
 ' From delator. ' Evocatus. 
 
 I 2 
 
cxlviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 KTijaei<} eyavaLv fj iroacav ^prjfiaTeov Kvpievovaiv. oi Be enrov 
 a/Kfyorepoi ivveaKia-X^'''^ Srivdpia VTrdp)^eiv avTol<! /JLova, eKaa-Toa 
 avT&v avijKOVTO^ tov •qfiiaews. /cat raina ovk iv apyvpiot^ 
 e^acTKOv ex^iv, dW iv Stan/i^cret 7)}? -TrKe&pcov rpiaKovra evvia, 
 fiovoDV, ef S)v Koi Toiif (f>6pov^ d.va<j}epeiv koI avTov<; aiTovpyovvTa<{ 
 Siarpe^effd'ai- eiTa Se koX Tai xetpa^ Ta<s eavT&v iinBetKpvvai 
 fiapTvpiov Trji; avTovpyiaq, ttjv tov (T(o/j,aTO<; aKXrjpiav /cat Tovt 
 a/iro T^9 (Tvvexpv'i epyacria<; ivairoTwmdevra^ erri t5)v. loieov 
 Xstp&v Tv\ov<; trapiardvra'i. ipoarrjffevTai} Se -irepl tov 'KpiaTOv 
 Kal rrjis ^a(7i\eia<; avTov, oiroia rt? etV/ kuI ttotb Kal iroi <f)avr)cro- 
 fievr), Xoyov Bovvai ta? ov KO(rfiiKf] fiev oiiS' eVtyetov, iirovpaviov 
 8e KoX dyyeXiicr) Tvyxdvet, eirl a-vvTeXela tov al&vo<i yevqaofievrf, 
 oirrfvlKa iXdmv iv Bo^r) Kpivtl ^rnvTai koX veKpov<; Kal aTroBcoaei, 
 eKda-TO) KaTCb to, iTnTfjBev/MaTa avTov. i(j)' ol<! fiTfSev avT&v 
 KUTeyvcoKOTa tov AofieTiavov dXXd Kal ta? evTeXav KaTa<f>povr]- 
 cravTa iXevffepovi} fikv avToin; dveivai, KaTairavcrai Be Bta irpoa- 
 Tdy/j,aTo<; TOV KaTo, t'^? iKKXrja-ia<i Biwyfiov. tovi B^ d-iToXvdevTa<; 
 r]yt]<Taar6ai, (became bishops) Tmv iKKXrjiTi&v eo? av Bi} fidprvpai; 
 ofiov Kal dirb yevov^ ovTai tov K.vpiov, yevofiivrji; re etpTjj/j;? fteXpt 
 Tpa'iavov Trapafielvai avToiit too yS/p. 
 
 Mr. James Moffatt {historical N.T. p. 591) tries to use this 
 sjtory in support of the view that our epistle was written in the 
 second century. He says, ' As grandsons of Jude were alive in 
 Domitian's reign, the period of his own life would be far too early 
 to suit the evidence of the writing.' Domitian's reign extended 
 from 81 to 96 a.d. Jude, as we have seen, was apparently the 
 youngest of the Brethren of the Lord, probably bom not later 
 than 10 A.D., if we accept the date of 6 B.C. for the Nativity. 
 Taking into account the age at which marriage generally took 
 place in Judaea, we may suppose that he had sons before 3-5 A.D. 
 and grandsons by 60 A.D. These may have been brought before 
 Domitian in any year of his reign. Jude himself would thus have 
 been 71 in the first year of Domitian. If his letter was written 
 iti 80 A.D. (see la^t chapter, p. cxly) he would have been 70 years 
 of age, and his grandsons about 20. Any date after the death of 
 Jude and before the end of the reign of Domitian is possible 
 for the interview. 
 
 In my Introduction to St. James I have pointed out, that his 
 epistle bears marked traces of some characteristics which are 
 found in the Lord Himself. I propose to call attention here to 
 
THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE OF JUDE cxlix 
 
 some resemblances and differences between the epistles of thfe 
 two brothers. 
 
 A. (1) Among the former we may note the tone of undoubting and 
 unquestioned authority which pervades the two epistles, combined 
 with the personal humility of the writers. They do not arrogate to 
 themselves that relationship which constituted the ground of the 
 reverence with which they were regarded by their fellow-believers^ 
 They are simply servants of Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, to whoSe 
 coming, as the righteous Judge, they look forward, whose power 
 still manifests itself in works of mercy (James 1^, 2\ 5^' ^' ") ; of 
 Jesus Christ, who keeps His people safe to the end, through 
 whom they hope for eternal life, to deny whom is the climax of 
 impiety, in whom the Father is glorified for eyer (Jude ^' *' ^^' ^). 
 They are sharers of a common salvation (Jude ^), they need forgive- 
 ness of sin like other men (James 3^). 
 
 (2) Mental characteristics as exhibited in the two epistles. 
 
 In my edition of James (p. ccxxix) I have summed up the 
 more general qualities of his style in the words ' energy, 
 vivacity, and as conducive to both, vividness of represefltation, 
 meaning by the last that dislike of mere abstractions, that delight 
 in throwing everything into picturesque and dramatic forms, which 
 is so marked a feature in our Epistle.' To a certain extent this 
 is true also of Jude, as shown in his imaginative power and his 
 frequent use of figurative speech. Cf Jude v. 8, where the innovators 
 are spoken of as dreamers polluting the flesh ; v. 12, where they are 
 compared (1) to sunken rocks on which those who meet them at the 
 love-feasts run aground and perish, (2) to waterless clouds driven by 
 the wind, (3) to trees which have to be rooted up, because they bear 
 no fruit in the fruit-bearing season, (4) to wild waves foaming out 
 their own shame on the shore, (5) to falling stars which are 
 extinguished in everlasting gloom. In v. 20 the faithful are 
 bidden to build themselves up on their most holy faith ; in v. 23, 
 to save sinners, snatching them from the fire ; to hate the 
 garment spotted by the flesh. In regard to St. James I further 
 illustrated the quality of vividness by ' the frequent reference to 
 examples such as Abraham, Rahab, Job, Elijah.' In the same 
 way St. Jude gives animation to his warnings by reference to the 
 Israelites who perished in the wilderness for their unbelief after 
 being saved from Egypt ; to the fallen angels who are reserved 
 for the judgment in everlasting chains ; to Sodom and the neigh- 
 
cl INTRODUCTION 
 
 bouring cities, which sinned in the same way as the angels, and 
 now suflPer the penalty of eternal fire (vv. 5-7). Reverence for the 
 powers of the unseen world is commended by the pattern of the 
 archangel Michael, who, even in his dispute with the devil for 
 the body of Moses, refused to bring a railing accusation, but com- 
 mitted the case to God (vv. 8, 9). Cain and Balaam and Korah 
 are cited as the predecessors of the present disturbers of the Church 
 (v, 11). Enoch the 7th from Adam has left us his warning 
 against such men (vv. 14, 15). ' You have yourselves heard the 
 same warning from the Apostles ' (v. 17). 
 
 (3) For moral strictness and stern severity in rebuking sin, the 
 whole of this short epistle may be compared with such passages 
 as James 2^^, 3^^ 4^-5"- For noble and weighty expression we may 
 compare vv. 20, 21, vfieii Se, dyuTrriToi, iiroLKoSofiovvre's eavToim 
 ry dytcoTaTr) iifiSiv TrierTei, iv nrvevfiari, dyiq> "Trpoaevypfievoi, 
 iavToii^ iv dydirr] %eov rrfprjaare, irpoahe'xpij.evoi to ekeo<; tov 
 Kvpiov riiiwv 'liqaov Hpia-Tov el<s ^mrjv almviov and the final 
 doxology, with the passages which I have selected from St. James 
 in p. ccxxviii. The appealing w^airqToi, which is thrice found in 
 St. James, is also thrice repeated in Jude. The warning against 
 Respect of Persons is found in James 2^"^ and in Jude ^^ : 
 that against a murmuring discontented spirit in James 1^^, 4^ 5* 
 in Jude ^^' ^^ ; that against the misuse of the tongue in James 
 3^'^", in Jude ^® : the charge to labour for the salvation of others 
 in James 5^^"^*, in Jude '^'^^. For special details of style see 
 above, ch. ii. pp. xxvi foil.; but I may notice here the forcible 
 antithesis in v. 10, otra p,ev ovk oiSaaiv ^Xaa-^rjfjLova-iv, oa-a Se 
 ipvaiK&i! <B9 rd oKoya ^ma eirlaTavTai, iv tovtoiv <f)9eipovrai. 
 As regards vocabulary, the most striking resemblance is the 
 occurrence of ijrvy^^iKo^ as opposed to •yrvevp.aTiKOi, of which the 
 earliest biblical example is in James 3^^ but this had been adopted 
 by Paul (1 Cor. S^" foil.) before it was made use of by Jude. 
 
 £. (1) The differences between the two epistles are hardly less 
 marked : Jude evidently belongs to a much later period of Christian 
 development. James, as I have endeavoured to show in the 
 Introduction to his Epistle, wrote about the year 45 a.d. before any 
 of the other canonical books was in existence, and his theological 
 position is that of the early church described in the opening chapters 
 of the Acts. Jude is familiar with the writings of St. Paul. He 
 is familiar with the terms amrrip and acoTrjpia (vv. 3 and 25): 
 
THE AUTHOR OF THE EPISTLE OF JUDE cli 
 
 in w. 20, 21, quoted above, he brings together the three Persons of 
 the Trinity; he addresses those to whom he writes in Pauline 
 language as KXrfToi (v. 1) and ayioi {v. 3), and uses forms of 
 ascription and doxology closely resembling those which occur in 
 St. Peter and St. Paul. Their ' most holy faith ' is a ' tradition once 
 delivered to the saints' (w. 4, 20) : they are bidden to 'remember the 
 words of the Apostles, how they told them that in the last time there 
 should come scoffers ' (w. 17, 18). The error which he combats 
 appears to be a misgrowth of St. Paul's teaching in regard to 
 a salvation of free grace, ' not of works, lest any man should boast ' 
 (v. 4). Many of the features which he distinguishes are such as 
 we find delineated in St. Paul's farewell to the Ephesian Church, 
 and in some of his Epistles, especially those to Titus and 
 Timothy. 
 
 (2) Another difference might seem to be Jude's repeated 
 references to Pseudepigrapha such as the book of Enoch and 
 the Assumption of Moses (on which see the next chapter) and his 
 readiness to give credence to fanciful legends such as the fall 
 of the Watchers, and the contention for the body of Moses. 
 Credulity of this kind seems to be far apart from the strong 
 practical sense of James. Yet there are signs that the latter was 
 not unacquainted with rabbinical traditions. Spitta even goes so 
 far as to trace most of his teaching to pre-Christian sources. I 
 have argued against this view in ch. vii.^ of my Introduction to his 
 Epistle ; but my notes on 1^ (St'^wj^o?) and 4*' ® dyvlaare KapSiai; 
 Scy}rvy(pf raXanrcap^a-aTe, suggest a connexion with an apocryphal 
 writing quoted in Clem. Rom. i. 23 ^ ypaifiv a^rr], oirov \eyet 
 TaXaiTroopoi ela-iv oi St'i/ruj^ot^ and identified by Lightfoot and 
 Spitta with Mdad and Modad (on which see Herm. Vis. ii. 3), by 
 Hilgenfeld with the Assumption of Moses. The phrase in 4", 
 aT/til? yap iare irpb's oKlyov ipaivofievr], has been traced by some to 
 another apocryphal quotation found in Clem. i. 17 eyat Be el/ii drfui 
 airo Kv6pa<;, which Hilgenfeld also supposes to be taken from the 
 Assumption of Moses. The phrase Koa/xo^ dSiKiw} in James 3^ is 
 found in Enoch 48''. The Testaments of the Patriarchs, which also 
 contain quotations from Enoch (such as Sim. 5 edtpaica iv x'^P"'' 
 KTTJpi ypa^ri<! 'Evm^, Levi 10 ^ifiXo^ ^Eivmx tov SiKuiov, ib. 14, 
 eypfov dtro ypa(f>ri<; 'Evw;;^ oti iirl TeKei tttre/SiyixeTe, ib. 16, Juda 18, 
 
 ' The quotation, as given more fully in Clem. Rom.ii. 11, contains the somewhat 
 rare word ctKorairToo-ia, which is also used by James 3'°. 
 
clii INTRODUCTION 
 
 Beifij. 9, Zah. 3, NepM. 4, iv ypa4)^ cvylq, 'Eva>x ort . . . votijaete 
 Karh. irda-av avo/xiav XoBoficov), furnish several parallels quoted 
 in my note on James 4^ avriarrjTe rm Sia06\tp ical ^ev^erai d^' 
 {i/i&v. The words which immediately precede {iyyia-afe ra @e^ 
 KoX eyyla-et vfilv) are not unlike another quotation which occurs in 
 Herm, Vis. ii. 3 eyyixi 0e6s rots eiriarpe^onivoi,^, mv ykypainai iv 
 Tci) 'E\8aT KaX MwS^T rot? TrpoiprjTeva-aaip iv Ty ep'i^p.(p reS Xaw. 
 James has also been credited with a knowledge of the Sibylline 
 writings on the ground of the phrase lov davarTj^Spov which 
 occurs in 3* and also in Sib. Prooem, 71 
 
 etVl 0eol fiepoTTWv SijXjjTope?^ <[ovtoi> d0ov\a)v, 
 tS)v Si] KUK a-TOfiaTov ^(eirai Oavarri^opo^ loi. 
 
 But if there is borrowing, it is just as likely to be on the 
 other side. The strange expression rpoxo'i yeviaeats in 3* is 
 regarded as Orphic by some, but it seems to have been used by 
 the Orphic writers in a different sense, viz. that of the endless 
 changes of metempsychosis. 
 
 (3) Another difference which strikes one on reading the two 
 epistles is that while the former is full of instruction for the present 
 time, the bulk of the latter is made up of denunciations, which 
 have very much lost their force. To a modern reader it is 
 curious rather than edifying, with the exception of the beginning 
 and end (w. 1, 2 and 20-25). This is no doubt to be explained by 
 what is stated of the purport of the letter in v, '6. It was called 
 out by a sudden emergency, to guard against an immediate 
 pressing danger, and was substituted for a treatise irepl Tfi<; koivtj^ 
 a-taT7ipia<i which Jude had hoped to send (v. 3), and which would 
 probably have been more in the tone and spirit of w. 20 f. 
 
 ^ MS. ZoKoyyropes, GefTcken reads i6\tp TtyriTTipes. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 Use of Apocryphal Bqoks by Jude 
 
 Clement of Alexandria in his Adumbrationes (Dind. vol. iii. 
 p. 483), after quoting Jude v. 9, ' Quando Michael archangelus cum 
 diabolo disputans altercabatur de corpore Moysis,' remarks ' hie 
 confirmat Assumptionem Moysis,' i.e. here the writer corroborates 
 the Assumption of Moses ; and again, in commenting on v. 14, 
 'Prophetavit autem de his Septimus ab Adam Enoch,' he. adds 
 ' His verbis prophetam (al. prophetiam) comprobat.' 
 
 The Hebrew original of the book of Enoch ^ is now lost. It 
 was translated into Greek, of which only a few fragments remain, 
 and this was again translated into Ethiopic, probably about 
 600 A.D. A copy of the last was found in Abyssinia in 1773 by 
 Bruce, the famous traveller, and an English version was published 
 by Abp. Laurence in 1821, followed by the Ethiopic text in 1838. 
 The composite nature of the book is generally recognized. The 
 latest editor, R. H. Charles, who is my authority for what follows, 
 divides it into five sections and recognizes many interpolations in 
 these. He considers that the larger portion of the book was 
 written not later than 160 B.C., and that no part is more recent 
 than the Christian era. It exercised an important influence on 
 Jewish and Christian literature during the first three centuries 
 A.D., being probably used by the author of the Assumption of 
 Moses (written about the Christian era), also by the writers of the 
 JBook of Jubilees, the Apocalypse of Baruch, the FouHh Book of Ezra, 
 and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. Mr. Charles traces its 
 influence in the N.T. not merely in the epistles of St. Jude and 
 the two epistles of St. Peter, but above all, in the Apocalypse ; 
 
 ' On which see Schiirer, Hist, of Jewish People, vol. iii. pp. 54-73. 
 
cliv INTRODUCTION 
 
 also in the Acts, and the epistle to the Hebrews, in some of the 
 epistles of St. Paul, and in the Gospels. It is quoted three times 
 (twice as Scripture) in the JEpistle of Barnabas, is referred to, 
 though not named, in Justin and Athenagoras, is cited by 
 Irenaeus iv. 16. 2 : ' Enoch . , . cum esset homo, legatione ad angelos 
 fungebatur et translatus est et conservatur usque nunc testis 
 judicii Dei, quoniam angeli quidam deciderunt in terram in judi- 
 cium ' (En. 14^). Tertullian quotes it as Scripture, calling Enoch 
 the oldest of the prophets {Idol, xv, Apol. xxii). He allows that 
 its canonicity was denied by some, ' quia nee in armarium 
 Judaicum admittitur,' and also because it was thought that, if it 
 were a genuine writing of Enoch, it must have perished ift the 
 Deluge. He considers however that it should be received, 
 because of its witness to Christ, and because it has the testimony 
 of the Apostle Jude. It is twice quoted in Clement's Ed. Proph. 
 (Dind. iii. pp. 456, 474) as well as in Strom, iii. 9. Origen speaks 
 doubtfully of the authority of Enoch : cf. G. Celsum v. 54, iv ralii 
 iKK\7)<Tiai,<i ov irdvv <f)6peTai, d)<} 6ela to, eTri/yeypafifieva tov 
 'Ei/oj;^ ^t^la, and In Johanrtem vi. 25, <b? ev t£ '^vod'x^ f^eypairrai,, 
 ei TO) tf>i\ov ■TrapaMj(e(rdai w? ar/iov to ^L0\iov, also In Num. Horn. 
 xxviii. 2, Be Princ. i. 3. 3. Hilary {Gomm. in Psalm, cxxxii. 3) 
 writes: 'Fertur id, de quo etiam nescio cuius liber extat, quod 
 angeli concupiscentes filias hominum cum de caelo descenderent 
 in montem Hermon convenerant.' Jerome says that the doubts 
 entertained as to the epistle of St. Jude arose from his quoting an 
 apocr3^hal book as an authority {De Vir. III. iv), ' quia de libro 
 Enoch, qui apocryphus est, in ea assumit testimonia a plerisque 
 reicitur.' Cf also Gomm. in Ps. cxxxii. 3 and Gomm. in Titum, 
 i. 12. Augustine (Giv. Dei, xv. 23. 4) and Chrysostom {Hom. in 
 Gen. vi. 1) speak of the story of the angels and the daughters of 
 men as a baseless fable. Still more severe is the condemnation 
 passed on the book of Enoch with other apocryphal writings in 
 Const, Apost. vi. 16. 2 as ^dopoiroia koL t^? ci\rj0elai i'^^dpd. 
 
 Mr. Charles has also edited the Assumption of Moses (1897), 
 which he regards as a composite work made up of two distinct 
 books, the Testament and the Assumption of Moses.^ ' The former 
 was written in Hebrew between 7 and 29 A.D., and possibly also 
 the latter. A Greek version of the entire work appeared in the 
 
 1 Cf. Schilrer, pp. 73-83. 
 
USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS BY JUDE civ 
 
 first century A.D. Of this only a few fragments have been preserved. 
 The Greek version was translated into Latin not later than the 
 fifth century' (pp. xiii, xiv). 'The book preserved in the in- 
 complete Latin version, first published by Ceriani in 1861, is in 
 reality a Testament and not an Assumption.' ' The editing of the 
 two books in one was probably done in the first century, as St. Jude 
 draws upon both in his epistle' (pp. xlvii and 1). Thus Jude 
 i!. 9 ^ is derived from the Assumption, Jude v. 16 from the Testament 
 (p. Ixii). On the latter Charles compares ovroi ela-i yoyyva-Tai, 
 fie/x-^i/ioipoi, Kal TO aTOfia avrmv XaXel virepoyKa, davfid^ovreii 
 irpoamira m^eXia'i -)(^dpiv with Asc. M. vii. 7 quaerulosi, vii. 9 et 
 manus eorum et mentes immunda tractantes et os eorum loqueiur 
 ingentia, v. 5 erunt illis temporibus mirantes personae . . . et 
 accipientes munera (MS. acceptiones munerum). He identifies the 
 i/MiraiKTai of Jude v. 18 with the homines pestilentiosi of Ass. M. 
 vii. 3, and calls attention to the frequent recurrence of the word 
 aa-e^eh in the former (vv. 4, 15, 18) and impii in the latter : see 
 vi. 1 facient facientes impietatem, vii. 3 pestilentiosi et impii, *6. 7, 
 ix. 3, xi. 17. 
 
 Again there appears to be a reminiscence of the Testaments 
 of the Patriarchs, where the sin of the Watchers is connected 
 with that of Sodom : cf. Test. Nepht. 3, riXioii xal (reXrjvrj 
 Kai acTTepe^ ovk dXXoiov(7i ttjv rd^iv ainwv . . . edprj "rrXa- 
 vrjOivTU Kal d<pevTa Kvpiov fjXKoitaaav rd^iv avT&v . . . 
 i^aKoXovBrjaavTet irvevfiaa-i irXdvrj^. 'T/.tet? firj owtw? . . . iva 
 fj.i) yevrja-ffe «? ZiSSofia, ^Tt? ivtjXXa^ev rd^iv (ftvaeayi; avTrj^. 
 0/j,oia)<s Kal 'Eyp^yopei iv^XXa^av rd^iv <j}V(7€ca<; avr&v, 
 ou? KarijpderaTO Kv/otos ivl tov KaraxXva-fiov, Test. Aser. 7 /ii) 
 yiveaOe eo? "Itohofia i]n<; rjyvorjae rov<: dyyeXov<} Kvplov K.al 
 aTTtoXero eo)? almvo^. There seems to be more than a casual 
 coincidence between these passages and Jude 6, 7, and 13, dyyi- 
 Xovg Tous fi'^ T7]pi]a-avTa<s Trjv eavr&v dp-)(r]V , ... «? %6So/j,a . . . 
 
 1 See n. on this, and add to the illustrative passages there quoted a scholium 
 printed for the first time in James' Test, of Abraham, p. 18 : li SidPoKos avTetx^" 
 de\ap &Trarrjffat, Keytov Sri ''E,^6v itrrtv rb ffufia, as rijs S\7]s SetTiT6^Q)V' Kal ^Kovffev rh 
 'KniTifi'titTai ffot Kipios, To{iT€aTtp d Kipios 6 iravTW Tuif irvevfidTav Beffn6Ctav &.\\ot 
 Se, '6Tt &ov\6tievos 6 &ehs Sei^ai '6ti fieri t^v evdevSe SLvaWayijv, rais ij/ieTepais tj/vxcus 
 avOiffrdfievoi <^tTav> Saifioves nopevofievais rijv iirl ret &vq} iropelav, rovro oZp 
 iTwext^pV^^v dpaffOai iirl ttjs Maffeus raiprjs' i^Aaatpiifiet yhp koX b Sid0o\os Karcfc 
 Kwffeus, (povea tovtov KaK&v 8ti ri iraTc£|ai rbv Aiy&TCTiov 6 VIixaij\ & apxdyye\Qs, 
 fiil iveyK^v rijv avTov ^Kaff^iitilav, eXpTjKev ai>T^ bri 'EiriTifi'f]aat ffoi Kiptos 5 &€6s, 
 Sid^oKe. i\eye Se Kal tovto, '6rL etj/siffaTO 6 @ehs slffayay&iv rhv M(etTT}v ivQa &fxoffev 
 aijThv fx^ GitreKBeii'. 
 
elvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 TOP Ofioiov rpotrov iKTiopvevaaaai ical aireXdovaai, oiria-o} aapico<; 
 erepa^ irpoicetvTai Seiyfia wpof alwvidv . . . aa-repei; ifKavrirai. 
 
 We have seen how this use of apocryphal books was viewed by 
 the early Christian writers. They were at first disposed to think 
 that a book stamped with the approval of St, Jude must be itself 
 inspired. Later on, the feeling changed : the authority of St. Jude 
 was no longer sufficient to save the apocryphal writing : on the con- 
 trary the prejudice against the Apocrypha and its ' blasphemous 
 fables ' (Chrys. Horn. 22 in Gen.) led many to doubt the authority 
 of St. Jude : see above quotation from Jerome, who argues that 
 the approval of the Apostle need not be supposed to extend to 
 the whole of the book of Enoch, but only to the verses quoted 
 by him. So Augustine {Civ. Dei, xv. 23, 4) : ' Scripsisse quidem 
 nonnulla divina Enoch ilium septimum ab Adam iiegare non 
 possumus, cum hoc in epistola canonica Judas apostolus dicat' 
 (although the book as a whole has been justly excluded from the 
 Canon). 
 
 Some modern writers have endeavoured to avoid the necessity 
 of allowing that an apocryphal writing is quoted as authoritative 
 in the Bible, by the supposition that the words quoted may have 
 come down by tradition and have been made use of by the in- 
 spired writer, independently of the book from which he is sup- 
 posed to quote, or that they were uttered by immediate inspiration 
 without any human assistance, or again, that the book of Enoch 
 may be subsequent to that of Jude, and have borrowed from it. 
 But the careful investigation of many scholars, as summed up by 
 Charles, can leave little doubt in any candid mind as to the 
 proximate dates, both of Enoch and of the Assumption. St. Jude 
 does not put forward his account of the burial of Moses or the 
 preaching of Enoch, as though it were something unheard of before. 
 As regards the libertines described in the latter book, he uses the 
 phrase irpo'^eripaii.p.kvoi,, implying that he refers to a written 
 prophecy. None of the early Fathers find a difficulty in suppos- 
 ing him to refer to a book which was not included in the Canon. 
 Jews of that time were accustomed to accept rabbinical explana- 
 tions or additions to Scripture as having authority. Thus St. Paul 
 accepts the story of the Kock which followed the Israelites in 
 their wanderings (1 Cor. 10*), gives the names of the magicians 
 who withstood Moses before Pharaoh (2 Tim. 3*), recognizes the 
 instrumentality of angels in the giving of the Law (Gal. 3^', cf. 
 
USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS BY JUDE clvii 
 
 Heb. 2^, Acts 7^*). So, too, Stephen speaks of Moses as learned in 
 all the wisdom of the Egyptians (Acts 7'^^), the author of the ep. to the 
 Hebrews (11^^) alludes to the tradition as to the death of Isaiah 
 (see Charles' Ascension of Isaiah, pp. xlv foil.), and James (5^^) 
 limits the drought predicted by Elijah to 3^ years. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 The Stobt of the Fallen Angels 
 
 St. Jude (m. 5-8) introduoes as examples of the divine wrath 
 against those who had sinned after receiving favours from God (1) 
 the Israelites who perished in the wilderness for unbelief after 
 they had been saved from Egypt ; (2) the angels who abandoned 
 their original office and habitation, being led away by fleshly lusts, 
 and are now kept in chains under darkness till the day of judg- 
 ment; (3) the people of Sodom, who inhabited a land like the 
 garden of the Lord (Gen. 13^") and were rescued from Chedorlaomer 
 by Abraham (Gen. 14^^' ^^), and yet sinned after the fashion 
 of the angels, and are now a warning to all, suflfering the punish- 
 ment of eternal fire. A similar account is given in 2 Pet. 2**, 
 where it is said (1) that God spared not the angels who sinned, 
 but hurled them into Tartarus, to be detained there in pits of 
 darkness until the final judgment ; (2) that He brought a flood on 
 the world of the ungodly, while he spared Noah ; (3) that He 
 destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, while he delivered righteous Lot ; 
 in all three cases punishing impurity and rebellion. 
 
 As is shown in the explanatory notes, this account of the Fall 
 of the Angels is taken directly from the book of Enoch, which is 
 itself an expansion from Jewish and Gentile sources of the strange 
 narrative contained in Gen. 6^* : ' It came to pass, when men 
 began to multiply on the face of the ground and daughters were 
 bom unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men 
 that they were fair ; and they took them wives of all that they 
 chose. . . The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also 
 after that, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of 
 men, and they bare children unto them : the same were the mighty 
 men which were of old, the men of renown ' (R.V.). iyevero fjvUa 
 
THE STORY OF THE FALLEN ANGELS clix 
 
 Tjp^avTO 01 avBptoTTOL TToWoi yivecrOai iirl ti}? yfji; koI Ovyarepe^ 
 eyevvriOvja-av aiiTol^, Ihovre^ Se ol ayyeXoi tov @eov rai: Ovyarepa^ 
 TMv avdpwirfov on KaXaX elcrlv eXaBov eavToi<; yvvalicat; airo 
 traaSiv mv e^eXe^avTo . . . oi Se yiyavTe<s fjaav iirX t^? 7?}? ei* rat? 
 ■^fLepai<s e/reiWt?, kol fier iicelvo, w? &v eiaeiropevovTO ol viol tov 
 ®€ov TTpo? ra<; dvyaTepat r&v avOpdairoav Koi iyevvaxrav eavTol<s, 
 eKtlvoi rjtj-av 01 yiyavre<! 01 air aimvot, ol, avdptoiTOi ol dvo/naaroi 
 (LXX.). That the version ayyeXoi gives the true force of the original 
 is evident from the other passages in which the phrase ' sons of God ' 
 occurs, Job 1«, 2\ 38', Dan, B^-^, Ps. 29\ 89«. It has been suggested 
 that the phrase fier eKelvo may be a marginal note having 
 reference to Num. 13^, where the Nephilim are mentioned as a 
 gigantic race, 'in whose eyes the spies were as grasshoppers,' 
 inhabiting a part of Canaan at the time of the Exodus. The 
 translation yiyavre^ implies not only stiperhuman size, but also 
 superhuman insolence and impiety. According to Greek mytho- 
 logy they were children of Heaven and Earth, who rose up in 
 insurrection against the Gods and were hurled down to Tartarus 
 or buried beneath the mountains. This resemblance is noted by 
 Josephus in the passage quoted below. 
 
 It is evident that the passage in Gen. 6 is a fragment uncon- 
 nected either with what precedes or follows. Driver says of it : 
 ' We must see in it an ancient Hebrew legend . . . the intention 
 of which was to account for the origin of a supposed race of pre- 
 historic giants, of whom no doubt (for they were " men of name ") 
 Hebrew folk-lore told much more than the compiler of Genesis 
 has deemed worthy of preservation.' Ryle {Early Narratives of 
 Genesis, pp. 91-95) speaks of it as ' an extract from a very early 
 legend which gives an alternative explanation of the Fall, in which 
 woman is again tempted by one of higher race.' 
 
 The story was variously commented on by later Jewish writers, 
 most of whom supposed that the Nephilim were the offspring of 
 ihe intercourse between the angels and the daughters of men, and 
 that they were destroyed in the Flood : cf. Sir. 16' ovk i^iXda-aro 
 irepX T&v ap'Xaioav yiydvT(ov o'i diriarrjaav (? eTrlarevaav) ry lo'')(i>i 
 avT&v, Wisdom, 14^ aTroXXvfiivoiv virepri^dvmv ytydvTtov, r] e\7ris 
 TOV Koa-fiov eirl ffj^eSt'a? KaTatpvyovaa direXivev al&vi cnrep/ia 
 yevea-eax; Ty ay icv/3epvr)6elcra ^etpt, 3. Mace. 2* crif tovi; efiirpoadev 
 dSiKiav voiijaavTui;, ev oZs xal ylyavTe<; ^crav pwfiy xal dpacrei 
 TreTTOt^ores, Biitf)6eipa<;, iirayayav aiiToii; dfieTpr/Tov vBmp, Baruch 
 
clx INTRODUCTION 
 
 326-28^ Josephus Ant. 1. 3. 1 , nroWol ykp ayyeKoi @eov yvvai^l ffvviSv- 
 T6? v0pi(rTa<i iyivvrjaap TratSa? ical 'iravro<i vvepoTrrat koXov Sict, 
 Ttjv sttI Ty Svvdfiei, treiroiOrfavv. ofioia rots inro yiywinwv reroXp,^- 
 (r0ai Xeyofievoii vcj) 'EWijvav ical oiroL Spa<raL -jrapaSlSovrai,. 
 Philo ( Vit. Cont. p. 472) ridicules the idea of augels being open 
 to such temptation, f^v ToX/j.&triv ovk evayS>9 "Trpoadirreiv ral^ 
 fiaKaplaii; koX 0eiaif Svvd/ieiriv, el yvvai^l 0vr]rat<; iirifuivivreii 
 Q)fi(\rfa-av ol iravro^ vddov<i dp.iro')(pi,. A knowledge of the sin 
 of the angels seems to be implied in Job 4^, ' Behold he put no 
 trust in his servants and his angels he charged with folly/ and also 
 in the story of Sarah and Asmodeus (Tobit 6^* etc.). TertuUian 
 {Be Virg. Vel. 7) explains St, Paul's injunction (1 Cor. ll^*) by 
 reference to the same history ' propter angelos, scilicet quos legimus 
 a Deo et caelo excidisse ob concupiscentiam feminarum.' 
 
 The Fall of the Angels is largely treated of in the collection of 
 treatises which goes under the name of the Book of Enoch. The 
 earliest portion of the book is considered by the latest editor, Mr. 
 R. H. Charles, to have been written in the first quarter of the 
 second century B.C. Two hundred of the angels, or watchers, 
 'Eypijyopoi, as they are called in the Greek versions of Dan. 5^ by 
 Aquila and Symmachus, conspired together under the leader- 
 ship of Semjaza (elsewhere called Azazel, as in chapters 8 and 9) 
 and descended on Mt. Hermon in the days of Jared, father of 
 Enoch (c. 6). There they took to themselves human wives 
 whom they instructed in magic and various arts, and begot giants, 
 who afterwards begot the Nephilim : cf. c. 8 ol Be ylyavrei ireKvo)- 
 <rav 'Na(f>7}\e£fi . . . fiera Se ravra rjp^avTo ol ylyavTet KaTetrdieiv 
 rat irdpKa<s Ta<! dvBptoirwv (like Polyphemus). Complaint having 
 been made of the sin and misery thus introduced into the world, 
 Raphael is sent down from heaven to bind Azazel hand and foot 
 and shut him up in darkness till the judgment day, when he will 
 be cast into eternal fire. Gabriel is at the same time sent to slay 
 the giants (10*) : the watchers will be bound under the hills for 
 seventy generations, and then be confined for ever in the abyss of 
 fire : the spirits of the slain giants become demons. In c. 19, 
 however, the demons are represented as existing before the fall of 
 the watchers. 
 
 The prevailing demonology of the Book of Enoch is thus 
 summed up by Dr. Charles (JEnoch, p. 52). The angelic watchers 
 who fell from lusting after the daughters of men have been 
 
THE STORY OF THE FALLEN ANGELS clxi 
 
 imprisoned in darkness froin the time of their fall. The demons 
 are the spirits which proceeded from the souls of the giants who 
 were their offspring. They work moral ruin on earth without 
 hindrance till the final judgment. Satan is the ruler of a counter 
 kingdom of evil. He led astray the angels and made them his 
 subjects. He also tempted Eve. The Satans can still appear in 
 heaven (as in Job). They tempt to evil, they accuse the fallen, 
 they punish the condemned. In portions however of the Book of 
 Enoch there is no mention of a Satan or Satans, but the angels 
 are led astray by their own chief Azazel, or as he is sometimes 
 called Semjaza (En. ix. x. xiii. liv.). Of the Secrets of Enoch, 
 which is supposed to date from about the Christian era. Dr. Charles 
 says:^ ' It is hard to get a consistent view of the demonology of the 
 book : it seems to be as follows : Satan, one of the archangels, 
 seduced the watchers of the fifth heaven into revolt in order to 
 establish a counter kingdom to God. Therefore Satan or the 
 Satans were cast down from heaven and given the air for their 
 habitation. Some however of the Satans or Watchers went down 
 to earth and married the daughters of men.' Compare ch. xviii. 3. 
 ' These are the Grigori, who with their prince Satanail rejected 
 the holy Lord, and in consequence of these things they are kept 
 in great darkness.' 
 
 In c. 54 there appears to be an attempt to connect the two 
 different stories of the Fall : the guilt of the Watchers is said to 
 have consisted in their becoming subject to Satan, who was either 
 identified with the Serpent, as in Apoc. 12* koI i^Xrjdrj 6 Spaxcov 6 
 fj-eja^, 6 0(f)i,<s 6 apyaio<;, 6 KaKovfievoi; Aia^SoXo; koI o '%aTava<;, 
 6 ifkavwv TTjv olKov/iavrjv oXtjv — e^XrjOrj eh Tr]v yfjv, Kal ol ayyeXoi. 
 avTov iJ-eT avrov i^X^Orjaav ; or else was supposed to have made 
 use of the Serpent as his instrument, as in the Asmimjption of Moses 
 quoted by Orig. De Prin^ip. iii. 2. 1 (Lomm. vol. xxi. p. 303) : ' In 
 Genesi serpens Evam seduxisse describitur, de quo in Ase. Mosis, 
 cujus libelli meminit apostolus Judas, Michael Archangelus cum 
 diabolo disputans de corpore Mosis ait a diabolo inspiratum serpen- 
 tem causam exstitisse praevaricationis Adae et Evae.' ^ 
 
 The history of the gradual development of the belief in 
 regard to Satan, as exhibited in the Bible, will be found 
 in any of the Dictionaries of the Bible. Besides the attempt 
 
 ' See his note on pp. 36, 37. 
 
 " Cf . Tennant, The Fall and Original Sin, pp. 245, 246. 
 
clxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 to harmonize the two Fall-stories by making Satan the 
 cause of both, an attempt was made to anive at the same 
 result by ascribing to Satan or the Serpent the same motive 
 which led to the fall of the angels. In Wisdom 2^* we read 
 ' By the envy of the devil death entered into the world.' This 
 envy is explained in rabbinical writings sometimes as occa- 
 sioned by the dignity of Adam and his lordship over the creation, 
 but more frequently by Satan's desire for Eve : ^ cf. 4 Mace. 18* ovSe 
 eXvfji-qvaTO fiov ra dyva t^? TrapOeviaf Xvfieoav dTrdTrji; 6t^i^. 
 Sometimes again his fall is ascribed to the less ignoble motive of 
 pride, as in the pseudepigraphic Life of Adam : ' When God created 
 Adam, He called upon the angels to adore him as His image . . . 
 Satan however refused, and on being threatened with the 
 wrath of God said that he would exalt his throne above the stars 
 of heaven' (Isa. 14^^). In other writings {Life of Adam, Secrets of 
 Enoch) Satan refuses to worship God Himself, ' entertaining the 
 impossible idea that he should make his throne higher than the 
 clouds over the earth, and should be equal in rank to [God's] 
 power.' ^ 
 
 There can be little doubt that the story of the punishment of 
 the angels took its colouring from two passages of Isaiah, the fine 
 imaginative description of the mighty king of Babylon, under the 
 figure of the morning star, entering the realm of Hades (ch. 14) 
 and what appears to be an account of the punishment of guardian 
 angels for their neglect of the nations committed to their charge 
 (ch. 24^"), ' It shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord 
 shall punish the host of the high ones on high, and the kings of 
 the earth upon the eai'th. And they shall be gathered together 
 as prisoners are gathered in the pit, and shall be shut up in the 
 prison and after many days shall they be visited.' 
 
 St. Jude's allusion to this story is merely parenthetical, to illus- 
 trate the law of judgment. He appears not to recognize any 
 connexion between the Fallen Angels and Satan. The former are 
 suffering imprisonment in darkness till the final judgment : the 
 latter was apparently able to confront the archangel on equal 
 
 ^ See Tennant, pp. 152 foil. ; Thackeray, St. Paid and Jewish Thought, 
 pp. 50 foil. ; Edersheim, Life and Times of Jems, i. p. 165, ii. 753 foil. In the 
 latter passage the rabbis are quoted to the effect that the angels generally were 
 opposed to the creation of man, and that the demons were the offspring of Eve 
 and male spirits, and Adam and female spirits, especially Lilith. 
 
 2 See Tennant, pp. 199, 201, 206». 
 
THE STORY OF THE FALLEN ANGELS clxiii 
 
 terms, wlien contending for the body of Moses. So the continued 
 activity and even the authority of Satan and his angels in this 
 world are asserted both in the O.T., as in Job 1® and Zech. 3^' ^, and 
 in the N.T., as in James 4^^, 1 P. 5*, Eph. ^' ^^' ^^ (we have to stand 
 against the wiles of the devil, . . . our warfare is not against flesh 
 and blood, but) irpo? to? ap-yaii, irpo^ ra? i^ova-ia<s, Trpo? tou? 
 Koa-fioKparopaii tov aKorovi tov al5>vo<; tovtov, irpo<s ra irvev- 
 fiaTiKo, TTJi; irovr)pia<i iv rot? iirovpavlofi, see Lightfoot on Col. 2^^. 
 In 2 Cor. 4* Satan is spoken of as the god, in John 12*^ and 16^^ 
 as the prince of this world. He is the tempter and accuser of the 
 brethren, and did not shrink even from assailing the Son of God 
 Himself (Mt. 4*). 
 
 The above account of the Fall of the Angels was that \isually 
 accepted, with slight variations, both among Jews and Christians 
 till towards the close of the fourth century A.D. It is alluded to 
 in Test. Nepht. iii. ol '^ypi^yope^ ivijWa^av rd^iv ^vaeax: avruv, 
 o6? KaTtfpdaaTo Kupto? evX tov KaTaxXva-fiov, and with a rational- 
 istic explanation in Test. JSuh. v. where the watchers are said to 
 have been seduced by women, ovreo yap eOeK^av tou? 'Eiypr]y6pov<f 
 •jrpb TOV KaraKXva-fiov' Kaxeivoi <rwexoi>'i opmvre^ avra^ iyevovro 
 iv eTTiffufiia dWijXeav Kal avviKa^ov rfj hiavoia rr/v Trpd^tv Kal 
 /j,eTeaXVf''''''''^?''V''' ^'5 dvdpmirovi xal ev ry crvvova-ia rmv avhp&v 
 avT&v <rvve<jiacvovTO avTai<s, Kaxelvai eiriBvfiova'ai ttj Siavoia t^? 
 <f)avTaaiag avT&v erexov yiyavra<;. So Justin M. Apol. i. 5, ra 
 iraXaiov Saifiove^ (f>av\oi iTn<f}aveia'i iroirja-dfievoi Kal yvvaiKWi 
 i/iot')^evaav koI iralBa^ Sii(f}0€ipav Kal ^o^Tjrpa avOpcoiroi^ eSei^av, 
 CO? Kara'TrXayrivai Toii<i o", . . . fiv i-maTdfievoi Baifiova^ eivai 
 (f>avXov<;, 0€ov<! irpoa-wvofui^ov, Apol. ii. 5, oi B' ayyeXoi, irapa^dvTet 
 TrjvBe Ttjv rd^LV, yvvaiKOiv fii^ecriv iJTTi^dria-av Kal TratSaij- 
 eTeKvaxrcuv, o'i elcnv ol Xeyofievou haifiove<;, Heracleon ap. Orig. 
 (in Joh. torn. 13, Lomni. vol. ii. p. 125) ^ijTelaffai <}>r]a-i irepi riveov 
 dyyeKoov, el awdrlaovTai,, t&v KaTeX6ovT(ov ewi rai rmv dvBpmircav 
 ffvyarepai;, Tert. Apol. 22, Be Virg. Vel. 7, Be Cultu Fern. 2 (where 
 he defends the authenticity of our Epistle), ib. 10, Iren. iv. 36. 4,. 
 Clem. Al. Paed. iii. p. 260, Seiy/id troi tovtcov ol dyyeXoi, rov @eov rb 
 KdXXo<; a7roXe\oi7roT6? Sia KdXXo<i fiapatvofievov, Kal roaovrov e^ 
 ovpav&v diroirea-6vre<s 'x^afiai, ib.Tp. 280, Strom, iii. p. 538, Str. v. 650, 
 ol dyyeXoi eKelvoi, ol tov ava> KXrjpov 6t\'»j;)^0Tes KaToXiadij(ravT£<; 
 el<s 'qSovd'!, e^eiTTov to, dvoppriTa rat? yvvai^lv k.t.X. Celsus- 
 having made use of the story in his attack on the Christians^ 
 
 m 2 
 
clxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 Origen in his reply (v. 54) states that the Book of Enoch was not 
 regarded as authoritative in the Church, and quotes Philo's explana- 
 tion of Gen. 6 to the effect that it gives an allegorical account of 
 the fall of the soul through temptations of sense : he does not 
 however pronounce any definite opinion of his own. In his 
 comment on Joh. 6^^ he seems to accept the ordinary view in 
 the words ov fiovov Se 6 av0pa>iro<{ e^eirea-ev iic reXeiov i-Trl to 
 areKe^, aWa xal ISovTei ol viol tov ®eov ra? ffvyarepai} t&v 
 avBpfOTTCov K.r.X. 
 
 His contemporary Julius Africanus is said to be the only one of 
 the ante-Nicene Fathers who enunciated the view which after- 
 wards prevailed, viz. that ' the sons of God were the descendants 
 of Seth,and the daughters of men descendants of Cain.' ^ See the 
 quotation in Routh, Bel. Sacr. ii. p. 241, where he also gives the 
 alternative explanation el Sk iir' ctryyiXav vooiro tovto, toix; irepX 
 fiayeiaii Koi yor]Tela<s . . . e<T')(p\aKOTa'i trvviivai '^(prj t&v /lerecopeov 
 Tai<s yvvat^l ttjv yvasaiv SeBeoKevat. Eusebius (Pr. Ilv.\. 4. 11, 12) 
 still keeps to the old view and compai'es the narrative of Gen. 6 to 
 the stories of the Titans and giants of Greek mythology. So 
 Lactantius, Div. Inst. ii. 14: 'Deus ne fraudibus suis diabolus, cui 
 ab initio terrae dederat potestatem, vel corrumperet vel disper- 
 deret homines, quod in exordio rerum fecerat, misit angelos ad 
 tutelam cultumque generis humani . . . Itaque illos cum homini- 
 bus commorantes dominator ille terrae fallacissimus consuetudine 
 ipsa pauUatim ad vitia pellexit et mulierum congressibus inqui- 
 Bavit ... sic eos diabolus ex angelis Dei suos fecit satellites,' etc. 
 So Sulpicius Severus (Ghron. i. 2) : 'Angeli quibus caelum sedes 
 ■erat, speciosarum forma virginum capti . . . naturae suae originis- 
 •que degeneres . . . matrimoniis se mortalibus miscuerunt.' Juhan, 
 like Celsus, used this belief as a ground for attacking Christianity. 
 Cyril of Alexandria, in his reply (ix. p. 296) repudiates the behef 
 as altogether unworthy, and injurious to morality, since men plead 
 the angels' sin as excuse for their own, and adopts the intei-pre- 
 sation of ' sons of God ' previously given by Africanus. Chryso- 
 «tom deals at length with the subject in his 22nd homily 
 on Genesis. He calls the old interpretation blasphemous, and 
 holds that it is precluded by the words of Christ, that 'in the 
 
 1 It is also found in the apocryphal Conflict of Adam and Eve of uncertain 
 date, on which see the art. ' Adam, Books of,' in the D. of Chriat. Biog. i. 
 36 foil. 
 
THE STORY OF THE FALLEN ANGELS olxv 
 
 resurrection men shall be like angels, neither marrying nor 
 given in marriage.' Augustine {Civ. Dei, xv. 23) thinks it cannot 
 be denied ' Silvanos et Faunos, quos vulgo incubos vocant . . . 
 mulierum appetisse ac peregisse concubitum . . . Dei tamen 
 angelos sanctos nuUo modo sic labi potuisse crediderim, sed potius 
 de illis qui primum apostatantes a Deo cum diabolo principe suo 
 ceciderunt,' unless we are rather to understand this of the child- 
 ren of Seth. A little later Philastrius {Haer. 107) goes so far as 
 to condemn the old opinion as a heresy. 
 
 The sympathies of Christians in the present day must assuredly 
 be with those who endeavoured to eliminate from the Scriptures 
 all that might seem to be dishonouring to God and injurious to 
 men. But the methods employed with this view were often such 
 as we could not now accept. For instance, the allegorical method 
 borrowed from the Stoics by Philo, and adopted from him by many 
 of the Fathers, is too subjective and arbitrary to be of any value 
 in getting rid of moral difficulties. We have replaced this now 
 by the historical method, first enunciated by our Lord, when he 
 contrasted the spirit of the Gospel with that of the old Dispensa- 
 tion.^ There is a continuous growth in the ideal of conduct as set 
 before us in the Bible. Much that was commanded or permitted 
 in the days of Abraham or Moses or David is forbidden to those 
 who have received the fuller light of Christianity. So, what it 
 was found possible for men to believe about God Himself and 
 about the holy angels, is impossible for us now.^ The words put 
 into the mouth of God in Gen. 3^^ and in ll^-'^, we feel to be 
 inconsistent with any true idea of the power and wisdom and love 
 of God, and only suitable to a very low state of human development. 
 
 1 Cf. Mt. 5^'-*', 19^, Lk. 9^*-". In the last passage the reading supported by 
 the best MSS. is Kipie 0eAeif GiTrufiev trvp Kara^rjvai a-jrh rov ovpayov Kal avaK&aat 
 avTois ; a-Tpa^peU Se iirerlfiTifffv auTois, leaving out all that gives point to the 
 fuller narrative preserved in other MSS. and versions, which insert the words us 
 Kol 'H\las iwolrjirev at the end of the Apostles' question, and the words ital ehcv 
 o\iK otSaTe oiov Tvei/iaTds iare u/ieTs. 6 yiip vths tov avSpdmov ouk ^\8eii tf/vxits avBpd- 
 ircav airo\4aai a\xi auaai, after avTols. Hort thinks that these clauses were 
 probably 'derived from some extraneous source, written or oral' (S&l. Read. 
 p. 60), but the additions are of such extraordinary interest and value, so evid- 
 ' ently bearing the mark of the spirit of Christ Himself, and the narrative without 
 them is so bald and pointless, that I cannot believe that the latter is all that 
 came from St. Luke's pen. It seems to me far more probable that a complete 
 early copy fell into the hands of some Jewish Christian, who was so shocked to 
 see the authority of the great prophet Elijah thus eontumeliously set aside, that' 
 he reduced the pungent life-giving text to the harmless residuum preserved to us 
 by our present oldest MSS. , and unhappily sanctioned by the R. V. 
 ^ See Xennant, I.e. p. 4. 
 
clxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 So also for the story of the fall of the angels. But is it a 
 satisfactory explanation of the latter to suppose that 'sons of 
 Seth ' are meant by ' sons of God ' ? Ryle {Early Narratives of 
 Genesis, 91-95) points out that ' there is nothing in the context 
 to suggest this, no sign that the Sethites were distinguished for 
 piety : they are not even exempted from the charge of general 
 wickedness which brought on the Flood.' Equally untenable is 
 the Jewish explanation that ' sons of God ' are the nobles. I 
 think no one who has studied with any care the recent investiga- 
 tions as to the origin of the book of Genesis, of which Driver's 
 Book of Genesis may be taken as a specimen, can doubt that it 
 contains much which is unhistoric, though full of moral and 
 spiritual teaching. The pre-Abrahamic narrative shows many 
 resemblances with the Babylonian records, but in general the 
 motive has been changed and purified.^ Thus Driver says (p. Ixiii) : 
 ' It is impossible, if we compare the early narratives of Genesis 
 with the Babylonian narratives, from which in some cases they 
 seem plainly to have been ultimately derived . . . not to perceive 
 the controlling operation of the Spirit of God, which has taught 
 these Hebrew writers ... to take the primitive traditions of the 
 human race, to purify them from their grossness and their poly- 
 theism, and to make them at once the foundation and the explana- 
 tion of the long history that is to follow.' Of the pai'ticular 
 passage in question however Driver says (p. 83) : ' As a rule, the 
 Hebrew narrators stripped off the mythological colouring of the 
 piece of folklore which they record ; but in the present instance it 
 is still discernible.' ^ 
 
 1 Tennant, 20, 21, 41. 
 
 - For further information on this subject see Suicer's Thetaurus under &yyc\os, 
 and 'Eypiryopos, Hasting's D. of B., under 'Angel,' 'Demon,' 'Fall,' 'Flood'; 
 Encycl. of B. Lit., under 'Angel,' 'Demon,' 'Deluge,' 'Nephilim,' 'Satan'; 
 Maitland's ^niOT?i (Essays i v. -vi.), where the literal interpretation is defended ; 
 Hagenbaoh, Hist. Doctr. § 52 and § 132. 
 
CHAPTER XI 
 
 False Teachers in the Church towards the end of the 
 First Century 
 
 Jude. 
 
 Who are the mischief-makers against whom Jude's warning is 
 directed ? 
 
 The occasion of writing is that intelligence has just been 
 received of a new danger threatening the Church. Jude feels 
 bound to warn the faithful that they must defend the faith 
 once delivered to the saints against certain persons who 
 have secretly made their way into the Church, men long ago 
 marked out for judgment, impious, changing the grace of our 
 Ood into licentioftsness, and denying the only Master and our 
 Lord Jesus Christ.^ Following, as they do, in the steps of 
 the sinners of past ages, — Israel in the Wilderness, the 
 apostate angels, the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah, — they 
 will also share their fate. The offence of these was sensu- 
 ality and disobedience to the laws of nature and of God. So 
 the sin of the new apostates is impurity, rebellion, and 
 irreverence. [Yet even the chief of the angels, when defending 
 the body of Moses against Satan, treated him with respect.] 
 They rail against things (persons) beyond their ken, while they 
 bring destruction on themselves through following their carnal 
 appetites. They are followers of Cain in their jealousy and hatred 
 ■of the righteous, of Korah in rebelling against authority, of 
 Balaam in their eager propagation of error for the sake of gain. 
 
 ^ In my note on this passage I have quoted parallels from the Book of Enoch, 
 ■which must certainly be taken literally. I think therefore that it is better to 
 understand the denial by these heretics as explicit and theoretical, not merely as 
 implied in their evil life and practice. 
 
olxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 They are like sunken rocks which cause the shipwreck of heedless 
 souls by the bad examples they set in your love-feasts; like 
 rainless clouds scudding before the wind; like trees in autumn 
 which are yet without fruit, twice dead, torn up by the roots ; like 
 wild waves foaming up their own shame ; or falling stars destined 
 to disappear in eternal gloom. It is of these that Enoch prophesied 
 that the Lord would come to convict the impious of their impiety 
 and of all their murmuring against Him. Against these the 
 Apostles used to warn you that, in the last time, there would come 
 mockers walking after their own lusts. They are the causes of 
 division, carnal, without the Spirit. (To resist them) it is necessary 
 that you should build up yourselves on your most holy faith, 
 praying in the Spirit, keeping yourselves in the love of God, 
 looking for everlasting life. As for those who are in danger of 
 falling, it is your duty in some cases to convince them when 
 they dispute (or ' are in doubt '), in others to snatch them from 
 the fire which threatens them, in others to feel towards them a 
 trembling pity joined with abhorrence of their impurities. 
 
 2 Peter. 
 
 Here the mischief-makers are characterized as ^^evBoirpo^fjTat 
 and y}revSoSiSd<TKaXoi,. They will secretly introduce destructive 
 heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, drawing 
 down on themselves swift destruction. Many will follow their 
 licentiousness, bringing discredit on the way of truth. Through 
 covetousness they will make merchandise of you with feigned 
 words, but the judgment pronounced against them has been long 
 working and will speedily bring about their destruction. Examples 
 of such judgment in the past are the fall of the angels, the 
 deluge, the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, when Lot was 
 vexed with the sight and hearing of the impiety and licentious- 
 ness which surrounded him. God saves the righteous from 
 temptation, but reserves the wicked for the day of judgment, 
 especially those that surrender themselves to the lusts of the 
 flesh, and despise authority. They are daring and self-willed, and 
 tremble not to rail at dignities [yet angels who are so far superior 
 do not bring railing accusations against them]. Thus railing 
 where they are without knowledge, they become like brute 
 beasts made by nature to be captured and destroyed, and shall 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH clxix 
 
 themselves be utterly destroyed, ' defrauded of the hire of fraud.' 
 They count it pleasure ^ to spend the day in carnal gratification ; 
 they are spots and blemishes, indulging themselves in your feasts, 
 to which they gain admission through their wiles. Accursed as 
 they are, they have adulterous eyes, unwearied in sin ; they entice 
 the unstable, their heart is practised in covetousness ; they have 
 gone astray from the right road and followed the way of Balaam, 
 who loved the hire of wrong-doing, but was rebuked by the ass for 
 his transgression. Such men are wells without water, mists 
 driven by the wind, doomed for ever to outer darkness. By 
 their confident boasting they allure through the lusts of the flesh 
 those who were just escaping from the snares of error. They 
 promise them freedom, whUe they themselves are servants of 
 corruption. Unhappy men, their former conversion has only sunk 
 them to a worse state, if they again plunge into the defilements 
 of the world. 
 
 Remember the words of the prophets and of your apostles, that 
 in the last days mockers should come, walking after their own 
 lusts and saying " where is the promise of his coming ? all con- 
 tinues as it was.' They forget that one day is with the Lord as 
 a thousand years. The delay proceeds from the long-suffering of 
 God, as Paul wrote according to the wisdom given to him, though 
 it is true that in his writings there are diflScult sayings, which 
 are liable to be misunderstood and misused by the ignorant and 
 unstable. 
 
 Paul. 
 
 The Epistle to the Philippians was probably written about the 
 year 61, early in St. Paul's first captivity in Rome. Bp. Lightfoot (in 
 his Commentary, p. 42) says that ' it represents a short breathing- 
 space when one antagonistic error has been fought and overcome, 
 and another is dimly foreseen in the future. The Apostle's great- 
 battle hitherto has been with Pharisaic Judaism, his great 
 weapon the doctrine of grace. In the Epistle to the Philippians 
 we have the spent wave of this controversy ... A new type of 
 error is springing up — more speculative and less practical in its 
 origin — which in one form or another mainly occupies his atten- 
 tion throughout the Epistles to the Colossians and Ephesians, 
 
 ^ I have suggested in the chapter on the Text that iyairrit' should be read for 
 
clxx INTEODUCTION 
 
 and the Pastoral Epistles; and which under the distinctive name 
 of Gnosticism in its manifold and monstrous developments will 
 disturb the peace of the Church for two centuries to come.' 
 There is much resemblance between the antinomians described in 
 Phil. 3^^'-, ■jToWol yap irepiirarovinv, o&? 7ro\X,a«(? eXeyov vfiiv, 
 vvv he Koi KKaimv Xeyca, tows i X^ P° ^ '^ t ov ar av pov tov 
 'K.pia-Tov, S)v TO T6\o? air ol)\e ia, S)v 6 6 ed<; '^ /co iXta, kol f) 
 B 6 ^ a iv ry al a ^vvy av t a>v, oi to, ewiyeia ^povovvTe<s, and 
 those referred to in J. m. 4, 10-13, 2 P. 2i- 2- \ 
 
 The first distinct allusion to these heresies appears in St. Paul's 
 farewell speech to. the Ephesian elders. Acts 20^^ 'After my 
 departure wolves will enter in, not sparing the flock, and of your- 
 selves will rise up men speaking perverse things to draw away 
 the disciples after them.' But occasional warnings of a nature not 
 altogether dissimilar may be found even in the earlier epistles : 
 thus we read of yjrevSdSeXcjjoi in Gal. 2*, of yfreyBaTroaroXoi, in 2 Cor. 
 11^*, of a mystery of iniquity already at work in 2 Th. 2^, of those 
 that deny the resurrection from the dead in 1 Cor. 15^^ of those 
 who eat the Lord's supper unworthily and cause divisions among 
 the brethren in 1 Cor. 11^^'^', of those who are puffed up with 
 notions of their own superior enlightenment in 1 Cor. 1^^"^^, 8^*, 
 who think they may take part in idolatrous feasts on the ground 
 -that all things are lawful unto them (1 Cor. 6^^, 10^^), who defy 
 their teachers and even the Apostle himself (1 Cor. 4^"^^ 5^, 8"^ 
 Q1-J2- iQU-ss-^^ innovators in doctrine, serving their own belly, 
 indulging ia carnal lusts (Rom. 16^'' ^^, 1 Cor. 6^^*), deceiving the 
 simple through their plausible speeches (Eph. 4^*, irepi^epo/ievoi 
 •TravTi avifi^ t^9 BiSaa-KaXia<s ■ ev rf} KV^ia t&v avOptOTrav ev 
 Travovpyla irpo^ Tfjv fieOoSlav tjJ? TrXawrj?, ib. 5* /iijSet? v/ia^ 
 hiraTarm Kevoi<; \070t?). 
 
 ' The letters to the Colossians and Ephesians exhibit an advanced 
 stage in the development of the Church. The heresies which the 
 Apostle here combats are no longer the crude materialistic errors of 
 the early childhood of Christianity, but the more subtle speculations 
 of its maturer age . . . The heresies of the Pastoral Epistles are the 
 heresies of the Colossians and Ephesians grown rank and corrupt.'^ 
 For the detailed account of the Colossian heresy see Lightfoot's 
 Commentary, pp. 73-113, especially pp. 98 ff. : ' Gnosticism strove 
 to establish ... an intellectual oligarchy in religion. It had its 
 
 ' Lightfoot, PhU. p. 45. 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH clxxi 
 
 hidden ■wisdom, its exclusive mysteries, its privileged class ... St. 
 Paul in this Epistle feels himself challenged to contend for the 
 universality of the Gospel.' ' Only in the light of such an antagon- 
 ism can we understand the emphatic iteration with which he 
 claims to warn emry man and teach every man in every wisdom, 
 that he may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus (1^^). It will 
 be remembered that wisdom in Gnostic teaching was the exclusive 
 possession of the few, . . . that perfection was the term especially 
 applied to this privileged minority, and thus it will be readily 
 understood why St. Paul . . . should express his intense anxiety 
 for the Churches of Colossae and the neighbourhood, lest they 
 should be led astray by a spurious wisdom to desert the true 
 knowledge' (2*). 'This false wisdom is . . , speculative, vague and 
 dreamy ' (2*- **■ ^^). [We may compare the phrase evv-n-via^ofievoi in 
 Jude 8.] As regards their cosmogony and theology St. Paul 
 attacks the doctrine of angelic mediators, setting against it the 
 doctrine of the Word Incarnate, in whom the whole Pleroma 
 resides. Angelolatry is a denial of Christ's twofold personality 
 and His mediatorial oflfice. As regards the practical results of 
 this teaching, we find these to be either immoral, as in the 
 Pastoral Epistles to some extent, ' and still more plainly in the 
 Catholic Epistles (Jude^ 2 P. 2^'") and the Apocalypse ' ; or ascetic, 
 as among the Colossians {2^^- ^- ^^) and 1 Tim. 4^ St. Paul in his 
 warning against the new heretics does not dwell on the contrast of 
 law and grace, as in the Epistle to the Galatians, but denounces 
 their ascetic practices as concentrating the thoughts on earthly 
 things, while they are found valueless against sensual indulgence, 
 which can only be overcome by the elevation of the inner life in 
 Christ. 
 
 I proceed to cite the relevant passages from the Pastoral 
 Epistles. 1 Tim. 1^' ^ some have turned aside into fiaratoXoyiav, 
 6e\ovre<i eivai vo/j,oSiSderKd\oi, fii] voovvre^ fi'qr e a 
 Xiyova- IV fir/T e ire pi t Iv mv Sia^e^aiovvrai; 
 (v. 19) Some have made shipioreck concerning the faith, of 
 whom are Hynjenaeus and Alexander ; (3*) fir) ve6<j>VTov, Xva /Mrj 
 Tv<pa>0£l<i et? K p i fia i p. ire ay r ov Sia^oXov; (4^) t o 
 S e irv ev p,a p ■qToy; Xey ei o t i i v v a- t epo i <; k a i p a 1 1 
 aiT0iTT7](T0VTai T iv e <i rrj<; tt i ar e (o <i ir p o a e^o v t ei 
 irvevfiaffi nrXav o l<; kuI BiSaaKoXiai^ Sacfioviav, iv viro- 
 Kpi<rei ■>lrevBo\6y(ov, KeKavTrjpiaa/jievcov rr)v ihiav tTvveiSrjxnv, 
 
clxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 KcoXvovTcov ya/j,eiv, avexsa-dai ^pcofiaTcov ; (ver. 7) tovi 0e/3i]\oui! 
 Kai ypacoSei^ fivdov^ irapairov; (6*) el rt? erepoSiSaerKaXei Koi 
 ftr] '7rpo(Tep')(eTai vyiaivovaiv \6y019, . . .tbt v <f>(o r ai . . .v o a S)v 
 TT e pi l^TjT rj a eif Kal Xoyo/jbay^iai;, e^ ov ylverai . . . 
 Biairaparpi^al Z i e^6 a p jjl eva> v av 6 p airoi v rov v ov v 
 . . , V o p,i^6vT wv "TTO p la fiov elvai Trjv eiae^eiav) 
 (ver. 20) ttjv -tt a p a 6r] ktjv ^ vXa^ ov eKrpeiro/iepoi ra? 
 /Se/SjjXov? K evo (j)(o V lav Kal avTiOeaei^ t^? -y^evStavvfiov 
 yvmaeox;. 2 Tim. 1^^ Sold the pattern of smind words, etc.; 
 (2^*) Of these things pi(,t them in remembrance ; (y. 16) Shun profane 
 babblings . . . Their word will eat as a canker, of whom are 
 Hymenaeus and Philetus, men who, concerning the truth, have 
 erred, saying that the resurrection is past already. (2^^) In meek- 
 ness correcting them that oppose themselves, if peradventure God 
 may give them repentance . . . and that they may recover themselves 
 out of the snare of the devil; 2 Tim. 3^ foil, iv ia-xo,rat,<; 
 ■t] fjLe p a i<s evfTTqaovTai Kaipot ^aXcTrot. eaovrat yctp oi dvdpaj- 
 TToi <j>i\avToi, ^iXdpyvpoi, aXa^ ov e 1, vir e prj <^av o i, 
 l3\da-(j>r]fioi, y o V ev (T tv air ei6 el<s, d-)(api<Troi, dv 6 <r to i, 
 da-Topyoi, aaTrovhot,, Sid0oXoi, d k p ar eiv, dv^/iepoi, d^iXdyadoi, 
 irpohoTai, ■jrpoireTel';, reTV(j)cofi6voi, (f} iXtj B o vo i fidWov 
 rj (^CKodeoi, e y(ov r e i; fi 6 p cj) co a iv ev <t e j3 e i av, rr) v Be 
 B V V a fiiv avTfj<; dpvovfievoi. Koi tovtov<s diroTpeirov. 
 eK TOVTCov ydp elaiv ol evBvvovre<s 64? t^? olKia<s Kal 
 al^fj,a\ci)Ti^ovTe<; yvvaiKdpia aetrwpevfieva d/iapTiai<} dy 6 fiev a 
 eiridvfiiaiis iroiKiXaiv . . .0 v t poTrov 'Ia)avvfj<; Kal 'lafi^pfj'; 
 d V T i cr rr] a- av Mmuo-et, ovTto? Kal ovtoi dv 6 i a t O''" t a t 
 T§ dXrjdeia, dvOpwiroi KaTe<f>6apfj,evoi tov vovv, dBoKi/iot 
 irepl rrjv iriariv ... (v. 13) Trovr/pol Be dvOpoowot koI 76.17x69 
 TrpoKoyjrovcriv e trl to ^eipov, irXa v oi>v t ei Ka i 
 TrXavd>fievoi. crii Be n ev e e v ol<i e fi ad ۥ; . . . (4*) ea-Tai 
 ydp Katpo's ore Tfj<; v y i a iv ov a-rj i; B iB a<r k aXi a<; o v k 
 dve^ovrai, dXXd Kara r d <; IB i a<; i7rt9v/iia<; eavToi<{ 
 itnatopevaovaiv BiBao'KdXovi, Kvrfdofievoi ttjv aKor^v. 
 
 Titus l-"-" eWlv TToXXoi dvv -k ot a kt o i, fL aT aioXoy ot, 
 Kal (ppevaTrdrai /idXiara ot ex irepiTOfifji;, obv Bel evia-TOfii- 
 ^eiv, oiTivev oXovv oikovi; dv ar p eir ov a iv B iBdc k ovt e v a 
 fj, rj Bel a iff ')(p o v k e pB o v <; y^d p tv ; {v. 16) @ebv6/j,oXo- 
 y ov a- tv e I S i V a I, t 6 i<s Be epyoiiidpvovvTat, /SSe- 
 XvKTol 6vTe<s Kal dve 1 6 el <; Kal tt/oo? ttuv epyov ayadov 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH clxxiii 
 
 dBoKifioi ; (3^) fieopa^ ^t^Tija-eif koX yeveaXoyiw; Kal fJ-d'^^a^ vofiiKa'i 
 •jrepua-racro . . . alperiKov dvBpoa-Trov fier^ . . . vovdeaiav irapaiTov, 
 elSw'i OTt e^ecTTpairrai 6 rotovTO'; koI dfiaprdvei, mv avTOKard- 
 Kpiro<;. 
 
 Apocalypse. 
 
 2^ (Ephesus) e7reipaa-a<s tov<; Xiyovrais eavTov'} aTroaToXovi; 
 eivai Kal ovk elaiv, Kot eu/oe? avTOV<s •^enSet? ; (ver. 6) /xiaeii; to. 
 epya t&v "NiKoXaiToiv h iy& fiiaS) ; {ver. 9 Smyrna) those that say 
 they are Jews, but really are the synagogue of Satan ; {ver. 13 Per- 
 gamum) the seat of Satan; {ver. 14) e'xei<i ixei KpaTovvTa<; ttjv 
 SiSa'^ijv B a \ a a /x., 8? iSiSaaKev reS BaXa/c ^aXuv aKdvZaXov 
 ivcoTTiov T&v vimv 'Icrpaij'K, ijiayeiv elBcoXoOvra Kal iropveCaai, ; 
 {ver.lb) Nicolaitans ; {ver. 18 Thyatira) the harlot Jezebel, who calls 
 herself a prophetess and teaches my servants to commit adultery 
 and eat elhwXodvTa; 'the depths of Satan ' as they say; (3* Sardis) 
 ' they have not defiled their garments ' ; (3^ Philadelphia) ' thou 
 didst keep my word and didst not deny my name.' 
 
 Hpistles of John. 
 
 1 Joh. 2^® i a- 'x^d Tt] & pa e <7 t I v, Kal Kada'i rjKova-are otl 
 avTij(pi<TTO<s epj(eTai, Kal v v v dv t i'X,p i a- t o i tt oW ol 
 yeyovaa-tv, oOev yivaxTKOfj-ev on ia-y^^drrj &pa iaTiv. k^ ^/jl&v 
 i^riXdav, dXX' ovk rjaav i^ rjjjb&v ... (v. 22) Tt? iariv 6 yp-ev(7Tr]<; 
 el fifj 6 dpvovfievov Sri 'Iijo-ou? ovk eaTiv 6 Hpia-ro^ ; ovto^ 
 itTTiv 6 avTixpi(rTO<i o dpvovfj,evo<: t ov tt a t e p a Kal r o v 
 V I 6v. ira'i 6 dpvovfievo^ rovvlbv ovBe tov irarepa e^ei . . . {v. 26) 
 ravra eypa-yjra vfiiv irepl r mv irXav (ovt mv v fid<s ; (4^) 
 IT oXXol yjr ev 8 OTT p <f)fJT a I i ^ eXrjX v 6 a <r i v e I <; tov 
 K oo' /J. ov. (2 Joh. ') TToWol TrXd V o I e ^ rjX0 av ei? tov 
 K 6 (T fiov o i fiT) ofj.oXoyovvTe's Irj a o v v ^piarbv ep^p- 
 fjbevov iv aapKi. (3 Joh. ®) o (fnXoTrptoTevcov A i o t p e (prj ^ 
 oil K cTTtSe^erat r) p, a <;. Sid tovto, idv eX0(o, v ir o ixv rj a (o 
 avTov T d epya a ir o l el Xoy o i<i ir ovrjpol <s (j)Xv ap a v 
 ^ fj,d^. 
 
 How far do these prognostics of evil agree ? We may say that 
 the general picture is that of the prevalence of antinomian heresy, 
 resulting in corruption of morals and disbelief in God and 
 
clxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 Christ. This falling away is to take place in the last times 
 (Jude 1^ 2 P. 21, 33, 1 Tim. 4<\ 2 Tim. B\ 4>^ 1 Joh. 2^^' i*, 
 2 Th. 281^, Matt. 2¥^'^^), but it has already begun, as is shown by 
 the use of the past or present tenses in Jude *■ *' i"' "' ^^- "• 1*, 
 2 P. 21''' 15. 17-22, 34, 1 Tim. 16> 7. 19, 63, 2 Tim. 3«-9, Tit. li""!*, Apoc. 
 22' 6. u, 1 Joh. 218' 19, 22, 41, 8^ 2 Joh. 7. In some passages the stress 
 is laid more upon practice, in others more upon the erroneous 
 belief which lay at the root of the evil practice and was 
 developed and strengthened by it. St. Jude, for instance, 
 speaks more of practice and less of belief, but it seems to me 
 unnecessary to suppose, as some have done, that the dangers 
 against which he warns the Church are different from those against 
 which St. Peter's warning is directed. The moral corruption 
 described in the two epistles is the same even in its minutest 
 points : the cause of this corruption is the same, the misinterpre- 
 tation and misuse of St. Paul's doctrine of God's free grace 
 (Jude *, 2 P. 219, 316, cf. Rom. S^-s). The agents use the same 
 methods and are described in the same terms : they are Christians 
 in name and steal into the Church in each place without divulging 
 their impious views (Jude *' i^, 2 P. 2i' ^''' ^i). They join in the 
 love-feasts (Jude 1^, 2 P. 21^, I Cor. lli^), are greedy of gain 
 (Jude 11' 18, 2 P. 212' 15, 16)^ are disputatious (Jude 22, 2 P. 3*- 18), 
 plausible (Jude i^, 2 P. 2^), boastful, disobedient, irreverent 
 (Jude ^' 11' 1*, 2 P. 21"' 11' 1^), speaking evil of things and persons 
 beyond their knowledge (Jude i", 2 P. 21^), seducing the simple 
 by their confident and scornful assertions (Jude i^" i*' i^' 1*, 2 P. 
 22, 14, 18^, murmuring against God and even going so far as to deny 
 ' the one Master and the Lord Jesus Christ ' (Jude *' 1* 1®), or ' the 
 Master that bought them' (2 P. 2i). It is true that in 2 P. the 
 mischief-makers are distinctly called ' false-teachers ' and charged 
 with introducing aipeaeif (2i), while these terms are not used by St. 
 Jude ; but the language used by the latter seems to imply something 
 more than a mere indulgence in the lusts of the flesh. The faithful 
 are bidden not simply to abstain from the sins of impurity, disobedi- 
 ence, irreverence, covetousness, murmuring, impiety, self-seeking ; 
 they are not simply told to keep the commandments, but to defend 
 the faith once delivered to the saints, and build themselves up 
 upon its foundation (vv. 3, 20) ; they are to answer opponents 
 (v. 22) who use the doctrine of grace to justify sin (v. 4), who 
 deny God and Christ — a phrase which cannot, I think, mean less 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH clxxv 
 
 than that they put forward ideas out of harmony with the true 
 doctrine of the Incarnation and of the Divine Nature. The same 
 characteristics appear in v. 8, where the innovators are said ' to 
 make light of lordship and to rail at dignities/ which can hardly 
 be meant for earthly authorities, since in ?;, 10 they are' spoken of 
 as things ' beyond their ken.' Again the metaphors used in w. 12 
 and 13 seem to require claims on the part of the innovators to be 
 regarded as leaders and teachers, who are there represented as 
 disappointing the hopes of their followers, like clouds which give 
 no water, trees which yield no fruit, meteors which are soon lost 
 in darkness. They titter proud and hard words against God ; 
 they are yfrv^iKoi (not merely a-ap/ciKoi) ; they make invidious 
 distinctions and so cause divisions (w. 15, 16, 19).^ 
 
 The italicized and spaced words in the quotations given above 
 from the Pastoral Epistles and the Epistles of St. John will serve 
 to show the general resemblance between these and our two 
 Epistles. The Epistle to the Colossians goes more fully into the 
 more speculative side of heretical teaching in reference to the 
 Pleroma and the worship of angels (as to which latter there is 
 a curious difference between the Epistle to the Colossians and 
 those epistles with which we are more especially concerned) ; but 
 the presumption and exclusiveness of the false teachers, their 
 inadequate views of the nature and work of Christ, and the 
 practical immorality which was combined with their ascetic 
 practices, are quite in agreement with the features of the heresy 
 which are disclosed in the Epistle of St. Jude and the 2nd Epistle 
 of St. Peter. 
 
 ' Zahn {Einleitung, ii. pp. 76-81) particularizes the characteristics o£ the Inno- 
 vators in Jude's epistle, in words which may be thus summarized. 
 
 1. They profess Christianity and have gained admission to the Christian love- 
 feast, but do not show the fruits of the Spirit ; on the contrary they give rise to 
 divisions in the Church. 
 
 2. Like Korah, they rebel against those who are over them in the Lord, and stir 
 up discontent on the ground that all have equal rights, and that there is no 
 ground for the discipline exacted of them. 
 
 3. They walk after their own lusts, make use of the love-feasts as occasions of 
 self-indulgence, and show a tendency to the unnatural vices of the Sodomites and 
 the Apostate angels (ver. 8). 
 
 4. They are confident and boastful, and utter hard words not only against 
 their superiors in the Church, but even against God (ver. 15). They make light 
 of the Divine majesty and speak ill of the angels (ver. 8) [from ver. 9 we gather 
 that evil angels also are included]. They live in a dream-world of their own. 
 
 5. For the sake of gain they follow eagerly in the steps of Balaam the seducer 
 of Israel, flattering the rich (J. ^'), and seeking for popularity by all means fair 
 or foul (of. Tit. V\ 1 Tim. 6=). 
 
 6. This state of things had been prophesied long before. 
 
clxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 Comparing together Jude ^\ 2 P. 2^®'^® and Apoc. 2^*, it would seem 
 that it was customary with the orthodox to mark their disapproval 
 of the proceedings of some of the contemporary heretics by styling 
 them followers of Balaam. The reference to elSeoXodvra in con- 
 nexion with this name reminds one of the difficulty caused in the 
 Churches of Rome and Corinth by the apostolic warning against 
 eating what was offered to idols. St. Paul, after declaring that an 
 idol itself is nothing and that a Christian may eat freely of all 
 that is set before him, because the earth is the Lord's and the 
 fulness thereof, yet requires the strong to bear with the infirmities 
 of the weak, and in 1 Cor. 10^" affirms that, though all things 
 are lawful, all are not expedient, and that, since the worship of 
 the heathen is really a devil-worship, those who partake in the 
 heathen feasts really enter into communion with devils. When 
 Jude refers to the error of Balaam, he probably refers to those 
 who considered it a mark of enlightenment to join in the life of the 
 heathen round them and at the same time strove to make gain by 
 flattering the rich. In Apoc. 2^^"^^ it is said that the Church 
 in Pergamum was troubled with those that hold the doctrine of 
 Balaam (who are apparently identified with those that hold the 
 doctrine of the Nicolaitans), and from v. 6 it would seem that this 
 sect was also known in Ephesus and had rendered itself hated there 
 by its deeds. Clement (Strom, ii. 118, iii. 25) frees not only Nicolaus 
 himself (whom he calls avtjp airoa-roKiKois, and who is identified with 
 the deacon of Acts 6 by Irenaeus and TertuUian) but also his sons 
 and daughters, from the charge of immorality, and thinks that the 
 heretics who abused his name misunderstood the phrase employed 
 by him, to Seiv Trapa'^prjadai rfi aapKi. aXS. o fiev yevvalo<! 
 KoXovecv Beiv iStjXov rd<s re riSova<; ras re iTn6v(iCa<i . . . ol Be eh 
 f)Bovr)V rpar/wv SiKr/v eKXvOevTe<! olov e<^v^pl^ovTe<; rm (Tcofiari 
 KaOfiSvTTaBova-iv. He tells however a most extraordinary story 
 about Nicolaus being ready to hand over his wife to any one who 
 would take her.^ 
 
 Referring to St. Jude's description of the heretics of his time 
 Clement says (Str. iii. 11, p. 515) that w. 8-16 might appear 
 to be spoken prophetically of the Carpocratians of a later age. 
 Epiphanius says the same of the ' Gnostici ' (which seems to have 
 been the name used of themselves by the Ophites), ffaer. xxvi. 11, 
 where he quotes Jude vv. 8—10 as an exact description of their 
 1 See liightfoot, Oal pp. 297 n., 309. 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IK THE CHURCH olxxvii 
 
 horrible mysteries, and says they even used Jude's denunciations as 
 
 countenancing their own proceedings, c. 13.^ He adds that their 
 
 order of Levites, whom they held in highest esteem, were guilty 
 
 of the sin of sodomy against which Jude so earnestly warns his 
 
 readers (vv. 7, 8). The Cainites, who are said to be a branch of 
 
 the Ophites, held that the Creator was evil (Jude 4), that the 
 
 Serpent represented the wisdom of God, that Cain and Esau, 
 
 Korah, and the Sodomites were champions of right (Jude vv. 7, 11) : 
 
 see Epiphan. Eaer. xxxviii. 1, Iren. i. 31. 1, Hippol. Bef. v. 16 (on 
 
 the Peratae). Hippolytus says of the Naassenes or Ophites, that 
 
 they called themselves Gnostics, (j)daKovTe<; fiovoi to, ^d6r) 
 
 yiv(oa-K6Lv (Bef. Haer. v. 6), which reminds us of the words 
 
 addressed to the Church in Thyatira (Apoc. '2?-^-'^), where we 
 
 read first of a false prophetess who tepipts the believers 
 
 to commit fornication and eat things offered to idols, which 
 
 is also the teaching of the followers of Balaam and of the 
 
 Nicolaitans {vv. 14, 15), and secondly of those who say that 
 
 they know to, 0ddea tov ^aravd, where the addition rov Xarava 
 
 pronounces judgment upon the heretics. Of these Nicolaitans 
 
 Irenaeus says (iii. c. 1) that the evangelist St. John wrote his 
 
 Gospel to remove the error "qui a Cerintho inseminatus erat 
 
 hominibus et multo prius ab his qui dicuntur Nicolaitae, qui sunt 
 
 vulsio (anroa-Traa-fia) eius quae falso cognominatur scientia, ut 
 
 suaderet quoniam unus Deus qui omnia fecit per verbum suum ; 
 
 et non, quemadmodum illi dicunt, alterum quidem fabricatorem, 
 
 alium autem Patrem Domini ; et alium quidem fabricatoris filium, 
 
 alterum vero de superioribus Christum, quem et impassibilem 
 
 perseverasse, descendentem in Jesum . . et iterum revolasse in 
 
 suuni Pleroma.' This account would agree with the statement 
 
 of St. Jude that the heretics, whom he condemns, denied the 
 
 Father and the Son (v. 4). We seem to be justified then in saying 
 
 that the heretical movements of the latter part of the first century, 
 
 of which we find traces in the later epistles and in the Apocalypse, 
 
 culminated in the teaching of Cerinthus, the opponent of St. John, 
 
 for a fuller account of whom I must refer to pp. 106 to 114 of 
 
 Bishop Lightfoot's commentary on the Colossians. 
 
 There is however an earlier name, which I cannot think we 
 
 1 In this passage he condemns the literal interpretation of the word ivvima- 
 Q61UV01, holding that the context shows it to be spoken irspl t^i fivBiiSovs avTuv 
 Toaycadias Ka\ \Tjpo\oylaSf ois Slot virvov Keyofihiis Koi ovk hirh SppoifieVTjs diayotas. 
 
 n 
 
clxxviil INTRODUCTION 
 
 are at liberty to pass over, like some German commentators, as 
 though it were absolutely unhistorical, denoting an imaginary 
 personage, used by the Ebionites as a pseudonym for the Apostle 
 St. Paul, — and that is Simon Magus. Believing that we have in 
 Acts viii. a true account of an actual historical event, drawn up by 
 a contemporary writer, and seeing no reason to doubt that his 
 followers formed a heretical sect known to Justin Martyr, and 
 holding, more or less, the opinions ascribed to them by Justin, 
 Irenaeus, and Hippolytus, I think we are at any rate bound to 
 compare these opinions with those which we have found to be 
 condemned in the later writings of the N.T. Our first witness, 
 St. Luke, tells us that, before the martyrdom of St. Stephen, Simou 
 had already gained notoriety as a magician and aroused the wonder 
 of the people of Samaria, Xeytaj/ elvai Tiva eavrov fiiyav ; that 
 the Samaritans of all classes believed his professions and agreed 
 in holding that oiT6<i iariv rj Svvafii^ rod @eov rj KaXovfiivr) 
 fieyaXr}. On Philip's visit to Samaria after Stephen's death Simon 
 was much struck with the miracles which he wrought, and received 
 baptism from him. Afterwards, when Simon saw that the gift of 
 the Holy Spirit followed the laying on of the Apostles' hands, he 
 offered Peter money that he might receive the same power, and 
 was met by the stern reproof to apyvpiop aov aiiv crol eir] ek 
 aTTcoXeiav. The story ends with Simon's entreaty that the 
 Apostles would pray for him ottw? fitfSev iireXdrj c'tt' e/^e o)v 
 elp7]KaTe. 
 
 From this account we learn that Simon, before his baptism, 
 claimed to be magnus quidam, a mysterious being, whom his 
 followers regarded as ' that potency of God which is called great.' 
 His teaching and his claims are more fully given by his compatriot 
 Justin Martyr, who tells us that Simon was born in the village of 
 Gitta in Samaria (Apol. i. 26), and was honoured by almost alF 
 the Samaritans and by a few others m? top irp&Tov deov, and again 
 {Dial. 120 fin.) hv deov virepdvco TratrJj? o.p'xfji koi i^ovalaf koi 
 Svvdfieoa^ elvai Xiyovcriv. He adds that Simon was accompanied 
 by a woman named Helena, whom he declared to be ^ irpatTri 
 evvoia ' the first Idea or Conception.' * 
 
 Irenaeus (i. 23) explains that the Idea (corresponding to the 
 
 ' Ju8tin'a story of the worship of Simon in Rome is now generally allowed to 
 have arisen from a confusion between Simon and the ancient Sabine deity Semo 
 Sancus, 
 
FALSE TEACHERS IN THE CHURCH clxxix 
 
 Sophia of other gnostic systems), in accordance with the will of 
 her Father, gave birth to the angels and archangels, by whom this 
 world was made, and was detained here below as the lost sheep, 
 suffering all manner of indignities, till at last her Father, being 
 wearied of the evil rule of the angels, descended to redeem her, 
 and raise mankind, taking the shape first of angel and then of 
 man.^ The law and prophecies of the O.T. were given, he 
 said, by the angels and need not be regarded by those who put 
 their trust in Simon and Helena. Men were saved, as was asserted 
 by the heretics in Jude 4, by grace and not by good works (' secun- 
 dum ipsius gratiam salvari hominss.sed non secundum operas justas' 
 Iren. i. 23. 3, ov yap firj Kparela-ffab aiiToii^ eiriTivL vofii^ofiiv^ kuko} 
 XeXvTpcovTUi yap, Hippol. vi. 19).^ Indeed the difference between 
 good and evil was only conventional, depending on the arbitrary 
 will of the angels {ov yap icm ^vaei KaKov aXKa dicref eOevro 
 yap, <f)T)a-iv, oi dyyeXoi, Hippol. vi. 19). Simon claimed to have 
 shown himself to the Jews as a Son, to the Samaritans as a 
 Father, to the Gentiles as a Holy Spirit. Origen says the sect 
 had dwindled down to less than thirty in his day (c. Cels. i. 57). 
 Celsus himself professed to have come across Christians who 
 called themselves Simonians or Helenians, but Origen will not 
 allow that they are really Christians, on ovSafiw^ top 'Irjaovv 
 o/ioXoyovtriv viov ®eov ^i/ia)viavoi, dWh SvvafiLv &eov Xeyovai, 
 TOP Xificava (ib. v. 62). He adds that they had never suffered 
 persecution, because Simon had taught them that idolatry was of 
 no consequence (ib. vi. 11). Hippolytus quotes words which 
 bear witness to the indiscriminate indulgence of their lusts 
 akoyiaro)'; (j)da-K0VTe<i Betv fiiyvvaffac..., dWa Kal fiaKapi^ovcriv 
 eavrov<i iirl r^ Koivy p-i^ei, ravTTjv elvai Xiyovre^ ttjv reXeiav 
 dydirrjv. It is unnecessary to point out in how many respects 
 this short abstract agrees with the features of the heresy against 
 which the later epistles are directed.^ 
 
 We have seen above that one characteristic of these heretics 
 was that they spoke evil of angels, and we have just had an instance 
 
 ^ The distinctive feature of this as compared with other gnostic systems seems 
 to have been that Simon claimed to be the Father or first principle, manifesting 
 himself in a series of incarnations. 
 
 ^ So Irenaeus says of the Valentinians (i. 6. 2) avTois fiii Sici irpd^eus, aAAib 5i& 
 rh tpiiret itvfvuariKohs elvat, irovT^ re Kal ndvTas iTai6i]<re(r6ai Soy iiaTl^ovtiiv. 
 
 ^ See further Mansel, Gnostic Heresies, pp. 79 foil. ; Headlam's article on Simon 
 in Hastings' D. of B., Salmon's in the JDict. of Christian Biography ; and on the 
 other side Schmiedel in Encycl. Bibl. 
 
 n 2 
 
clxxx INTRODUCTION 
 
 of this in the case of Simon Magus. In my note on v. 8 1 have 
 suggested other ways in which we might understand this, one, 
 which is supported by Ewald, being identical with the views of 
 some early heretics, e.g. the Simonians and Carpocrates, of whom 
 Irenaeus says (i. 25. 1) ' mundum ab angelis multo inferioribus 
 ingenito Patre factum dicunt,' that Jesus received power from 
 the Father, ' uti mundi fabricatores effugere posset,' and that 
 His followers also were enabled 'contemnere mundi fabricatores 
 archontas.' A 0Xaa-^r)fiia of a more atrocious kind is attributed 
 to the Cainites by the same writer (i. 31. 2), 'nee aliter servari 
 nisi per omnia eant ' (so they interpreted Math. 5^). What 
 follows is more clearly given in the Greek of Epiphanius, ffaer. 
 38. 2, exacrroi dppr^Ta ttoi&v koI ala-^povpyia<; iinTeKcav eVt- 
 KaXeirai, eKcia-Tov dyyeXov ovofia ical eKaa-TO) tovtwv irpoadiTTet 
 Ti, epyov ddefiiTov . . . d Beiva dyyeXe Kara'^^pM/iai aov to epyov 
 rj helva i^ovaia irpaTTCo <tov ttjv irpd^iv. Epiphanius asserts that 
 these abominations were common to the Nicolaitans with other 
 sects, and professes that he learnt this, not merely from books, 
 but from actual intercourse with those who practised them and 
 tried to induce him to join their society (Haer. 26. 17). Strong 
 as is St. Jude's language, it would probably have been stronger 
 still, if the evil had reached this height when he wrote. Like 
 the other N.T. writers he saw the germs of intellectual licence 
 and moral laxity which were destined to show such a frightful 
 development in a later generation.^ 
 
 ' On the Nicolaitans see Ramsay, Expositor, vol. ix. pp. 401-422, especially 
 p. 407. This movement ' was evidently an attempt to eflfect a reasonable com- 
 promise with the established usages of Graeco-Roman Society, and to retain 
 as many as possible of those usages in the Christian system of life.' 'The 
 historian must regard the Nicolaitans with intense interest, and must regret 
 deeply that we know so little about them, and that only from their enemies. 
 And yet at the same time he must feel that nothing could have saved the infant 
 Church from melting away into one of those vague and ineffective schools of 
 
 ghilosophic ethics except the stern and strict rule here laid down by St. John . . . 
 Inly the most convinced, resolute, almost bigoted adherence to the most uncom- 
 promising interpretation of its own principles could have given the Christians 
 the courage and self-reliance which were needed ' (p. 408). 
 
CHAPTER XII 
 
 Notes on the Text of the Epistle of Jude and the 
 Second Epistle of Peter 
 
 If we may judge from the number of 'primitive errors' sus- 
 pected by WH in the short Epistle of Jude, it would seem that 
 the text is in a less satisfactory condition than that of any other 
 portion of the New Testament. There are no less than four such 
 errors in these twenty- five verses, the same number as are found in 
 the eight chapters of the two Petrine Epistles, and in the forty- 
 four chapters of the first two Gospels. 
 
 Since the publication of the 8th edition of Tischendorf s Greek 
 Testament by Dr. C. K Gregory in 1872, much study has been 
 bestowed on the Syriac and the Egyptian versions by the Rev. 
 Dr. Gwynn and the Rev. G. Horner, who are now respectively 
 engaged on critical editions of these versions. Dr. Gwynn gave 
 some account of the results of his labours in an article 
 published in the Hermathena for 1890, entitled The Older Syriac 
 Versions of the Four Minor Catholic Epistles, and I have to 
 thank both him and Mr. Horner for their kindness in answering 
 queries put to them when I was in doubt as to a reading. 
 The Syriac versions are distinguished by Dr. Gwynn as follows : 
 the.Philoxenian made by Polycarpus for Bishop Philoxenus in the 
 year 508 a.d. is denoted by the initial p, and the Harkleian which 
 is a revision of the Philoxenian made by Thomas of Harkel in 
 616 A.D., by the initial h. Unfortunately the ordinary notation 
 of these is rather misleading, p being distinguished as Syr. *""*'• 
 in Tischendorf -and elsewhere, because it was printed by Pocock 
 in 1630 from an inferior MS. in the Bodleian, whereas Dr. 
 Gwynn has been able to collate 15 MSS., many of much 
 superior value to th^ Bodleian, The fate of h hg,s been eveij 
 
clxxxii INTRODUCTION 
 
 worse, as it is cited by Tischendorf as SyrP. though Tregelles 
 cites it correctly as Hcl.^ There is a good account of the 
 Egyptian Versions in Hastings' D. of B. vol. i. pp. 668 f., the 
 writer of which distinguishes three Coptic versions : the Bohairic 
 of northern Egypt, sometimes called Memphitic or Coptic (boh.) ; 
 the Sahidic, sometimes called Thebaic, of southern Egypt (sah.), 
 which only exists in a fragmentary state ; and the Middle Egyptian, 
 of which fragments have been found in the Fayoum and at 
 Akhmim. 
 
 In what follows I give the text of WH. 
 
 Jude V. 1. Tot? Iv @e^ warpl ■^yairrjfiivoi'; Koi 'Irja-ov X-pia-ra 
 TeTTjprjfiivoi^ KKrjToi^. 
 
 Here fjyanr]ii.evois is supported by AB N, several cursives and versions, Orig. 
 iii. 607, Lucif. Cassiod. al., while ryyiacrfievois is read by KLP al. WH (in 
 App. p. 576, and Notes on Sel. Readings, p. 106) say that 'the text is probably 
 a primitive error for rois 6e& . . . xal iv 'I. X.' For the reading iv 'I. X. they 
 cite Viilg. Spec. Syr". Sah. Aeth. Orig. {Mt.) Lucif. Cassiod. ; but I learn from 
 Dr. Qwynn tha,t the true readings of the Syriac versions are as follows : — 
 
 'p is pn-ima facie a rendering of the Greek xois edveai [xois] icXijroIs, rots iv 
 6ea irarpi fjyaTrrifievois Kai iv 'Ir/trov Xptara Terqprjfiivois. But, as there are no 
 case-endings in Syr., the translator was obliged to insert a preposition (and he 
 had few to choose from) just as the English translator must. Hence the 
 presence in p of the preposition = ev proves nothing. Nor do I think p had 
 before him a text with toIs kX^toXs, or with icXijTotr placed not at end of 
 sentence, h omits koI iv 'I. X. reTtjprj/iivois, and places kXi^toIs at end.' 
 
 Similarly Mr. Horner holds that though Sail, translates ' kept in J. C.,' we 
 need not suppose that the preposition means anything more than the Greek 
 dative. He translates Boh. 'lo those who were loved by (or in) God the 
 Father, and were kept by J. C, to those who are called ' ; and Sah. ' To the 
 beloved who are in God the Father, to those who are called, who are kept by 
 (or in) J. C 
 
 The objection to the text rests on internal grounds. There 
 
 appears to be no parallel either for iv ©eeS Tlarpl ^yairrjfiivoi,, or 
 
 fpr X.pi(TTQ} TeTTjprjfiivoi, whereas the preposition iv is constantly 
 
 used to express the relation in which believers stand to Christ as 
 
 the members of His body. If Bishop Lightfoot is right in saying 
 
 (on Col. 3^^) that in the New Testament the word rfyairrf/iivoi, 
 
 ' seems to be always used of the object of God's love,' it is difficult 
 
 to see the propriety of the phrase ' Brethren beloved by God in 
 
 God.' Omitting the preposition we have the dative of the agent, 
 
 ' Dr. Gwynn adds : ' It is important to distinguish the readings of the text of 
 h from those of the margin. In other parts of the N. T. , especially Gospels and 
 Acts, the latter are often of value, though In the four Minor Catholic Epistles 
 they are usually merely copied from p, and therefore add nothing towards the 
 determination of the Gr?ek text.' 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER olxxxiii 
 
 as in Nehemiah 13^®, nyairm/ji,evo<} reS ©ecS ^v. Nor does it seem 
 a natural expression to speak of ' those who are kept for Christ ' 
 (so Alford, Spitta, B. Weiss, v. Soden, al.) ; rather believers are 
 kept hy and in Christ, as in 2 Thes. 2^, Apoc. 3^". The easiest way 
 of accounting for the error is to suppose that iv was accidentally 
 omitted, and then corrected in the margin and inserted in the 
 wrong place. Possibly the wrong insertion of iv may have sug- 
 gested or facilitated the change from ■^yairrjfiivoii; to jj^tacr/xei'ot?. 
 
 [v. 2. ' The better MSS. of ^ are divided between ev aydTry and 
 Kal ayaTTT), the one which is best of all reading Kai. The con- 
 fusion is one that often occurs, as the diflference is in a single 
 letter, and there is no case-ending to decide the doubt, h has koI 
 aydvr]. 
 
 V. 4. ®eov Koi Kvpiov h and all the best MSS. of p : the later 
 ones om. Kal, thus making heairoT-qv @e6v refer to Jesus Christ.' G.] 
 
 v. 5. VTTO/ivrjaai Bk vfia's ^ovXofiai elS6Ta<; ava^ irdvTa, on 
 Kupto? \aov eK yrj^ AlyvvTov aa)aa<i ro hevrepov rovi fir] inaTev- 
 (Tavra<i dirdoKecrev. I quote Tregelles' notes with additions from 
 Tischendorf in round brackets, only changing the notation of the 
 Egyptian and Syriac versions to prevent confusion, and correcting 
 the citations in accordance with more recent collations, 
 
 elSoras 'add. vjiSls r i< 31 KL. syrr., om. ABC^ 13 Vulg. Boh. Sah. Arm.,' 
 and so Tisch. 
 
 In point of fact however B reads elh6Ta<i vfia<s, as any one 
 may convince himself by looking at Cozza-Luzi's photographic 
 reproduction. Also Dr. Gwynn reports that h and all the MSS. of 
 p give the same reading, though he adds that the pleonastic 
 idiom of the Syriac would lead the translators to supply the 
 pronoun even if wanting in the Greek. The preponderance of 
 authority is therefore in favour of this latter reading. The 
 repeated vfid'; emphasizes the contrast between the readers (' to 
 remind you, you who know it already') and the libertines pre- 
 viously spoken of. The repetition here may be compared with the 
 repeated vfilv of v. 3. 
 
 oTTol an^e Trai/TO ABC. 13. 31. L. OT). Ante on K. AnteXaov . (Syrr.) Arm. 
 Ante ex y^s Aly. Cleai. 280 (and 997, Did. Cassiod.). on Kvpioi a-ixras top 
 Xa^i/ cK yrjs Aly. aira^ Sah., on 6.ira^ Kvpios traxras "Kaoif avTov Boh. Om. dira^ 
 Lucif. 28. [&!ra^ is so placed in Syrr. as to be connected with a-acras ' when 
 he had once saved them,' G.l 
 
 TTfivTa ABC8 13 Vulg, Syr'', Boh, Arm, Aeth. Lucif. [In the App. 
 
olxxxiv INTRODUCTION 
 
 to WH {Sel. Readings, p. 106) it is suggested that this may be a primitive 
 error for Travras (cf. 1 John 2^) found in Syr^.H tovto] r- 31. KL. Sah. 
 
 3n] add. 6 r-0.^ 31. KL. Arm. Clem. 280. Cm. ABX 13. 
 
 Kvpios] NCKL. Syr^ Oeos C^ Tol. SyrP. Arm. Clem. Lucif. 'Itjo-ovs 
 AB. 13 Vulg. Boh. Sah. Aeth. [In App. to WH. {Sel. Beadings, p. 106) 
 it is suggested that there may have been some primitive error, ' apparently 
 oTiKO (on KiJptos), and otjIc (on 'Iijcrovs) for otio (o« o).'] 
 
 yrjs om. Syr". 
 
 It appears to me that the true reading of the passage is vTrofivij- 
 crai Se v/j.ci'S 0ov\ofiai, elSorai; vnat irdvTa, on K.vpio<; aira^ Xabv 
 eK yrj<; Alyvirrov traxrai to Sevrepov [tov<;J firj 7ri(rTev<ravTa<i 
 airoaXecrev. I see no difficulty in irdvra, which gives a reason for 
 the use of the word inrofivrja-ai, ' I need only remind you,, because 
 you already Imow all that I have to say.' It was easy for the 
 second v/iS? to be omitted as unnecessary, and then the word 
 aira^ might be inserted in its place partly for rhythmical reasons ; 
 but it is really unmeaning after etSdras : the knowledge of the 
 incidents, which are related in this and the following verses, is not 
 a knowledge for good and all, such as the faith spoken of in v. 3. 
 On the other hand, aira^ is very appropriate if taken with Xaov 
 adxrat (a people was saved out of Egypt once for all), and it 
 prepares the way for to Sevrepov. For the reading ■7rdvTa<} 
 I see no reason. Can it be assumed that all who are 
 addressed should be familiar with the legends contained in the 
 Book of Enoch and the Ascension of Moses, to which allusion is 
 made in what follows ? It is surely much more to the point for 
 the writer to say, as he does again below (v. 17), that he is only 
 repeating what is generally known, though it need not be known 
 to every individual. As to Hort's suggestion on the word xvpioi, 
 that the original was on 6 (Xaov armcras:), I think the fact of 
 the variants is better explained by Spitta, who considers that the 
 abbreviations |C, KC, ©C might easily be confused, if the 
 first letter was faintly written, and that the mention of tov fiovov 
 Sea-TTOTtjv Kal K-upiov 'I.X. in the preceding verse would naturally 
 lead a later copyist to prefer |C, a supposition which is con- 
 firmed by Cramer's Catena, p. 158, ecpijrai yap irpo tovt(ov 
 Trepl avTov, to? e'lrj aXr]9tvoii Beo'i euros o ix6vo<i SecriroTr)^ 6 
 Kvpia 'I.X., o dvayaycbv tov Xaov i^ AlyvirTov Sta MaJcre'eB?. 
 Spitta himself however holds that 0C is the true reading, as 
 it agrees with the corresponding passage in 2 Peter 2*, 6 ©eos 
 
 ' ' This is an error : the two best MSS. of p represent trdvTa,' G. 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER clxxxv 
 
 ayyiXav dfiaprijaravTcuv ovk ecfteicraTo, and with Clement's 
 paraphrase (Adumbr. Dind. iii. p. 482) : ' Quoniam Dominus Deus 
 semel populum de terra Aegypti liberans deinceps eos qui non 
 crediderunt perdidit.' There is no instance in the New Testament of 
 the personal name ' Jesus ' being used of the pre-existent Messiah, 
 though the official name 'Christ' is found in 1 Cor. 10*'*, 
 in reference to the wandering in the wilderness. But in the 
 second and later centuries this distinction was less carefully 
 observed. Thus Justin M. (Dial. 120), speaking of the prophecy 
 in Genesis 49^", says that it does not refer to Judah, but to Jesus, 
 Tov Koi, Tovi TraTepa^ vfiSiv i^ AlyvTrrov i^ayayovTa, and this use 
 of the name was confirmed by the idea that the son of Nun was a 
 personification of Christ (see Justin, Dial. 75; Clem. Al. 133; 
 Didymus, De Trin. 1. 19, 'louSa? Ka6oXiK&<s ypd^ei, a-Tra^ yap 
 icvpio<i 'Itjo-oO? \aov e^ AiyvTrrov a-ma-a^ k.t.X. ; Jerome, G. Jov. 1. 
 12 ; Lact. Irist, 4. 17, 'Christi figuram gerebat ille Jesus, qui cum 
 primum Auses vocaretur, Moyses futura praesentiens jussit eum 
 Jesum vocari'). In the explanatory note I have stated my 
 reasons for considering that the article before ily) did not belong 
 to the original text. 
 
 V. 6. ayyeXows re] dyy. Si A boh.^, koi dyy. sah. boh^. 
 
 \y. 7. p and h punctuate irpoKeivrai Seiyfia irvpoi; alcoviov, Biicrjv 
 vvexova-ai, h interpolates Ti(f>pa bef. vpoicetvTai : so Lucifer (de 
 non conv. c. haeretids) reads ' cinis propositae sunt exemplum.' G.] 
 
 V. 12. ovToi etaiv [ot] iv Tai<s arfdiravi v/j,&v a-m\dSe<; a-vvevm- 
 j^pvfievoi dtjiojSeai eavrov^ TTOi/iaivovTei. The article here is 
 omitted by t^K and many inferior MSS. with vg. (but not syrr. or 
 sah. or boh.), and some of the patristic quotations. I agree with 
 Dr. Chase in thinking that it is out of place here, as in v. 5 
 above. There is not only the difficulty of construction (oi... 
 ffTTtXaSe?), but the very bold assumption that the signification 
 of trmXaSe? will be at once apparent. If we omit the article, 
 a(f>6^a)9 should be attached to a-vvevm^. as by Ti. In syrr. it is 
 joined with •jroi/iaivomei;. 
 
 avvevw)(pvixevoi\ C sah. boh. add v/miv. 
 
 [v. 18. Syrr. p and h agree with KLP in prefixing oti to ev 
 e<T-)(drm or eV ia-'x^drov r&v 'X^povcov ; but this is only in 
 accordance with the Syriac usage in introducing a quotation, and 
 is no evidence as to the Greek reading. G.J 
 
 Mr. Horner sends me the following Greek rendering of a 
 
clxxxvi INTRODUCTION 
 
 fragment from a Fayoum papyrus, which is supposed to 
 belong to the fifth or sixth century, containing w. 17-20, 
 tSjv prifidrav tov Kvplov rjfiSiv 'Irjaov lLpi,(rTov\T&v irpoecprjfievoov 
 vtro r&v airodToKosv, OTiirep eltrov on iv ia-yuT^ too ')^p6vrp 
 ifiTraiKTai eXevcrovTai -jropevofievoi, Kar^ ra<; iiridv/iiat; 
 aae^ela^' ovrol elcnv ol diroBiopl^ovTe^, -xlrv^iKoi, fif) exovrev 
 irvevixa. 'Tfj,et<! Si, dyairrjToi, eare olxoBofiovvTev eavrovi} iv 
 iriarei Vfi&v [dyia to eXeo?] irpoaev^ofievoi, iv irvevfian ayla>, 
 which agrees exactly with sah. except that, for the bracketed 
 words, the latter has dyicoTarri omitting to eXeo?. 
 
 V. 19. oiiToi elaiv ol diroSiopi^ovTei;, yfrvxiKol irvevfia p.r] 
 e^oj/Te?. 
 
 dTToSwpiCovTfs add. iavrovs C vulg. syxr. Om. J^ABKL 13, etc. 
 
 This rare word is used of logical distinctions in Arist. Pol. iv. 
 48, axTirep ovv el ^wov irporipovfieffa Xaj3eiv etSt/, irpStTov av 
 dirohuopi^ofjiev birep dvayKoiov irdv e^eiv ^mov (' as, if we wished 
 to make a classification of animals, we should have begun by 
 setting aside that which all animals have in common'), and I 
 believe in every other passage in which it is known to occur. Schott, 
 B. Weiss, and Huther-Kiihl would give it a similar sense in this 
 passage, supposing the words i^vx^lkoX irvev/aa fit] eypvTe^ to be 
 spoken by, or at least to express the feeling of oi d-irohi,opi^ovre<i :'■ 
 ' welche Unterscheidungen machen, sc. zwischen Psychikern und 
 Pneumatikern, wobei dann der Verfasser diese Unterscheidungen 
 in seiner drastischen Weise sofort zu ihren Ungunsten umkehrt.' 
 This explanation seems to me to give a better sense than the 
 gloss approved by Spitta, ol rd a^^afiaTa iroiovvTe<i ; for one 
 cause of the danger which threatens the Church is that the 
 innovators do not separate themselves openly, but steal in unob- 
 served (Trapeia-eSiirjaav, v. 4), and take part in the love-feasts of 
 the faithful, in which they are like sunken rocks (v. 12); and, 
 secondly, it is by no means certain that the word aTroBiopi^m could 
 bear this 'sense. d<J3opi^a> is used in Luke 6^^ of excommunica- 
 tion by superior authority, which of course would not be applicable 
 here. On the other hand, it seems impossible to get the former 
 sense out of the Greek as it stands. Even if we allowed the possi- 
 bility of such a harsh construction as to put ■^^v^i-icol in inverted 
 commas, as the utterance of the innovators (and should we not then 
 have expected the contrast yjrvy^iKoi, irvevfiariKoi ?), still we cannot 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER clxxxvii 
 
 use the same word over again to express Jude's ' drastic ' retort. 
 This difficulty would be removed if we supposed the loss of a line 
 to the following effect after airoSiopi^ovTe<} : — 
 
 ■\lrvxi'icov<; u/*a? (or tov<} Trto-Tous) \eyovT€<;, oi'tcs avTol 
 
 We may compare Clement's paraphrase in the Adumbratioiies 
 (Dind. vol. iii. p. 483, more correctly given in Zahn, Forsch. iii. 
 p. 85) : Isti sunt ^ inquit segregantes fideles a fidelibus secundum 
 propriam infidelitatem redarguti^ et iterum [non] * discernentes 
 sancta * a canibus.^ Animates inquit spiritum non habentes, spiritum 
 scilicet, qui est per fidem secundum usum justitiae. 
 
 [The authorities are two MSS., Cod. Laudun. 96, sec. ix. (L), 
 Cod. Berol. Phill. 1665, sec. xiii. (M), and the Ed. Pr. of De la 
 Eigne, 1575 (P).] 
 
 Zahn endeavours to defend the reading sancta a caniMis by 
 quoting Clem. Str. ii. 7, rmv Se dyiav fiSTaBiSovat rots kvctiv 
 airayopeverai, which seems to me entirely alien to the general 
 drift of the passage. Starting with the carnibus of the oldest MS., 
 I think we should read carnalibus. If we retain sancta, I should 
 be inclined to understand this in reference to the behaviour of the 
 libertines at the love-feasts described in v. 12, which may be com- 
 pared withal Cor. 11^^, 6 yap ia-6l<ov kuX irlvmv ava^iw; Kpifia 
 eavrm ea-diei xal irivei firj SiaKpivcov to a o) fia. But 
 perhaps we should read sanctos and transpose the clauses as 
 follows : — 
 
 Isti segregantes : fideles a fidelibus et iterum sanctos a carnalibus 
 discernentes secundum propriam incredulitatem, redarguti, ani- 
 males spiritum non habentes, the Greek being something of this 
 sort : ovToi elaiv ol airohbopl^ovre's. iricrTov^ r&v irtarrSsv, aylovi 
 Se dv rasv -ifrv^iK&v SiatcpivovTei Kara ttiv Ihiav diricrTiav, i\iy- 
 •X^ovrai ■\^V)(iKol irvev/j.a firj e-XpvTe<s. 
 
 The opposition of -^jrvx^ikoi to irvevfiariKoi is familiar in the 
 writings of Tertullian after he became a Montanist. The Church 
 is carnal, the'sect spiritual. So the Valentinians distinguished 
 their own adherents as pneumatici from the psychici who composed 
 
 ' Sunt M, cm. LP. 
 
 ^ Redarguti MP, redargui L. 
 
 ' Non inserted by Zahn (the Rev. P. M. Barnard suggests parum for iterum). 
 
 * Sancta L has the word between the lines. 
 
 ' Canibiis MP, carnibus L (' wenn ioh nicht die Variante iibersehen habe '). 
 
clxxxviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 the Church. These were also technical terms with the Naassenes 
 and Heracleon (see my notes on James S^^), and were probably 
 borrowed by the early heretics from St. Paul, who uses them to 
 distinguish the natural from the heavenly body (1 Cor. 15**), and 
 also to express the presence or absence of spiritual insight (1 Cor. 
 2^*') yjrvxticoi avdpoi'iro'; ov Si'^^erai to, tov irvevfiaTog tov @eov, 
 fitopia y^p avr^ iartv . . . 6 Be irvevfiaTiKO'; avaitpLvet iravja. 
 The innovators against whom St. Jude writes seem to have been 
 professed followers of St. Paul (like the Marcionites afterwards), 
 abusing the doctrine of Free Grace which they had learnt from 
 him {v. 4, Tr\v tov 0eoO j^apiTa fierariOevTei et? da-eXyeiav), pro- 
 fessing a knowledge of the I3a,dri tov @eov (1 Cor. 2^*), though it 
 was really a knowledge only of to, ^dOea tov XaTava (Apoc. 2^), 
 and claiming to be the true SvvaToi and irvevfjuaTCKol, as denying 
 dead works and setting the spirit above the letter. This explains 
 the subsequent misrepresentation of St. Paul as a heresiarch in 
 the Pseudo-Clementine writings. 
 
 vv. 22, 23. (Text of Tischendorf and Tregelles) kuI ov<s ftev 
 iXey^eTe SiaKpivofievov^, ov<; Se o-tafere iie irvpo'; dpird^ovTe'i, ovf 
 Se iXeaTe iv (j>6^ip, iU(TOvvTe<i koX tov diro t^? crapKoi; etnrt- 
 Xwfievov y(^iT&va. (Text of WH. and B. Weiss) koL oft? /j,ev eX-eare 
 Siaicpivofievov^ o-tofere i/c irvpM dpirdtpvTe<i, ow? Se eXeare iv 
 (^o/S^), iuaovvTe<s koX tov diro tt}^ aapicb'; ea-iriKasiiivov X^TWi/a. In 
 App. to WH. it is added, ' Some primitive error probable : perhaps 
 the first eXeare an interpolation' (^Sel. Readings, p. 107). 
 
 22 IKiyxfTc AC* 13. Vulg Boh. Arm. Aeth. (Eph. Theophyl. Oee. Comm. 
 
 Cassiod.). AeSre BC^ • Syr''. eXecii-e KLP (Theophyl. Oec. ixt.), « 
 
 TTupos &pird£eTf (hie) Syr'. Clem. 773. 
 diwcpivoiievovs ABCR . 13. Vulg. Syrr. Boh. Arm. Clem. 773, bicxpivdiuvot 
 
 KLP + . 
 23. ois 8e (1st) ASC 13 KLP Vulg. SyrK Boh. Arm., Om. B., 8e SyrP. Clem, 
 o-cifsre XABC 13 Vulg. Boh. Arm, Aeth., ex (jbo'iSm o-mfere KLP + , tXeelre 
 
 Clem. 773 (quoted below), e\eaTe iv <f>6^a Syr"! in mipos ABCKLPK 
 
 13 Arm., « tov tt. Boh. Om. o-wferf eK nvphs ap-rrd^ovrts Sypi". 
 ipTrd^ovTcs ovs 8e iXeare iv <\>6&a ABi$ 13. Vulg., Arm., om. Apird^ovres Boh., 
 
 dpird^ovTf! iv (jjofiio C. Syr''., dpTrd^ovTcs KLP + 
 
 Tischendorf makes the matter clearer by giving the consecu- 
 tive text of versions and quotations as follows : Vulg. M hos 
 quidem arguite judicatos, illos vera salvate de igne rapicntes, 
 aliis autem miseremini in timore. Ar°. M quosdam corripite 
 super peccatis eorum, et quomndam miseremini cumfuerint vicfi, 
 et quosdam salvate ex igne et liberate eos. Ar^. M signaie quos- 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER clxxxix 
 
 dam cum dtibitaverint orhos (?) d solvate quosdam territione, 
 dbripite eos ex igne. Aeth. quoniamest quern redarguent per verbum 
 quod dictum est (Aeth^''-. promoter peccatum eorum), et est qui et 
 sei'vabitur] ex igne et rapient eum, et est qui servabitur timore et 
 poenitentia. Arm. Ht quosdam damnantes sitis reprehensione, et 
 quosdam solvate rapiendo ex igne, et quorundam miseremini timore 
 judicando (? indicando). Cassiodor.^*^ Ita ut quosdam dijudicatos 
 arguant, quosdam de adustione aeterni ignis eripiant, nonnuUis 
 misereantur errantibus et conscientias maculatas emundent, sic tamen 
 ut peccata coram digna execrationere fugiant, Mr. Horner states 
 that vv. 22, 23 are omitted in Sah. He translates Boh. as follows : 
 KaX ott's fiev 6A,67;^6T6 SiaKpivo/ievovi, oS? Be a-do^ere ex tov ttu/so? 
 (al. om. Toil), obt Se eXedre (al. t^epere) iv (po^cj). Commentaries of 
 Theophylact and Oecumenius, KoKelvov^ Be, el fiev diroBda-Tavrai 
 VfiMv — TOVTO yap arjfiaivei rb BiaKpiveaOai — eXeyj^ere, TovreaTi 
 ^avepovre TOt? irda-i rrjv acre^eiav avT&v ecre Be Trpbi Xaaiv 
 a.<j)opa<Ti, fifi diradelade, dWa to5 t^s dydwr]^ vfimv eXem irpoa- 
 Xafi^dveade, o'm^ovTe'i e« tov i^TreiXrj/jLevov avTOi<i irvpoi' irpoa- 
 Xa/i^dveaOe Be fierd tov iXeeiv avToiii ical /lerd (fiofiov. 
 
 In all these it will be observed that three classes are dis- 
 tinguished, as in the text of Tregelles and Tischendorf, and in A, 
 ows fJ.6v eX,eyy(ere BiaKpivofievovt, otiv Be ampere ex ttUjOO? dp-Trd^ov- 
 rey, o^? Bk eXeuTe iv <j>6/3<p, and N, ovf fiev eXeaTe BiaKpivofievov<;, 
 ovi Be o-fflfere e/c ttu/so? dpird^ovTe'i, ov? Be eXedre iv <fi60ea. We 
 should draw the same conclusion from the seeming quotation in 
 Can. Apost. vi. 4 (pv fiia'^a-ei'; irdvTa dvdpeowov, dXXd) oOs fiev 
 eXey^eii, ob'} Be e\€»;<r6t?, Trepl &v Be Trpocrev^r) (ob<; Be dyaTr'^aei'i 
 virep TTjv ■^vyrjv aov), which occurs also, with the omission of the 
 cause ot<i Bk iXe^aeii in the Didache ii. 7. 
 
 Two classes only are distinguished in the following : SyrP. 
 M quosdam de illis quidem ex igne rapite ; cum antem resipuerint, 
 miseremini super eis in timore, representing koI 0O9 /lev e/e 
 TTUjOO? apird^CTe, BiaKpivofievov; Be iXeaTe iv (fio^^i. Syr**, et 
 hos quidem miseremini resipiscentes, hos autem servate de igne 
 rapientes in timore, representing koI ou? fiev iXeuTe BiaKpivo/ievov<s, 
 om Be o-eofeTe e« irvpoi apva^ovTei iv (f)6^q). Clem. Adumbr. 
 quosdam autem solvate de igne rapientes, quibusdam vero miseremini 
 in timore} representing ou? Se o-wfiere e'/c irvpb'i dpvd^ovTe^, o&s Be 
 
 ^ The paraphrase continues, id est ut eos qui in ignem cadunt doceatis ut semet 
 ipsos liberent. (It would seem that this clause has got misplaced and should be 
 
cxc INTRODUCTION 
 
 eXedre ev ^6^<p. Clem. 'Strom, vi. 773, xal ot^ '/J,ev e'/e TTf/JO? 
 apva^eTe, hiaKptvofievovi Be iXeeire, implying that he was ac- 
 quainted with two diEferent recensions. With these we may 
 compare the texts of B, followed by WH. and B. Weiss, /cal ovi 
 [xev eXeare StaKpivofiivov^ ampere Ik Try/so? dpird^ovrei;, ov<; oe 
 iXeaTB ev 4>o^'P> °^ ^> *"' "^^ f*^" eXey)(eT6 BiuKpivofievov^, ovi Be 
 o-tofere bk ttu/jos dpTrd^ovrei ev <f>6^a), and of KLP, Kai ov^ fiev 
 iXeeire BiaKpivofievoi, oS? Be ev (po^m ampere bk irvpo<; aptra- 
 
 ^OVTBI. 
 
 St. Jude's predilection for triplets, as seen in vv. 2, 4, 8, in the 
 examples of judgment in m. 5-7, and of sin in v. 11, is prima 
 facie favourable to the triple division in this passage. Supposing 
 we take A and K to represent the original, consisting of three 
 members, a 6 c, we find B complete in a and c, but confused as to 
 b. As it stands, it gives an impossible reading ; since it requires 
 0&9 fiev to be taken as the relative, introducing, the subordinate 
 verb iXedre, depending on the principal verb cra^eTe ; while ov<; 
 Be, on the other hand, must be taken as demonstrative. WH 
 suggest that eXedre has crept in from below. Omitting this, we 
 get the sense, ' Some who doubt save, snatching them from fire ; 
 others compassionate in fear.' It seems an easier explanation to 
 suppose that iXedre was written in error for eXeyxexe, and ov<; 
 omitted in error after SiaKpcvofievov<;. The latter phenomenon is 
 exemplified in the readings of Syr^. and Clem. Sir. 773. The 
 texts of C and KLP are complete in a and b, but insert a phrase 
 from c in 6. The most natural explanation here seems to. be that 
 the duplication of iXedte in a and c (as in H) caused the 
 omission of the second eXedre, and therefore of the second ovt Be. 
 The reading Biaxptvofievoi in KLP was a natural assimilation to 
 the following nominative dpTrd^ovTsv, and seemed, to those who 
 were not aware of the difference in the meaning of the active and 
 middle of SiaKpivm, to supply a very appropriate thought, viz. 
 that discrimination must be used; treatment should differ in 
 different cases. 
 
 The real difficulty however of the triple division is to arrive at 
 a clear demarcation between the classes alluded to. ' The triple 
 division,' says Hort (App. p. 107), ' gives no satisfactory sense ' ; 
 
 inserted after rapientes.) Odientes, mquit, earn, quae camcUig est, macidatam 
 tunicam; animae videlicet tunica macida (read maculata) est spiritus concupis- 
 centiis poUtUtis camalibus. 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER cxci 
 
 and it certainly has been very diversely interpreted, some holding 
 with Ktihl that the first case is the worst and the last the most 
 hopeful : ' Die dritte Klasse . . . durch helfendes Erbarmen wieder 
 hergestellt werden koanen, mit dejien es also nicht so schlimm 
 steht, wie mit denen, welchen gegeniiber nur eXiyxeiv zu iiben 
 ist, aber auch nicht so schlimm, wie mit denen, die nur durch 
 rasche, zugreifende That zu retten sind ' ; while the majority take 
 Reiche's view of a climax : ' a dubitantibus minusque depravatis 
 ... ad insanabiles, quibus opem ferre pro tempore ab ipsorum 
 contumacia prohibemur.' My own view is that Jude does not 
 here touch on the case of the heretical leaders, of whom he has 
 spoken with such severity before. In their present mood they are 
 not subjects of eXeo?, any more than the Pharisees condemned by 
 our Lord, as long as they persisted in their hostility to the truth. 
 The admonition here given by St. Jude seems to be the same as 
 that contained in the final verses of the Epistle written by his 
 brother long before : idv xis iv vfiiv irXavr/df] airo tjj? a\r]0eia<s 
 Kal iirtaTph^y Ti<s avrov, yivma-Kere on 6 iiricrTpiyJrai; afiapTmXov 
 eK irXavrii; oSov avrov crcocrei "^v^^rjv ex Oavdrov. The first class 
 with which the believers are called upon to deal is that of doubters, 
 SiaKpivo/ievoi, men still halting between two opinions (cf. James 
 1®), or perhaps we should understand it of disputers, as in 
 Jude 9. These they are to reprove and convince (cf. John 16^'®, 
 iXiy^ei irepl dfiapna<! on ov nrio'TevovcTiv el<; i/ie). Then follow 
 two classes undistinguished by any special characteristic, whose 
 condition we can only conjecture from the course of action to be 
 pursued respecting them. The second class is evidently in more 
 imminent danger than the one we have already considered, since 
 they are to be saved by immediate energetic action, snatching 
 them from the fire ; the third seems to be beyond human help, 
 since the duty of the believers is limited to trembling compassion, 
 ■expressing itself no doubt in prayer, but apparently shrinking 
 from personal communication with the terrible infection of evil. 
 We may compare with this St. Paul's judgtnent as to the case of 
 incest in the Church of Corinth (1 Cor. 5^), and the story told 
 about Cerinthus and St. John. 
 
 2 P. i. 1. Xvfieoov NAKLP syrr ' al. longe phi.' Ti Treg WH.'°, 
 Spitta, Weiss, Kiihl, von Soden, Zahn, ^i/ncov B vg sah boh WH. It 
 is far more easy to suppose that 'Zcfimv was a correction of Xv/j,ewv 
 
oxen INTRODUCTION 
 
 than the reverse, as Xviiewv is only used of Peter in one other 
 passage of the New Testament, viz.. Acts xv. 14, where the MSS. 
 all agree, but the Vulg. and several other versions read ^ifiav. I 
 cannot think the record of B so good in this epistle as to justify 
 us in following it against the weight of the other MSS. as well as 
 against internal probability. 
 
 i. 2. Tov 6eov Kul 'IijtroO tov Kvplov rj^iSiv MSS. generally Ti 
 Treg WH., Om. tov 0eov teal 'Ir/o-oO P. vulg. Minusc. 69, 137, 163, 
 Spitta, Zahn, Nestle. There is much to be said for the omission : 
 see n. on the passage. 
 
 [i. 3. syrP represents cos iravTa rij? Qe.la<i Bvvdfieca^ airov 
 SeSmprjfievov ' in as much as He has given all things of divine 
 power,' syr*" o? . . . SeSa>prjfievo<} ; both connect vv. 3, 4 closely 
 with V. 2, not with v. 5. G.] 
 
 ISla B6^y a ACP 13 vg sah boh syrr Ti Treg WH."", v. Soden, 
 Weiss, Spitta, Kuhl, Keil + , Sik 8of »;? ^KL 31 ' al. longe plu.' WH. 
 The recurrence of Sih in the sentence irdvra rjfuv tjj? 0eia<i 
 Svvdfieco<! avTov rh Trpos ^(oijv . . . BeBeoprjfiev'r]<i S ta tjj? iiriyva>- 
 ffew? rod KaXea-avTO<! fip.a<; B i h So'^jjs koI dpeTrj^' B i' &v ra 
 fieyKTra . . . iTrayyeXfiaTa BeBmprjrai, "va B i a rovTcav yivrjade 
 6ela<i Koivcovol ^uo-eia?,. makes it more likely that Bid should have 
 been written by mistake for IBla than the reverse ; Bo^y would 
 then be corrected to Bo^r}^. Again Bih. Bo^rji} is too vague to 
 convey a meaning ; while iBioi is a favourite word with 2 Peter 
 and IBia Bo^y gives an excellent sense, ' He called us, drew us by 
 His own divine perfection ' : cf. ' we love Him, because He first 
 loved us.' 
 
 i. 4. Bi mv TO. Tifiia koX /le^iaTa ri/uv B syr*" spec Qm) WH. 
 Weiss, St' Siv rd Tifiia yfiiv koX fiiyia-ra H KL + Ti, Be' &v rh 
 fieyiffra koX rlfiia ijfiiv ACP 13. 31. 68 syrP Treg (sed A 68 syrP 
 vfitv pro rjfiiv ^). As regards the order of the epithets, XBKL 
 agree in placing the positive first, thus avoiding the very un- 
 natural anti-climax. It is true that examples of the anti-climax 
 may be found in other writers, but only when the epithets are not 
 in pari materia, as in Xen. Cyrop, ii. 4. 29 BvvarwTdTOiv ical 
 •n-poBvfiasv, where the two characteristics do not necessarily vary 
 together. The position of the dative in B seems to be the true 
 one ; that in X is explained by the desire to bring it under the 
 influence of Tlfua. The order in A seems to have originated in 
 ' Syrh has 7)iuv but, as usual, gives the reading of syri" in marg. 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER 
 
 CXOIU 
 
 the accidental or intentional omission of rlfiia Kal and its wrong 
 insertion from the margin. A appears to be right in reading vfuv, 
 as we can hardly understand the following <^ivi]aQe without it. 
 Confusion between ^/^et? and vfiil^ is very common, and the 
 change here is explained by the preceding jj/ta? in v. 3. Spitta, 
 reading Tifiia '^fuv, inserts viuv after iTrayyek/jLaTa. 
 
 i. 12. fieXXyaco H ABOP vg Ti Treg WH, oiK a/ie\j?Vffl KL 
 syrr, ov /j.eW'qa-ai tol Cass, /jteXija-aj Field (OHum Norv. ii. p. 151). 
 The insertion of the negative is an attempt to get over the 
 awkwardness of fieXX'qcrto, 'I shall be about to,' the only other 
 example of which in the N.T. is Mt. 24^ fieXXija-eTe aaoveiv 
 iroXipbovi, where the tense seems to point to an event which will 
 be imminent at a time still in the future. This is not the case 
 here. Other instances of the confusion between fieXat and fiiXXa 
 are John 128, j p_ 57^ jy;^ 22^^ where many MSS. have the incor- 
 rect fiiXXw. Field quotes Suidas iMeXrjcrm- aTrouSaa-oa, ^povTiaw. 
 Hesychius and Photius wrongly ascribe this force to jMeXX'qam, 
 perhaps from a recollection of the received reading of this passage. 
 Schleusner's note on Photius is {Gur. Nov. p. 227) ' pro fxeXXriaw 
 necessario reponendum est fxeXria-a).' Other instances of the 
 personal construction, fieXw for fieXei fioi,^ are found in Eur. 
 Here. F. 772 6eol r&v aSixcov fiiXovai Kal twv oa-icov iirateiv, Plut. 
 Vit. 395. 
 
 iv Trj irapovari dXrjdela. For the difficult irapovari, read by all 
 the authorities, Spitta suggests ■n-apaBodela-r/, as in ii. 21 e« t^? 
 TrapaSo9eiari9 avToi<! dy(a^ evToXrj<i, and Jude 3 t^ aira^ nrapa- 
 Sodeiarj iriaTet. 
 
 i. 17. ^eovfji; ivey^deiarjis air^ roiaa-Be vtto rrj^ neyaXoirpetrovv 
 S6^ri<!. So all the authorities, except syrf, which give airo, and vg 
 which has delapm a (in Sabatier's Old Latin del. de). It is diffi- 
 cult however to see the force of viro, ' a voice brought by the 
 excellent glory.' We have an example of the proper use of 
 <j)epofiai VTTO just below in v. 21, virb irvevfiaTov aylov (fiepo/ievoi 
 iXdXrjo-av. Surely the excellent glory is the source, not the vehicle 
 of the voice I think we should read airo with syrr. In like 
 manner viro has been substituted for awo in most MSS. of Lk, 8^^ 
 and Acts 15*. 
 
 i, 19, av')Qji,ii^p^'\ c'^dJ.Tjpm A 26 al. There is the same peculiarity 
 
 i ^uidas explains /leXco by iy iiri/ieXflif elut. 
 
cxciv INTRODUCTION 
 
 ia the ciKaTairda-Tovii of B ia ii. 14, on which see note. Perhaps 
 it originated in faulty pronunciation. 
 
 i. 21. diro deov BP syr^ + WH Ti, dirb deXi^fiaTO'i Oeov boh, 
 ay lot deov N KL syrP+Treg, ayioi tov deov A, ciy''°'' ^^^> o^yof 
 dirb deov al. Evidently ayioi, is a correction, which had the 
 advantage of giving greater prominence to the idea of holiness. 
 
 ii. 4. <npol<i X Ti {aeipoig ABC Treg), aeipaU KLP vg syrr 
 boh + . Sah translates freely, 'For God spared not the angels 
 when they sinned, but cast them down to the abyss in darknesses 
 infinite, he gave them to be kept for the judgment being punished,' 
 which seems to represent afiva-atp iv aireipot<s {cf. J. 6 ai'St'oi?) 
 ^6<f)ot,<i rapTapaaai TrapeScaxev et? Kpieriv KoXa^ofievovi Tqpelv. 
 If (reipati were the reading of the archetype, we can hardly 
 conceive its being changed to a-tpoli, since the former is the 
 commoner word and is also supported by Se<r/toZ? in Jude 6. On 
 the other hand, it is difficult to see why the author should prefer 
 to write a-ipoiv. Why should he not have used a Septuagint 
 equivalent, ajSvaaoi;, Xukko^, ^odwof etc., unless indeed the 
 former was the word employed in Enoch? See further in the 
 explanatory note. 
 
 ^oijyov BCKLPN Ti Treg WH Weiss, ^6(j>oi^ HA Spitta, Kuhl. 
 The latter reading may have arisen from a marginal -oi<s intended 
 to correct a-eipal<}, but vn-ongly applied to ^o^ovt Spitta would 
 read fo^ot? contracted from ^o^eoii{, but the word itself is very 
 rare, and there is no proof that it was ever contracted. 
 
 Tvpovfievovi BCKLP syr'^ + Ti Treg WH, KoXa^o/ievovi rripelv 
 K A latt syrP boh sah Spitta (who rejects the usual explanation that 
 this is an emendation from ver. 9 on the ground that the influence 
 would rather have been the other way; ver. 9 would have been 
 altered to agree with ver. 4, but there is no trace of this). On the 
 other hand, there are many examples of recurrent phrase in 2 Pet., 
 e.g. Steyeipeiv iv {nro/jiivriaei in i, 13 and iii. 1 ; tovto irpwTov 
 yiwvaKovTei; in i. 20, iii. 3 ; e^aKoXovOeco in i. 16, ii. 2, 15 ; (j}6opd, 
 ii. 12 bis; fiiaffov dSiKia(}, ii. 13, 15; SeXed^o), ii. 14, 18; 
 ovpavol . . . TrapeXeva-ovrat aroiy(eia Bk Kavaov/ieva Xvdijaerai 
 in iii. 10, and ovpavol , . . XvOija-ovrat Kal arofxela Kavaovfieva 
 TijKerai in iii. 12. Moreover, the reading of K A is more in harmony 
 with the description in Enoch x. 4, 12, Ixxxviii. 2, where final 
 punishment is preceded by preparatory punishment. 
 
 ji. 6. KUTaa-Tpocfiy KaTexpivev X AC^KL vg syrr (eV KaT. 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER cxcv 
 
 where eV merely marks the dative) + Treg Ti Spitta Weiss v. 
 Soden, KaTe/cpivev BC WH, KaTea-rpe-^ev P. It seems more 
 likely that KaTaa-Tpo<f>i} should have been accidentally omitted 
 than inserted. It was a natural word for the author to use, as 
 KaTaarTpe(j)eo and Karaajpoi^ri are used of the destruction of 
 Sodom in Genesis xix. 25, 29, Deuteronomy xxix. 23, Isaiah xiii. 
 19, Jeremiah xxvii. 40, Amos iv. 11. For constr. of. Mark x. 33, 
 KaTUKpivovatv avTov davaTcp, Matthew xx. 18 (where B omits 
 OavoLTtp), Martyr. Andr. jprius 13 avSpa firjSev aSiK'^aavra Kari- 
 Kpivev aravpm, Diod. xiv. 4 tov? 'TrovrjpoTaTov's KareBiKa^ov dapdrm, 
 Ael. V.S[. xii. 49 KaTeyvdxrOr) BavaTtp. 
 
 aare^eaiv BP syr"* (exemplum eorum quae impiis futura sunt 
 ponens) syr? (exemplum impiis futurorum ponens, al. exemplum 
 impiis futuris ponens) WH, roiii dae^ea-iv sah boh, aae^eiv X 
 ACKIftVg Treg Ti. The infinitive da-e^elv is naturally suggested 
 by fieWovTcov, but does not give so good a sense as the dat. 
 aae^eaiv. As a rule, inroSeiyfia takes a genitive of the thing 
 and dat. of the person, as in Sir. 44. 16 'Eva>^ vir6Beiy/ia fieTavoia<i 
 Tail yeveal^ ; 2 Mace. vi. 31 rots veoi<i viroSeiyfia yevvai6Tr)T0(} 
 KaToXiwrnv ; 3 Mace. ii. 5 irapdBeiyfia roii eTriyvofiivoig Kara- 
 (Tri^(Ta<s. So here it makes much better sense to say ' an example 
 (or warning) to ungodly persons of things in store for them' 
 [cf. Heb. xi. 20 irepl fieXKovrap ev\6yrfaev, and v.l. in Heb. ix. 11 
 rmv /leWovTCOv dyad&v. Col. 2^' a ia-riv a-Kid tS)v fieXKovrmv, 
 Petri Apoc. {pup. Clem. Al. 8tr. vi. § 48) dtroaroKov^ BrjXovvra'; 
 Toi, fieXKovTo] than to say ' an example of persons about to do 
 wrong,' which would be better expressed by the sim-ple 7rapdBeiy/j,a 
 dcre^eiaq. 
 
 ii. 8. 6 BUaio^ N ACKLP syrr Treg Ti, om. 6 B WH. The 
 latter reading gives an easier construction for the datives 
 ^ke/jLfiaTt KoX aKoy, ' righteous in look and in hearing,' i.e. he 
 discouraged sin by the expression of his countenance and by 
 refusing to listen to evil. Reading o BUaio<i, we should have to 
 govern ^i/jL/iarc by ■yjrv^rjv Biicaiav ifiaadvi^ev, and to give an 
 unprecedented force to ^Xifi/ian, ' the righteous man tortured his 
 righteous soul in seeing and hearing because of their lawless 
 deeds ' (cf Field, Ot. Norv. p. 241). Vg (not noticed in Ti) seems 
 to agree with B, ' aspectu enim et auditu Justus erat habitans 
 apud eos qui de die in diem animam justam iniquis operibus 
 cruciabant.' 
 
 2 
 
cxcvi INTEODUCTIO]N 
 
 11. 11. ov (jiepovcriv tear' avrmv -irapa Kvplm ^\dac[>rifiov xpccriv 
 a BCKLP syrr Ti, om. m-apa Kvplm A vg+, irapa Kvpcov minusc. 
 et. verss. al. Spitta, [Trapk Kvpiip] Treg WH. Here air&p refers 
 to S6^a<; ( = Tfl5 Sta^oXp), and iraph. /ev/jt'g), refers to <J\Aa elirev 
 eiriTifMija-ai aoi, Kvptoi in Jude 9. It is implied that reverence for 
 God was the motive which restrained the angel from presumptu- 
 ous judgment. It is impossible to imagine such a phrase foisted 
 in by a scribe, and its difficulty accounts for its disappearance 
 from A, whereas it is quite in accordance with 2 Peter's remote 
 and abstract way of alluding to what he had before him in Jude. 
 I see no meaning in Spitta's irapa Kvpiov. If it is ' from the 
 Lord,' how can it be a ^da-^r}fio<; Kpi<n<! ? 
 
 ii. 13. dSiKovfievoL H BP syr? arm-]- WH, Ko/iiovfievoi H" ACKL 
 vg sah boh syr'' (ementes)-|-Ti Treg. The future KOfiiovfievot is 
 out of place here, where we want a present (or even a past) 
 participle synchronizing with the verb <ji0api]aovTai, and can only 
 be regarded as an emendation of the misunderstood dBiKovfievoi, 
 which may be translated ' defrauded of the hire of fraud,' like 
 Balaam, to whom Balak addressed the words, ' God hath kept thee 
 from honour' (Num. xxiv. 11), and who was eventually killed in 
 his attempt to seduce Israel. So here the false teachers will be 
 destroyed before they obtain the honour and popularity which 
 they seek. 
 
 ■f]hovrjv ^yovfiepoi all MSS. and edd. I have endeavoured to 
 explain this reading in the note. But I am inclined to think 
 that fjhovqv, which may have been a marginal gloss on rpv^rfv, 
 has taken the place of a half-obliterated dydwrjv. Of. Clem. Al. 
 Str. iii. 10 ov yap dydirriv eiiroifi' av ttjv a-vveXevcriv avT&v, and 
 just below fied' ■qfiepav ^Sij ( = 2 P. ei» rifiepcf) irap &v cLv ideX-q- 
 acoab yvvaiK&v dirairelv rr/v tov K.apTroKpaTeiov vofiov ■viraKO'qv. 
 So Paed. ii. 4 (p. 165) rifv dydirriv ttjv ■^yiacrfjiivT^v . . . Kadv^pi- 
 ^ovTe<!, ih. tA? ToiavTa<i eerridaeiv 6 Kvpio<; dydira<! ov KeKkriKev, 
 ib. § 7 dydirr) fikv oZv Selirvov ovk ea-rtv, fj Se e(rrla<n,<! dydirr)'} 
 rjpTriaBa), and other passages quoted in my App. C on Strom, vii. 
 If dyd7rr)v had thus been lost, it was natural to change dirdrai^ 
 into dydirafs, but the quotations from Hermas in my note here 
 show that Tpv(f>'r] and dTrdrai were often connected. 
 
 iv rats avdrai'} avT&v X A^C^KLP syr''-|-WH, for dirdraKi 
 A^BC^ vg syrP (and mg of syr"^) Treg Zahn Nestle Lightfoot (on 
 Ign. Smtfrn.), WH mg. read dydirai';. The gen. avT&v is in favour 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER cxcvii 
 
 of dtraTaK;. It is in consequence of their wiles that they are of 
 admitted to your love feasts. We have here one of the curious 
 instances of a change of meaning with very slight variation 
 of sound in passing from Jude to 2 Peter. So airlXoi and 
 o-TTiXaSe? in the same verse. The reading of B is probably a 
 correction from Jude 12. 
 
 ii. 14. aKaTaTravaTov; KCKLP 13 31 Ti Treg, aKara- 
 irdarovi AB WH. The latter form is unknown in Greek. It is 
 supposed to be derived from a Laconian form wdt^m, see under 
 afjLTrd^ovTat in Herwerden, Zex. Gr. Suppletorium, where, after 
 quoting from Hesych. afnr. = dva7ravovTat, he continues: 'fuit 
 ergo verbum Laconicum ird^ev = Traveiv.' It seems very unlikely 
 that such a word should have found its way into the- archetype of 
 2 Peter. As suggested above (i. 19) on the form ay(fji,ripw, the read- 
 ing may have originated in a faulty pronunciation on the part of the 
 reader, or the v may have been accidentally omitted at the end of 
 the line, as in B, where one line ends with ira- and the next line 
 begins with -arov^. So in v. 21 below, B has lost the last syllable 
 of ecrxara at the end of a line. Blass, Gr. T. Gr., p. 44, gives 
 examples of forms in which the v has been lost, such as iirdrjp, 
 Herm. Vis, i, 33, iiravairaijaeTai Luke x. 6, and eKarjv from icaia). 
 Cf. New Sayings of Jesus, 1 ^aaiXevaa^ dvaTraija-eTai. Schaefer 
 in the Index to Bast's Comment. Palaeogr. (s. av et a confusa) 
 refers to the reading ■n-C<^aa-Kov for irli^avcrKov in Horn. Od. 12. 
 165 with Person's note, and Dr. F. G. Kenyon writes to me that 
 earov and raro are not unfrequently found in papyri and inscrip- 
 tions for eavTov and rairo. He also mentions that 'A^ouo-to? 
 often stands for Avyova-TO'; in papyri, that two examples of Trdot 
 for Travco occur in the G.I.G., viz., 5984 A 3 dvairaoixevo'i and 6595, 
 4 dvairdeTai,, and refers to a paragraph on the subject in Cronert's 
 Memoria Herculanensis, p. 126.^ Hort in his Notes on Orthography 
 {Appendix, p. 170) mentions the form dvairafio^ = dvd'!rav(ri<i in a 
 glossary quoted by Ducange. His own view however is that 
 'the better sense "insatiable" is provided by an altogether 
 different verb irdaaaQai (from iraTeoiiai). After pointing out 
 that in Homer it means no more than " to taste," Athenaeus adds in 
 contrast (i, 43, p. 24 A) ol he vecoTepoi /cal iirl tow TrKrjpmdijvai 
 TiOeaai to irdaaadat . . . 'A/BaraTrao-To? is exactly similar to 
 airacTTo^, diraaria, aTraa-ri.' There is no evidence however that 
 ' See J. H. Moulton Gr. of N. T. Greek, Prolegomena, p. 47. 
 
cxcviii INTRODUCTION 
 
 these words bear the suggested sense. In all the recorded 
 examples aTracrTo<i and its cognates have the sense of ' fasting.' 
 
 ii. 15. KaraXeiTTOvTei H AB Ti WH, KaTaXiirovTe'; B^CKLP 
 syrr + Treg WH". If we assume that the reference is to a fact 
 anterior to the action of the verb hrXavrjOrfaav, the aor. would 
 seem to be needed here ; but there is no reason why the facts 
 should not be regarded as contemporaneous : or rather we might 
 say that we have here one fact described under two names : 
 leaving the right path is equivalent to going in the wrong path. 
 For the confusion between et and i, see my note on I'Se James 
 iii. 3 and Hort's Introduction, p. 306 : ' B shows a remarkable 
 inclination to change t into ei! of which we have the following 
 instances in this epistle, i. 1 laoTeifiov, 17 reifiriv, 20 and iii. 3 
 ryeivtoa-KovTe^, 21 yeivBTai, iii. 1 eiKiKpeivrj, 8 j^etXict iis. 
 
 Boo-o/3 N°ACKLP boh syr'' Ti Treg, Bemp B syr? sah WH 
 Weiss, Bewopo-o/j X (arising from a confusion between 'Qoaop and 
 the marginal correction emp). Prof. Swete informs me, on the 
 authority of Mr. Norman McLean, who is engaged on the forth- 
 coming critical edition of the LXX, that while the name of 
 Balaam's father occurs in seven passages of the Pentateuch, there 
 is no support for the reading Bosor, ' either in our thirty cursives 
 or in the Armenian, Ethiopic, Latin, or Syriac versions.' Prof. 
 Driver considers that it is simply due to textual corruption, (see 
 Hastings' D. of B. i. p. 447, and Zahn's Einl in d. N.T. ii. p. 110). 
 The support of the ordinary name by B against the other MSS. 
 may be compared with its support of %lfitav against Xv/ieeiov in 
 i. 1. It seems to me far more probable that an original 'Boa-op 
 should have been changed to Becop than the reverse. 
 
 o? fiiadov d8iicla<; ■^ydvricrev ACKLP «-= syrr WH Ti Treg, 
 fiiadbv dSiKia's ■^ydTrrjcrav B arm Treg™ WH™. The objection to 
 the latter reading is that in the next clause (eKey^iv ea-)(ev) we 
 have to revert to the subject Balaam. Possibly an accidental 
 omission of o? may account for B's reading. 
 
 ii. 18. oXtya? AB X" vg syrr (' propemodum ' White, ' paululum ' 
 Poc, Gwynn is doubtful), sah boh render ' shghtly ' Treg Ti WH, 
 ovrax; X CKLP, oXiyov minusc. al. The reading 6vToa<; (translated 
 ' who were clean escaped ' in A.V.) seems to involve a self-contra- 
 diction after BeXed^ovaiv. In the MSS. it is hardly distinguish- 
 able from the rare adverb 6Xiya><!. Like ovtox;, the reading oXiyov, 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT QF JUDE AND 2 PETER cxoix 
 
 ' for a short time/ would seem to require the aor. airo<f>vrf6vTa<s 
 read by KLP. 
 
 iii. 6. St &v 6 t6t6 Koa-fiof USart KaraK\vadel<s dwcoKero. 
 Commentators explain St &v as referring to the ef uSaro? xal St 
 vSaro<! of the preceding verse, ' that there were heavens from of 
 old, and an earth compacted out of water and through water by 
 the word of God.' It is very harsh to make two different waters 
 out of two different uses or actions of water, and it is still harsher 
 to repeat vSari in the same clause, ' through which (waters) the 
 then world was destroyed by water.' Remembering that one of 
 the commonest sources of MS. corruption is the confusion between 
 long and short vowels, I think we should read St' ov with minusc. 
 31,^ which would refer to the immediately preceding toS tov @eov 
 \6yo), and give a much clearer expression to the argument. The 
 world was first created out of water by the JVord of God : owing 
 to that same Word it was destroyed by water, and will one day be 
 destroyed by fire. 
 
 iii. 7. T^ avra ABP vg sah boh + WH Ti, tw uvtov H CKL 
 syrr Treg Weiss. The former is the far more 'effective reading, 
 emphasizing the identity of the creative and the destructive Word. 
 If a genitive were wanted, it would have been more natural to 
 repeat @eov. 
 
 iii. 9. St' X A 5. 13. 69 + vg Aug. spec, sah syrr aeth, el<s 
 BCKLP arm boh Cecum., ijycta? K L boh Theoph. Oec, u/iias « ABCP 
 sah syrr arm aeth vg spec +• St' u/ia? Treg*", et? vfid<s Treg WH 
 Weiss, 615 ij/iS? KL. I am inclined to think that St' ij/iS? is right, 
 though the weight of evidence is the other way. It is a wider and 
 deeper truth which is expressed by saying that God delays his 
 coming for our sakes in order that none may be lost, than by saying 
 that God is long-suffering toward you, the particular church 
 addressed.^ The frequent interchange of vfieli and ij/^eis in MSS. 
 is generally recognized, cf. Winer, p. 330 n. So in i;, 11 below I 
 am inclined to think that rifjLa<! (read by X) must have been what 
 the author wrote and not the u/ios of ACKL omitted by B. 
 
 iii. 10. ^fiepa Kvpiov BC Treg Ti WH, 17 fnxipa h, K AKLP 
 Weiss. The phrase rfiiepa Kvpiov is found without the article in 
 
 1 I learn from Nestle's Introduction to Textual Criticism that Schmiedel in his 
 revision of Winer's Or. § 19, is also in favour of this reading. 
 • ^ Cf. however 1 Pet. l^"'- <l>avepae4vTos eV iffxarou rav xp^vuv 5i' lifias, Toir 81' 
 ouToD iriarobs els ®e6v, which Hort explains of the Gentiles generally. 
 
oc INTRODUCTION 
 
 1 Thess. V. 2. Where 17 fjiiepa occurs, as in 2 Th. ii. 2, Kvpiov also 
 generally takes the article; cf. below v. 12. 
 
 iii. 10. oi ovpavol ABC Treg WH Weiss, ovpavoi N KL Ti, 
 add. fiev X13. The anarthrous aToiy^eia and yrj which follow are 
 in favour of the omission of the article. In v, 7 the article is 
 required by the following vvv. 
 
 evpedijaeTui H BKP syrP, ou;^ evped'qaerat, sah, KaraKarjaeTai 
 AL boh syr'' Ti, Kavdijaerai vel KaTaKavdijaovrat ah, d<j>aviadi]- 
 aovTai G, om. Koh yrj — evpeOijaeTai vg, om. evpedrja-eTui spec, 
 Weiss reads evpedrjtreTat with a question, ex pvija-erac corr. putat 
 H (S.B. p. 103). The phrase ovx evpia-Kerai is used to denote 
 disappearance in Ps. xxxvii. 36 ovx evpeOrj 6 roirot avrov, Job xx. 
 8 &a-7rep ivvTTViov eKireTaaOev oi firi evpedy, Dan. xi, 19 Trea-eirai 
 Kal oi^ evpeffrja-erai, Heb. xi. 5, Apoc. xviii. 21. I do not think 
 we can give this forpe to the simple question, as Weiss. It is 
 plain that the reading of C is merely a conjectural emendation by 
 a scribe who could make nothing of evpedija-erai : so probably in 
 the case of KaTaKarjaerai and the other readings. The required 
 sense would be given by KarapvijcreTai or Biapvi^aeTai, but not, I 
 think, by the simple pvijaeTai. Buttman's suggestion, a ev avTfj 
 epya evpeOija-eTac, does not seem to me very felicitous. Dr. Chase 
 thinks that Siapv^aerai receives some support from Enoch i. 6, 
 and also that it is nearer to evpedija-eTai than KaTapvija-erai. He 
 suggests however that possibly laOijaeTai or k^iadija-eTai may be 
 the true reading, in accordance with the words addressed to 
 Gabriel in Enoch x. 7, laarov t^v yrju ^v rjifjavtaav 01 hypriyopoi, 
 and in anticipation of Kaivrjv yrjv in ver. 13 below (the three 
 clauses in vv. 126, 13, answering to the three clauses in «;. 10); 
 but he allows that ' ver. 11 seems to require some verb implying 
 destruction at the end of ver. 10.' Could this be apdrjaerai ? 
 There is much to be said for -KvprnOria-erat, suggested by Dr. 
 Abbott and also by Vansittart in J. of Philol. vol. iii. p. 358. The 
 latter thinks the variants may be explained by the supposition 
 that the archetype had become illegible in places, that the 
 first and fourth letters had disappeared before the first scribe 
 conjectured \e'\vp\e'\6'^aeTai, and that the letters vp had also 
 disappeared before the second scribe conjectured {cK^avia-IOiqa-eTai, 
 while 6 also had disappeared when the third scribe conjectured 
 [«aTa«a]j;o-6Taf. 
 
 iii. 11. Tovroov ovv NAKL syr^ Ti Treg, tovtoov oiJtws B 
 
NOTES ON THE TEXT OF JUDE AND 2 PETER cpi 
 
 syi* (mg. ovv) WH Weiss, rovrwv he ovrtas CP. There seems 
 no special reason for ovTto'i. It is the general fact, not the parti- 
 cular manner of destruction, which has to be insisted on. The 
 reading of is merely an emendation. Dr. F. G. Kenyon writes 
 that the abbreviations of outms and o3v are scarcely distinguish- 
 able, the former appearing as o in the London medical papyrus, 
 as o in the Berlin Didymus papyrus, while oZv = 6 in the Aristotle 
 papyrus, and in the Berlin Didymus. 
 
 iii. 16 Trao-ai? rait KKLP Ti, om. rai<s ABC Treg WH Weiss. 
 ' In all letters ' seems to me too indefinite : rat? would be easily 
 lost after irdaaii}. 
 
 As a rough test of the character of B in these epistles, I give 
 below the readings in which it differs from all or most of the other 
 uncial MSS. I have put (a) before the readings which seemed to 
 me right, (/3) before those which seemed wrong, (?) where I was 
 doubtful. 
 
 Readings of B which are wnsupported ly other uncial MSS. : 
 
 JUDE. 
 
 4 (a) irapeKTehvriaav. 5 (/3) u/ta? aira^ iravra (instead of u/xa? 
 iravra). 9 (j8) ore Mt;j^a>7\ . . . tots. 13 (/8) 'trXdv7]re<i oh 
 ^6(}>ot aKOTovi. 14 (a) eirpo^riTeva-ev, 23 (/8) om. 1st 0^9 Se. 
 
 2 Petek. 
 i. 1 (/8) liifimv. i. 4 (a) rifiia koI /leyia-Ta rifiXv. i. 17 (?) U169 
 fiov 6 ayamiTO'i fiov outo? iariv. ii. 8 (a) clkotj St'/eato?. ii. 15 (^) 
 Bewp /JLia-dov dSiKia'} riyaTrrja-av. ii. 16 (;8) av6pa>iroi<i. ii. 18 (/3) 
 fiaTaioTT]'; B', naTaioTVTri<! B*. ii. 20 (0) iaXa. iii. 5 (^) avve- 
 <rTdoari<!. iii. 11 (/3) rovrmv ovtcd^, ib. om. vfia^. Possibly the 
 pronoun was omitted in the archetype and differently supplied 
 by X and the other MSS. 
 
 Readings of B supported hy om other uncial MS, : 
 
 JUDE. 
 
 5 (?) 'Ijjo-oOs BC. 18 (?) eV icrxa-Tov xpovov BC. 21 (/3) 
 
 TTjprjacDfiev BC. 
 
 2 Peter. 
 
 i. 18 (?) Tffl arfia opei BC. i. 21 (a) dirb deov BP. ii. 6 (/3) om. 
 KaTa<7Tpo(f)f} BC. ' ii. 13 (/3) dyaTrat? BA^. ii. 14 (/3) dxaraTra- 
 
ocii INTRODUCTION 
 
 o-Tous BA. ii. 15 (/3) om. os BH. ii. 19 (?) tovt^ BH (omitting 
 Kai). ii. 20 (?) Kvplov (omitting fjfi&v) BK. ii. 22 (?) tcvXiafioi/ ' 
 BO. iii. 10 (a) rfjiepa (omitting ij) BC. 
 
 Beadifigs of B supported by two other uncial MS8. : 
 
 2 Peteb. 
 
 i. 3 (jS) Sia So^Tj? Kai aperrj^ BKL. ii. 4 (?) a-eipoiv BAG. ii. 12 
 (a) oLSiKov/jLepoi, BPK. ii. 15 (?) KaToXeiirovTef BAX. ii. 21 (a) 
 v'iro(7Tpe'<^ai BOP. ii. 22 (a) a-Vfi^e07]Kev (omitting Se) BAX. 
 iii. 7 (a) rm auro) BAP. iii. 9 {^) ek vfiai BOP. iii. 10 {/S) ol 
 ovpavoi BAG. (?) evped^a-erai BKP. iii. 16 (/3) Tracrats (omitting 
 Tai-s) BAG. 
 
EPISTLE OF JUDE 
 
 AND 
 
 SECOND EPISTLE OF PETEE 
 
EPISTLE OF JUDE 
 
 SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER 
 
 The text given below is founded generally upon that of WH. 
 Where I have departed from this, I have given my reasons for so 
 doing either in the Introduction on the Text or in the Critical Notes. 
 The latter are drawn principally from the last editions of Tregelles 
 and Tischendorf and also from personal inspections of the facsimiles of 
 codd. B and J{, as well as from information received from Prof. 
 Gwjmn and the Rev. G. Horner in reference to the Syriac and 
 Egyptian versions, of which I have said something in the Introduction 
 on the Text. 
 
 Both Epistles are contained in the uncials X-A-BCKLP. They are 
 omitted in the Peshitto, but included in the later Syriac versions, the 
 Philoxenian and Harkleian, here distinguished as sy»* and syr^. In 
 citing the Egyptian versions I shave used the notation Boh., now 
 commonly employed, instead of the less distinctive Copt., employed by 
 Tischendorf. The only other point which it may be well to mention is 
 that, as in the Epistle of James, the symbol + is appended in the 
 Critical Notes to signify that the reading in question is found in other 
 authorities besides those previously mentioned. 
 
 The marginal references denote various degrees of resemblance 
 in the two Epistles, including not merely the recurrence of the same 
 word in parallel passages, but also the occurrence of cognate or 
 equivalent expressions. 
 
 It may be well to mention that in the following passages I have 
 supported in the notes a different reading from that given in the text : 
 Jude V. 1 ToTs 0e<t> . . ■ Koi iv 'Irjcrov, 2 Pet. 1^ om. tov ®€ov kol 'Irjcrov, 
 1^ om. avTov, 1* vfuv, 1' a.fiapTr)fi,a.Ttov, \^^ /leX-^am, V^ airo, 2* (retpais, 
 ib. Ko\a^ofievovi Tv/peiv, 3^ St.' ov, 3^ ijfia.?, S^^ r-^^erai. 
 
[1-2 
 
 lOYAA EniSTOAH 
 
 2 p- 1- 1 1 'lov8as 'I r] (T o V ^ p l (tt o v fioOAoy, a8eX(f>69 5h 
 
 2P. 1. 17 'laKCO^ov, TOis ev Qem war pi TjyairrjiKvois kolI 'Irja-ov 
 2 p. 1. a, 10 Jipia-T^) TeTr/prjfievoi-s kXtj t ols' 2 eAcoy vfuv Koi 
 2 p. 1. 2, 7 el pr)vr] kcu ay a ttv ttXtj v v e lt}. 
 
 1. To/s flci)).../<at ev iTjirov conj. H (/SeZ. Scad. p. 106). rfyattriufvois AB N, 1171- 
 
 R(TfiilfOli KLP. 
 
I 1-8] 
 
 nETPOY Eni2T0AH B 
 
 1 ^vfietav Jlerpos d o vXo s Kai airocTToXos 'lij a o v j.2 
 ^ p KTT o V TOis laoTifiov rjjMv Xa)(ovcrLV ir la t lv ev j. 3, 20 
 SiKaioavpr) tov Qeov rjfjiMV koI a wtt] p o s 'Irjaov 3. 25 
 ^puTTOv' 2 ^ap c 9 vplv Koi el py] vrj TrXrj6vv6e[rfj.i,j.i 
 ev €7riyvco(ret tov Qeov kol Irjaov tov Kvptov rjfiwv, 
 
 3 (OS TravTa r)p,lv rrjs Oeias Swa/iiecos avTOv to. 
 Trpos ^a> 7) V KOLi evaefietav SeSmprj/ievrjs 8ta Trjs cttl- J- 21 
 yvaxrecos tov KaXecravTO? TjfMois I8ia 86^r} koi dperrj , J- 1, J- h 
 
 4 81 cov Ta Tifiia koi fikyiara rj/niv kirayyeXfiaTa 
 SeScoprjTat, iva 8ia tovtcov yevrjade Oeias Koivcovol 
 ^vareats, airo^vyovTes ttJs ev t^ Koap-w ev eiridvp.ias.u.is 
 (f) o p a s. 5 Koi avTO tovto 8e cnr ov 8rjv ir a a a v 3.10,3. 
 TrapetareveyKavTes €7ri^op7]yrj(raT€ ev t rj ir i a t e t3.B,2o 
 V p.63 V Trjv ap€T7}v, ev 8e Trj dpery ttjv yvcocriv, 6 ev 
 
 8e TTj yvcocrei ttjv eyKpuTetav, ev 5e ttj eyKpareia 
 Ttjv vTrojxovrjv, ev 8e ttj vTrofiovrj ttjv evaefieiav, 
 7 ev 8e tji evae^eia r^v ^iXa8eX'^iav, ev 8e Ty 
 (f)tXaSeX(f)ia. ttjv ay airrj v. 8 Tavra yap vplv virap- 3. % 21 
 ^ovTa Kal TrXeova^ovra ovk dpyovs ov8e aKa pir o v s 3.12 
 KaOiaTrjaiv els ttjv tov Kvpiov iqpMv \rjaov \pi(rTov 
 
 1. ^v/ifuv X AKLP syrr. +Treg. Ti. WH., ti^uio ri/uv /cai iieyiara N KL Ti. 
 WH.™, 'S.iii.av B vulg. sah. boh. +WH. WH.™, iitytara koi tiiuo. ij/iii/ ACP syrP. 
 CIS SiKaioffwriv X. rov 9eo«] t. Kvptov K. (sedAsyrP. viiiv) 13, 31 + Treg. tjjj evr<f 
 
 2. Tjftav, WH., TifjLCov. Treg. Ti. Koafiep ev eirtdvfiitf'] rrtv ev rep KOfffitp eiri- 
 
 3. TTOJ/To BCKLP + Treg.WH., to Sv/uav ti. ^«opaj. syrr. WH. Ti. Treg., 
 iravra N A + Ti. iSiif Bo|j) Koi aperri K <p8opas, Weiss. 
 
 ACP 13 vul!<. spec. syrr. sah. boh. Ti. 5. Kai avro touto Se BCKLP, koi outoi 
 
 Treg. WH.™, Sm So^ns koi apejTis BKL ie A vulg. + , koi outo 5e touto N C^ 
 
 31 WH. syrr., kot' {pro koi) codj. Blass. 
 
 4. T</iio KOI /i«7i(rTo i;/iii' B syr''. spec. 8. virapxovTa] irapovra A. + . 
 
 b2 
 
lOYAA [3 
 
 2 p. 3. 1, 8, 3 Ay uTrrjT o I f tt a<r av (ttt o v St) u irotov- 
 
 14, 17 
 
 2 P. 1. s, 10 /iej/oy y p a(p € Lv v fiiv Trepi rrjs koivtjs iqfuov 
 2 P. 3. 1, 15 (TcoTT] p Las avayKrjv €(t\ov y p ayj/ ai v p,iv Trapa- 
 2P. 2. 21 KaXmv eirayoavL^cadai rfj aira^ tt a p a8 o € i(rr) tocs 
 
 2P. 3 2 2 P. (J y J i y TT [ (T T € I. 
 
 L, I, o ' 
 
 3. KoiFfTS ij^wvjic. u/ifljy boh., om. rtfiav KLP + , aa-niptas] add. koi C»^'K. ypaifai] 
 ypa0ety K. 
 
I 8-19] HETPOY B 5 
 
 tTTiyvcaa-iv. 9 ip yap fir} TrapeaTiv ravra, TV(f)Xos e<TTiv 
 fjLvcoTra^wv, XtjOtjv Xa^mv tov KadapKr/xov rmv tt aXa u.* 
 avTov afiapTUou. 10 Sto fiaXXov, ad6A0oi, (nrovdacrare 
 fie^aiav vfjLcov ttjv kXtJ(tip kcu eKXoyrjv woieladai' Ji.^s 
 ravra yap irocovvres ov fir) TrTaicrrjTe TTore'JM 
 
 II ovTcos yap irXovaims em^^oprfyrfdrjaerai vfiiv rj 
 euroSos eiy rrjv aim u to u ^aciXeiau rov Kvpiov rjfxaiv J- 7, si 
 Kai <T corrj p o s \r)(rov ^piarov. j. 25 
 
 12 Aio fieXXrjaco ael vfias virofiifivrjcrKiLV Trepl J. 5 
 rovrcov, Kairrep elSor as /cat ecrrrjpiyfievovs (v rrj j. 5 
 7rapova~r) aXrfdeia. 13 SiKatou de rjyovfiai, e0 oaov 
 elfil ev Tovrco rm (TKrjvwfiari, 8iey€ip€iv vfias ev u tt o- J- s 
 fivr) a € I, 14 eiScos on raj^ivrj eariv ?) airoOeais rov 
 (TKrjuayfiaros fiov, KaOws koll 6 Kvpios rffiav Irjarovs 
 X/otoToy eSrjXoxrev fioi. 15 airovBaato 5e xai enacr- 
 rore ex^''' vfias fiera rrjv ^fi-Tffv e^oSov rrjv rovrav 
 fivr)fir)u TToieLo-dat. 16 ov yap (re(ro(j>i(Tfifvoi9 fivdois ^ 3 
 e^aKoXovOrjiravres eyvcopicrafiev vfilv rrjv rov Kvpiov 
 Tjfiwu Irjaov \pi(Trov dvvafiiu kuI rrapovaiav, aXX 
 eiroTrrat yevrfdepres rrjs eKeivov fieyaXeiorrjros. 17 Xa^cou 
 yap irapa Q eo v ir ar p os rifitju kcu. 8 ^ av, ^taj/^y J. 1, J. 24 
 kv€-)(6ei(Trfs avra roid(r8e viro rrjs fieyaXoirpeTrovs 5 o ^ 77 y 
 O viof fiov 6 ayairrfTos pov ovros eariv, els ov iyco 
 €v8oKr]aa, — 18 kuI ravrrjv rrfv ^covrfv rjpels rjKovaapev 
 e^ ovpavov kve')(6ela-av aw avr^ ovres ev rco ayLCo opei' 
 19 /cat €)(Ofiev fie^atorepov rov Trpo(()r)riKov Xoyov, op j. 14 
 AcaAojy Troieire Trpoae-xpvres cos Xv)(ya) (j)aLvovrt ev 
 av^firfpa ronrco, ecus ov rjpepa 8iavya(rr) Koi (f)0)a(f)opos 
 
 9. a/wpTtay BCLP + WH., afiaprrina- 12, 13 om. Koiirep — Sieyeipfif ifMS N. 
 Tuv K AK Ti. Treg. "WH"". 13. «iroMi'i)<rei] ttj vt. A K. 
 
 10. fficavBaiTare] add. tva Sta rav Kahav 14, kuBus kui o Kvpios Tifiuv om. K. 
 ufiay fpyav H A sjTT. sah. boh. {sed om. 15. (r-irovSatru] o-irouSofai K syrP., ffirou- 
 vfiav N) + . TroieiaSai] iroifiaSe A, iroiiiaBf Sairare sy i'^. 
 
 syrr. vulg. cf. "WH. {App. p. 103). . 17. «wo] orro syrr. o uioj fiov o ayairri- 
 
 12. iieKKriffai N ABCP vulg. sah. boh. toj /lov outos co-tic B WH., ovros effTix o 
 
 + ,ov ntWriaw tol. Cassiod. , ovk ajieXitaa vios fiov o ayait-nros ACKL N sah. (adding 
 
 KL syrr. +, /leAijcra Field, oei vnas /iou after 07.) Treg. Ti. 
 BCKL + , vjjLas aei A vulg., oei irepi 18. T<f o7ii>> op« BC+ WH. Treg., Tip 
 
 TOVToav vTrofiifivTjtrKeiy vfias K. opei Tip ayttp ACKLP X + Tl. 
 
lOYAA [4-9 
 
 2P. 2. 1, 8.7 4 Trapeia-eSvTjarav yap rives avOpcairoi, ol 
 2P. i.9,2.37ra A a i Trpoyeypa/xfievot els tovto to Kpip.a, aae- 
 2P.8.7,2P. j8 e ly, Tr]v tov Qeov -qp-mv xapira pLeTaTiOevres els 
 2P. 2. 2, 7 aa eXy e Lav /cat tov p,ovov 8 e air o ttj v Kal Kvpiov 
 2 p. 2.1 Tjpmv lr](Tovv ^picTTOv apvovp-evoi. 5 Ytto- 
 2P.1.12 p.vrja-ai 8e vpas ^ovXofMat, elBoras vp-as iravTa, otl 
 2 p. 3.1 Ku/3ioy aira^ Xaov eK yrjs Klyvirrov acocras to Sevrepov 
 2 p. 2. 1, s. [Towy] pr] TTiarevaavTas aTrmXeaev, 6 ayyeXovs 
 
 2 p. 2. 4 \ y , y, ~»XJ-,.\»« 
 
 re Tovs p-rj TrjprjaavTas ttjv eavrcov apyrjv aXXa airohi- 
 t p. 1. s, 2. TTOvTas TO 18 I o V oiKTjTTjpiov els K p t <T I V p. e y a X T] s 
 
 16,22,3.8 , / - „ >..«/ < \ 5- ' J ' 
 
 2Py.jM- 77 /A e/j a y o e cr p. o l s aiOLOis v tt o Qo(pov t e t rj- 
 2 p. 2.6 p Tj K e V' *7 (OS ^ o 8 o p, a Kal V 6 p. o p p a kcu ai 
 
 irepi avras tt o X e i s, tov opuoiov Tpoirov tovtols eK- 
 2P. 2. 10 TTopvevaaaai kou aTreXdovarai oiriaco a a p k o s tre- 
 2 p. 2. 6, 1. pas, irpoKeivTai 8 ely p. a ir v p o s al 00 v i o v Siktjv 
 
 v7re)(ovcrai. 8 OpLoicos p,evToi Kal ovroi evinrvia^opevoi 
 27.2.10,20 a a p K a pev piaLvovcriv, kv p l6 ttjt a 8e a e- 
 
 T o va IV, 8 o ^as 8e fiXacr(f)r)pova-tv. 9 'O 8e 
 2 p. 2. 11 Mt^aT^A o ap)(^ayyeXos, ore r^ Sia/SoAop 8taKpi- 
 
 vopevos 8ieX€yeTo irepl tov M.covaecos (riopMTos, ovk 
 2v.2,io,u cr oX pr] a- € V k p i cr i v eir e v ey k eiv fiXa(r(j)rj- 
 
 4. irapet(reSvri<ravBWH..,irapei<Tidv<rav (on 07ra| Ijjff. Kaon) sah. arm. Did. 
 SACKLP + Ti. Treg. Sfaworriv] add. Caasiod., Kaov atra^ (i\em., \aov ABCL 
 Bfof KLP syrr. +. Ti. Treg. WH. 
 
 5. vnas iravra N KL 31 syrr. Clem. 6. fo^oy] add. ayiav o77€A.o)i' specu- 
 Theoph. Oecon. +, v/ms oTraf xoi/to B, Inni, Luc. cf. H. {S.JR. p. 106), oYpiaiK 
 oTToiTroi/ToAC^lSvuIg. +Ti. Treg. WH., 077. Clem. p. 280. add. 'in Tartaro 
 airaf iracTas H. {Set. Bead. p. 106). irt constrictos' Orig. 
 
 X AB syrl"., add. d C^KL syrP. xvpios 8. KvptoTiira] — rrjTas i< Orig. 
 
 a CKL syiK, Iriaovs AB + , Of OS C'-syrP. 9. Se Mixoi)\...ot6 ACKL K, ore 
 
 Clem, airof Aooi/ N 68 tol. syrr. boh. Mix- .. .tote B. Kvpios] S Sios ti. 
 
T 19-11 9] HETPOY B 7 
 
 avareiXrj ev rats Kapbiais v/xmu' 20 tovto irpmrov 
 yiv(o(TKOVT€s OTL TTaora Trpo^rjTCia ypacprjf ISiaf ewi- 
 Xvcretos ov yiviTaL" 21 ov yap deXrjpMTi avOpcoirov 
 TjVt^dri irpo^rjTeia Trore, aAAa vtto TTvevfjuaTosi-io 
 ay iov (l)epofxevoi eXaXrjcrav airo Qeov avOpanroi. 
 
 II 
 
 1 'KykvovTo 5e kclI yjrevSoTrpoiprJTat ev r^ Xam, wfj. 5 
 KoX kv vp.iv eaovrai yf^evSoSiSaa-KaXoc, oirives tt ap e i a- j.i 
 dPovo-iv alpeaeis airaXe ta?, kol tov ayopatravra 
 avTovs o e (TTT o TT) V apvovp.evoi, eTrayovreg eavrois J- * 
 ra^iv^v aw(oX€Lav' 2 /cai ttoXXoL e^aKoXovOraovaLvJi 
 avTwv Tals aar eXy eiais, 8l ovs tj 080s r^yJ*. J" 
 dXrjdeiag ^Xacr^rjp.rjd'qaeTaL' 3 xat ev irXeove^ia^.^, 
 TrXaa-Tois Xoyois vpRs epiropeva-ovrai' ois to k p t p-a^i 
 e KTT aXai ovk dpyei, Ka\ rj dircoXe la avrcov ov j. 4, j ^ 
 vvcrrd^ei. 4 et yap 6 Qeos dyyeXcov dp.apTij-J.6 
 advTCov OVK e(j)e[(raTO, dXXd a e l pols ^o ({) ov rap- J. e 
 Tapwaas TrapeScoKev elf Kp icr lv Tr)povp,evovs,j.6 
 5 KKt dpxaiov Kocrp-ov ovk e((>eLa-aT0, dXXa bySoov Ncoe 
 8cKaioa-vvr)9 KTjpvKa e^vXa^ev, KaraKkvapov Koapm J- 24 
 da e fiS V eird^as' 6 kolI iroXe is ^0 80 p,co v KatJ. 4, is, j. t 
 T o p,6 p p as Tecjypcocras Karaarpo^y KareKpivev, vir o- 
 8eiy pa p,eXX6vTa>v da e ^ea lv redeiKcos, 7 Ka). 8iKaiov J- t j. 4 
 AcoT KaTa7rovovp.evov viro ttjs Tav a0eap.cov ev a a e X y e i a i- ^ 
 dvaaTpo^rjS epvaaro, — 8 ^Xep.p.aTi yap Ka\ aKorj 
 SiKaios evKaroiKcov ev avTols T]p.epav e^ ■^p.epas '^vxv 
 8iKaiav dvopuoLs epyois e^aadvL^ev, — 9 oi8ev Ku/otoyj. is 
 
 20. Trpo^TjTCM ypapi]s] ypa<pt) irpoipr}- Co<l>ov] (o<Ijois A N. Tripovfievous] Ko\ofo- 
 Tf los syrl". fiTiKvffeas] eiriKvtris syrr. fievovs rripetv A H vulg. syrP. boh. (ex. 
 
 21. irpo-^TITeioiroTeBCKP + WH.Treg., i). 9 ?). 
 
 iroTE wpoip. X AL Ti. oiro Beov BP 6. KaraaTpo^iTj KaTeKpiVfv] N ACJib 
 
 syri. boh. WH. Ti., 07101 Beov S KL vulg. syrr. +Treg. Ti., KariKpivep BC 
 
 svrP. + Tres., 07101 sah., 07101 tou 9. A, boh. WH., Koreo-TpeiJievP. oo-E^ecrii' BP 
 
 07.010^080. syrr. WH., o<ree«^8<ACKL + Treg^^Ti^ 
 
 II 1. ev Tu Aoy] 0J». sah. 7. epoo-oToBWH., e/jpuiroToKAOKLF 
 
 2. oSos] Solo A N". Treg. Ti. „*nirTO 
 
 4. o-eipois ABC WH. Treg., o-ipou K 8. !t/coioi B vg. WH. 4Sik. SACKLP 
 
 Ti., o-eipoij KLP vulg. syrr. boh.+. syrr. boh. Treg. Ti. 
 
8 lOYAA [9-16 
 
 III as, aWa euirev 'ETriTifir/a-ai a o t Kv p to f. 
 2 p. 2. 12 10 OvT o I 8 e a a fie v ov k otSaariv fi Xaa-^rj- 
 liov or iv, oara 8e<pv(riKCos do s ra a\oy a ^^ a 
 erricrTavTaL, ev t ov t o is (f)deipovTai. 11 ovai 
 2 p. 2. IS avTols, OTL rfj o 8 ^ tov K.aiu eTTopevdrjcrav, /cal r^ 
 iv.i.iB.s.irXavy tov BaAaa/i pucrO ov e^e\v$r)<Tav, /cat 
 2 p. 8. 8, 9 ry avTiXoyia tov Kope air (oX o ut o. 12 ovtoi elcriv 
 2 p. 2. 18 [ol] eu rais ay air ais vjicov cnr iXa8 es (rvpevca- 
 2P. s, 17 \o V fie V i a^oficos eavrovs iroifiaivovTes, u e (f) eXa i 
 avv 8 po I VTTO ave fioav 7rapa(f)epofievai, 8ev- 
 2 p. 1. 8 8pa (pdivoTrapiva ana pir a 8\s aTrodavovra CKpi^eo- 
 OevTa, 13 KVfiara aypia OaXaaarjs ewa^pi^ovTa ras 
 2 p. 3. 17 eavTav aiaxwas, acrrepes irXavrfTai ols 6 ^oipos 
 2P. 8. 18 rov (TKOTOvs els alava TerrjprjTai. 14 "Eirpo- 
 2 T 1.19,3, <pr] T ev a e V 8e kcCl tovtois e^Sopos airo 'A8ap Kvcox 
 Xeycov '18ov rjXOev Kvpios eu dyiais pvpiaaiv avTOv, 
 Iffi'^^ ^^ TToi^aai Kpiariv KUTa TravTCov kcu eXey^ai iravTas 
 2 p. 2. 8 T OV s a (T e fi els irepX TravTcov tcou e py co v aae^eias 
 avTcov (OV T]cre^r)aai/ Kal Trepl TravToou tcov aKXrfpcov 
 cov eXaX7](rav kut avrov dpapTooXol da e fi els. 
 2 p. 2. 10; 16 OvTOL elaiu yoyyvnTai, pefi^ifioipoi, KaTa Tas 
 eir i6v pias avT wv iropevop-evoi, kou t o 
 2 p. 2. 18 (TTOfia avT o) V XaXel virepoyKa, davpui^ovTes 
 irpocroma co^eXias xapiv. 
 
 12. ovToi tiatv] add. (ex v, 16) 707- 14. ttrpo^riTtvatv B', tirpotip. W, irpot- 
 yvffTai — iropevofievoi K &. 01 iv T015] ■irpu(t>. tt, irpoKJ). ACKL al. ayiais fivpuuriv] 
 om. 01 K K vulg. Luc. Theophl. Oecon. + fuipiaatv ayuuv ayytXuv K gyrP. sah. 
 Chase. a7oirou S BKL syrr. sah. boh. arm. +. 
 
 + , aTtarais AC. vfjiMv\ avTuv A vulg. 15. wavrat rovs affffieis] add, avrav 
 
 syrP. +. avvfvuxovnevoi, o^o/Smi syrr. KL Ti. {vncuHaV), iraaav '^vxif ^ 'V^- 
 
 Tieg, WH-fffvyevax- a<t>o0its,Ti. itapa- sah. areffems avrav] om. K sah. +, 
 
 iptpofievoi B. [curt$fiai] avrav Treg. VK\iiipuv'i add. 
 
 13. irKavrires on (o(pos iTKorovt B. Ao^air N C Ti. 
 
11 9-17] HETPOY B ^ 
 
 evirefiets ex Treipaafiov pveadai, dSiKovs 8e ds tJ/xc-j. e 
 pav K p ia- ecos KoXa^ofx^vovs t tj p eiv, 10 fidXiaTa 
 Se Tovs OTT Itrto cr a p k o s f u €7r td v fi la fit a a pov j.'r,s,ie,ii 
 TTopevopevovs Koi KvpiorrjTOs kut a(j) p o- 
 vovvras. To'Kp.rjToi av6a8eis, So^as ov rpepov- j.s 
 a IV fiXa(r(l)7)fiovvTes' 11 ottov dy y cXo ij.9 
 l<T)(vt Koi 8vvap,eL p^i^oves bvres ov (f) e p o v cr i v 
 KUT avTWv TT a p a ILv p im fiXaa(j)r)pou k p lct l v. 
 
 12 o VT o I 8 e, (OS aXoy a ^m a yeyevvrip,eva (f) v- j. lo 
 a I K a eiy aXaxriv koX (j) 6 o p a v, e v o I s ay v o o v- 
 
 a i V ^Xaa <^rj fx o V VT e s, e v rfj ^ 6 o p a avT oo v 
 Ka\ (f)daprj(rovTai, 13 dSiKovfievoi p. l a 6 o v 
 a8iKLas' r]8ovr]v i^yovp-evot ttjv ev Tjpepa Tpv(f)r)v, 
 
 a IT lXo I KCLL pMflOl €VTpV(j)mVT€9 € V T al s a IT aT a L s ^-^^ 
 avTcov <TVV€VCo-)^ovpi€voi vpxv, 14 o^6aXp,ovs 
 e-)(0VTes p,€crTovs p,OLy^aXi8os Ka\ aKaTairavaTovs apap- 
 Tias, 8eXea^ovT€s xfrvxas aa-TrjpiKTOvs, KapSiav yeyvp- 
 vaap.€vijv irXeove^ias 'i')(pvTis, Karapas T€Kva' 15 Kara- J. n 
 XeiirovTes ev 6 elav 6 8 o v eirXavr] 6 rj a a v, 
 e^aKoXovOrjcravres ry 6 8^ t o v B aXaa p, tov Boo"op 
 oy paadov d8cK[as rjyaTrrjcrev, 16 eXey^iv fifj. is, 22 
 'ea")(€v i8ias irapavop-ias' viro^vyiov a(j)a)vov ev av0pa~ 
 TTOv (pcnvy (^dey^apLevov eKcoXvaev rrjv tov 7rpo(j)r]Tov 
 7rapa(f)poviav. 17 ovto'l elcrcv irrjy a\ aw 8 p o i koI J. n 
 6 p.L-)(^XaL virb XaiXarr o s eXavvopevai, ols 
 
 9. irsipaff/ttou] -cr^ai' S + Ti. 14. fioixaAiSos BCKLP + , ^oixa^ios 
 
 10. tiri9uiwf\ -as X, -ais CP syr'". + . AX vulg. aah. boh. , okotottouo-tous N 
 ToKiafrai avBaSeis Ti. Weiss, ToA^mjToi, CKLP syrr. + Ti. Treg. , -iraaTovs AB 
 avBaSeis Treg. WH. WH. -wavirTov Tulg. + . a/iapriaj] 
 
 11.. iropo Kvpitf X BCKLP syrr. +Ti., anapnais K spec. 
 ojn. A + , ■tapa Kvpiou miriMsa. et versiones 15. KaTa\emavTes H AB WH. Ti., 
 
 plur. Spitta, [wapa Kupup] WH. Treg. KaTa\movrfs B^CKLP + Treg. WH". 
 
 12. ^eyew/jj/tei/o ABOP + WH. Treg., Boo-opACKLP S". vulg. boh. syrl^. aeth., 
 y€yevnii.fva N A^ KL + Ti. 767. ipvcr. Ti. Treg. WH™., Bewp B syrP.+WH., 
 N ABCP, <j)vir. yey. KL. koi (pSapri- Beuopffap ti. os ACKLP S" syrr. WH., 
 a-ovTcu] xaTtt^eap- KL + . om. B X WH™. 7j707rj7ffev] itymritaav B 
 
 13. oBiKou/tfrai N BP syrP. +WH., ko- WH". 
 
 liioviKVOi ACKL K". boh. spec. syr''. + 16. avepanrov] avBpuirois B. 
 
 Ti. Treg. airoTaii N ACKLP syrli. (mg. 17. /cai o^ixA-o'] ve^e\at (ex Jud. 12) 
 
 ayavais), WH. Ti., ayairats A^B sah. L + , om. km — reriiipriTai K. (Tkotovs 
 
 syfP. +Treg. WH™. add. eis atmva (ex Jud. 13) ACLP. 
 
10 lOYAA [17-19 
 
 2 p. S, 1 
 
 12 
 2 P. 3.2 
 
 2 P. 3. 3 
 
 17 'Yfiels Be, ayaTTTjTOL, /xv tj a tjt e t co v 
 prjiiaTcov Tmv it p o e iprj fie uo) v vtt o rmv airo- 
 
 CTT 6\(OV TOV KVploV t] fX CO V 1 7] <T O V ^ p I (T T O V' 
 
 2 p. 2. 10 18 OTL eXeyov vpxv Ett e a^ar ov ^p o v o v e a o v- 
 ra I e fiTT ai KT ai Kara t as e av t oo v e tt 10 v /lias 
 TT o p € V o fie V I Tcov aaf^eimv. 19 Ovroi elaiv ol 
 airo8iopi^ovTes, ^v^ikoi, irvevfia fir] e\ovTeS' 
 
 18. fir' EffXOTou N B, on ctt' eax- AC, boh. al. caovrai S BCK.LP, tXevirovTai 
 
 [oTi] eir' tax- Treg., in ev ftrxaff KL N* AC sah. boh. tidv aire^Eiiiii'] othtw 
 
 mg. P sah. XP"^"" ^^t tou xP"""' " A, aae^tiav sy rK , cnriaa atrePetas syrP. 
 
 XpoVif ^h T(p xpo''V ^ ^^^- 1 "rav XP"""" 19. oiroStopifoKTesJarfd. eaurot/jC vulg. 
 
II 17-III 3] nETPOY B 11 
 
 o ^ 0(f) OS Tov a KOT ov s TeTTjprjTai. 18 uTre/a-Jis 
 oy Ka yap fiaraiOTrjTOS (j) 6 eyy o fie i/ o i SeXea^ovaiv J. is 
 (V e-TT 10 V fjL la IS crapKOS dcreXyeiats tovs oA/-j. r 
 ycos airo^evyovras tovs ev TrXavy ava(rTp€(f)op,evovs, J- u 
 19 eXevdepiav avrols eTrayyeXXofiei'oi, avTol SovXol 
 VTrap)(ouT€s rrjs ^Oopas' ^ yap tis rjTTijTai, tovto) 
 SeSovXtoTui. 20 el yap a'iro(f>vyouT€s ra fjuiacrfxaTa^-^ 
 TOV Kocrfiov ev kinyvcoaei tov Kvpiov /cat crcoTrjpos^-^^ 
 'Irjaov ^puTTOv, tovtois Se iraXiv e/xTrXaKevTes r)TTC0VTaL, 
 yeyovev avrols ra ea^ara ■)(eipoua Tcav irpoarcov. 
 ^1 KpeiTTOv yap rju avTois p-rj eireyvcDKevai, ttjv ooov 
 TTjs SiKaioavvrjs f) einyvovaiv viroarpey^at e k ttj s 
 •Trap aSo 6 e i <T 7} s avrols ay i as euroXrjs'^-^ 
 22 (Tvp^efirfKCv avrols ro rrjs akrjdovs irapoipias, Kvcov 
 eTTia-rpe'^as eiri to 1.8 to v e^epapa, Kai 'Yy Xovcrapivrj ^- ^ 
 els KvXtapou fSop^opov. 
 
 Ill 
 
 1 TavTrjv TjSij, ayairrjToL, Bevrepav v pi v j.b, n, 20 
 ypd^ci) kirLaroXrjv, kv ais dteyelpo} vpxov ev utto-j. 3 
 pvrj a € L rrjv elXtKpivrj Siduocav, 2 pvr] a 61] v aLs.6 
 Tw V 7T p o € ipt} pe V (ov p 7] p a T CO V vTTO tSu a y i CO V 
 7rpod)rjrmv ical rrjs rcov airoa roXcav vp<av e v- j. h, j. ir 
 roXris TOV Kvpiov Kal a corrj p o s, 3 tovtoi.h 
 Trpcorov yivaxTKOvres on. eAevaovrai eTT e (r^a- j.is 
 rcov rwv 'qp.eptov ev e p,7r a ly po vrj e piralKrai 
 Kara r as 18 ias e tt i0 v p.ias avrmv tt o p ev o- 
 
 18. fxaratoTiiros] liaraunris B', -otijttjs 21. emyvoviriv] add. fis -ra oiritra A 
 
 B* ^afl7jToioT>iTos N*. aire\yeiais} aaeK- ti +. viroa-Tpetficu BCP + , eTrio-TpeiJrai 
 
 yeias P vulg. syrr. boh. + . oK,y«s AB S" ^L + , avaKa/i^uL A K. e« BCKLP, ott,, 
 
 syrr vulg. sah. boh ^^^.^^^^^/'ItI'p 22. <r.Mi8e^„«. K AB, add. S. CKLP 
 
 "^19. TO«T,j. K B sah. boh.+WH. Ti, '" 2. «^<»r S ABCKLP, r,^«.r mi»««c. 
 
 20 Kvp^o^ BK + WH. Treg., add. ^- -"X^^r^v K ABC^ e<rx«To« KLP + , 
 
 in fine versus. 
 
 IV CP), om. KL. 
 
12 lOYAA 
 
Ill 3-13] HETPOY B 13 
 
 fxe i> i 4 KUL XeyovTis Ylov eariv t) eTrayyeXia rijf 
 wapova-ias avTOv ; a(f) r}9 yap . ol warepef eKOifi^drja-av, 
 iravra ovrtos Siafiivei air apxrjs Kricrecos. 5 XavOavei 
 yap avTOVs tovto deXovras on ovpavoi rjaav eKTraXai 
 Kttt yrj e^ vSaros Ka\ 8i vSaros (rvvecrTaara too tov 
 Qeov Xoym' G 8t d>v o rare Koapos vSari KaTaKXvadeis 
 a TT 0) A e T o' 7 ol 5e viiv ovpavoi koll tj yrj rm avrco j. n 
 Aoyoi> Tedr)(ravpicrfievoL elcAv ttv pi tt) p o v fie v o l elyj. «, j. r 
 7) fie pav K p iaecos Ka\ dircoXeias twu a o- e /3 to i; j. e, j. * 
 av 6 pioir wv. 8 Ei/ fie tovto p.TJ Xavdavkrw vfxas, 
 ayaTTTjToi, oTi pia rfpipa irapa Y^vplco cos x'^^" ^ '• i^' "{ 
 eTt) Ka), ■)(iXLa eTt) cos i^pepa p.ia. 9 ov ^paSvvei 
 Kvpios Trjs eirayyeXias, cos Ttves ^paSvTrJTa rjyovvTai, 
 aAAa p.aKpodvp,€l els vp.as, p,r) ^ovXopevos Tivas air o- 
 Xe cr 6 ai aXXa iravTas els p-eravoiau ^coprjcrai. 10 H^ei J. n 
 8e rjp-epa Kvptov cos KXeiTTrjSf ev y ol ovpavoi j.» 
 poL^TjSov TrapeXevcrovTai, crTOL-)(€ia 5e Kavcrovpeva XvOtj- 
 aeTai,, Kal yrj kcu Ta ev avTy epya evpedr/aeTai. 
 
 11 TovTCOv ovv -iravTcov Xvopevcov iroTairovs 8ei virap- 
 ■)(eiv vpas ev ayiais avacrrpocpais Kal evore^eiaLs 
 
 12 TrpocrSoKmvTas Kal cnrevSovTas ttjv Trapovcriav Trjs 3.2\ 
 TOV Qeov rj p,€ p as, 8l rjv ovpavoi irvpovpevoi J- e 
 XvdrjcrovTai kcu cTTOi^ela Kavcrovp,€va TrjKeTat. 13 /cat- 
 vovs 8e ovpavovs Kal yrjv Kaivrjv kutu to eirayyeXpa 
 avTov IT p o cr 8 o Km p.e V, ev oTy 8LKaiocrvvr] KaTOiKel. J- 21 
 
 5. trvveffTuffa ACLP N°, a-vveirratrTis tur '), KaraKaTjffeTai AL syr*^. Ti., Kavdnj- 
 Bj -ffTaffai K, -ffTwra X "WH™. aerat vel KaraKavBriffovTai al. , cupaviardv]- 
 
 6. Si' ttjy] Si' Sv 31. (Tovrai 0, om. xai yri — evpeBjiaerai vulg., 
 
 7. Tfl» avT<p ABP TTilg. sah. boh. WH. om. evpeBjifferai spec, ex pvriireTai corr. 
 Ti., Tij) avTou K CKL syrr. Treg. putat H. (S.S. p. 103). 
 
 8. KOI XiAio erri] om. K. 11. TovTav ovv S AKL syrP. vnlg. 
 
 9. e(ju/*osBCPboh.WH. Treg.,S£«/iiiis boh. Ti. Treg., toutiov ovtus B + WH., 
 N A vulg. sah. syrr. + Ti. , ets ri/jias KL. tovtcov Sc ovtus CP. v/jias ACKL N<= 
 
 10. vi^epa BC Ti. Treg. WH., tj ri/iepa syrr. Ti.Treg.,i)juosN, om. B, [v/ias] WH. 
 
 X AKLP. KhtTTTTtS N ABP + , K\. ev 12. Tt)K6TOI X ABKL, TOItTJO-eTai C, 
 
 vvKTi CKL {ex 1 Th. v. 2). oi ovpavoi raKifffovrai P, corr. ex TrjfeToi putat H. 
 
 ABC WH. Treg., om. oi K KL.Ti., add. {S.M. p. 103). 
 
 Ii€v it IS. poi{vSovBCLP,pvCvSovtiAK, 13. yr}v xaivnv BCKLP WH. Treg., 
 
 pv(iSov vel p7i(iSav vel pi{riSov al. \vBti- k. y. K ATi. Kara] xai A sah. +. ro 
 
 o-tToi X BCP, \v9ritrovTai AKL. tvptBri- eirayyeKua BCKLP syrP. WH. Treg., tb 
 
 (TcTBi X BKP syrP. (Sah. ' non invenien- tirayyeKiuna N A sah. boh. syr'>. + Ti. 
 
14 lOYAA [20-25 
 
 2 p. 8. 17 20 Y/ieiy §6, ay aiTTjT i, eiroiKoSofiovvres eavrovs 
 
 iv.2.2i;i. Ty ayicoTarr) vfiav iricTTei, iv Trvevfiart ayico Trpoa- 
 2P. 1. 7 ev)(oixevoi, 21 eavrovs €v ayairrj Qeov TT/jprjaare 
 i. T. 3. 12, Trpo a 8^X0 fie vol to eXeos tov Kvpiov rjpuaiv \rjaov 
 2P. i 3, 11 ^piarov els ^coijv almviov. 22 Kat ovs fiev eXey- 
 sp. 2. 16 X^''^ 8iaKpiuop,evovs, 23 ovs 8e aco^ere 6k Trvpos 
 2 p. 3. 7 apira^ovres, ovs 8e eXeare ev ^ofito, p,LcrovvT€s kcu 
 2 P. 2. 13, 3. TOV aiTO TTjs (xapKos e (TTT iXco fie V o V ^iTcova. 
 
 2P.3.i7,2.5 24 TS 8e 8vvafievcp ^vXa^at vfias airTatcrTovs 
 2P. 1. 17 KCU crTr}(Tat KaTevannov ttjs 86^r}s avTov dfic6~ 
 2F.s.ii;i.i fjLo V s ev ayaXXiaaei, 25 fiov^ ©f^ (reoTrjpi rjfiaiv 
 2 P. 3.18 Sia Irja-ov l^picTTOv tov Kvpiov rjficov 8o^a fieya- 
 2P. 3. 18 Xeoavvi] Kparos koX e^ovaia irpo iravTos tov alauos- 
 Kal vvv Kal els iravTas tovs alaivas' afirv. 
 
 21. TIjpTJffOTe'] TTjpTJffUfieV BC. (f>0$tp C. 
 
 22. eXeyxere AC vulg. boh. arm. + , 24. vpias K BCL vulg. syrr. boh. , ij/tcra 
 eAeare ^? BC^, eXeetrc KLP + . SiuKptvo- A ByrP*. , avrovs KP, airraitrrovs] add. 
 fievovs K ABC, SiaKpiPOfieyoi KLP. Kat affniXovs C. afiwfiovs} afiefivTovs A. 
 
 23. <ii/i5£(l)KACKLP,0OT. B. iriofeTe 25. /ioixf'i add. ffoipij) KL7 + . Sial.X. 
 ti ABC, ev <po0if aa{ere KLP. ovs Sf (2) tov Kvpiov rinuv] om. KP. tis ■navras\ 
 f\eaTe ey ipoffif K AB., om. KLP., ev fis K. 
 
Ill 14-18] HETPOY B 15 
 
 14 Aio, ayuTrrjTOi, ravra 7rpoa8oKcovTfs airovSa- J. ir, j. 21 
 (rare acnr cXo i koL a/xco fxij t o i avTco evpedrji/ai ev J. 28, j. 24 
 eiprjur), 15 xat ttjv tov Kvpiov rjficov p,aKpodvp,iau aro)- J. 2, j. 3, 35 
 Trjplav rjyeladef Kadcus kol o dyaTrrjTOs ruiav a8eX(f)6s 
 IlaGAoy Kara Tr)i> 8o6eiaav avT^ (ro^iav typay^ev 
 vfilv, 16 (OS Koi ev Traaais rals eiriaToXais AaAcoi' ev 
 avTots Trepl tovtcov, €u aty ea-riv Svavorjra riva, a 
 ol afiaOeis kol aanqpLKTOL arpe^XovirLV my koi ray 
 XotTTas ypa(()a9 irpos Trjv 1 8 lav avTcov aircoXuav. J'.a 
 17 Yp.els ovv, ay airrjT o i, TrpoytvaxTKOvres (f) v~ J- 20 
 Xacr (T ea 6 e tva ixr) rrj ratv aOeapxov irXavrj aw- J- 24, J- n 
 aira^devres eKTrearjTe tov l8[ov aTT]pt.yp.ov, 18 au^a- 
 v€T€ 8e ev y^apiTi KOii yvaxrei tov Kvplov r]pMv kcu^* 
 (TCOTrjpos Irjaov ^piaTov. avrw ?) 8o^a Kal i/ui/ j. 24, j.^25 
 KalelsrjfjLepavalmvof. J- 25 
 
 14. afiufitjToi] a/juafioi A. ois CICLP. 
 
 16. irocroisABC WH.,Treg., add. TBI! 18. aulavcTE] aulavcirSE CF. fin. afinv 
 
 SKLPTi. ouTois] ouTois A. 01 s SAB, S ACKLP, om. B WH. Ti, [o;»))y] Treg, 
 
• NOTES ON ST. JUDE 
 
 1. 'Ii)iroO XpiiTTovSovXos.] The same phrase is used by St. James in 
 the Inscription to his epistle, also by St. Paul in Rom. and Phil. In 
 1 Pet. the phrase used is diroo-ToXos 'I. X., in 2 Pet. SoSAos koI djroo-To- 
 A.OS. It is, I think, a mistake to translate SovXos by the word ' slave,' 
 the modern connotation of which is so different from that of the Greek 
 word (cf. 2 Cor. 4^). There is no opposition between SovXeia and 
 ikevOepia in the Christian's willing service. It only becomes a Sov\cia 
 in the opposed sense, when he ceases to love what is commanded and 
 feels it as an external yoke. 
 
 i8e\<t)J)s srioKcipou.] Cf. Tit. 11 SoCAos ®iov, d7rdo-To\os 8c 'I. X. See 
 Introduction on the Author. 
 
 rots Iv 0Ec^ irarpl ■^■yamjiift'ois Kal'lT|crou Xpi<rTflT6Tt|pi]|ilvois K\i]TOts.] On 
 
 the readings see Introduction on the Text. For the phrase 0c6s 
 iraTTjp see Hort's note on 1 P. P. The easier reading of some MSS., 
 jyytaoTjM.ei'ois for riya'mjii.ivoK, is probably derived from 1 Cor. 1^ ■qyuw- 
 jucvois iv X. 'I. There is no precise parallel either for ei* ®£m rjy. 
 or for Xpto-Tw TCT. The preposition ev is constantly used to express 
 the relation in which believers stand to Christ : they are incorporated 
 in Him as the branches in the vine, as the living stones in the 
 spiritual temple, an the members in the body of which He is the head. 
 Thus we find such jjhrases as rots iv X. 'I. Rom. 8\ toiis ovras iv 
 Kvpiio ib. 1611, 3,vdpii>iroi iv XpurrS 2 Cor. 12'^, eh Xpurrov ifiwnTLo-- 
 Orj/iev Gal. 3^^, toTs ctyiois iv X. 'I. Phil. 11, BiKauoO^vai iv Xpurrtf Gal. 
 21'', dyitrrii rijs iv X. 'I. 1 Tim . 1", jruTTjptas t^s iv X. 'I. 2 Tim. 
 21°. So here 'beloved as members of Christ, reflecting back his 
 glorious image ' would be a natural and easy conception. Sometimes 
 the name of the Father is joined with that of the Son in such a phrase, 
 as in 1 Th. li novA.os ry iKKXri(Tl(f ©etro-aXoviKecov iv ®eto Trarpl k. 
 K.vpiia 'I. X., cf. 1 Joh. 41^ o 0£os aydmj icrriv, Koi 6 fievrnv iv ry dywirif 
 iv T<3 ®£(3 fievei koL 6 ©eos iv avTw, Joh. 17^1 tva iravres ev wariv, KaBtoi 
 (TV, IXanyp, iv i/jMi, Kayii iv arot, tva Koi avTol iv 17/xtv Strtv, below ver. 25 
 fiovio ®eu o-MT^pt ijju.fii' Stot 'I. X. There would therefore have been no 
 difficulty in the expression iv ®. 11. /cat 'I. X. Ten)py)p.fvois, cf. Joh. I711 
 TTorep ayie, T^pijtrov airoiis iv r^ ovojuj-ti crov O) SeSoj/cas /iOi...°OTe ^/niji' 
 
 
 
18 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 juct' avrlav iyu) ir-^povv auTois k.t.X., also ver. 15. But it is different with 
 •i7ya7nj/i£'vois. Lightfoot, commenting on Col. 3^^ eK\€KToi tov ©eoO, 
 aytoi (cai ■^yairrniivoi, says that in the N.T. the last word ' seems to be 
 used always of the objects of God's love,' which he illustrates by 1 Th. 
 1* EiSoTES, aSe\<j>ol riyainfiiJ.ivoi inro ®iOv, tt/v iK\.oyriv v/j^wv, and 2 Th. 2^*, 
 dScX^ol ifyairriii.€voi viro Kvpiov. Cf. 2 Cor. 13^', Rom. 5^, 1 Joh. 
 49,10,19^ Hos. 14*. B. Weiss takes it in the same way here, but 
 it is difficult to see the propriety of the phrase, ' Brethren beloved by 
 God in God.' 'HyoTnj/iei/oi is used of the objects of man's love in 
 Clem. Horn. ix. 5 tu>v auroTs rjyawq)i,h/iiifv Toils ra^ous vaois rifiuxriv, and 
 the cognate ayairrfroi is constantly used in the same sense (as below 
 ver. 3), as well as in the sense of ' beloved of God ' (Rom. 1^ ayant)- 
 Tois ®eov, kXijtois dyt'ots). If, therefore, we are to retain the reading, I 
 am disposed to interpret it as equivalent to aSf\.<t>oC, ' beloved by us in 
 the Father,' i.e. ' beloved with <l>iXaSeX<t)ia as children of God,' but I 
 think that Hort is right in considering that iv has shifted its place in 
 the text. See below. 
 
 . The verb Tijpiia, used of persons, has two significations, that of 
 friendly, or that of punitive keeping, — to keep safe from harm, or to 
 keep in custody. An example of the former use is found in this 
 epistle ver. 2 1 eavrovi iv aydirg ©eou Tqp'^irare, the latter in ver. 6 eJs Kpiaiv 
 Sccr/iois ren^pi^Kev. The former is the sense required in this verse, but 
 the force of the dative is not quite clear. Alford, Spitta, Keil, Kiihl 
 take it as dat. commodi 'kept for J. C (cf. 2 Cor. IP ifmvrov v/uv 
 iT-^pi](ra, Athanas I. 393 A rijv dxpoao-tv tw Paxn\a Tjjpeiv). This might 
 also mean kept safe ' for the sake of ' or ' at the request of J. C : cf. 
 Joh. 17^^ quoted above. The difficulty is that this seems to ignore 
 any active participation by Christ in the work of preserving or defend- 
 ing His Church, as shown in 2 Th. 3^ ttio-tos Se eo-Tiv 6 Kvpio's, os 
 (TTfipi^ii vfiai KoX <f)v\a.^ei diro tov Kotr/Aou. Below (ver. 24) it is said of 
 the Father that He is able i^vXa^ai ijuas dm-ato-Tows and so in Rom. 
 16^^ we read (fiovia o-ot^m @£w)t<S 8wafi,ivto i/ios crnjpi^ai. In ver. 21 the 
 faithful are called upon to keep themselves in the love of God. It is 
 possible, however, to take the dative as expressing the agent, cf . Nehem. 
 132^ dyaTTio/iei/os Tu ®eu ^v, and my note on James 3^ 8a/i.d^eTat kol SeSd'- 
 /jLatrrai rrj (jtvcrei ry avBpiamirg. Others suppose the dat. to be governed 
 by the iv which precedes ©c<p, but the interposed riyairrifievoK makes 
 this very harsh. 
 
 The above difficulties have led to the suspicion of a ' primitive error ' 
 in the text, seeWH in Sel. Readings, p. 106, where it is suggested that 
 iv should be omitted before ©£<3 and inserted before 'Itja-ov, giving the 
 sense ' to those who have been beloved by the Father, and who have 
 been kept safe in Jesus from the temptations to which others have 
 succumbed.' The prominence here given to the love of the Father is in 
 accordance with the general tone of the N.T. and especially of the 
 writings of St. John. Whatever reading we adopt, Jude has in mind 
 the contrast with those who had not been ' kept ' but had broken 
 loose from the Christian fold ; cf. 1 P. P roiis iv Swdfiu ®eov <l>povpo\i- 
 (uevous Sia iricTTews eis (TiaTfipiav. 
 
1] NOTES 19 
 
 Dr. Chase defends the MS. reading in the following note which he 
 allows me to insert : — 
 
 Israel in the Old Testament is represented as differing from other nations in 
 that Jehovah ' loved ' him or ' loved ' the ' fathers '— Deut. 4", lO^", 23' 2 Chron 
 2", 98, Is. 43^ Hos. 223 (LXX. ; cf. Rom. 9^), Mai. P; comp. Pss. Sol. Qi". 
 
 Hence [S] iiyairriii4vos becomes a title — or of the nature of a title — for the people : 
 Deut. 32", 33"2-6, 2 Chron. 20', Ps. 28«(?), Is. 51, 442, Bar. .SS'. 
 
 Further, it is used in the singular of certain typical Israelites, Abraham (Dan. 
 33=, Th. and LXX. ), Moses (Ecclus. 45'), Samuel (Ecclus. 46^3), Solomon (Neh. 1326) ; 
 and in particular it seems to have got a special force as a title of the Messiah 
 (Robinson, Ephesians, pp. 229 ff.). Moreover in one passage of 3 Maoc. (6") it is 
 in the plural used of a body of Israelites as opposed to heathen — fi^ rots fiaralois 
 01 naTaiitj>poves ev\ttyitai,Taaav iirl t^ tuv iiyairri/ievaiv iron aTtaXeiif. Hence like 
 such words as £710?, iK\eKT6s, which also are specially applied to the Messiah, it 
 has a particular application to Israel and may be said to be in the singular a title 
 of the people and of the Messiah, the typical Israelite. In the salutation to 
 the Ep. the singular would have been impossible, but the plural seems to me 
 quite natural to express the thought that these correspondents of St. Jude were 
 now the true Israel. 
 
 The other three passages of the New Testament in which Tiyarrifievoi is used I 
 think confirm this view of the word, (a) In 1 Thess. 1^ {eld6res, a,Sf\fo\ iiy. inb tov 
 @euv,Tiiv iK\oyiiv v/iwv) it is brought irnto close relation to the divine exKoyii, the 
 latter word being pre-eminently one used to express Israel's relation to Jehovah 
 (see Hort on 1 Pet. 1^, 2* [Messianic use] » }. (5) 2 Thess. 2^ (a5. iiyairrifievai iirh 
 Kvplov, in eiAoTo vfucis d ®ehs ott' cipx?* ic.t.\.), where WH give the words as a 
 
 quotation from Deut. 33^2_ Here also we have the O.T. idea of God's choice 
 
 for the word ei'AoTo in reference to Israel, see Deut. 26^^ (c) Col. 3'^ {4vSi(ra(ree 
 oZv iis iK\€KTol TOV 06OU, ayioi Kol iiyaTTTifievot). St. Paul had just said ovk $vi 
 EWriv Kal 'lovdalos : then he uses of the gentile Colossians three words specially con- 
 nected with Israel — fK\eKroi (the same idea as in 1 and 2 Thess. ), 617101, iiyairriiiepoi. 
 The use of iiyairrifievos (and -01) both in the O.T. and in the N.T. seems to me to 
 afford very strong reasons for regarding the word as one taken over by the 
 Apostles from the vocabulary of the Theocracy. For the thought, see Hort 
 1 Pet., Introd. Lect., p. 7. 
 
 I cannot lielp thinking that, following on these words, the words Torj..,'li)trou 
 Xpio-T^ TCTiipiiiiivois naturally express the thought — ' who have been kept for 
 Jesus Christ,' the reference being to these Gentiles having been reserved as a 
 Xahs els irepiirolTiatv. Note especially the perfect participle, and compare the 
 whole phrase K\ripovoiilav...TeTrip7i^ivTiv h obpavois els i/ias (1 Pet. 1^'' with Hort's 
 notes). , 
 
 Such a reference to the Gentile character of his friends— of course in its reli- 
 gious aspect — is just what we should expect from a Hebrew Apostle writing from 
 Jerusalem : of. Jas. 1^ (to the Theocracy), 1 Pet. 1^ (to Gentiles). 
 
 Such a, reference I find in the following verse irepl ttjs koivtjs fi/iSi/ aarriplas 
 
 see my art. in Hastings' Diet. ii. p. 805a. I was glad to find that Dr. Armitage 
 Robinson adopted this interpretation in a University sermon (' Unity in Christ' 
 p. 248 : ' " Our common salvation " — a phrase which falls naturally from the pen 
 of a Jewish Christian writing to his Gentile brethren '). 
 
 It also appears to me most natural that, as other writers of other N. T. Epistles, 
 St. Jude should in the salutation refer to the essential position of his friends. He 
 begins as he would have done had no necessity been laid on him to devote 
 his letter to warning them against special dangers. The reference to these begins 
 with i>. 3i. 
 
 For the phrase iv [rij!] 0c^ compare Ps. 43' h t^ 0e$ iirati>e(r67i(T6/ie8a, 59" 4v t^ 
 @e$ irofliirofiev Siva/iiv. I venture to think that the use of such an 0. T. phrase, 
 made definitely Christian, is very probable in St. Jude. I further compare 
 Ignatius Som. 1 cKKKi)aiif iiyawriiievTi xal Tre<pwTt(!ii.ivri iv Be\'lifiaTi rod 6e\i)<ravTos 
 Th irii/Ta & effTiv — a parallel which gives part of the meaning. Perhaps one might 
 paraphrase St. Jude — ' who through the will and the working of God have 
 attained to the being numbered among the Beloved. ' 
 
 C 2 
 
20 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 I quite agree with all that is here said on the application of riyamj- 
 /xci/ois in this passage. Jude speaks to the Christians as inheriting the 
 privileges of God's ancient people. But the use of ei/ in the phrase 
 rjyairqii.evoi? iv ®e^ does not seem to be quite on a par with the instances 
 quoted from the Psalms, where the R.V. has ' In God have we made 
 (LXX. 'shall we make') our boast,' and 'Through God we shall do 
 valiantly.' The quotation from Ignatius would furnish a nearer 
 parallel if it were not for the interposition of ■ire<j)uyrwr^Livri after ■^airrj- 
 /iivrj, and the use of ev OeKruxaTi instead of ®e^. Then, are we justified 
 in assuming that those addressed are Gentiles ? Zahn (Uinleitung 
 II. 75, 51) holds that Jude's mission was limited to the circumcision 
 (Gal. 2^"', 1 Cor. 9^), and this view gains support from the familiarity- 
 imputed to the readers not merely with the facts of O.T. history, but 
 also with apocryphal books and rabbinical traditions in vv. 5-7, 9-11 
 and 14. The innovators, of course, may have come from Gentile 
 communities. Again, as the thought which fills the writer's mind is 
 one which has nothing to do with the difference between Jew and 
 Gentile, but has reference to a new danger threatening both alike, it 
 seems to me that the phrase kolvtjs crionjpCai wiU have a more living 
 meaning, if it is contrasted here with the special warning required 
 for the particular church to which he writes, than if we assign to it 
 a meaning which, if not quite outworn, was at least of less pressing 
 importance at the time. 
 
 kXijtois is here the substantive of which ^yairrifiivon and Terqprnjievoi^ 
 are predicated. We find the same use in Apoc. 17^* {yiKricrovcriv) oi ju.£t' 
 avTov K\rjTo\ k. cKkcKTol K. TTicTToi, vo. St. Paul's epistles, as in Rom. 1* 
 ev ois IcTTe KoX vfieis, kXtjtoI 'Ir/crov XpicrToC, 1 Cor. 1^* KtjpvKTcro/j.ei' 
 XpuTTov i<rTavp(Ofievov, 'louSatots fiei' o-KavSoA.oi' . . . avTOL<s Sc rots kXijtois 
 . . XpuTTov ®eov SvvafiLv. The calling is sometimes specially defined, 
 as in Rom. 1.-^ UaSAos kXijtos diroo-ToXos, ib. 1^ kXyjtok dyt'ois. At 
 other times its nature is further explained, as in Rom. 8^^ tois Kara 
 ■/rp60e(Ti,v kXijtois ovuiv, 1 Cor. 1^^ pXeTrere t^v k\^<71v v/iiov, a,8eX<f>oi, oTt 
 ov TToAiXoi <ro<^ot Kara (rdpKa . . . aWa. to. /xiapa rov Kotr/iou i^eXe^aro o 
 ®£os, Eph. I-'* CIS TO eJSevai v/xai ris eoTiv ^ eXirts T^s kXiJo-cws avTOv, 
 T« 6 Trkoyroi Trji 8o^s r^s Kkr]povoiJi,iai avTOv Iv tois dyt'ois; 2 Tim. 1® 
 TBeov Tov (TuiaravTOi ^//.ds koX KoXicravTos kX^o-si dyt'oi, Heb. 3^ K\.-q<re<i)s 
 iirovpaviov fi.ero\oi. In Matt. 22^* a distinction is made between 
 calling and election {ttoXKol yap daiv lAryrol, SKiyoi 8e ckXektoi) but 
 Lightfoot (Col. 312) denies that this distinction is to be found in the 
 Epistles. 
 
 We have many examples of the divine calhng in the Gk)spels, 
 as in the case of the Apostles (Mt. 4^1, Mk. l^") and in the para- 
 bles of the Great Supper and the Labourers in the Vineyard. This 
 idea of calling or election is derived from the O.T. See Hort's n. on 
 1 Pet. P 'l7](rov XpuTTov cxXe/cToTs : ' Two great forms of election are 
 spoken of in the O.T., the choosing of Israel, and the choosing of single 
 Israelites, or bodies of Israelites to perform certain functions for 
 Israel ... It is singular that e/<A.£KTos never stands at the beginning of 
 St. Paul's Epistles, as it does here : ... his corresponding word is 
 
1, 3] . NOTES 21 
 
 kXijtos and he often uses KaXeu) with a similar force. The calling and 
 the choosing imply each other, the calling being the outward ex- 
 pression of the antecedent choosing, the act by which it begins to take 
 effect. Both words emphatically mark the present state of the persons 
 addressed as being due to the free agency of God ... In Deuteronomy 
 (43^) the choosing by God is ascribed to His own love of Israel : the 
 ground of it lay in Himself, not in Israel ... As is the election of the 
 ruler or priest within Israel for the sake of Israel, such is the election 
 of Israel for the sake of the whole human race. Such also, still more 
 clearly and emphatically is the election of the new Israel.' For a 
 similar use of the word ' call ' in Isaiah, of. ch. 48^2, 43^' ''. The chief 
 distinction between the ' calling ' of the old and of the new dispensa- 
 tion is that the former is rather expressive of dignity (' called by the 
 name of God '), the latter of invitation ; but the former appears also in 
 the N.T. in such phrases as James 2'' to KaXov Svo/jui to iTriKXTjOiv e^' 
 {11x0.1, and 1 Pet. 2^ {/teis he yivo? iickeKTOv, fiacriX.tiov tepareu/ia . . . A.o6s 
 CIS irepnroCria-iv. The reason for St. Jude's here characterizing the 
 called as beloved and kept, is because he has in his mind others 
 who had been called, but had gone astray and incurred the wrath of 
 God. 
 
 2. For the Salutation see my note on )(a.ipeiv James 1^, and Hort's 
 excellent note on 1 P. 1* X*^?" • • • TXij^uv^etiy. We find eXcos and 
 itp'^vri joined in Gal. e^", and with the addition of x"P's ^ 1 Tim. 
 1^, 2 Tim. 12, 2 Joh. 3. The mercy of God is the ground of peace, 
 which is perfected in the feeling of God's love towards them. The 
 verb irXridwOeiri occurs in the Salutation both of 1 Pet. and 2 Pet. 
 and in Dan. 6^ (in the letter of Darius) exprprq vfdv irX-qdwBuT), 
 cf. 1 Thess. 312 vinos Se 6 Ku'pios TrXeovacrat /cat irepura-evcriu rfj aydwri ets 
 dWiJXous. ' AyaTny ( = the love of God) occurs also in the final salutation 
 of 2 Cor. ij x^tp'S T. Kvpiov 'IrjcroC koX ■q ayam; ToS ©eoB, and in Eph. elprjinj 
 TOis dSeX^ois Koi ayairq //.ero Trto-TCtos diro ©eoC irarpos Kai Kuptou I. X. 
 Cf. 1 Joh. 31 iSere iroraTriyv a.ya.Tcr]V Se'SoiKev yifiZv b iraTyjp tva Te'/ci/a ®£oO 
 Kk-qOmixev, where Westcott's n. is ' The divine love is infused into them, 
 so that it is their own, and becomes in them the source of a divine life 
 (Rom. 13'°). In virtue of this gift they are inspired with a love 
 which is like the love of God, and by this they truly claim the title of 
 children of God as partakers in His nature, 1 Joh. 4'^' 1^.' The same 
 salutation is used in the letter of the Smyrnaeans (c. 156 a.d.) giving 
 an account of the martyrdom of Polycarp, ?A,eos koi elpr/vT) koX ayainf 
 ®iov Trarpbi Koi Kvpiov fijiSiV 'I. X. irX-qOvvOdy). The thought of eXeos 
 and ay dm] recurs again in ver. 21. 
 
 3. avairiiTot occurs in w. 17 and 20, also in 2 P. 3T-«'U.n^ 1 Pet. 
 2^\ 412, and James. It is common in the Epistles of John and of Paul, 
 sometimes with /*ov attached, as in 1 Cor. 10^*, Phil. 2^% and is often 
 joined to ASeX^ot, especially in James. The dyam; of ver. 2 leads on to 
 the dyaTTijToi here. They are themselves dyaTrjjroi because the love of 
 God is shed abroad in their hearts. 
 
 irao-av <rirow8^v irotoii(».evos.] For irSerav see my n. on James 1^, and 
 of. 2 Pet. 1^ arirovSriv irSo-av Trapaa-eviyKavrei, 1^^ a-7rovSd<rm ix^iv Vfiai 
 
22 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 ixv^firjv TToiela-Oai, also Isocr. Orat. v. p. 91 b irSo-av Trjv (nrovSrp/ irepi 
 TouTou iroLUarOai, Plato, Euthyd. 304 E irept ovSevos d^tW dva^iav <r'7rovSr]V 
 iroLovurai. Other examples in Wetstein. Jude was busy on another 
 subject, when he received the news of a fresh danger to the Church, 
 which he felt it his duty to meet at once. Whether he lived to carry 
 out his earlier design, and whether it was of the nature of a treatise 
 or of an epistle, we know not. It is noteworthy that there is a 
 similar allusion in 2 P. 3^ to an earlier letter now lost. Compare Barn. 
 4^ TToWa 8e 6eA.(i)v ypa.<j)ei,v . . . ypdtjaiv icrirovSacra. 
 
 Koivfis <r<i)Tr)p£as.] Cf. n. on 2 P. 1^ l(r6Ti[Ji,ov, Tit. 1* Kara KOivriv ttlcttlv, 
 Ign. Eph. 1 vTrep Tov koivov ouo/jLaroi koI eA,jrtSos with Lightfoot's n., 
 Jos. Ant. 10. 1. 3 (Hezekiah besought Isaiah to oflfer sacrifice) virip 
 rrji Koiv^s o-uiTripLais. Bede explains as follows : ' omnium electorum 
 communis est salus, fides et dilectio Christi.' Jude puts on one side 
 the address he was preparing on the main principles of Christianity 
 (probably we may take vv. 20 and 21 as a sample of what this 
 would have been) and turns to the special evil which was then 
 threatening the church. 
 
 a.v6,yKr\v 'iaxovyp&'^ai.'j Cf. Luke 14^* f)(<o AvayKi/i' iSeTv avTov, Heb. 
 7^^, al., also Plut. Cato Mi. 24 JcvdyKrjv ecrx^v eK0aXetv acr^qp.ovova'av 
 Trjv yvvoLKa. There is a similar combination of ypa<j>€iv and ypdij/ai. in 
 3 Job. 13. The aor. ypdij/ai, contrasted with the preceding pres. 
 ypdtjiiLv, implies that the new epistle had to be written at once and 
 could not be prepared for at leisure, like the one he had previously 
 contemplated. It was no welcome task : ' necessity was laid upon 
 him.' The watchman was bound to give warning, however much the 
 people might resent it (Ezek. 3"-i«, 33«-8). 
 
 eira'Ya>vC£EO-Sai rfj &ira£ irapa8o6£Cirt| rots oyCois ir£<rTei..] ' to contend 
 for the faith,' almost equivalent to the ay&via-ai Trepl t^s a\r]6dqg 
 in Sir. i^, see 1 Tim. 6^^ S.yu>vi^ov tov KaXbv aySva t^s m'o-Tctos, and eU 
 KOiriS) aytovi^o/tevos Col. 1^'. We may compare iirafivvtiv, e-iravwiraveiv 
 vofiia Rom. 21''. Bengel connects this with the parallel phrase 
 £7rotKoSo/AowT«s rij iricrTei in ver. 20 by the thought borrowed from 
 Nehem. 4^^ foil. 'Officium duplex, pugnare strenue pro flde contra 
 hostes, et aediflcare se ipsum in fide.' It is possible (as is shown by 
 the following examples) for spiritual blessings, once given, to be lost, 
 unless we use every effort to maintain them. The redemption from 
 Egypt was a fact, as baptism into the name of Christ is a fact, 
 but, unless it is borne in mind and acted upon, the fact loses its 
 efficacy. The word eTray. is rare in this sense (1) : it is found in Plut. Mor. 
 1075 D irrayiovi^op.tvo's 6 KXedvOrji ry iKtnipiMj-ti. Stephanus quotes 
 Maximus Schol. in Dion. Areop. p. 54 to-utjj t^ 8o^ liraymvidrai. 
 Philo (M. 2. 495) uses it in the same sense 'with the' dative under- 
 stood, £iray(i)j/t^o/x£vos (tu aihiov eivat tov k6<tii.ov) 6 KpiToXaos exprJTO koI 
 ToiovTio Xdyu, ib. p. 228 j^w. (2) Closely connected with this sense is that 
 which we find in Plut. V. 65 c. Irepots iiraywyC^ovrai reKp-yipioK 'lay 
 stress upon other proofs.' Aristid. t^xi^ pyjropiK-^ p. 658 (D. 
 vol. ii. p. 756) Kara Xe'fiv yiverai ^paxyrrji, oTav Tts . . . /t^ ltraymvi^f}rai 
 t;5 ^-sf" • • • OTOV Tis p.^ ^i\oTip.rjTaL wpos rr]V Xefiv, dXka. koX irpos to. 
 
3, 4] NOTES 23 
 
 ■7fpa.yiw.ra airopXiini. (3) Libanius (Arg. in Androt. p. 587 Sturepos 6 
 AtdSiapos eiraycovt^crai tovt(i) tm Xdyo)) seems to use it in the sense of 
 ' following up the argument of the previous speaker,' Xoyia being the 
 instrumental dative. So Philostr. V. Soph. i. 17 ihiaKi tQ TlToXiixuivi 6 
 HpmSijs Kai TO //.ij irapekOelv «ir' aww ets A.dyou iiriSeiiiv firjB' iira.y(i>vlv<w6ai 
 ot (ut post eum ad declamandum non veniret, nee post eum dicere 
 auderet), Sext. Emp. Math. iii. 327 ^pxei f).\v icrois iv tovtok Treparovv t. 
 dvTtppijo-iv, oju(i>s 8« cn-ayoivi^d/uEvoi (ulterius decernentes) ■Kupaa-op.iOa 
 SiSao-KEiv, Dion. Hal. .ilrs iBAe<. vii. 6 ' urge those who have taken few 
 prizes oTi Set ixi) TovTots apKeitrSai dXXa . , . iirayu>VL(ra(T6ai Koi irpotrka- 
 fielv iripovi. (4) ' Fighting against,' so translated in Plut. V. 187 
 ^d/Sios, (SoTrep a.d\r]Tr]'i ayadbi iirayuivi^o/ievo? rm 'Avvi)8a, ib. 486 Kijucov 
 cooTrep d^XijT^s Seivos Suo Kadripy/KW aymvCap-aTa. . . . iirrjytavicraTO ToTs 
 viKais by L. and S. but probably to be understood as (3) ' followed up.' 
 TTa &iraS irapa8o6«£<r|] rots a7Cois irCcrrei.] The word Trtoris here is not 
 used in its primary sense of a subjective feeling of trust or belief, but 
 in the secondary sense of the thing believed, the Truth or the Gospel, 
 as in ver. 20 below, Gal. l^^ o Blwkwv ij/uSs irore vvv evayyeXC^erai rijv 
 irtOTtv ^v TTore hropOa, also Gal. 3^^, Phil. Y^ irvvaOXovvTes ry irt'o-T«i tov 
 evayyeXiov, where see Lightf oot, Acts 6'^. In the same way eXms is used 
 in a concrete sense for the object of hope (as in Col. 1* ttjv e\7ri8a ri/v 
 aTOK«/AEi/ijv vp.iv, 1 Tim. 1^ 'Irja-ov XpiiTTOv rijs eXTrtSos rjp.Zv, Tit. 2^* 
 Trpoa'Stxop.evoi Trjv p.aKapCav ikiriSa), and ^djSos for the object of fear, 
 Rom. 133, 1 p. 314. 
 
 fiiraj.] Used here in its classical sense ' once for all,' as below v. 5, 
 and in Heb. 6* roiis aira| ^ioTUTOevTa's, ib. 926' ^r, lO^, 1 P. 318. This 
 excludes the novelties of the libertines, of. Gal. P. The later sense 
 'on one occasion' is found in 2 Cor. 11 25 ^^af iXuBdirO'qv, 1 Th. 218 
 Kai arraf Kai Sis ■^Oeki^a'ap.tv IKOav. 
 
 TOpaSoOttoT).] Cf. Philo M. 1. 387 irio-Tcvet tok ajrof wapaZoBeia-i, 2 P. 
 2^1. The Christian tradition is constantly referred to by the Fathers, 
 as by Clem. Al. Str. vii. where we read of ij dXij^^s n-apdSoo-is (p. 845), 
 fj iKKX.r]<na<TTiKr] w. (p. 890), ij BiCa ir. (p. 896), ^ irdvriov rtov diroo'Toktov 
 IT. (p. 900), oi TOV Xpto-Tov. IT. (p. 901), and even in theN. T. as in 1 Cor. 
 11^ Kofitai irapiSiOKa vp,iv Tots wapaSd<r£ts KaT€)(eTe, 2 Th. 21^, 1 Tim. 
 6^'* TTjv TrapaO-^Kujv ijivXa^av. For an account of the gradual formation 
 of the Creed, see Kattenbusch Das Apostol. Symbol, 1894, M'Giffert 
 The Apostles' Greed 1902, and especially A. E. Burn's Introduction to 
 the Greeds, ch. ii. 1899. 
 
 Tots oYtois.] Used generally of Christians who were consecrated and 
 called to be holy, as in 1 Cor. 2, Phil. V-, where see Lightf oot. The 
 word contains an appeal to the brethren to stand fast against the 
 teaching and practice of the libertines. 
 
 4. iropeio-eSiiijo-ov -ydp tivcs fivepwiroi.] For the form, which is found in 
 B and adopted by WH, Veitch cites SiekSv^vui in Hippocr. i. 601, and 
 compares l^vrp), Ippmfv. The aor. is here used with the perfect force, 
 as in V. 11 ivopcvOi^a-av, etc., cf. Blass Gr. p. 199, my ed. of St. James, 
 p. ccii, and Dr. Weymouth there cited. The contrary view is main- 
 tained by Winer, but corrected in Moulton's n. p. 345. The verb 
 
24 THE EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 occurs in Demades 178 aSixos irapeurSvvmv Xoyos eh ras twv SiKaa-Taiv 
 yvcJ/tos OVK ea a-vvopav T^v aXi^Oeuxv, Clem. Al. p. 659 orrtos eis T^v rHv 
 aiviyiJ,dTuiv ^wotav i) ^■qTrja-i'S TrapfurSvovtra iirl ttjv evpea-iv rfji a\r]6tiai 
 ava^pdfii.'g, D. Laert. ii. 142 \a6paimi TrapturBiii cU rrjv irarpiSa, Plut. M. 
 p. 216 B Ta &pxala vofii/m iKXvo/ieva fwpa, a\Xa Se TrapeurSvofxtva /loxOripa, 
 other exx. in Wetst. The noun ■n-apeiaSva-i's occurs in Barn. 2^'>, 4^ 
 avTurriofJLtv iva jxr) <T\y TaptCtrhucriv o fitXas, Clem. Al. p. 189 d.Kpoa-^a\r]9 
 fj Tov oivov wapeia-Sva-K. Similar compounds are Trapiuri^ipm in 2 P. 1', 
 irapeia-dyo) in 2 P. 2^, iraptttraKTO^ in Gal. 2* 8io toiis TrapeuTOKTOvi \j/evS- 
 aBeX.<t>ovi oiTives iraptiarjX.Oov KaTocrKOTnjirai T^v ikevOepCav vfmv, Rom. 5 , 
 2 Maco. 8^ iraptuTiropevofi.tvoi XcXtj^otus ets ran Koifiai, SO irapeuTtpTTio, 
 TraptuTwiiJi.'irtii, TraptuririirTw. The earliest prophecy of such seducers 
 comes from the lips of Jesus Himself Mt. 7^^ vpoa-ix^Te airh twv 
 ij/evSoTrpo<lyriT&v, otTives €p\ovTai Trpoi vp.as iv hfSvfUicn vpo^druyv, e(T(o0ev 
 Se tuTi \vKoi apirayti, cf. Acts 2029' 30 and Introduction on the Early 
 Heresies. 
 
 Tives dvepairoi.] For the position of the indefinite tis see Acts 3^ 
 Kai Tis &vi,p x<»A.os...e/8a(7Tci^£TO, 148, 151^ 17«'34,1 Tim.b^rmovS.vepii- 
 iriav al afjuapTuiL irpoSi^Xoi dcriv : and for pleonastic avflpcon-os Lk. 15* rts 
 &v6paiiros €xo>v ■n-po^ara k.t.X. Mt. 7^, IS^^, Jn. 5^. [For rives, hinting 
 at a party who are yet well known, compare 2 Cor. lO^^^ Gal. 1''. C. 
 Compare also Gal. 2^2 irpo rov iXOetv rivas oltto 'laKw^ov, 2 P. 3' <Ss rtvcs 
 ppaSvTrjra ijyoSvTai.] It has often a contemptuous signification. 
 
 oi irdXai irp07CYpa|ji.)i^voi As toOto rh Kp(|iia.1 Cf . 2 P. 2* ols to Kpifia eKwa- 
 \ai ouK dp-yet. Clem. Al. Adwwhr. in ep. Judae translates ' homines impii 
 qui olim...praedestinati erant in judicium... non ut fiant impii; sed 
 exsistentes jam impii in judicium praescripti sunt.' The word iraXai 
 precludes the supposition that the 2nd ep. of Peter can be referred to.i 
 The allusion is to the book of Enoch quoted in w. 14, 15. In ver. 18 
 below the same warning is said to have been given by the Apostles. 
 The phrase ol wpoy. is in apposition to rives avBpayiroi, cf. Gal. V with 
 Lightfoot's n., Lk. 18^ ewrev Se Trpos rtvas rois Treiroi^oras e<^' eavrots. 
 For Ttpoy. cf. Rom. 15* oa-a yap irpoeypaKJiri eis rr]V ^/terepav SiSocrKoXiav 
 iypdijyrj. Bp. Lightfoot in his note on Gal. 3^ oTs (car' o^daX/xovs 'I- 
 X. Trpoeypd<jyri i<TTavpii>p.evoi seems to give to the word here the same 
 sense ' placard ' which it bears there, quoting in support Demosth. 
 1151 rois Trp vraveis irpoypa^eiv avria ttjv Kpi'onv eiri 8vo ^juepasand Plut. 
 Camill. 9 r^s 8iki;s Trp<yyeypaiJi,ii,ivri<i : but in those passages the subject is 
 the trial, here it is the person. He would, I suppose, translate ' long 
 ago advertised for this judgment.' Perhaps it is better to take it as 
 ' designated beforehand,' «c. by Enoch, or (less probably) ' written 
 before in God's book of judgment,' cf. Exod. 32^2, Isa. 4^ ot ypa<j>evT9s eis 
 ^Mjjv, Dan. 12^, and the passages quoted from Enoch below. In any case 
 
 1 Zahn, it is true, following Sohott and others, argues in favour of this refer- 
 ence, holding that rrixai may be equivalent to ' lately ' ; and the word is of 
 course very elastic in meaning ; but unless the contrast makes it clear that the 
 reference is to a recent past, I think we are bound to assign to the word its usual 
 force, especially here, where it stands first, giving the tone as it were to what 
 follows, and is further confirmed and explained by ?j8!o/4oj Airb 'A5(J/i in ver. 14. 
 
4] NOTES 25 
 
 the word is intended to show that they are already doomed to punishment 
 as enemies of God. As such, they are to be shunned by the faithful, 
 but not to be feared, because, dangerous as they may seem, they 
 cannot alter the divine purpose. Dr. Chase compares Hort's interesting 
 note on 1 P. 2* eis o kbi eTe'^jjo-av. By 'this' Spitta understands 'that judg- 
 ment which I am now about to declare,' i.e., the condemnation 
 contained in the word do-ejSeis used by some ancient writer. Zahn 
 however remarks that oStos usually refers to what precedes, and he 
 would take rovro here (with Hofmann) as referring to irapeMreSujjaav. 
 I agree that the classical distinction between the prospective use of 
 o8e and rotdo-Sc, and the retrospective use of oStos and tolovtos prevails 
 also in the F.T., as in the rdJSe \iyei of Apoc. 2i' 8. 12. is. 31. 7. u con- 
 trasted with the /io-a TttBra of Apoc. i\ T^- ^ 155, igi, 191, and the 
 solitary instance of rotdo-Se in 2 P. l^^ (where (fxav^i roiao-Se is explained 
 by the following 6 vids fiov oStos ea-riv), as contrasted with the common 
 retrospective use of toioStos. OStos however may acquire a pro- 
 spective use when it serves (like the Lat. is) simply as the base of a 
 subsequent explanatory clause, whether introduced by the relative, as 
 in Lk. 6' ovSl rovro di'cyvuTe o iiroCrjo'ev AaveiS ; Phil. 2^ rovro <^pov£tT£ 
 h> vfiiv o Koi ev XpttrrS, or by a conjunction such as tva (Lk. 1*^) or on 
 (Lk. 10"), or €1 (1 P. 219 ^o5^o ^^pi^ ^j)^ or /*,} (2 Cor. 82» o-reXAd/ievoi 
 rovro /tij Tis), or what approaches more nearly to the use here, by a verb 
 or noun in apposition as Lk. S^" irpocredriKcv kol rovro, KareKXeurev, 
 ib. 1218 rovro ttohjo-m, Ko6e\5, 1 Th. 4^ toCto i<rriv 6e\.rjna ®eoS 6 ayia- 
 cr/ios vfiSn', Lk. 212 rovro vfjiiv OTy/teTov, evpi^a-ere Ppi<j>o<;, Rom. 14'^ rovro 
 Kplvare, ro fx-rf riOevai ■Trpoa-KO/n./M, 2 Cor. 21 eicpiva rovro, rb /t-r) iXOeiv. 
 None of these is quite like our text, where every reader naturally looks 
 back for an explanation of rovro. I think however irapcitreSujyo-av hardly 
 satisfies the requirements of the case. It is not referred to in the 
 Book of Enoch, and it is a very subordinate feature in the evil doings 
 of the libertines. I should rather carry back the thought to the 
 assailants of the faith implied in the vapaKaXurv iTrayiovC^ta-Gai of ver. 3, 
 which is then further explained by the participles in ver. 4. The 
 sin itself is its own judgment (Joh. 31^). Dr. Bigg considers that rovro 
 ro KplpM is meaningless here, and can only be explained by the sup- 
 position that it was hastily borrowed by Jude from 2 P. 2^, but why 
 should he have added rovro, which makes the difficulty ? 
 
 We may compare Enoch 108^ ' Some of them are written and inscribed 
 above in heaven, in order that the angels may read them and know 
 that which will befall the sinners and the spirits of the humble,' ch. 
 81* 'blessed is the man who dies in righteousness, concerning whom 
 there is no book of unrighteousness written,' ch. 1061* ' after that 
 there will be still more unrighteousness... for I know the mysteries of 
 the heavenly tables, for the Lord hath showed me... and I have read 
 in the heavenly tables,' also Charles on 47^ Test. Pair. Aser. 7 aveyvixiv 
 evTaTswXa^i rasv ovpavwv on aiTtiiBtmm<i airaBrjO-ert avr^ (the Messiah) koX 
 a.a-e^ovvre'i dcre/S^ereTE eis avrov, ib. Levi 14 cyvwv dirb ypa^^s 'Evm;^ oti eiri 
 teXos a<TePrja-£re, eiri Kvpiov x"P"S 6irt)3a\A.0VT£S iv ■Traa-y KaKiq., Apoc. 
 Ba/ruch. 24^ ' aperientur libri in quibus scripta sunt peccata omnium qui 
 
26 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 peccaverint.' Charles says the conception is variable ; in Jubilees it 
 sometimes 'implies little more than a contemporary heavenly record 
 of events,' while in Enoch and Test, xii Patria/rch. ' it wavers between 
 an absolute determination and prediction, pure and simple.' 
 
 do-E^^ts.] This word may be almost said to give the keynote to the 
 Epistle (cf. w. 15, 18) as it does to the Book of Enoch. 
 
 T<|v ToS 0COV ^|iuv \apvTa (lerariB^vrfs «is iiriKyftav.^ With this we may 
 compare 1 P. 2^^ firj ois iiriKdX.vfiiJM €\oVTeg Trjs KOKtas rifv i\ev6tplav, 
 2 P. 2^^, iXeudcpiav ivayyeXXo/xivoi, 3^^ Suotojjto Tiva, a. ol aiJuiOeis 
 <TTpeP\ov<TLV irpos Trjv iSt'av avTwv airwXeiav, Rom. 3^' ^' ^'*. (If man 
 is justified by free grace and not by works, then works are unnecessary) 
 ib. 61' 16, 821, 1 Cor. 612, 1023 foil, Joh. 832-36^ Gal. 513 {^jIj ^^> is.€veepCq. 
 iKK-qdrfTt' jxovov ixrj rr]v iXevOeplav eh a(f>opfjirjv ry crapKi. For fieraTiOevTe^ 
 see Gal. 1^, for otreKyeiav 2 P. 2* ttoWoI i^aKoXov0TJirov(riv avrZv 
 rats aa-eXyeCaK, ib. 2^- 13, 1 P. 43, and Lightfoot on Gal. 5i* ' A man 
 may be aKaJdapToi and hide his sin : he does not become aa-ekyri? until 
 he shocks public decency. In classical Greek the word do-cAyeta 
 generally signifies insolence or violence towards another... In the later 
 language the prominent idea is sensuality.. .cp. Polyb. 37. 2 iroWi] Se 
 Tts axTikyaa Koi irepi ras (TiaiuxTiKOM e7n6viii.iai avrm (mve^KokovOei. Thus 
 it has much the same range of meaning as v^pi^.' On the meaning of 
 ;(apis see Robinson Ephes. p. 221 f. The form xap'" is used elsewhere 
 in the N.T., except in Acts 242'. 
 
 Tov (uSvov S«nr<STT|v Kal K^piov ^pov 'Ii|irovv Xpurrov dpvovficvoul So 2 P. 
 21 TOV ayopatraina avTov<s Seaironjv apvov/jLefoi. On the denial of God 
 and Christ see Mt. 1033 g(j-Tis av api^oTjrat /te e/j-irpotrdev tZv dvOpanrotv, 
 a.pv7J(T0iiaL Kayo) avrov e/JurrpoarOev tov iraTpoi fiov, ib. 26™ (Peter's 
 denial), 1 Joh. 222 qStos Ikttiv 6 avrixpia-TOi, 6 apvovptevos tov iraTcpa 
 Kal TOV vlov. Tit. 11® @€bv onoXoyovcriv eiSevai, tois Se cpyois aipvovvTai, 
 fiSekvKTol OVTCS Kal a-ireL0eLS Kal irpos vav epyov aya&ov iSoKi/ioi, 1 Tim. 
 5* T^i' iria-TLv y)pv7)Tai. This denial is one of the sins noticed in the 
 book of Enoch. 382 ' When the Righteous One shall appear . . . where 
 will be the dwelling of the sinners and where the resting-place of 
 those who have denied the Lord of Spirits?' ib. 412, 452^ 4.37^ 
 4810 < They will fall and not rise again ... for they have denied the 
 Lord of Spirits and His Anointed.' 
 
 Two questions have been raised as to the meaning of the text, (1) is 
 T. fiovov SearTToTrjv to be understood of the Son, (2) what is the force 
 of dpveurOai 1 The objection to understanding SeoTroTiys of our Lord 
 is that in every other passage in the N.T., where Seo-a-onjs occurs, 
 except in 2 P. 2i (on which see n.), it is spoken of God the Father ; 
 that, this being the case, it is difficult to understand how Christ can 
 be called tov /ndvov Sta-jronji'.i It seems to me a forced explanation to 
 say that the phrase fiovoi SecriroTrj's has reference only to other earthly 
 masters. No Jew could use it in this connexion without thinking 
 
 ' It is true that the use of the word Sf(rir6(rwoi, to denote the kinsfolk of Jesus 
 by Julius Africanus (lived at Emmaus about 200 a.d.) ap. Euseb. H.E. i. 7, proves 
 that the word Se<rir6rris must have been used of our Lord at an earlier period, but 
 I am not aware of any example of this use in the Apostolic Fathers. 
 
4, 5] NOTES 27 
 
 of the one Master in heaven. Again /yioi/os is elsewhere used of the 
 Father only, as in Joh. 5** rrjv 8d|av t^v ■Trapa tov fj.6vov ®eov ov 
 fijTeiTe, 17^ tva ywuxTKiOcriv (re rov /xovov oXijOlvov ®e6v, Rom. 16^^ /J-ovo 
 (70<l>(a ®e<f 8ta 'Irjcrov Xpioroi), 1 Tim. 1'^ tm ^atriXei tS>v aiiavmv . . . 
 /j-ovw ®€(o Ti[jiri K. So^a, ib. 6^^' ■''' o juaxapios k. /xovos Swacrriys, 6 
 juovos «x"'' a^avatriav, and by Jude himself, below 25 juocu ©cm o-wT-^pi 
 ■^jacov 8ia 'I. X., TOV Kvpiov ■^fj.Stv So^a. Wetst. quotes several passages in 
 which Josephus speaks of God as o /tdi/os Sco-ttotijs. On the other hand 
 the phrase, so taken, seems to contradict the general rule that, where 
 two nouns, denoting attributes, are joined by Kai, if the article is pre- 
 fixed to the first noun only, the second noun will then be an attribute 
 of the same subject. In the present case however the second noun 
 (Kvpiov) belongs to the class of words which may stand without the 
 article, see Winer pp. 147-163. A similar doubtful case is found in 
 Tit. 2'* irpotrSe^d/ievoi ttjv fjiaKapiav iXjriSa koX iTn<f>d,vciav rrj's 8d^s tov 
 /jLeydkov ®€ov koi orwTjjpos ^/iGv X. 'I. os cScdkev eavrbv vTrep ■^fiSiv tva X.VTpio- 
 a-ryraL ^/nas, where also I should take tov /teyaAov ©eov to refer to the 
 Father. Other examples of the same kind are Eph. 5° ovk c^" 
 KK'qpovoft.iav iv, Ty fiaaiKeLo, tov XptffTov Koi ®eov (where Alf. notes 
 'We cannot safely say here that the same Person is intended by 
 X. K. ®€ov merely on account of the omission of the art. ; for (1) any 
 introduction of such a predication regarding Christ would here be 
 manifestly out of place, (2) ©cos is so frequently ^anarthrous that it 
 is not safe to ground any such inference on its use here '), 2 Th. 1^^ 
 OTTOS ivSo^acrOy to ovo/xa tov Kvpiov ■^/j.Siv 'Ir/iTOv ev i/uv Kat vfieK iv avTio 
 Kara Trjv X"P"' ''"°^ ©eov v/ilov koi Kvpiov 'Ijjo-oS Hpurrov ; 1 Tim. 5^' 
 (cf. 2 Tim. 4I) hiafiMpTvpofiLai ivdiriov tov ®eov /cat XpicTTOv hjcrov Kal 
 tSv e/cXeKTcov dyyeAojv, which Chrysostom explains /idpTvpa xaXu tov 
 ®€bv Kal TOV vlov avTov ; 2 P. 1^ cv StKaiotruvi; tot; ®€ov rifuov Kat (rurrripoi 
 'Irjvov Xpia-Tov, where see n. On this use of the article see Green's 
 Gr. of N.T. pp. 205-219. Rampf compares Eus. H.E. vii. 30 (the 
 charge brought against Paul of Samosata) to5 koX tov ©eov tov eavToC 
 Kat Kvptov apvovfiivov. The denial of the only Master and Our Lord 
 J. C. may be implicit, shown by their conduct, though not asserted in 
 word, as in Tit. 1 i^j fcut it is more naturally taken as explicit, as in 
 1 Joh. 2^, where Westcott notes that a common gnostic theory was 
 that ' " the Aeon Christ " descended upon the man Jesus at His baptism 
 and left Him before His passion. Those who held such a doctrine 
 denied . . . the union of the divine and human in one Person . . . and 
 this denial involves the loss of the Father, not only because the ideas 
 of sonship and fatherhood are correlative, but because ... it is only in 
 the Son that we have the [full] revelation of God as Father.' The phrase 
 TOV /jiovov Sea-iroTTiv might also refer to the heresy attributed to Cerinthus 
 by Hippolytus {Haer. vii. 33, x. 21) ov^ vtto tov irpMTOv Oeov tov koct/jlov 
 yeyovevai rjOikrja-ev dW vtro Swa/teois Ttvos oyyeXtK^s, and Irenaeus {Haer. 
 i. 26). See Introduction on Early Heresies. 
 
 5. 4iro(i.v(jo-ot t\ 4|Jids poil\o|iai, elSiSTas 4|j.as irdvTa.] 1 Cf. 2 P. P^ 816 
 
 ^ On the readings see Introduction. 
 
28 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 fieWi^aui vfias del virofiifi.vri(rKtLV KutTrep fiSoras, ib. 1^^ Sieytipeiv v/iSi 
 iv vTrofiVT^tru, ib. 3^ Sceyeipia v/juav hi virofivi^a-ei TrjV elXiKpivfj Btdvoiav, 
 Rom. 15^* irewcurp.aL 8c ort xal avTol fiecTTOi i(rT£ aya6w<Tvvt]S, ■mirXTjpwp.evot, 
 Trdarji rrji yviacrewi . . . Tokjjjrfporipioi Se typayjia vfuv aiio fj-epovi <os ivava- 
 IJiifiv^a-Kiav vp-di. The word eiSoras justifies vrrofivTJ(rai, : they only need to 
 be reminded of truths already known, so that it is unnecessary to write at 
 length. The repeated ifids contrasts the readers with the libertines of 
 the former verse. The words in themselves might be taken ironically of 
 persons professing (like the Corinthians) to ' know all things,' but the 
 broad distinction maintained throughout the epistle between vfi.et's 
 and ovTOL (the Libertines) forbids such an interpretation. If we 
 read aira^ TTiivTa with some M88., it suggests something of anxiety 
 and upbraiding, which may be compared with the tone of St. Paul 
 in writing to the Galatians. See, however, the following note for 
 the position of airaf. Instead of irdvTa some MSB. have tovto. 
 The former finds some support in Enoch 1^ ' I heard every thing from 
 the angels,' 25^ ' I should like to know about every thing,' Secrets of 
 En. 40^'^ 'I know all things from the lips of the Lord... I know all 
 things and have written all things in the books,' 6P (quoted by Chase 
 in D. of the Bib.). It should probably be understood of all that follows, 
 including the historical allusions, implying that those addressed were 
 familiar not only with the O.T. but with rabbinical traditions, so Estius 
 ' omnia de quibus volo vos commonere.' ^ Bede's note is ' omnia videlicet 
 arcana fidei scientes et non opus habentes recentia quasi sanctiora a 
 novis audire magistris.' In what follows he takes awai with a-iocrais, ' ita 
 clamantes ad se de aflBictione Aegyptiae primo salvavit humiles, ut 
 secundo murmurantes contra se in eremo prostemeret superbos . . • 
 Meminerimus ilium sic per aquas baptismi salvare credentes, ut etiam 
 post baptismum humilem in nobis requirat vitam.' 
 
 Sti Kipios, 4iro| Xoiv Ik yijs Aly&irrov tr&a-as, rh Stirrtpov [tous] (tfl irurrtiiravras 
 im&Kea-ev.'] For text see Introduction on Readings. Clement in his 
 Adumbrationes gives the paraphrase ' Quoniam Dominus Deus semel 
 populum de terra Aegypti liberans deinceps eos qui non crediderunt 
 perdidit' and then to obviate a possible misconstruction of the last 
 word, adds characteristically ' ut eos videlicet per supplicium erudiret. 
 In praesenti quippe tempore puniti sunt et perierunt, propter eos qui 
 salvantur, donee convertantur ad Dominum.' Justin {Dial. 120) 
 speaking of the prophecy in Gen. 491", g^ys that it does not refer to 
 Judah, but to Jesus rov koX roiis irarepas vpJutv i^ Alyvirrov i^ayayovra, 
 but the use of the personal name .Jesus in such a connexion has no 
 parallel in the N. T., though the official name Christ occurs with 
 a similar reference in 1 Cor. 10^' », Heb. IP". Clem. Al. p. 133 
 says (of Exod. 232") § pmcttlko^ iKeivoi ayytXos 'Itjitovs. The reading 
 
 ^ Dr. Bigg points out that the facts which Jude expects his readers to remember, 
 viz. the instances of judgment which follow, were less likely to be remembered than 
 the admonitions to prepare for the Coming Kingdom which precede 2 P. 1", and 
 he argues that this proves clumsy borrowing on the part of the former ; but the 
 provocation in the Wilderness and the destruction of 8odom were among the most 
 familiar lessons of the O.T. 
 
5] NOTES 29 
 
 '1-/70-01)5 is recognized by Jerome {Jovin. 1. 12) but explained by 
 him of Joshua. With this we may compare Sir. 46^ foil. Kparatos Iv 
 TToXefiio 'Itjo-oBs NaviJ-.-os iyevero Kara to ovofia avTov /ueyas eirt era)' 
 Tr/pia iKXeKTuiv avTov, Justin Dial. 75, where reference is made to Exod. 
 2320,21 'Behold I send my angel before thee, to keep thee in the 
 way and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware 
 of him and obey his voice ; for he will not pardon your transgression, 
 for my name is in him.' Justin's comment is tis ow tts Trjv y^v 
 eio-^ya-ye.TOvs TttTEpas ^jnfiv; ^8j; ttotc voijo-OTe on 6 iv tu ovo/uaTt tovtco 
 ejrovo/iao-flets 'Iijo-ovs, irporepov Aio^s KaA.oi!/x£i/os (see Numb. IS^^), ib. 
 106, 132, Clem. Al. 134, Lactant. Inst. 4. 17 Christi flguram gerebat 
 ille Jesus ; qui cum primum Auses vocaretur, Moyses f utura praesen- 
 tiena jussit eum Jesum vocari ; other reff. in Pearson {Art. 2. p. 75, 
 ed. Chevallier). It is difficult however to see how Joshua can be said 
 either to have saved the people from Egypt or to have destroyed the 
 disbelievers. Moses was the divine instrument in the former case, and 
 we are only told of one, Achan, whom Joshua put to death, and that, 
 not for disbelief, but for disobedience. Again Joshua had nothing 
 to do with the punishment of the angels (v. 6). The punishment of 
 murmurers and unbelievers is always ascribed to God, as in Numbers 
 1411.12^ Psa. 78, 95, 106, Sir. 16''-io, Heb. 3i6-i9, and 1 Cor. 10ii». 
 
 rh ScvTcpov has given rise to much discussion. If we place aira^ 
 before Kaov with Sin., or before ck yijs with Clem. Al. p. 280 (6 ©eos 
 ttTraf eK yrjs AlyvTrrov Xabv (rtoo-as, to Sevrepov . . .airdkea-ev), we might then 
 regard it as contrasting the preceding saving with the following 
 destruction. I think Ewald is right in connecting airaf with this 
 later clause rather than with eiSoras, as it agrees better with the 
 a^rai of ver. 3, and intensifies the warning. The deliverance from Egypt 
 was the creation of a people once for all, but yet it was followed by 
 the destruction of the unbelieving portion of the people, i.e. by all 
 but Caleb and Joshua (Num. li^'^''). So in 1 Cor. 10 we have the 
 privileges of Israel allowed, and yet all was in vain because of their 
 unbelief. There seems less force in the connexion of aira^ with ctSoTas : 
 17817 would have been more suitable. For the opposition to to Sivrepov 
 cf. Heb. 9^* 6 Xpto-Tos aira^ 7rpo<revex6eli £ts to TroWmv afeveyKtiv a/jLapTiai 
 £K SevTepov )(ijDpis ap-apTiai 6<l)6TJ<TiTai, Theoph. Autol. ii. 26 ivo to /icv aira^ 
 y TreTrhrjptafJieifov 0T€ eTeOr], to Se Sevrepov /liWri irXyjpova'Oai p-eTo. t^v... 
 KpUriv, Liban. ap. Wetst. e/ioi Se airaf apKct yiktiyra. oi^Aciv, StvTepov 
 
 e OVK€TL 
 
 I am inclined to think that the article before /tij is an intrusion, as 
 it seems to be before ev in ver. 12. Omitting it, we can take Scwepov 
 with p,ri TTio-rewavTas, getting the sense : 'In the 1st case of unbelief 
 (in Egypt) 1 salvation followed ; in the 2nd (in the wilderness) 
 destruction,' lit. 'when they, a second time, failed to believe,' He 
 destroyed them.' If this was the original reading, it is easy to under- 
 stand the insertion of toi;s as facilitating the plural construction after 
 \aov. We may compare the solemn utterance in Heb. 10^^ l/covo-tws 
 
 1 Cf. Excel. 2", 41, 521, 6', 14"' 12. 
 
30 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 OLfiapravovTuyv r/fiMV fuera to Xafietv rrjv iiriyvaxriv t^s aKijOdas ovk eri mpl 
 afiapTiMV dTroXeiTTCTat dvcria, and the belief, apparently based upon it, in 
 the early Church as to sin after baptism, cf . Herm. Mand. iv. 3, Yis. ii. 1, 
 Clem. Al. Sl/r. ii. p. 459 tov ovv iikr)<^(yra. rip/ a(j>e<riv tu>v afjiapriStv ovk en 
 afii,apTd.vciv XPV- '"■' y°-P ''"S I'pcuTg (cat /xovg /jLeravoia run' d[i,apTiZv avrrj av 
 €tij . . . cScoKci/ ovv aWrjv en rots kov rfj mcrrei irepiTeirToiKOO'L tivl irXrjp.p.eXilj- 
 fnan, TToXviXiO's <5v, /ieTdvoiav Sevripav. Hence sprang the custom of post- 
 poning baptism till the approach of death. For the emphatic Sevnpov 
 compare 8h airoeavovra in ver. 12, also 2 P. P, 220-22, Heb. 6^8, Tit. 310 
 alpefiKov dv6poiirov ficra p,i.av koX Scvripav vovdeaiav Trapaurov. 
 
 Others join to SevTepov with o-cao-as, some supposing a reference to 
 the saving from famine in the wilderness, others to the Salvation 
 wrought by Christ. This last seems to be the view taken by Zahn, 
 who understands trojcras Xaov metaphorically of the new Israel and 
 reads 'Iijo-otJs, maintaining that Jesus may be called the destroyer of 
 Jerusalem, because He prophesied its destruction and spoke of His 
 word as that which should judge men at the last day (Job. 12**). He 
 considers that, if the saving and destruction are to be understood of 
 the Exodus of old, it is difficult to account for its being placed before 
 the Fall of the Angels. But why may not Jude have followed the 
 warning derived from O.T. history in 1 Cor. 10, and then have be- 
 thought himself of the warning derived from the story of the Watchers 
 in Enoch? Some again imagine allusion to be made to a second 
 destruction, such as the carrying away captive, or even the fall of 
 Jerusalem under Titus. I do not think we can make to Bevrepov 
 simply equivalent to va-repov, as is done by many interpreters. In 
 Nonnus Dionys. 46. 189 koX tote pXv Xme Xvcrcra voocr^oXeos Atovwou, 
 KOI, TTpoTtpas <j>pivas cV^e to Sevrepov it is nearly ' again.' For the 
 combination criotras — aTrdXea-ev B. Weiss compares James 4^2 d^ ia-nv — 
 6 Svvd[jLivoi trSto'ai koI oTroXetrai. 
 
 6. oYV^ous T€ Tois (I'fi TTjp'iio-avTOS T'fiv sovTOv apx'fiv . . . els Kpiirw...Terf\pr\Ktv.'\ 
 Cf. Clem. Al. Adumbr. ' Angelos qui non servaverunt proprium princi- 
 patum, scilicet quern acceperunt secundum profectum.' This of course 
 supplies an even more striking instance of the possibility of falling 
 away from grace, cf . Bede ' Qui angelis peccantibus non pepercit, nee 
 hominibus parcet superbientibus, sed et hos quoque cum suum princi- 
 patum non servaverint, quo per gratiam adoptionis filii Deieffecti sunt, 
 sed reliquerint suum domicilium, id est, Ecclesiae unitatem...dam- 
 nabit.' On the Fall of the Angels see Introduction and the parallel 
 passages in 2 P. 2*, and in Enoch, chapters 6-10. 
 
 "■PX^".] Used of office and dignity, as in Gen. 40^1 of the chief 
 butler : here perhaps of the office of Watcher, though Spitta takes it 
 more generally of the sovereignty belonging to their abode in heaven = 
 TOV dvoi KXrjpov in Clem. Al. 650 P. The term dpxrj is used of the evil 
 angels themselves in Eph. &^K Cf. Enoch 12*, of the Watchers 
 (angels) who have abandoned the high heaven and the holy 
 efernaZ ^Zace and defiled themselves with women, ih. 15'. PhUo says 
 of the fallen angels (M. 1, p. 268) KaXov pJri XnroTaKTTJa-ai /*ev t^s toC 
 ®fov Ta^eojs, iv ij tous Terajfievov^ TravTas dpiareveiv dvayxij, aiTO/ioA.^o-ai 
 
5-7] NOTES 31 
 
 Se Trpos Trjv avav8pov ^Sov^v. So Just. M. Apol. ii. 5 ot 8' ■ ayyeXoi irapa- 
 ^dvTe^ T^vSe Ti]V ra^iv yvvaiKiov fii^einv ^TTijflijtrav with Otto s n. 
 
 airoXiirdvTas rb JSiov olKiiT^ipiov.] Cf. 2 Cor. 5^ to oIk. to e^ oipavoB, and 
 the quotation from Enoch in the last n. [For oi/cr^Tijpiov cf. Enoch 15^ 
 (the message of Enoch to the Watchers) ' the spiritual have their 
 dwelling in heaven '...17 KaToiKjjo-ts auTfiv eo-Tat iirl t^s y^s. C] 
 
 els KpCo-tv (le-ydXiis ifj|JL^pas Seo-jiots aiSCois vvh £<{if>ov reT'/jpTiKev.'] Cf. 2 P. 2^ 
 aeipOK ^6ff>ov TaprapuKras, ib. 2' dStVovs eis rifi,ipav Kpio-Eojs KoXa^o/u,ci/oiJS 
 Tijpeiv, iS. 3^ rr]pov[A,€VOi. £is ■^fiipav Kpitrtun. . .twv acre/Hov avOpmiriav, Joel 2^' 
 6 ^Xtos p.eTa<TTpa<f)tj<T€TaL eis (7K0T0S...Tptv cX^eii/ t^v fj/iepav Kvpiov rr/v 
 /AcyaXijv Kat iTTUJMV^, Apoc. 6^^ ^X^ev ij 17/iepa ^ fLiydXti t^s opy^s airol, 
 ■ifi. 16^* o-wayayciv ouToiis eis tov irdXejiiov rfjs |jie7dXT)s V)|i.^pas toS ®eoi) 
 Toi) TTovTOKpotTopos. Enoch 10^ iiriKoXv^ov avTto (Azazel) ctkotos, Kal 
 otKjjo-ciTd) exeT cts rbv alZva, 10^^ S^cov avTOv^...fji,S)(pi ■rjp.ipai Kpicreias 
 airZv, ib. 22^^ (Gr. in Charles' App. 0) fxixpi t^s /xcyaXiys riiiipai t^s 
 Kpto-Ews, i6. 54^, note on xlv. 1. So rj^iipa rov KvpCov 1 Cor. P, 2 P. 31" 
 cd., iKiCvi] rj ■tjii.e.pa 2 Th. l^". On Setr/iois see En. 54^'^ ' I saw how they 
 made iron chains of immeasurable weight, and I asked for whom they 
 were prepared, and he said unto me " These are prepared for the hosts 
 of Azazel." ' Cf. Sea-fiioi o-kotous (Wisd. 17^) of the plague of darkness. 
 
 For the use of the ace. after inro to express ' rest under,' 
 instead of the earlier dat. or gen. cf. Joh. 1*^ ovra imo rrjv <tvk^v, 
 Jannaris Gr. § 1698^ Schmid Attic, iv. p. 467 f. 
 
 aiSiois.] The chains are called ' everlasting,' but they are only used 
 for a temporary purpose, to keep them for the final judgment. It 
 seems to be here synonymous with alwviog in ver. 7. So too in the 
 only other passages in which it occurs in the Bible, Wisdom 7^^ 
 airavyacrfid i(TTi <^(0T0S aiStou, and Rom. 1^" ij d'l'Sios aiToC hvva.fi.i's Koi 
 diioTTi's. After tpiliov Clem. Al. p. 280 adds ctyptW ayye'Xwv, a variant of 
 which is found also in Lucif. 28 sanctorum angelorum, Speculum, 
 p. 50 (Belsheim, 1899). Cf. Deissmann, Bible Studies, p. 363 n. 
 
 7. <os Sd8o|ia Kol r^fioppa koI at irepV aurds iriSXeis.] The 3rd example of 
 divine judgment differs from the two others, as it tells only of the 
 punishment, not of the fall from grace. Hence the difference of con- 
 nexion dyyeXous t e . . . a) s 2o8o/*a. Cf . 2 P. 2^ iroAeis SoSo/xooi/ kol 
 Vofioppa's KaTaa-TpoKJy^ KareKpivev. The destruction was not limited to 
 these two cities, but extended to all the neighbouring country- (Gen. 
 19^5^ called UevTa-iroXi^ in Wisd. 10*), including the towns of Admah and 
 Zeboim (Deut. 29^^, Hos. IP). Zoar was spared at the request of 
 Lot. 
 
 Tov 8|j,oiov Tpoirov to^Itois iKiropvsvirao-ot.] For the adverbial ace, which 
 repeats the preceding m? = sicut (Clem. Adumbr.), cf. Mt. 23^7 3v rpoTrov 
 iiricrvvdyei opvts toi voo-o-ta, 2 Mace. 15^^ ov Tpoirov oTvoi...a.iroTe\ei, o^tid 
 Kai, Luc. Catapl. 6 redvatri. tov o/j,oiov Tpoirov. ' Like them,' i.e. the 
 fallen angels. The two judgments are similarly joined in Test. Nepht. 3 
 /i^ yivri&Be. d>s SoSojiia, rfrvs ev^Waf e Ta.i,ai (jivtrews aur^s. O/ioicos Se /cat 
 01 'Eypiyyopes ev^XXa^av Ta^tv tjrvcremi avrwv, o6s KwrrfpaaraTO K.vpioi, 3 Mace. 
 2*' 5. Others understand rowots of the libertines who are subse- 
 quently referred to as oStoi (w. 8, 10, 12, 16, 19) ; but the beginning 
 
32 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 of ver. 8 (fievroi kol ovtol) seems to distinguish between them and the 
 preceding. The verb ckit. occurs in Gen. 38^* of Tamar, Exod. 34i^' i* 
 (/MT^ TTOTe) iKiropveu(Tut(nv oirLcrm Twv 6tS>v avT&v, Lev. 17^, Hos. 4^^, Ezek. 
 
 ^6. 28, 33 
 
 aireX6ov(rai oirlira o-apK^s er^pos.J In the case of the angels the for- 
 bidden flesh (lit. ' other than that appointed by God ') refers to the 
 intercourse with women ; in the case of Sodom to the departure from 
 the natural use (Rom. 1^'), what Philo calls dvojuovs koI iKdea-fiov^ 
 /xt'feis {de Gig. M 1, p. 267), cf. Exod. 30^ om dvoicreis Ovfuaiw. erepov. 
 For the post-classical phrase cf. 2 P. 21" rois ottlo-od o-apKos ev eiriBviLiq. 
 fiLatr/Jiov iropevofievov?, Deut. 4^ eTroptvOrj &iricrm BeeX^eyu/j, Jer. 2^' ^. 
 
 TrpiSKCivTai Sc^Yfia irup&s olmvCou SCkijv inr^ODiroi..l Cf. Enoch 67^^ ' this 
 judgment wherewith the angels are judged is a testimony for the kings 
 and the mighty,' 2 P. 2^ vTroSeiy/jux p-eXXovTwr aa-efiea-w rtOciKwi, 1 Cor. 
 10^' 11 rvTTOi iyevovTO, Heb. 4^1 tva firj iv t<3 avTM ns VTroSety/uart tteotj t^s 
 aireiGeiai, 3 Mace. 2^ <rv tous VTrepiji^ai'iav ipya^o/jiivovi SoSo/i.iras... 
 iropl 6aio Korei^Xc^as, irapaSeiy/ia Toi'S hriya/ofiivoK /caTacTTTjtras, Clem. 
 Al. p. 260 httyp-d (Toi TOVTtav oi ayyekoi, tov ®eov ro koXKoi 
 diroXeXoiiroTES 8ta KaWo^ futpaivop-evov, Ael. V.II. vi. 12 fin. J/v Seiyna. 
 ov TO TV)(pv ToTs dvflponrois cts <no<j>poiTvvr)v i) tov Aiovvdiov c/c tZv 
 TrjXiKOvTiav eh ovTio Tairuva fieTa^oXrj. The present aspect of the 
 Lacus Asphaltites was a conspicuous image of the lake of fire and 
 brimstone prepared for Satan and his followers, Apoc. ID^", 201", 218_ 
 It is questioned whether Trvpos is governed by Setyfia or Socijv. If 
 by SiKTjv, then the burning of Sodom is itself spoken of as stUl 
 going on (eternal), and this is in accordance with Jewish belief 
 as recorded in Wisd. 10^ (irvp IlevTairoXeuis) ^s hi /iapTvpiov t^s 
 Tzovqpiai Kairvi^o/ievij Ka6i(TTTjKe xepo-os, Philo (De Ahr. ■ M. 2. 21) 
 /xc;(pi vvv KauTai. to yap Kepavviov irvp ^kktto (T/3evvv/Ji.evov ^ vipxrai 
 Tj iVTVtjterai. irto-Tis Se cra<j)i(TTa.Tq to. Sputfieva, tov yap arvp.Pe^TjKoro's 
 irdOovi (TTifiiiov icTiv 5 t€ avaSiSofievoi a€i koiitos koI o fUTaXkevovo'i 6elov, 
 lb. V. Mays. M. 2, p. 143. Some disallow this sense of aiuvtos and 
 think it can only be used of hell-fire, as in 4 Mace. 121^ (the words 
 of the martyr contrasting the fires of present torture with the eternal 
 flames awaiting the persecutor) Ta/xuveTac a-e ■q Oeia Sikij trvKVOTepai koI 
 aiwvito TTvpi, Kal /Sdcravot ets oX.ov tov alZva ovK dvijtrouo-t cr€. For an 
 examination of the word see Jukes Restitution of All Things, p. 67 n. 
 and cf. Jer. 2339'«, Ezek. 1663.65 (on the restoration of Sodom), 47ii2 
 (a prophecy of the removal of the curse of the Dead Sea and its 
 borders), Enoch. 10^ and i^, where the ets aiSsva of the former verse is 
 equivalent to 70 generations in the latter, also ver. 10 where ijm] auovios 
 is reckoned at 500 years. As the meaning of Set-y/xa is made clear by 
 the following participial clause, it seems unnecessary to take it with 
 TTupos in the sense of ' an example or type of eternal fire,' which 
 would escape the difficulty connected with oiuvtou, but leaves Stmyv 
 iiTrexovo-ot (for which cf. Xen. Mem. ii. 1, 8, 2, Mace. iv. 48) a 
 somewhat otiose appendage. In the book of Enoch (67* foil.) the 
 angels who sinned are said to be imprisoned in a burning valley 
 (Hinnom, ch. 27) in which there was a great swelling of waters, accom- 
 
7, 8] NOTES 33 
 
 panied by a smell of sulphur ; and ' that valley of the angels burned 
 continually under the earth.' Charles notes on this that ' the Gehenna 
 valley here includes the adjacent country down to the Dead Sea. A 
 subterranean fire was believed to exist under the Gehenna valley.' 
 
 8. o|io{<iis [i^vToi Kal oStou] Notwithstanding these warnings the liber- 
 tines go on in similar courses. 
 
 cvvirviato|jL(voi. crdpKa [naivovo-iv.J Clement's paraphrase in his Adum- 
 brationes is ' qui somniant imaginatione sua libidines , . . bonum esse 
 putantes non illud quod vere bonum est.' He also explains the word 
 in Sir. iii. 11, ov (so Hort, in the margin of his copy, corrects o of 
 MS.) yap virap rrj dXT]9cia iiri.^a.K\ov(Tiv. Cf. parallel in 2 P. 21"'^^, 
 1 Th. 5% Rom. 13ii'i2, Ps. 73'''», 126i. Can there be any reference to 
 the blindness with which the men of Sodom were smitten? The verb 
 is used in Acts 2^' (a quotation from Joel 2^*) ot Trpea-^vrepoi v/xlav 
 ivvTTvioK ivuirviao-drja-ovTai of those that see visions, and so Spitta, 
 holding that Jude copied from 2 P., would render it here, prefixing 
 the article to make it correspond with the tj/£vSoTrpo(l)^Tai and i^e-uSoSt- 
 ho.(TKa\oi of 2 P. 2^. Those who take the opposite view (viz. that 2 P. 
 was copied from Jude) will see nothing to justify the article. Mofifatt 
 {Hist. N.T.) translates 'these men of sensual imagination,' but in the 
 introduction to the epistle (p. 589) regards it as implying a ' claim to 
 possess visions.' The word is used by Isaiah 561" Jq connexion with 
 the words ovk eyvoxrav, ovk £i8dr« (see ver. 10 below), ewTrviatpixevoi 
 KoCrrjv ^iXouvTcs vvcrrdiai, which Delitsch explains ' instead of watching 
 and praying to see divine revelations for the benefit of the people, they 
 are lovers of ease, talkers in their sleep,' cf. ib. 291", jer. '^'^-^'^ where 
 lying dreams are contrasted with the word of the Lord, ib. 27^- (LXX. 
 34^) fxi] aKovire t!ov \j/€vSo7rpo<j)r]TS>v vp.l!>v . . . Kal tSiv hrvmiiatpp.fvmf v/xiv 
 ('nor to your dreamers ') /caiTcSv ol(iiVLcrfi.aiTO)v v/xav, Deut. 131' 3' ^ irpot^riTq's 
 rj hivTTvwitpp.a/o's. Compare Gen. 28'^, 4P. 
 
 Bengel's explanation ' Hominum mere naturalium indoles graphice 
 admodum descripta est. Somnians multa videre, audire, etc. aibi 
 videtur,' appears to agree with Clement's paraphrase. So Chase ' they 
 live in an unreal world of their own inflated imaginations,' comparing 
 the conjectural reading of Col. 21^ aipa Keve/ijSaTeijwv. This accords 
 with ver. 10 : in their delusion and their blindness they take the real 
 for the unreal, and the unreal for the real. The verb is used both in 
 the active and middle by Aristotle, Somn. 1. 1 irorcpov (rvp^/Saivei dei 
 ToTs KaOevSova-Lv ivmrvid^eiv, aXX' ov p,vriiJ,ovivov<Tiv ; Probl. 30. 14. 2 oi hi 
 TtS KadtvSeiv ivvTrvia^o/xevoi i<TTap.€vq<i ttji Siavoiai, Kai Ka0' o(rov ■^pc/jiei, 
 oveipwTTovcriv, cf. Artem. Oneir. 1. 1. Some interpret of polluting 
 dreams (cf. Lev. 15) ; but the word IwTrvia^Spevoi is evidently intended 
 to have a larger scope, covering not merely fiiaivova-iv but aOerova-iv 
 and Pkacr<f>r)ixov(Tiv. We must also interpret pnaivai here by the acrikyuav 
 of V. 4, the iKiropvevcracrai and o-apKos ere/aas of v. 7. This wide sense 
 appears in Tit. 1^^ tois p,ep,La<Tjj,4voii ovSev KaOapov, oXKa fie/jiiavTat 
 avTiSv Kal 6 vols Kal -fj crwetSijo-is. The heretics condemned by St. Paul 
 for forbidding marriage (1 Tim. 4^) regarded it as p.La(rp,oi aapKoi. 
 
 Kvpi<STt]Ta Si derrovo-iv, S(S£as Si pXair<fii)|iov<riv.] On first reading one is 
 
34 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 inclined to take the words Kvpiorrji and So^ai simply as abstractions. 
 The result of indulgence in degrading lusts is the loss of reverence, the 
 inability to recognize true greatness and due degrees of honour. This 
 would agree with the description of the libertines as sharing in the 
 avriXoyia of Korah, as KVfiara aypia OaXcuTtrri?, as yoyyvaraC uttering 
 hard speeches against God. When we examine however the use of 
 the word xvptoTjjs and the patristic comments, and when we consider 
 the reference to the archangel's behaviour towards Satan, and the 
 further explanation in ver. 10, where the crdpKa of ver. 8 is repre- 
 sented by a<7a ^vcriKQJs eTricTTavrai and the phrase KvpiorrjTa dOcTomiv, 
 So^a; Sk pXacr<f>rj(i.ova-iv by otra ovk otSao-iv P^swijyripMva-iv, we seem to 
 require a more pointed and definite meaning, not simply 'majesty,' 
 but ' the divine majesty,' not simply ' dignities,' but ' the angelic 
 orders.' Cf. 2 P. 21", Eph. l^^ (having raised him from the dead 
 and set him on his right hand) virtpavta Trdarrj^ "PX7* '"'■'■ ^^ovcriai 
 Koi Sumjucws Kal KvpiorrjTO's, Col. 1^^ iv aiirta iKTurOr] ra iravTa kv 
 Tots ovpavoTf KoX eiri t^s y^s, ra, opara. Kal ra aopara, etrc Opovoi ctTe 
 KupioTijTes etT£ apxaX nrc i^ovtriai, where Lightfoot says ' St. Paul 
 does not profess to describe objective realities but contents himself 
 with repeating subjective opinions . . . His language shows the 
 same spirit of impatience with this elaborate angelology, as in 
 ii. 18.' 'There can be little doubt that the primary reference is to 
 the orders of the celestial hierarchy conceived by these gnostic 
 Judaizers ' (see my n. on Clem. Str. vii. 9, p. 833). Lightfoot how- 
 ever considers that the words are intended to be taken in their widest 
 sense, including bad and good angels, as well as earthly dignities. In our 
 text it would seem that the word should be understood as expressing the 
 attribute of the true Kvpios, cf . Didache 4. 1 (honour him who speaks the 
 word of God) is Kvpiov, oOev yap -q Kvpionrji XaKetrai, tKiL Kvpioi iarriv, 
 Herm. Sim. v. 6. 1 cis SovXov rpoTtov ov KeZrai 6 utos tov ®eov, dXA.' ets 
 i^ov(Tiav /leyaXriv kcitoi Kal KvpioTrjra. Hase, on Leo Diaconus v. 3, 
 p. 449, has the note ' Kvpiortj's vocatur dignitas Servatoris, qua est 
 Dominus et noster et rerum creatarum omnium' and cites among other 
 exx. Chrys. Hom. in Matt. Ixxi. p. 696, ' the prophet bears witness 
 (bo TTjv KvpioTTjTa of Christ Kal TO o/xoTi/tov TO irpos TOV TraTepa,' Greg. 
 !Nyss. c. Eunom. vi. p. 180 C ^ Kvpiorr]^ oi^' ouo-ias ovo/w, aX\' eforo'uis 
 *o-Tt. It was also used as a complimentary address, •§ crij KvpioTrji ' your 
 lordship.' The verb aOeriw has God or Chi-ist for its object in Lk. IQi'', 
 Joh. 12*8, I Th. 4*, etc. We have then to consider how it can be said 
 that the libertines (oBtoi) ' despise authority ' in like manner to the 
 above mentioned offenders. For the former we may refer to ver. 4 
 Kvpiov rifiunr apvovfievoi, for the latter to the contempt shown by the 
 Israelites towards the commandments of God. [This is not inconsistent 
 with the statement in ver. 5 that the unbelieving were destroyed, for the 
 neglect of God proceeded from unbelief.] So the desertion of their 
 appointed station and abode by the angels showed their disregard for 
 the divine ordinance, and the behaviour of the men of Sodom combined 
 with the vilest lusts an impious irreverence towards God's representa- 
 tives, the angels (Gen. 19^). Cf. Joseph. Ant. i. 11. 2 tU dvdpunrovi^a-av 
 
8, 9] NOTES 35 
 
 vjSpKTTai Koi irpos to Beiov do-e/Scis, and Test. Aser 7, where the sin of 
 Sodom is expressly stated to have been their behaviour towards the 
 aagels, fir] •ytVeerfle <us 2o8o/ta tJtk ^yvoijtre tovs AyycXous TUvpiov koi 
 airiaXtTO lug aiuvos- 
 
 8<!Sas 8^ p\air(|>r||i.oCo-i.v.] Of. 2 P. 21" ToXfiT/Tal avdaScis So^as ov Tpe- 
 fAovo-iv j8Xao-<^j;noSi/T£s. The only other passage in the N.T. in which 
 the pi. occurs is 1 P. 1^\ where the sense is different. Dr. Bigg 
 compares Exod. 1 5^^ rts o/,iotos troi iv fieois, K.vpi€ ; rt's o/xoioi <roi ; 
 SeSoia<Tfi,€vo'i ev dyiois, Oav/iaa-TOi iv Sdfats. Clement's interpre- 
 tation of this and the preceding clause is as follows (Adumbr. 
 1008) ' dominationem spernunt, hoc est solum dominum qui vera 
 dominus noster est, Jesus Christus . . . majestatem blasphemant, hoc 
 est angelos.' The word Sofa in .the singular is used for the Shekinah, 
 see my n. on James 2^. This suggests that Clement may be right in 
 supposing the plural to be used for the angels, who are, as it were, 
 separate rays of that glory. Compare Philo's use of the name Xdyot 
 for the angels as contrasted with the divine Adyos. In Philo Monarch. 
 2 p. 218 the divine So'fa is said to consist of the host of angels, Sdfav 8e 
 <r^v eivot vofii^m ras o"£ Sopv<f>opov(Tai Swd/ieis. See Fest. Jud. 25 Kvptos 
 evXoyrjtre tov Aeui, 6 dyy€A.os tov Trpoo-toTrou e/te, at Swd/xets rfji Sd^s Tov 
 2v/x€(ov, also Luke 9^^, where it is said that ' the Son of Man will come 
 in His own glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy 
 angels.' 1 Ewald, Hist. Isr. tr. vol. viii. p. 142, explains r/ Kvpidrijsof the 
 true Deity, whom they practically deny by their dual God ; at Sdfai are 
 the angels, whom they blaspheme by supposing that they had created 
 the world in opposition to the will of the true God, whereas Michael 
 himself submitted everything to Him. This last clause would then be 
 an appendage to the preceding, with special reference to the case of 
 the Sodomites (cf. Joh. IS^"). There may also be some allusion to the 
 teaching or practice of the libertines. If we compare the mysterious 
 reference in 1 Cor. IP" Sta tovto 6<f>dXa 77 ywrj i^ova-iav fx^iv iiri r^s 
 (ce<^aX^s Sta Tois dyyeXous, which is explained by TertuUian (De Virg. 
 Vel. 7) as spoken of the fallen angels mentioned by Jude, 'propter 
 angelos, scilicet quos legimus a Deo et caelo excidisse ob concupiscen- 
 tiam feminarum ' we might suppose the |8A.ao-<^?7/xta, of which the liber- 
 tines were guilty, to consist in a denial or non-recognition of the 
 presence of good angels in their worship, or of the possibility of their 
 own becoming Koivrnvot Sai/xovtW ; or they may have scoffed at the 
 warnings against the assaults of the devil, or even at the very idea of 
 'spiritual wickedness in high places.' So understood, it prepares us 
 for the strange story of the next yerse. 
 
 9. 6 SI Mixo'fiX 6 apxayyeXos.] The term apx- occurs in the N.T. only 
 here and in 1 Th. i^®. The names of seven archangels are given in 
 Enoch. The story here narrated is taken from the apocr3rphal Assumptio 
 Mosis, as we learn from Clem. Adumhr. in Ep. Judae, and Orig. De 
 Princ. iii. 2. 1. Didymus (In Epist. Judas Enarratio) says that some 
 doubted the canonicity of the Epistle because of this quotation from 
 
 ' There is much said of the glory of the Angels in ASc. Isaiae, pp. 47, 49 foil, 
 ed. Charles. 
 
 D 2 
 
36 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JTJDE 
 
 an apocryphal book. In Cramer's Catena on this passage (p. 163) we 
 read TeXeurijtrovTos ev rm opei MQ>i;<re<as, 6 Mi^^a^X dtrocrTeWtTai /leTaOrjawv 
 TO a&fia, fira tov SiajSoXov Kara rov MuvcretdS pXajtrK^fiavvTOi koX tftovea 
 droyopevovTOs Sia to iraTafai tov AlyvwTiov, ovk eveyKoiv Ttfv kwt avrov 
 l3Xaor<j>riiJi,iav o oyyeXos, 'EiriTiji^jo-ai a-oi o 0cbs •n-pos tov SiA^oXov tfjjr). 
 Charles in his edition of the Assumption thus summarizes the fragments 
 dealing with the funeral of Moses : (1) Michael is commissioned to 
 bury Moses, (2) Satan opposes his burial on two grounds : (a) he claims 
 to be the lord of matter (hence the body should be handed over to him). 
 To this claim Michael rejoins, ' The Lord rebuke thee, for it was God's 
 spirit which created the world and all mankind.' (b) He brings the 
 charge of murder against Moses (the answer to this is wanting). The 
 story is based upon Deut. 34* (R.V.) 'he buried him (mgi. he was 
 buried) in the valley... but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this 
 day.' Compare the vain search for Elijah (2 K. 2i*"). Further 
 details in Josephns (Ant. iv. 8. 48) vi^ov% alff>viSiov iirip avrov a-ravTOi 
 d^an^crai Kara, tivos <f>dpayyoi. yeypac^e 8e avrov iv raw Upati /SiySAois 
 TfOvtura, SeCtrai p.-q Si virepPo\rpi t^s ■n-epl avrov dpcr^s irpos to Otiav avTov 
 avaxiopija-ai ToX.p.rjauKriv ehrelv, Philo I. p. 165, and Clem. Al. {Sir. vi. 
 § 132, p. 807) where it is said that Caleb and Joshua witnessed the 
 assumption of Moses to heaven, while his body was buried in the 
 clefts of the mountain. 
 
 SiaKpiv(S|uvos.] Here used in the sense of 'disputing,' as in Jer. IS^* 
 avSpa BtaKpivop.fvav iraxrr) rg y^, Joel 3^, Acts 11^. See my note on 
 James P and below ver. 22. 
 
 SmXIycto.] Cf. Mk. 9^* ffpos dW^Xous hu\e\6ri<Tav, tk nei^<av. 
 
 o4k «tiSX|it|o-cv KpCo-iv eir€vc7Kctv pXairi(n)|xCas.] Cf. Plat. Legg. ix. 856 Tpo- 
 Socreios avriav lirujiipatv, ib. 943 Tip.u>piav i'Truf). The word occurs elsewhere in 
 N. T. only in Rom. 3^. Field {On Trcmslation of N.T. p. 244) compares 
 Acts 25^* 01 Karijyopol ovSe/iiav aiTiav etfyepov &v iyo> VTrevoow, Diod. 16. 29 
 SCicijV hrTjveyKav Kara t&v 'SirapriaTuiv, ^b. 20. 10 Kpio'eig dSucovs iwulsipoVTK, 
 20. 62 fj}ofiijO£L's Tas cjri^epo/to'as Kpwrtis, torn. x. p. 171 ed. Bip. eir^tyKov 
 Kpuriv TTcpi v/3pe(i>s, and translates 'durst not bring against him an 
 accusation of blasphemy ' ; but surely that is just what he does in 
 appealing to God. Besides such a statement would be altogether 
 beside the point. The verse is introduced to show the guilt attached 
 to speaking evil of dignities, i.e. of angels. If Michael abstained from 
 speaking evil even of a fallen angel, this is appropriate ; not so, if he 
 simply abstained from charging the devU with speaking evil of Moses. 
 I take j3Xacr(ftT]p.Cai to be gen. qualitatis, expressed by the adj. pxdir<ln]iwv 
 in 2 P. : see below on ver. 18, James 1^5 dKpoar^s £7rtXi;o-/*ov5s, 2* Kpnai 
 SuxXoytXTfiSyv Trovr/pSiv, 3* 6 Koa-fLOi T^s dStKios, also 2 P. 2^ aipe'o-cif 
 airmXelai, 2^" iTriOvfiiq, fiiacriiov. 
 
 KpixTis, like KpLvio, has the two meanings of judgment and of 
 accusation, cf. Lycurg. 31 where oi (rvKo<f>avTovvTi<i are distinguished 
 from Tutv SiKaiaii rat KpCatK IvuTTafiivaiV. 
 
 {mTi|i^(rai<roiK^pios.] These words occur in the vision of Zechariah 
 (311") where the angel of the Lord replies to the charges of Satan 
 against the high priest Joshua with the words cjrm/i^o-ai Kvpios ev o-oi, 
 
9-11] NOTES 37 
 
 2i.a/3oXE, Koi e7riTi//.^croi Kupios iv croi, 6 exXe^ajK.ei'os rijv lepovcraXi^fi,. 
 They were no doubt inserted as appropriate by the author of the Asc. 
 Mos. in his account of the controversy at the grave of Moses. We 
 may compare Mt. 17'^ hrcTinTja-ev airu 6 'Iiyo-oBs. 
 
 10. oiroi 8i ia-a fiv oiK olSao-iv pXa(ri^i])i.oviriv.] The libertines do tbe 
 contrary of what we are told of the respect shown by the angel even 
 towards Satan : they speak evil of that spiritual world, those spiritual 
 beings, of which they know nothing, cf. 2 P. 2^-. The common verb 
 j8\acr<^. shows that the Sdfai of ver. 8 are identical with ocra ovk oiSoo-iv 
 here. For the blindness of the carnal mind to all higher wisdom cf. 
 
 1 Cor. 2^1®, a passage linked with our epistle by the distinction between 
 the \j/vxiKoi and Trvivp-ariKoL and by the words XaXoS/iev OcoB a-o<j>iav, r)v 
 oJSeis r&v ap\6vTiov tov a.mvo^ tovtov eyvcoKtv €i yap tyvoMrav ovk av Tov 
 Kvpiov T^s 8d^s i&Tavp(0(rav. See too Joh. 8^*, 1 Tim. 6* Terv^oiTai /iijSev 
 txio-Ta/ievos. For the form otSao-tv s.ee my ed. of St. James p. clxxxiii. 
 
 iSo-a 8i <|iuo-iKus us Ta &Xo7a £ua lirCo-ravTai.] This Stands for (rapKO, in 
 ver. 8 and is explained by dcreA-yeiav in ver. 4, iKiropveva-aa-ai in ver. 7, 
 fiiaLvovfTLV in ver. 8, Kara ras €7ri6i)^tas avrSiv iropevoixevoi in ver. 16. 
 
 4iv(riKus ' by instinct,' SO Diog. L. x. 137 ^vo-ikios kol ;(a>pls Xoyov. 
 Alford cites Xen. Gyrop. ii. 3. 9 p-iyyjv opS) iravrai avOpiiirov^ i^'trei 
 eirto'Ta/iei'ous, SxrTrep ye Kot raWa ^(3a iiriaTaTai Tiva p-o-yrp/ cKacrra ovSi 
 Trap' €Vos aWou pxiOovra rj irapa r^s (^wecjs. 
 
 Iv ToiiTois ij)B«£povTai.] The natural antithesis here would have been 
 ' these things they admire and delight in.' For this Jude substitutes 
 by a stern irony ' these things are their ruin.' Cf. Phil. 3^^ where 
 speaking of the enemies of the Cross the apostle says Stv to reXos 
 diriaXeia, &v 6 6t6i -q KOiXta. kol r/ Sofa iv rg aurxvvy avrStv, Eph. 4"^ 
 avoOiaOai . . . tov iraXaiov avBptoirov Tov <l>6tip6p,tvov Kara tols iTriOvp-ia^. 
 
 1 1 . oval airols, 8ri rrj oSu tov Kalv iiropeiSSijcrav.] For the use of the aorist 
 see n. on ver. 4 TrapetcreSwjo-av : for the phrase cf. Blass Gr. p. 119, and 
 
 2 P. 2^^ eicucoXovO'qcravm Tg oSw toB BaXad/u,. The phrase oval, so common 
 in Enoch, esp. in cc. 94 to 100, and in the Gospels and Apocalypse, occurs 
 in the epistles only here and in 1 Cor. 91''. "The woe is grounded on the 
 fate which awaits those who walk in the steps of Cain, Balaam, and 
 Korah. In 2 P. Balaam is the only one referred to of the three leaders 
 of wickedness here named by Jude. Cain, with Philo, is the type of 
 selfishness (M. 1 p. 206) ttSs (^iXauros tjrt/cXijo'tv Kaiv tvpriKtv (quoted by 
 Schneckenb. p. 221) ; he is named as a type of jealous hate in 1 John 
 311, 12 »j,^ aywirZ/iev dXXijXous" ov KaOioi Kaiv ek tov ■Trovr/pov rjv Koi ecrffxi-iev 
 TOV aSf\<j)bv aiiTOV' koL X^-P*-^' TiVos iir^a^ai avTOV ; on to. cpya auroC Trovrjpa 
 rjV, Ta hi TOV dSeX^oC airoS SiKaia, of unbelief in Heb. 11* iricrTet irXttova 
 6va-iav'Al3eX -rapa Kalv irpoa-^vtyKev tw ©eu. This view of his sin is also 
 taken by the later Jewish writers, cf. Philo De Agric. 1 M. 300 f., and 
 Targ. Jer. on Gen. 4' cited by Schneckenburger, in which Cain is 
 represented as saying ' non est judicium, nee judex, nee est aliud 
 saeculum, nee dabitur merces bona justis, nee ultio sumetur de 
 improbis, etc. There seems no reason why we should not regard Cain 
 here as symbolizing the absence both of faith and of love, cf. 1 Joh. 323. 
 Euthym Zig. gives an allegorical explanation, Kal aiiTol dSeXt^oKrovot 
 
38 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 euri, 01 &v SiSd,(rKov(n ras tGv aTraruifievav i/rup^as d^oKTuvovrt^. Cain 
 and Korah are said to have been objects of special reverence with 
 a section of the Ophite heresy, which appears to have been a 
 development of the Nicolaitans (Epiphan. Pan. i. 3. 37. 1 oi 'Otftlrai 
 TWi irpot^acTEis f.iK'q^atTiv airo r^s NiKoXaou koX VviixTTiKSyv koX ruiv irpo 
 TovTOiv aipicreiov). They held that the Creator was evil, that the 
 Serpent represented the divine Wisdom, that Cain and his successors 
 were champions of right (Epiphan. ib. 38. 1, ot Kaiavot <^acrt tov Kalv ix 
 TTJi itrxwpoTepos Awajucois vird.p\uv koX t^s avaOtv av$evTiai, and boast 
 themselves to be of kin to Cain, koI t&v SoSo/iiToii/ koI 'Ho-aB koI Kope, 
 see too Iren. i, 31, Clem. Str. vii. § 108). 
 
 rfl irXdvu '''"^ Ba\oA|i |i.iir6ov l|cx{8T|irav.] Westcott on 1 Joh. 1^ says that 
 ' the idea of TrXdvij is always that of straying from the one way ; not of 
 misconception in itself, but of misconduct [as in Rom. P^]. Such going 
 astray is essentially ruinous. The cognate terms are used of the false 
 Christs and prophets (Mt. 24* ff., Apoc. 22», 13", 1920, 1 Joh. 46, 2 Joh. 7), 
 of Satan (Apoc. 12^, 20^ ff.), of Babylon (Apoc. 18^3), of Balaam in 
 Jude 11.' See also his n. on 4" ix tovtov -yti/coo-Kojutv to irvevfjui t^s aXr}- 
 Oeiai KOL TO Tirev/ia ttj^ rrXanys. 
 
 Every word in this clause is open to question. The passive of 
 cKXEd) to ' pour out ' is used to express either the onward sweeping 
 movement of a great crowd, or the surrender to an overpowering 
 motive on the part of an individual = e^itsi sitnt,^ as in Sir. 37^* 
 fit) iK)(y6'g'i eir' iSecrfidriav, Test. Reuh. 1 iropvela ev y i^e)(u6riv, Clem. 
 Al. Str. ii. p. 491 eis yjSov^v, rpdymv St/ojv, iKy^vdevTes Kadr]Sv7ra6oviTiv, 
 Plut. V. Ant. 21 ets TOV -^SyTraOrj Kal aKoXaarov /8tov iKK€)(yfievos. Such 
 an interpretation seems not quite consistent with jjucrOov, which implies 
 cool self-interest. That covetousness, aurxpoKipSeia, was a common 
 motive with false teachers is often implied or asserted by St. Paul and 
 St. Peter in the passages quoted below : and this, we know, was the 
 case with Balaam ; but would it be correct to say either of him or of 
 his followers here condemned by St. Jude that they ran greedily into 
 (or ' in ') error for reward 1 No doubt there have been cases (such as 
 the St. Bartholomew or the September massacres) where people engaged 
 for hire ran greedily into all excesses of cruelty ; or covetousness itself 
 may become a passion, p,s in the case of the miser : but these cases seem 
 hardly parallel to that in the text. Perhaps we should understand it rather 
 of a headstrong will breaking down all obstacles, refusing to listen to 
 reason or expostulation, as Balaam holds to his purpose in spite of the 
 divine opposition manifested in such diverse ways. Then comes the 
 difficulty, how are we to understand the dative irkdvg, and what is the 
 reference in the word? Should we take irkdvy as equivalent to eis 
 7rXavr;v (Winer p. 268) 1 This is the interpretation given by Lucifer 
 p. 219 ' vae illis quoniam in seductionem B. mercede effusi sunt,' but it 
 is a rare use of the dative, and it seems more natural to explain irXAvg 
 by the preceding o8u (dat. of the means or manner), which is used in 
 the same collocation in 2 P. 2^^. What then are we to understand by 
 
 ' I do not think the marginal reading in the R. V. ' cast themselves away ' is 
 tenable. 
 
11] NOTES 39 
 
 ' they were hurried along on the line of Balaam's error ' ? What was his 
 error? From Numb. 22, 25is, and 31i«, Nehem. IS^ Utoaplrai l/jiia-eo,- 
 o-avTO iir avTov Tov BaXaaju KarapdrracrOai, Jos. Ant, iv. 6. 6, we learn 
 that B. was induced by Balak's bribe to act against his own convictions 
 and eventually to tempt Israel to fornication. This then is the error or 
 seduction by which he leads them astray.^ In rabbinical literature Balaam 
 is a sor-t of type of false teachers (Pirke Aboth v. 29 with Taylor's n.). 
 Some suppose the name Nicolaitan (Apoc. 2^) to be formed from the 
 Greek equivalent to Balaam = ' corrupter of the people;' see however the 
 passages quoted from Clem. Al. in the Introduction on Early Heresies. 
 In Apoc. 21* we read of some in Pergamum that held the teaching 
 of Balaam, os eSi'Sao-Kev "m BaXax ^oXiiv aKavSaXcrv evooTriov tZv viwv 
 'I(rpa^\, <t)a.y€iv tlStakoOvra /cat iropvixxrai. There is no hint to suggest 
 that the innovators, of whom Jude speaks, favoured idolatry, but they 
 may have prided themselves on their enlightenment in disregarding 
 the rule of tho Apostolic Coxmcil as to the use of meats offered to idols 
 (cf. 1 Cor. 8), and perhaps in burning incense in honour of the Emperor, 
 see Ramsay Expositor iov 1904, p. 409, and July pp. 43-60. Ontheother 
 hand Jude continually charges them with moral laxity, and we may sup- 
 pose that this was combined with claims to prophetic power and with 
 the covetousness which is often ascribed to the false teachers of the early 
 Church, as in 1 Th. 2* '■ where Paul asserts of his own ministry that it 
 was ovK CK TrXavr/i oiSe ii S.KaOap(ria% oiSe ec 8d\<j) . . . ovre yap iv \6yto 
 KoXaKciai iyevi^0r]fii,€V, ovt€ iv Trpo^acrei TrXeoveftas, ovre ^TjTOWTti i$ 
 &v0panrtm> So^av, 1 Tim. 3*' ^ htaKovovi firj SiXdyovs, p-i] oivta iroXAoJ 
 Trpocre^oiTas, p-il ai(T)(poKepSeii, fxovrai to p-vcrrripiov t^s TrttrTecog iv KaOapa 
 (TvveiS'qo'ii, Tit. 1^' ^^ St8ao"KOVT£S a p,^ Sei KepSovi \dpiv, 1 Pet. 5^. For the 
 gen. fua-Oov cf. Winer, p. 258, Plat. Hep. ix. 575 b purdov iiriKmipova-iVi 
 1 Cor. 7^ rip^s iiyopaa-drire. 
 
 On the whole I understand the passage thus : Balaam went wrong- 
 because he allowed himself to hanker after gain and so lost his 
 communion with God. He not only went wrong himself, but he abused 
 his great influence and his reputation as a prophet, to lead astray the 
 Israelites by drawing them away from the holy worship of Jehovah to- 
 the impure worship of Baal Peor. So these false teachers use their- 
 prophetical gifts for purposes of self-aggrandisement and endeavour 
 to make their services attractive by excluding from religion all that 
 is strenuous and difficult, and opening the door to' every kind of' 
 indulgence. 
 
 T^ dvTiXoYC^, ToB Kop^ diriiXovTo.] For Korah's sin see Numb. 16^ foil., 
 and compare, for the same rebellious spirit in the Christian Church, 
 3Joh. 9.10 (of Diotrephes), Tit. lio^", tla-X -^oXXoi ivmoTaKToi . . oSs SeT 
 in(rTop,l,^(iv, ih. P^ ; ih. S^"- n, 1 Tim. l^" (among those who have made 
 shipwreck of the faith mention is made of Hymenaeus and Alexander)- 
 ous irapiStoKa rio Saram iva waiScvOuxriv p,ii fiXa<r<t>rjp,€iv, ib. 6^'^, 2 Tim.. 
 
 1 Zahn understands vkAvti in an active, not a passive sense, as the ruling prin- 
 ciple of the nxdvos Balaam, not as the error into which others fell through his. 
 seductions. I do not think Jude discriminated between these meanings : ir\dvTf 
 covers both. 
 
*0 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 " , ' ° ^oyoi avTwv is ydyypaiva vo/iriv Ua, S>v iariv 'Y/ici/atos Kal 
 ^iXriTOi, oiTM'cs Trepi Tr]v a\rj0tiav r/arToxricrav, 4^* where the opposition 
 of Alexander the coppersmith is noted ; but especially Si"*, which 
 presents a close parallel to our passage, referring to a similar resistance 
 to Moses in the case of the apocryphal Jannes and Jambres. For 
 avTiXo-yto. see Heb. 12* avaXoyia-aa-Oe tov roiavrriv inro/jUfiev^KOTa vwo twv 
 a-iuxpriiikuiv «is iavTov avTiXoyiav. It is used as a translation of Meribah 
 ii Numb. 2013 al. and (in relation to Korah) in Protev. Jac. 9 fjLv^treTjTi 
 oa-aiiroLrja-ev 6 ©cos Tots Aaddv, Kape, koI 'A^eipap., ttSs iSi)(d<r6r] r/ yrj koX 
 Kareiriev avrovi Sia t^v dvri\oyiav avrSiv. 
 
 Rampf draws attention to the climax contained in these examples. 
 The sin of Cain is marked by the words iwopevO^crav 68<o, that of Balaam 
 the gentile prophet by iiexvdrj<Tav Trkdvy, that of the Levite Korah by 
 airioXovTO dvriXoyia. 
 
 12. o€to£ €liriv [oi.] ev rats aYciirais vjiuv o-iriXaScs <rvveva^ovf.evoi.~\ Dr. 
 Chase quotes Zech. l"", Apoc. 7", Enoch 46^, Secrets of Enoch, 7\ 
 183, 193^ gjg foj. ^;}jg phrase oStoi eicriv, adding that it was probably 
 adopted by St. Jude from apocalyptic writings, for which he clearly 
 had a spacial liking. On the early history of the Agape, see my 
 Appendix C to Clem. Al. Sf^om. vii. The parallel passage in 2 P. 
 (on which see n.) has two remarkable divergencies from the text here, 
 reading aTraTais for dyciTrais and o-ttiXoi for o-TriXaSes. There has been 
 much discussion as to the meaning of the latter word. It is agreed 
 that it is generally used of a rock in or by the sea, and many of the 
 lexicographers understand it of a hidden rock, v(^aXos irerpa, see 
 Thomas Mag. o-jriXas, 'Attikws- i!(^aXos Trerpa, "EAAtji/es, Etymol. M. 
 (r7r(XaScs...ai viro OdXacrcrav KtKpu/i/uei'at Trtrpai, odev Kal v^aXos avOpunrot 
 Xeyerai o KEKpv/x/i.ei'os (cat TravoCpyos, ib. KaTao-irtXa^ovTes, KaraKpvTrrovTK, 
 diro /xETai^opas rmv v<j)dKmv irerpZy, atrtvcs (itto irSaTOS KaXvirTOfiei/ai rots 
 aTrpouTTTcos irpoo'TreXa^ouo'i kivSvvov iTri^epovai (both cited by Wetst.). 
 The same explanation is given by the scholiast on Hom. Od. 5. 401-40.5 
 KoX h-q SoSttov aicovtre Trcyn. (TTiXdSe<r<Ti Oa\d<r(n^i . . . dXA.' aicral irpofiXrjrei Icroi' 
 o-TTtXaSes T€ Trayoi Tt. See Plut. Mor. 101 B ciSi'a o-jrtXdSos which Wytt. 
 translates ' tranquillitas maris caecam rupem tegentis,' ib. 476 a, Oecu- 
 menius on this passage at o-irtXaSes Tots ■Trkeoviriv oXeOpioi drrpocrSoKijr&is 
 iinyiv6p.fi/ai (? -vois). and i^aitftvr)^, utarirep o-TTtXdScs, iirdyovrei avrois rbv 
 okeOpov Tu>v il/v\wv. Wetst. also quotes Heliod. v. 31 daXda-trn Trpoo-ctKoo-as 
 av Tois avSpas al<jiViSCm (nrikdSi KaTao'turOevTai. The compound KaTacnriXd^ui 
 joined with the parallel ease of vi^aXos justifies, I think, this sense of 
 <rn-t\ds, which is rejected by most of the later commentators.^ Cf. also 
 the use of vavay^co in 1 Tim. P®, and the description of drunkenness 
 
 ' Dr. Bigg denies this meaning on the strength mainly of two quotations, 
 Hom. Od. 3. 298 irctp vrjis yc ttotX irnt\i.ieiiaiv ta(av xifivra, where, he says, the 
 trviK&Zfs are identical with Ktaa^i aiirel^. re 615 &.\a verpij of 293 ; and Anthol. xi. 
 •390 (pavl Si Kol vhiaaiv aKiitKavicaai x^P'^o"^ '^^f uipdKavs irirpas rav tpavepwp 
 (rm\iSav. In both of these I think the word refers to the breakers at the bottom 
 of the cli£Ps : in the latter it is said that hidden rocks are more dangerous than 
 visible reefs. Compare Diod. iii. 43 6pos St rairr} nap^Ketrat Karh fiiv rijv Kopvipifv 
 TtfTpat ivoTo/iiSas fx'" *"' ^ort Si/zfiri KaTarrKriKriieis, inh Si Tas ^iC"! <rTri\iSas 
 o(tlas Kal wvKviis ivSaKi.TTovs. 
 
11^ 12] NOTES 41 
 
 (perhaps suggested by the text) in Clem. Al. Paed. 183 fin. bpSre rov 
 vavayiov rov kiv&xivov...6 voSs '7repi<j>cpeTai t£ K^vSiavi. . .ivOaka-mviov eiXiy- 
 yiS, Tu ^0(^0) Tijs KaraiytSos, ToC T^s aXrjdeiai atrTOXQcraq \i/ji,evo^, ecus 
 di'Tnrep«r£(7u)V {xjioXois irerpois avTos avrov tfoKetXas «ts lySoms Siaffidfiprj. 
 Scopulus is used in a similar metaphoric sense, see Cic. in Pis. 41 
 where Piso and Gabinius are called ' geminae voragines scopulique 
 reipublicae.' On the other hand tra-iXas is sometimes used loosely of a 
 rock of any kind, as we find it joined with ii^iyXos in Soph. Laoc. fr. ; 
 sometimes of gravel, as in Track. 678 ( = ^Oovi in 698) where however 
 the reading and the interpretation are doubtful ; sometimes of a cave, 
 CaUim. Bel. 242, where the seals are said to bring forth their young 
 fvl a-TTiXaSea-a-iv, see also Suidas and ApoUon. lexx. Others take o-jrtXaSes 
 in the very rare sense of ' spots,' or ' stains ' like o-iriXoi in 2 P. The only 
 example of this sense seems to be in Orph. Lith. 614, but Hesych. 
 gives the interpretation o-n-iXas, p,tix.iacrp.ivoi. Lightfoot, on the Eevi- 
 sion of the N. T. p. 136 n., puts forward some arguments in favour of 
 this interpretation. (1) All the early versions translate it either -as a 
 substantive ' stains,' or as an adjective ' polluted.' (2) He thinks the 
 author of the Lithica, who probably lived in the fourth century, must 
 have had some other authority for his use of the word besides that of 
 Jude. I agree with Wordsworth and Dr. Chase in thinking that the 
 metaphor of the sunken rocks is more in harmony with the context. 
 
 How are we to account for the gender in oi ..o-TrtXaSes a-vveuw- 
 vovp^evoL ? Are we to suppose the gender of a-7riXds was changed or 
 forgotten in late Greek (cf. Winer pp. 25, 38, 73, 76) ? If so, the 
 forgetfulness seems to have been confined to this author. Or is this a 
 constructio ad sensum, the feminine being changed to masculine 
 because it is metaphorically used of men (Winer pp. 176, 648, 660, 
 672), cf. Apoc. 11* ouTOi ilariv at Suo X.v)(yiai al ivunriov rov Kvpiov ecrriiiTes 
 and B's reading ■irapa<l>ep6p.evot below? Or may we take a-inXdSe^ as 
 expressing a complementary notion in apposition to a-vv€v<axovp.evoi f 
 The last seems the best explanation though I cannot recall any exact 
 parallel. An easier remedy would be to omit the article (with K and 
 many versions), as suggested by Dr. Chase in Hastings' D. of B. ii. 
 p. 7996, translating : ' these are sunken rocks in your love-feasts while 
 they feast with you.' Spitta considers that there is a reference to 
 the same prophetic warning as in ver. 4. 
 
 a^)v€im\oifAvoi..'^ Is used in the parallel passage of 2 P. with a dat. as 
 in Luc. Philops 4, Jos. Ant. iv. 8. 7. 
 
 d(f>oP(os lauTois iroiiJiafvovTes.] If we take crrrtXaScs as complementary to 
 a-uvev<Dxovp.evoi, it is better to take d^oySus with ttoi/x. : if we omit the 
 article and take o-n-iA-aSes to be the predicate, a-uv£V(o)(ovfi.€voL will be an 
 epexegetic participle, which will require strengthening- by d^djSus. 
 Generally d<^. is used in a good sense, but we find it used, as here, 
 of the want of a right fear in Prov. 19^ <l>6^0i Kvpiov eis ^(orjv avSpi, 
 6 8c a<f>oPoi K.T.X. ih. 15^^ Kpu(T(Tov fjuKpa fiepls fitTo, fj>6fiov Kvpiov rj 
 Orjaavpol p,eyd\oi /xcra d^ojSias, Sir. 5^ Trepl e^iXacrixov /jLr] a(jio^oi yivov, 
 vpotrOetvai afiapriav icji' d/iajariais. The phrase lauTOvs iroi/x. recalls^ 
 Ezek. 34* i^oirKiqtrav oi ■jroLp.ivi's iavTov<s, to. Se irpoySaTa p,ov ovk ifioo'Kria'av, 
 
42 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 but there does not seem to be any reference to spiritual pastors in 
 Jude ; and iroifiaiva) has probably here the sense ' to fatten, indulge,' 
 as in Prov. 28^ os Se Troi/iaivti dcrurtav, dri/ia^ci irartpa, ib. 29* os Se 
 iroi/xaivei irdpvas, affoXei irkovTOV, Plut. Mor. 792 B 'Arrakov vtt' apyiai 
 /xaxpas iKkvOivTo. ko/xiS^ ^iXottol/mjv eiroi/iaivev aTe)(yS)i maiv6iJi,ivov. We- 
 may compare 1 Cor. 1127'»"-^ James ,5^, 1 Tim. 5«. 
 
 v6<j>^ai dvuSpoi iirb i,vi\uav irapa<f>€p(S|uvai.l The character of the inno- 
 vators is illustrated by figures drawn from the four elements, air, earth, 
 sea, heaven (aiO-^p). Spitta points out the resemblance to a passage in 
 Enoch (chapters 2-5), which follows immediately on the words quoted, 
 below vv. 14, 15. The regular order of nature is there contrasted with 
 the disorder and lawlessness of sinners. ' I observed everything that 
 took place in the heaven, how the luminaries. . .do not deviate from their- 
 orbits, how they all rise and set in order, each in its season, and 
 transgress not against their appointed order.... I observed and saw how 
 in winter all the trees seem as though they were withered and shed all 
 their. leaves... And again I observed the days of summer... how the 
 trees cover themselves with green leaves and bear fruit... And behold 
 how the sea? and the rivers accomplish their task. But as for you, 
 ye have not continued steadfast ; and the law of the Lord ye have not 
 fulfilled... and have slanderously spoken proud and hard words (below 
 ver. 15 trepl iravTuw rwv (TKkrjpwv a>v t\ak-q(7a.v Kar aiiTOv) with your impure 
 mouths against his greatness.' For the metaphor cf. Eph. 4i*. Clement's 
 paraphrase in the Adumbr. is ' Nubes sine aqua, hoc est qui verbum 
 divinum et fecundum in se non possident. Ob hoc et a ventis et 
 spiritibus violentis hujusmodi circumferuntur homines.' In the parallel 
 passage of 2 P. the first figure is broken into two, injyal airvSpoi, 
 onix^ai vwb XatXairos ikavvofievai. Perhaps the writer may have thought 
 that there was an undue multiplication of causes ; if the clouds were 
 waterless, it was needless to add that they were driven past by the 
 wind. It seems however to have been customary with St. Jude to 
 ' mak siker ' by the accumulation of causes, as we have below 8is airo- 
 6av6vTa, iKpL^wBevTo. We find the same comparison in Prov. 25^* 
 ' As clouds and wind without rain, so is he that boasteth himself of 
 his gifts falsely.' [The LXX. is less like our text, suggesting that 
 Jude was acquainted with the original Hebrew. C] For the use of 
 mo with dve/xoiv see my n. on James 3*. 
 
 S^vSpa iJieivoTrupivoi &Kopirtt.] Clement's paraphrase is ' Arbores autumn- 
 ales infructuosae [et] infideles videlicet, qui nullum fructum fidelitatis 
 apportant.' See below App. on (ftdivovapivo's. 
 
 81$ oiro9av<5vTo EKpi^ue^vra.] Clement's paraphrase is ' Bis morttiae, 
 semel scilicet quando delinquendo peccarunt ; secundo vero quando 
 suppliciis contradentur secundum praedestinata Dei judicia : mors 
 quippe reputanda est etiam quando quisque hereditatem non continuo 
 promeretur ' (Clement's favourite doctrine of the divine training and 
 discipline continued after death, as in Str. vii. 835, 879). I prefer 
 Schneckenburger's explanation, ' He who is not born again is dead in 
 his sins (Col. 2i*), he who has apostatized is twice dead,' cf. Apoc. 2P, 
 Heb. 6*-^ 2 P. 220 22, and the n. on to Sevrepov above, ver. 5. This 
 
12, 13] NOTES 43 
 
 does not however explain the words in their first application to the trees. 
 These may be called doubly dead, when they are not only saples?, 
 but are torn up by the root, which would have caused the death even 
 of a living tree. The figure of a tree is often used to illustrate the 
 consequences of a good or evil life, as in Ps< P, Mt. 3i", 7i', 151^ 
 iraira (ftvreia r)v ovk ifjivTevcrev 6 iraTijp fiov . . tKpitfaOrifTerai, Joh. 15^' ^. 
 
 13. Kv|iaTa ft-ypia 6aXd<r(rT]S lirmtipfjovra ris eawrfiv alirxvvos.] Cf. Cic. 
 Ad Herenn. iv. 55 spumans ex ore scelus. The two former illustrations, 
 the reefs and the clouds, refer to the specious professions of the libertines 
 and the mischief they caused ; the third, the dead trees, brings out also- 
 their own miserable condition; the fourth and fifth give a very fine 
 description of their lawlessness and shamelessness, and their eventual 
 fate. Clement's paraphrase here is not much to the purpose : ' Fluctus 
 ferocis ma/ris : his verbis vitam gentilem significat, quorum ambitionis. 
 abominabilis est finis.' The comparison reminds us of Isa. 57^" ' the 
 wicked are like the troubled sea, when it cannot rest, whose waters 
 cast up mire and dirt.' See my n. on James 1^. The phrase aypm 
 KV[ji.aTa is found in Wisdom 14^. The rare word iirattipi^ut is used of the 
 sea in Moschus v. 5. It refers to the seaweed and other refuse borne 
 on the crest of the waves and thrown up on the beach, to which are 
 compared the overflowings of ungodliness (Ps. 17*), the pv-irapia. koL 
 TTipura-eia KaKtas condemned by James pi, where see my note. The 
 libertines foam out their own shames by their swelling words (ver. 16), 
 while they turn the grace of God into a cloak for their licentiousness 
 (ver. 4). We may compare Phil. 3^^ ^ Sd^a iv rfj alcrxvvri avTwv. 
 
 iurripis irXavi)Toi.] Clement's paraphrase is ' Errantes et apostatas 
 significat : ex hujusmodi stellis sunt ijui angelorum cecidere de sedibus.' 
 This is borrowed from Enoch (chapters 43, 44) where it is said that some 
 of the stars become lightnings and cannot part with their new form, ib. 
 80, ' In the days of the sinners, many chiefs of the stars will err, and 
 will alter their orbits and tasks, ib. 86, where the fall of the angels is 
 described as the falling of stars, ib. 88 ' he seized the first star which 
 had fallen from heaven and bound it in an abyss ; now that abyss was 
 narrow and deep and horrible and dark . . . and they took all the 
 great stars and bound them hand and foot, and laid them in an abyss, '^ 
 ib. 90^* ' and judgment was held first upon the stars, and they were 
 judged and found guilty and were cast into an abyss of fire ' ; more 
 especially 18i*'- (where the Greek has been preserved, see Charles, 
 p. 354) 8c(r/x.(i)T^pioj' TovTo lyevero rots ao-rpots koi rais Sura/teo-iv tou 
 ovpavov Koi ol otrTepes ol KuXid/iei/oi iv t<3 irvpl ovroi eicriv, oi ir^ipaySavTes 
 TrpdoTTay/Aa Kvpiov ev a.p)(y t^s avaroX^i avTSj', on ovk i^XQov iv toIs 
 KaipoK airav, Kal apyiirOr] avT0i% koX eSrjirev airovi f^XP'' "'I'poi' TiXeiwa-eoys 
 apLapriai avrSiv eviavT&v fivpimv, ib. 21^'' iatpaKo. . . . tottov aKara- 
 CTKevoujTQV Koi <^oj8epdv ■ . . Koi ckei reOeafiai eTrra dcrrepas toS ovpavov 
 BeSc/xevovs . . . ovtoC eiaiv tS>v aorTipiov rov ovpavov oi iropa/SavTcs rT]v 
 ijTiTayrjv Tov K.vpiov, koi ihi6r](Tav S>Se ['■ixP'- '''"^ 7r\j;p5trai [nvpia enj. 
 
 It would seem from these passages, which Jude certainly had before 
 him, that TrXavrJTai cannot here have its usual application, the propriety 
 of which was repudiated by all the ancient astronomers from Plato 
 
44 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 downwards. Cf. Cic. N.D. ii. 51 'maxime sunt admirabiles motus earum 
 quinque stellarum quae falso vocantur errantes. Nihil enim errat quod 
 in omni aeternitate conservat motus constantes et ratos,' with the 
 passage quoted in my notes. So too Wordsworth in his Ode to Duty. 
 I think the A. V. ' wandering stars ' gives exactly the right sense. 
 TheophUus however, who is probably copying Jude, seems to assume 
 that irXav^ rat here bears its usual sense {ad Autol. ii. 15) f/ 8« tSiv 
 aarrpiov Bfcrii oiKovo/jiiav koX rd^iv iL\a Tu>v SiKCUOiv Kol cucrfjScav koI 
 T-qpovvTun' Tov vo/tov..,oi S' av /xcTajSatVovrts (Cot <f>ivyovTK i&irov Ik tottov, 
 ot Kol 7r\a.vr)Tfi KoXov/ievoi, koi avTol rviroi TVY}(dvov(ra> Ttov a^urTaiih/uni 
 dv6pu)Tru>v airo tov ®iov. 
 
 Some commentators take it as applying to comets ; perhaps the 
 quotations from Enoch 44 and 80 fit better with shooting stars, dcrrepes 
 StaTTovres (Arist. Meteor, i. 4. 7) which seem to rush from their sphere 
 into darkness; compare Hermes Trism. quoted in Stob. Eel. i. 478, 
 KOLTiodev T^s crc\^i/)js f-'uriv erepoi airTept^ ^daproX djsyol .... ovs koX 
 fjiiiii opm/iiv SuiXvofievovi, rrjv (l>vcrLV opLoiay i)(oim^ tois ayyTqaTOi^ T&v ejri 
 yrjq tfatav, iirl erfpov St ovSev yiyverai fj iva pavov <l>6apj. For the close 
 relationship supposed by the Jews to exist between the stars and the 
 angels see my n. on James 1" <f>umav. In this passage however the 
 subject of the comparison is men, who profess to give light and guidance, 
 as the pole-star does to mariners (is (^(oor^pes iv KocrpM Phil. 2**), but 
 who are only blind leaders of the blind, centres and propagators of 
 <ir\avy) (ver. 11), destined to be swallowed up in everlasting darkness. 
 Cf. Apoc. 613, Sio-i^, 91, 124. 
 
 ots 6 V&^os TOV o-K^ovs els aUSva TeT<ipt|Toi.] See the parallel in 2 P. V^, 
 and above ver. 6. 
 
 14. eirp<M|W)T«w€y Si Kol Tourots SpSopios air& 'ASa)i 'EviJx..] 'It was for 
 these also (as well as for his own contemporaries) that the prophecy of 
 Enoch was intended, far as he is removed from our time, being actiially 
 the sixth (by Hebrew calculation seventh) descendant from Adam.' 
 For Enoch compare Kalisch's n. on Gen. 5^' and the allusions Ln 
 Sir. 4410, 491*, Heb. IP, Charles Introduction to Book 0/ Enoch. 
 The prophecy is contained in En. P (Greek in Charles App. C. p. 327) 
 oTt ip)(eTou. (Tvv Tois (? Tais) ft.v p I a (T tv air ov koi tois d y i o t s airov 
 iro i^(r ai Kpiaiv Kara ir dv r mv, koX diroXiira tovs do'C^Seis 
 KoX eXeyfet iratrav crdpKa ircpt ir dvT 10 v <rS)v> e py <ov avriav 
 mv ^(T i ^r/crav Kar airo v d/ia/jTuXoi do-cjScis. The phrase 
 £/38o/;i.os dTTo 'ASdp. is also found in En. 60* 'My grandfather was 
 taken up, the seventh from Adam,' ib. 93^ ' And Enoch began to 
 recount from the books and spake : I was bom the seventh in the first 
 week, while judgment and righteousness still tarried ; and after me 
 there will arise in the second week great wickedness,' where Charles 
 refers to Jubilees 7. The genealogical order, as given in Gen. 5*'^'^, is 
 (1) Adam, (2) Seth, (3) Enos, (4) Cainan, (5) Mahalaleel, (6) Jared, 
 (7) Enoch. It is probably the sacredness of the Number 7 which led 
 Jewish writers to lay stress upon it in Enoch's case : see rabbinical 
 quotations in Wetstein. For the position of the augment in iirpotj)-^ 
 Tcva-ev, see L. and S. s.v., Winer p. 84, Blass p. 39. 
 
13-16] NOTES 45 
 
 ISov ^\6cv Kvpios Iv a7Cais (lupioo-iv o4tov.] Charles' translation from 
 the Aethiopic is ' And lo ! He comes with ten thousands of his holy 
 ones to execute judgment upon them, and He will destroy the ungodly 
 and will convict all flesh of all that the sinners and ungodly have 
 wrought and ungodly committed against Him.' For /ivpida-iv 
 dyye'Xw cfc Heb. 1222, pg. 68", Deut. 332. por the use of iv denoting 
 accompanying circumstances see Blass Gr. N.T. tr. p. 118, andLk. \^^ 
 ei Suyaros e(7Ttv iv SeKa -jfCKiairiv a.TravTr[<ia,i Tip fx.eTa. tiKoai )(i,Xid&<av 
 ipxo[ji.£vio iir avTov. The aorist here is the preterite of prophetic vision, 
 as when Micaiah says, 'I saw all Israel scattered,' cf. Apoc. 10', 14*. 
 Ewald notices that this quotation as to the Coming of the Lord and 
 the subsequent reference in ver. 24 imply the existence of the same 
 doubt as is expressed in 2 P. 3*. 
 
 15. iroiijcroi Kp£o-iv KOTO irAvTuv.] Follows exactly the Greek translation 
 of Enoch given above, cf. Ael. V.H. ii. 6 KpCriov eTreiflev airov diroSpSvat 
 Koi TTiv kot' a-uToB Kpiariv Sta^^eTpat. On the distinction between the 
 active iroiiiv Kpicriv ' to execute judgment ' (as in Job. 5^^) and the 
 periphrastic middle = Kpiveiv (as in Isocr. 48 d) see my nn. on aiTcti' and 
 aiTettr^at, i8e and iSov (James 4^, ib. 3'). 
 
 eX^yIoi. irdvTOS Tovs d<r£pels irepl iravrav tuv ipyav atrepdaus o^tuv &v 
 ■flo-ePno-oi/.j Shortened from the Greek Enoch quoted above. 
 
 d(rcp«ts.] Cf. vv. 4, 18. The word thrice repeated in this verse runs 
 through the epistle as a sort of refrain. 
 
 irepl irdvTwv t«v o-KXripuv &v l\d\T|<rav.] This is taken from Enoch 272. 
 Charles p. 366 (To Gehenna shall come) wdvTes oitivcs ipova-iv rm a-Top-ari. 
 avTuiv Kara K.vpiov <l)0)vr]v awpeTnj koi irepl t^s 8d^s avTOv <TK\r]pa. 
 XaX^o-o-ucriv, cf. ib. 5* ' The law of the Lord ye have not fulfilled, 
 but . . have slanderously spoken proud and hard words with your 
 impure mouths against His greatness,' ib. 101^, al., Gen. 42^ eA.dXr;crev 
 airois CTKXijpd, 1 Kings 12^^ dircKptflr; wpos rov Xaov orKKrjpa, Mai. S^^'^^. 
 
 16. o?To{ elo-iv 7077inrTo£, |i,c|ii|/Cpioipoi..] Charles thinks that we have 
 here another case of borrowing from the Assumption of Moses, see 
 Introd. on Apocryphal Quotations. The word yoyyucrTTjs is used in the 
 LXX., Exod. 168, Num. 111^14-27,29. x^e verb yoyyu'^w is found in 
 Joh. 7^2 of the whispering of the multitude in favour of Jesus, but is 
 generally used of smouldering discontent which people are afraid to 
 speak out, as in 1 Cor. lO^" of the murmurings of the Israelites in the 
 wilderness ; Mt. 201^ (where see Wetst.) of the grumbling of the 
 labourers who saw others receiving a day's pay for an hour's labour ; 
 Joh. 6*1*8 of the Jews who took offence at the preaching of the Bread 
 of Life. It is found in Epict. and M. Aur. but not in classical authors. 
 yoyyv(rp,os is used in 1 P. 4^. See further in Phrynichus p. 358 Lob. 
 For the word fiefiij/ifjLoipos see Lucian Cynic. 17 v/ieis 8e 8id tijv 
 evSai/jLoviav ovSevl rmv yiyvoixiviov dpitrKtaOi, koi ttclvti fjii/icjiea-de, kol to. p.€v 
 ■jrapovra KJjepeiv ovk iOeXire, ruiv 8e airovTiov ifftUade, )(eip.S>voi p-iv Oepoi 
 ev)(6p,evoi, Oipovs 8e \eip.lova . . . KaOdirep 01 vo(tovvtk, SvordpecTTOi kal 
 p,eixil/Liioipoi. ovres, and Theophr. Chdr. 17. It is used of the murmuring 
 of the Israelites by Philo Vit. Mos. 1. 109 M. See other exx. in Wetst. 
 The same spirit is condemned in James P^. 
 
46 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 KOTO Tos kin9vf.las airav iropcv^iievov.] Cf. 2 P. 3^ and 2^", below 
 ver. 18, and see my notes on James 4^' ^. Plumptre notes ' The temper 
 of self-indulgence recognizing not God's will, but man's desires, as the 
 law of action, is precisely that which issues in weariness and despair . . 
 cf. Eccles. 21-20.' 
 
 ri (rTiS|io ovTuv \oXct imipoyxa.'j See Enoch 5^ quoted on ver. 15, 
 also Enoch lOP 'ye have spoken insolent words against His righteous- 
 ness,' Ps. 12'', Ps. 73*, Dan. 7* oro/^ia XaXovv fjnydXa and ver. 20 of the 
 little horn; compare above vv. 4, 8, 11, and James 3* foil. In 
 classical writers vtripoyKa is generally used of great or even excessive 
 size, in later writers it is also used of ' big ' words, arrogant speech and 
 demeanour, see Alford's n. on 2 P.. 2^8 and Plut. Mor. 1119b (Socrates) 
 TT/V i/i^povTrjiTLav Ik rov piov kol tov tv<j>ov e^Xavve koX Ta9 iira)(0eK Koi 
 vTrepoyKovi KaTOtijcrets koI fjLfya\av)^iai, ib. 7a, where ^ BearpiKr} koX 
 TraparpaymSos Xcfts is styled vTripoyKoi in contrast with ury(yri A-e'^ts, Plut. 
 Vitae 505b tov ^acriXito^ to fjipovijiia rpayiKov koL viripoyKOV tv Tais /leyd- 
 Xats evTv\LaK lyeyovei. It is found in 2 P. 2^^ and in Dan. 11** o 
 )Sa(n\€vis vij/ojO'^creTaL koI fjnyaXwOrjarerai eiri TravTa 6t6v, Koi Xa\ij(r« 
 ■uTrepoyKa. 
 
 6atipid{ovns irpiJo-anro u(|»\Cos x^P^^-j The phrase occurs with the same 
 force in Lev. 19^* o« p.rj Oavfmo-rj^ irpoa-unrov, Job 13^", see my n. on 
 James 2^ /x-^ iv irpo(Tumo\r]p.\liCaK «X''''^ '''W ""'O"''"' toi! Kvpiov ^/tSv 'I. X., and 
 cf. 1 Tim. 3* quoted above on ver. 11. As the fear of God drives out 
 the fear of man, so defiance of God tends to put man in His place, 
 as the chief source of good or evil to his fellows. For the anacoluthon 
 (to <7T0/ia avrZv AoXci — 6avp.6.t^ovTe%) compare Col. 2^ tva ■jrapaK.\y)6w7iv 
 ai KapSiai vpMV <rup.fii^a(r6evT€? iv ^Iprprg where a similar periphrasis (ai 
 KapSiat vfiuiv = vfiets) is followed by a consiructio ad sensum, also Winer 
 p. 716. Perhaps the intrusion of the finite clause into a participial 
 series may be accounted for by a reminiscence of Ps. 171° to a-ropa 
 avrHv l\oXr]cr€v {nreprj(j)avia,v, or Ps. 144^' ii where a similar phrase 
 occurs. 
 
 17. v|uls 8^, la,7airr|ToC, |iv^a6T|TC tuv pi)|idT(i>v tuv irpocipT|)ievuv inch tuv 
 oirotrnSXwv.] The writer turns again, as in ver. 20 below, to the 
 faithful members of the Church (ver. 3) and reminds them, not now of 
 primeval prophecy, but of warning words uttered by the Apostles. 
 Some have taken this as a quotation by Jude from 2 P. 3*, where 
 the quotation is given more fully. But, there also, the words are 
 given as uttered by holy prophets and by ' your Apostles ', see n. on 
 the passage. The words 8ti eXeyov 4|itv, which follow, imply that the 
 warning was spoken, not written, and that it was often repeated. See 
 Introduction on the Early Heresies. 
 
 18. Iir' brxirov xp^vov So-ovtoi lp.fratKToi.1 The parallel in 2 P. 3* is 
 eXeu<70VTai iir i(T)(aT<i>v Ttuv ■^fifpStv iv ifiTraiy/xovg ifivaiKTai, where see n. 
 on the use of the article with eo-xaTo?, etc. Hort in his note on 1 P. P 
 translates iv xaipu icrxa-Tio ' in a season of extremity,' adding ' there is 
 no reason to think it has any technical sense such as by association we 
 attach to "the last day." ' It does not seem to me that this transla- 
 tion is suitable in 2 Tim. 3' iv tcrxoTais ^fxipan ivar^crovTai xaipoi 
 
16-19] NOTES 47 
 
 ^oktTToi, which would thus become merely tautological. There can be 
 no doubt that in 2 P. 2^" ra ta-xara compared with rlov TpioTOiv means 
 ' latest in time,' and so in Apoc. 1", 2«- 19, 22i3, Mt. 12«, 193o, 20%. etc. 
 So Joh. 6^' '• avaanqcTiO aiiro rg eo-p^arij -^/^tep^, T'*' iv ry etrp^aTij fnxipa, 
 t!j fitydk-g t^s iopr^i, 11^* dvacTT^creTat €V Tjj avaardcrti ev T-g ecr;(aTij 
 rj/JLcpq., 1 Cor. 15*'*^'*^'^^, Heb. P iir' icrxdrov tGv rifiepSiv i\.dXr]a-€v 
 rjplv (V vis. So I should take Acts 2", 1 P. P", 1 Joh. 2i8 where see 
 Westcott, and Isa. 2^. For em cf . Arist. Pol. iv. 3 «7ri tGv a.pxa-(<ov 
 Xpovwv. 
 
 The prophecy of this mocking, as a mark of the future trials 
 of the Church, has not come down to us. An example of it in 
 the very beginning of the Church is given in Acts 2^^ erepoi 
 ^(Xem^ovTes ekeyov oti yXevKous /ie/iccrTO)/i£i'oi et<rt. In the O. T. 
 we have such exx. as 2 Chron. 36^^ (the summing up of the attitude 
 of the Jews towards the prophets) ^&av /AUKTTjptfovres tovs dyyikov; 
 avrov (cat e^ou^evoCvres toiis Xdyovs avTov koi e/jwrai^ovrcs ev Tois irpo- 
 ^^Tais avTov, Jer. 20' eyfvqOr) Xoyos KvpLov eis 6v£t8wr/iov e/xol xal eis 
 j(X«i;a<rjuov iracrav fifiipav. Cf. also the mockery at the crucifixion, and 
 the declaration in Mt. lO^*'- ci tov olKohtairoTqv BeefejSotiX en-eKoXeo-av 
 iiroo-cp /toAAov K.r.\. In 2 P. the purport of this mockery is explained to 
 be the unfulfilled promise of the Parusia. Here we must gather its 
 meaning from the account already given of the libertines. If they 
 turned the grace of God into licentiousness, they would naturally mock 
 at the narrowness and want of enlightenment of those who took a 
 strict and literal view of the divine commandments : if they made light 
 of authority and treated spiritual things with irreverence, if they 
 foamed out their own shame and uttered proud and impious words, 
 if they denied God and Christ, they would naturally laugh at the 
 idea of a judgment to come. On the form e/x7ratKTi;s and its cognates 
 see n. on 2 P. 
 
 TOV cLo-cpeiuv.] (R.V. ' their own ungodly lusts '.) The position 
 of the gen. is peculiar, and probably intended to give additional 
 stress. We may compare it with James 2^ (/.r) Iv ■irpo<TumoXir)fiypiai<: 
 •€X£Te rrp/ ttuttiv tov KvpCov -qfi&v 'Iijcrol Xpicrrov, t^s 8o^s, where some 
 connect t^s Sd^s with Kvplov in a qualitative sense. I am rather dis- 
 posed to take TOV aa-e^eiHv here as a subjective gen. ' lusts belonging to or 
 arising from their impieties,' cf. Rom. P' KaOm ovk eSoKiju.acrai' tov ®tov 
 «X«i' *y finyvwa-ei, wapeSco/ccv avTovi 6 0£os ets a86Kip,ov vovv. 
 
 19. oJto£ elo-iv oi airo8iop£JovT«s.] ' These are they that make invidious 
 •distinctions.' See Introduction on the Text. The rare word diroSiopl- 
 ^ovTcs is used of logical distinctions in Aristotle Pol. iv. 43, wa-n-ep ovv 
 tl Itaov irpvgpoviJ.eOa ka^tiv eiSij, irpSyrov av airohiu>pit,oit,e.v cwip dvayKoiov 
 -iravexeiv tfaov ('as, if we wished to make a classification of animals, we 
 should have begun by setting aside that which all animals have in 
 ■common ') and, I believe, in every other passage in which it is known to 
 ■occur : see Maximus Confessor, ii. p. 103 d to fiiv <^vo-ik6v wpurev eir' 
 avrov, TO 8e yvia/uKov awoSiuipia-e translated ' naturali in eo (Christo) 
 %onstituta voluntate, arbitrariam dispunxit,' ib. p. 131 c As 6 Xdyos ^v 
 avTOV fiovov TO ifii.Tra6h, d\X' ov to <j}V(nKOV d-iroSiopiariwOal, OeXijfm ' quod 
 
48 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 dlxerat hoc solum spectare ut libidinosam, non ut naturalem voluntatem a 
 Salvatore eliminaret,' Severusrfe Clyst. 32. 25 orav ravra to. o-u/t^rrM/taTa 
 oi/ijj irapovTa, avoBiopi^e rrjv opyaviKtjv vocrov ix rrji ofioiofiepovi. I am 
 indebted for these references to Stephanus, but have not been able to 
 identify one to Hermes Poem. p. 17. The reference given for the word 
 a7ro8iopicr/i.os to Hermias in Flat. Phaedr. p. 166 is valueless, as the 
 true reading there is awoij.epuTiJi.6i (so stated in Couvreur's ed. 1901). 
 The simple Siopi^o) is found in Lev. 20^* Suopura v/iSs diro tSv iOvZv 
 ' I separated you from the nations,' Job 35ii : so a<j>opit,u> Mt. 253'^ 
 d^opi^ct Tol Trpo^ara aTro tS>v ipitjimv. Acts 19" (Paul left the syn- 
 agogue) Koi atpiipurev tows /toflj/ras, 2 Cor. 6^^ i^iXdare ix //.eirov avrwv 
 Koi a.<l)opi<r6riT£, Lk. 6^^ (of excommunication) orav atftoptaoxnv v/xas, 
 Gal. 2^^ (of Peter's withdrawal from the Gentiles) {nrfareXXev koi 
 affuapi^ei' iavTov. 
 
 »|niXtKoC.] Used of worldly wisdom in James 3^^, where see note, 
 distinguished from irvevfiariKos in 1 Cor. 2^^-^^' 15**, cf. the teaching of 
 the Naassenes {ap. Hippol. p. 164) eU tov oTkov Oeov ouk e'ureXevcrerai 
 aKodaproi oiSei's, ov i/ru^ucds, ov crapKucds, aXXa. TijpetTat TTveu/iaTiKOts. 
 
 irv€S|i,a (1.^1 ?x<»vT€s.] The subjective negative may be explained as 
 describing a class (such as have not) rather than as stating a fact in 
 regard to particular persons ; but the use of /xt^ is much more widely 
 extended in late than in classical Greek, cf. such phrases as lira. fL-q, 
 oTi p.iq. It is simplest to understand irvevpa here of the Holy Spirit, 
 cf. Rom. 8^ vp.eZ'S OVK ecTTe Iv trapKi dXV iv TTvevpaTi, ciTrep TrveB/xa ®coS 
 ot/cet iv vfuv, 1 Cor. 2^3, 7*", 1 Joh. 3^*, 413, and the contrast in ver. 20 
 iv irvt,vfi.o.Ti ayim Trpoaeu^op.evoi. Others, e.g. Plumptre, prefer the 
 explanation that ' the false teachers were so absorbed in their lower 
 sensuous nature that they no longer possessed, in any real sense of the 
 word, that element in man's compound being, which is itself spiritual, 
 and capable therefore of communion with the Divine Spirit.' The 
 connexion of the last clause with what precedes is illustrated by such 
 passages as Eph. 4^' *, crirouSafoi'Tes Tj/pciv ttjv ivorrjTa tov Trvev/iaTos • 
 fv a-u>ij.a KOI tv irvevfia, and 1 Cor. 3* ottov yap iv vp.iv ^rjXos . . ■ koi 
 Si^ooTacriai, ov)^i (rapKiKoi i<TT£ ; 
 
 20. 4n«is 8^, d7a'irTp-o£.] Contrasted with the libertines, as in ver. 17. 
 
 eiroiKoSo|iovvTES lavTois rg aYuoTdTt) ifiav iriirrei.] These words, descrip- 
 tive of earnest effort to build up the one spiritual temple, are con- 
 trasted with the i/xtraiKTai of ver. 18, and ol aiTo8iopit,ovTss in ver. 19. 
 For the construction of verbs compounded with irC see Winer pp. 535, 
 536. For the spiritual temple, cf. 1 Pet. 2^\ Col. l^s, Eph. 2^o-^-' 
 iTTOiKoSoiJ.rjOivTe's iirl tio 6ip,e\iu) tS>v dirooToXtuv Kal Trpoi^ijToiv, ovTot 
 aKpoyiavuLiov avrov XpicrToC 'Iijtrov k.t.X., 1 Cor. 3'"^^, a passage which 
 the writer may have had in his mind here and in ver. 23. Dr. Bigg 
 compares Polyc. Phil. 3 'If ye study the epistles of the blessed 
 apostle Paul, Sui/ij^rjo-tcr^e oiKoSo/ucTo'^ai cis -rqv Bodtitrav vp.'iv Tricmy. 
 Usually Christ is spoken of as the foundation or corner-stone of the 
 Church, and we should probably assign an objective sense to t^ Trt'oreL 
 here, as in ver. 3 above {i-rayuivl^ea-Oai rrj irt'orei). Otherwise it migh" 
 be explained of that faculty by which we are brought into relation 
 
19-22] NOTES 49 
 
 with the spiritual realities (Heb. ll^ ■klctti's iXTrilo/jiiviov vTrdo-Tatris, 
 Trpay/jLaToiv eXey^os ov /SXcTro/ie'i'iov), that which is the introduction to 
 all the other Christian graces, see n. on 2 P. P, and which leads to 
 eternal life (1 P. P, and ® Koiutpfi.evoi to riKoi rrji TrtWea)? vfjiSiv, criaTripCav 
 xjivy^Siv). The faith is here called ' most holy,' because it comes to us 
 from God, and reveals God to us, and because it is by its means 
 that man is made righteous, and enabled to overcome the world 
 (1 Job. 5*' ^). Cf. 1 Pet. 5' (0 a.vTi<7TyjT£ (TTepeol ry mcrTU. 
 
 For exx. of iavrovs used of the 2nd person see Winer tr. p. 187 f. 
 
 €v irveupiaTi ayCtf irpo(reTix<5|ievoi.] These words, contrasted with Trvev/xa 
 /j.r] exovTe? in ver. 19, show how they are to build themselves up upon 
 their faith. I understand them as equivalent to James 5^^ Ser/o-ts 
 diKaiov ivepyovfiivrj, where see n. Compare also Eph. 6^^ Sia irao-jjs 
 ir/jO(reu)()5s Trpotreup^d/ievot iv ■Travri KaipS iv irveiixari, Rom. 8^^' ^''. 
 
 21. lowovs ev d'yAiTfl ©coO Tt\pt\a-a,Tt.'\ In ver. 1 the passive is used : 
 those who are addressed are described as kept and beloved (cf. ver. 24 
 Tu Svvafji.ev(o <fiv\a.^ai) : here the active is used and emphasized by 
 the unusual order of words ; each is to keep himself in the love 
 of God, cf. James 1^^ ao-iriXov iavrbv rripiiv, Phil. 2^^ rrjv iavrZv 
 crutT-qpiav KaTepyd^eo'Oe' ®€os yap icrriv 6 ivepyZv iv v/xtv. Again in 
 ver. 2 the writer invokes the divine love and mercy on those to whom 
 he writes ; here they are bidden to take steps to secure these. Compare 
 Rom. 5^ 17 ayairrj rov ®eov iKKe)(UTai if rais KapStai'S rjixuiv 8ta irveu/taTos 
 ayiov Tov 8o$€VTOi fjplv, ib. 8^^' ^^ ireTrenr/iat otl ovt€ Odvaroi 0VT€ ^o)rj . . 
 ovre Ti<s KTiaii iripa Bw^creraL 17/ias ;)(a)ptcrai airo t^s dyaTnjs tov ®eov, Joh. 
 15^ Ka0u)S rjyd.7n](Tev /A£ 6 iraTrjp Kayta i/iSs ■^ydirrjcra, fidvare iv rrj dyaTi-g 
 ry ijxy. iav tos ivrokds fiov Tr]pT^(7rjTe, fj.evetTe iv r-g dyd-n-ri fjLov. The 
 aor. imper. is expressive of urgency, see n. on ijyiycracr^e James P- 
 
 irpo<r8cx(S|J.cvoi rb 8\£os.] Cf. Tit. 2'^ irpocrSexop.evoi ttjv fjLaKapiav iXmSa 
 Kol iirujidvuav rrjs Sd^ijs tov /ueyaXou ®eov Koi (TuyTrjpos rj/Jiiiiv 'I. X., and 
 2 P. 31^' 13' 1*. The same phrase is used of the Jews who were looking 
 for the promised Messiah at the time of his first coming, Mk. 15*', 
 Lk. 225. 38_ 
 
 ets lai\v al<6viov.] Some connect this closely with the imperative 
 Tjjpijo-ttTe, but it seems to me to follow more naturally on the nearer 
 phrase irp. to eA.eos : cf. 1 P. 1^'^ eiXoyr/Tos 6 ©eos ... /cara to ttoXv 
 avTOv eXeos dvayevv^cras ij/uas eZs Kkypovoixiav d<j>6apT0V . . . Tenjprj/j.o'rjv 
 iv ovpavoi? eU i/xas tovis . . . (f^povpovfievovi . . . els (TuiTrjpiav kT0iii.y)v diro- 
 KaXvt^Orjvai iv KaipZ i(r\dria, 
 
 22. oOs |i.^ IX^TX'" 8iaKpi.vo|i,eVous.] On the reading see the Introduc- 
 tion. For the form 8s p.iv instead of 6 /^leV, cf. Mt. 138, 22^, Lk. 2333, 
 Acts 27**, Rom. 14S, 1 Cor. V, IPi, 2 Cor. 2i6, 2 Tim. 22", not used in 
 Heb., 1 and 2 P., James or John. The doubled 01 Si is found in Mt. 
 2135 gy p^^y eSeipav, ov 8e d'TrcKTeivav, ov 8e iXi6oP6Xrja'av, ib. 25^5 ^ ^\y 
 (ZtuKiv Trevre TdXavTa, co 8e Bvo, <L Bk ev. The use is condemned as a 
 solecism by Thomas Magister and by Lucian Soloec. 1, but is common 
 in late Greek from the time of Aristotle, cf . Sturz Died. Maced. pp. 
 105 foU. On the word iXeyyia (here wrongly translated ' strafen,' in the 
 sense of excommunication, by Rampf), see Const. Apost. vii. 5. 3 cXey/xu 
 
50 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 ikcyieii Tov a&e\(j)6v trov, and Hare's excellent note L in his Mission of 
 the Comforter, where he argues that the conviction wrought by the 
 Spirit is a conviction unto salvation, rather than unto condemnation ; 
 and quotes Luecke as saying that ' IXi-^yiiv always implies the refuta- 
 tion, the overcoming of an error, a wrong, by the truth and right. 
 When this is brought before our conscience through the IXeyxos, there 
 arises a feeling of sin, which is always painful : thus every eXey^os is a 
 chastening, a punishment.' Compare Grote's life-like account of the 
 Socratic Elenchus in his Hist, of Greece. This verse seems to be referred 
 to in Can. Apost. vii. 4 ov {jLurrjcrwi rravTa avOpwTwv AXX' oSs I'-h' iXey^en, 
 ovs 06 e\ejJo"eis, Trtpi wv Se irpocnv^, ovs Be dyair^o'ets VTrip ttjv l/fu^^ijv crov, 
 which is also found in the Didache ii. 7 with the omission of oSs Si e\e^ 
 creis. Cf . Joh. 1 6^ eKtivos IXey^u tov K6<Tit.ov irepl afuiprias koi wepl SiKaio- 
 aivrji KoX Trepi Kpicreioi, 1 Cor. 14^ iXiy^^erai v'Tto ttovtuiv (the effect of 
 the prophets' teaching on an unbeliever). Tit. P^ eA,eyx« avrovq Scttoto- 
 /xcos iva vyuxLvuMTLV iv Tg irwrret, ib. 1^ tovs avriXtyovras eA.ey^ew', 2 Tim. 4^ 
 (the charge to Timothy) eXey^av, TrapaKoiXecrov kv iratrri /jLaKpodv/iiq., Apoc. 
 3^^ otrovs iav (jiiXSt kXiy^m Koi iraiSevo), Eph. 5^^ ra Se Travra €Xey;^o|tei'a 
 viTo TOV (^a)T09 (l)av€povTai. There is a tone of greater severity in the 
 TToiTJa-ai Kpi<Tiv kcu. kXeyiai of the 15th verse, but even there we need 
 not suppose that the preacher is hopeless of good being effected. The 
 point is of importance in deciding the mutual relations of the three 
 cases here considered. 
 
 SuiKpivaii^ovs.] We should have expected a nominative here to 
 correspond with apird^ovTcg and /Ato-owTts in the following clauses, and 
 so the text. rec. has BvuKpivop^voi, wrongly translated in A. V., as if it were 
 the active BiaKpCvovTes, ' making a difference.' This gives such a good 
 sense that some commentators (e.g. Stier) have been willing to condone 
 the bad Greek. It would have been better to alter the reading at once. 
 Keeping the reading of the best MSS.- we may either take the accusa- 
 tive as complementary to iXeyxeTe (as we find in Plato Theaet. 171 d 
 £/*€ eXcy^as X-qpovvTa, Xen. Mem. 1. 7. 2 eXeyx^iyo-cTai y«A.otos &v, Jelf 
 § 681), or simply as descriptive of the condition of the persons referred 
 to. There is also a question as to the meaning we should assign to 
 SuiKp. Is it to be understood in the same sense as in James 1*, 2* ? 
 In that case we might translate ' convict them of their want of faith,' 
 taking the participle as complementary to the verb ; or ' reprove them 
 because of their doubts.' It seems more probable however that the 
 meaning here is ' convince them when they dispute with you,' which we 
 may compare with 1 P. 3^^ eroifioi ail irpos aTroXoytav iravrl t<S aiToiWt 
 i/iSs Aoyov . . . aXXa fitra TrpaiSTijros Koi cfio^ov (cf . ev tj)6^to below). So 
 taken, this first clause would refer to intellectual difficulties to be met 
 by quiet reasoning ; the force of SiaKpivofievog being the same as that 
 in ver. 9 t<3 Sta^oXm SuiKp., and in Socr. B.H. v. 5 6 Xaos e'x*" ofiovoiav 
 KoX ovKiTi irpos d\X^Xoi;s SuKpivovTO. 
 
 23. o-iScTt.] Here again a word which is strictly applicable to God is 
 transferred to him whom God uses as his instrument, cf. 1 Pet. 4ii and 
 notes on T-qprjcraTe, c\eyx«Te above, especially James S^" o lTna-Tpof/a.% 
 aiJi.apT<iiXbv tK TrXdnjs bhov avTov ariia-u i/'UXTf *" 6avdT0v. 
 
22-23] JSTOTES 51 
 
 U irupis apirdSovTcs.] The expression is borrowed from Amos 41^ 
 KariiTTpcij/a v/aSs KaOua KaTicrTpetj/ev 6 ®€os SoSo/ia /cat Vofioppa , Koi 
 kyevifrOi is SaXos e^eariracrfjiivoi Ik irvpos, /cat oiS' ais eireo-Tpei^aTC irpo /u.e, 
 Xcyci Kvpt05, and Zech. 3^ ovk iSov oStos 8aA.os e^ecr'n-atr/ievos e/c irvpos / 
 Both passages have further connexions with our epistle, the former 
 from the reference to Sodom (see above ver. 7), the latter as following 
 immediately on the words eTrirt/iijcrat o-ot Kv'ptos quoted in v. 9, and pre- 
 ceding a reference to filthy garments (see note below). In it the High 
 Priest Joshua is a representative of Israel, saved like, a brand from the 
 captivity, which was the punishment of national sin. The image of 
 fire is naturally suggested by the allusion to the punishment of Sodom 
 in the passage of Amos, and of Korah (see above ver. 7) described in 
 Numb. 16^^, Ps. 106^^ i^cKavOr] irvp iv Trj uvvaytoyrj avruiv /cat tjjXo^ 
 KariipXf^tv aixapTbiXovs. The writer may also have had in mind St. 
 Paul's description of the building erected on the One Foundation (see 
 above ver. 20), which, he says, will be tried by fire, 1 Cor. 3^^'^^ iKdaTov to 
 epyov OTTotov l<niv to irvp avTo SoKi/iaaei , , , ei Ttvos to tpyov KaraKwrj- 
 (TiTai, ^iqix.iiiidyjcre.Tai, clvtos 8e (naOijcrerai, ovtioi Si ois Sta irvpo^. Such an 
 one might be spoken of 'as a brand snatched from the fire,' not how- 
 ever as here, saved from the fire of temptation, but as saved through 
 the agency of God's purgatorial fire, whether in this, or in a future life. 
 
 cXcoLte Iv 4'°P'?-] Luther (quoted by Huther) understands this in the 
 sense ' lasst sie gehen . . . habt nichts mit ihnen zu schaffen,' imply- 
 ing that the case is hopeless, and that there is nothing for bystanders 
 to do bnt to watch their fate with awe and pity. Huther argues that 
 this is against the use of IXcos in the N'.T. which expresses no mere 
 passive impression, but active benevolence, cf. James 2'^^'^^. The 
 faithful are urged to show all possible tenderness for the fallen, but at 
 the same time to have a fear lest they themselves or others whom thy 
 influence should be led to think too lightly of the sin whose ravages 
 they are endeavouring to repair. Cf. 2 Cor. 7^ /ca6apta-(i)/x.ev kavr.trb's 
 airo TravTos iJi,o\v(rfiov crapKos /cat 'Trvevp.aTOi iTTiTeXovvTes dyttotrwiyv iv if>6Pto 
 ©eoB, Phil. 212, \ p_ p7, 316, por the confusion of the contracted verbs 
 in -£«) and -dm In late Greek see Jannaris § 850, § 854 foil., Winer 
 p. 104. The best MSS. read IXca in Prov. 2p6, and eAeiovTos Rom. 
 916, but aeci in Rom. Qis. 
 
 (jLurotivTES Kal rhv dirb Ti|s <rapKj>s lo-iriX(i)(ji^vov x^™va.] While it is the 
 duty of the Christian to pity and pray for the sinner, he must view 
 with loathing all that bears traces of the sin. The form of expression 
 seems borrowed from such passages as Isa. 30^^, Lev. 15i', perhaps too 
 from Zech. 3* 'Iiyo-oBs rjv evSeSv/JLtvo? l/JLarta pvirapd. Cf. Apoc. 3* ovk 
 ifwXvvav TO. Ifidria avTwv, and Apocal. Pauli quoted by Spitta 6 x'tcoc 
 ixov OVK ipmrihOT]. The derivatives of <riri\os are peculiar to late Greek : 
 the only other examples of (ririXou) in Biblical Greek are James 3^ ij. 
 yXOtacra . . . ij <r7rtA.oi)cra oXov to o'lb/JLa and Wisd. 15* ctSos a-TnkwOev 
 Xpoi/JMai Sir]\Xayp,evoK. Compare for the treatment of the erring 
 2 Tim. 2^^' ^^ iv irpavTrjri irottSevovra tous aVTiSuiTiOeiiivovi fiiQiroTe Soi'i; avTol^ 
 6 Oeos /jLCTdvoiav £19 eTTLyvrntrw dXTjOeiai, Kal dvaviji/'too-tv^e/c t^s tov SiajSoXov 
 TToyiSos. 
 
 E 2 
 
52 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 24. T(p 8i Swajilvip i|iu\d|ai ijjias aTrToCarous.] Apparently a reminis- 
 cence 1 of Rom. 16^^ ""^ T<o Se 8vv afj,evw vfi,3,i cm^pt^at . . . /xov(3 
 <TO<j>(o ©eu Ota. 'Itj cr o v H. p l<t t ov, <u ij 8o^a ets Tois a t fi v a s 
 tGi/ a t (0 v 0) v. Similarly the noble doxology in Eph. S^" commences t<o 
 Se Suva/ieVo). The reading «/ias is confirmed by the evidence of i< 
 find B, which were unknown to Alford when he endeavoured to defend 
 the reading avrov's, found in KP and some inferior MSS. 
 
 dirTaMTTos.] Occurs in 3 Mace. £^^ /icyaXoSo^cos €-in^ava% to eXcos avrov 
 
 tSiv oA.<ov Swao-Tijs dTrrato-Tous avrov's ippva-aro : used here only in the 
 JfJ^ T. The verb wTaiio has the same figurative sense in James 2^^ 3^ 
 €1 Tts iv Xoyia ov irTaUi, oBtos reXetos &vrip, 2 P. 1^" ravra Troiovvm ov fji,r] 
 ■n-Taiarr]Te trOTe. 
 
 o-TTJo-oi Karevdiriov ttjs 8o|t]S airov a)ui|jious Iv aYaXXia<r«.1 Cf. Mt. 25^^"'^ 
 OTttv 8e eX.6r] 6 vloi Tov avBpiinrov ev ry S6^ avrov . . . (Trqcrti to. fi,ev 
 ■n-pojiaTa Ik Se^tSv avTov, Acts 6* ows ta-rrjaav evu>inov twv aTrocrroXmv, 
 Col. 1^^ Trapacnijcrai v/aSs dytous Kai a/jLio/xov? Kal aveyK\rjTOVi KaTevtoTTiov 
 avTov which Lightfoot refers to present approbation rather than to the 
 future judgment of God, comparing Rom. 14^2^ i Cor. 1^^, 2 Cor. 21'', 
 4:% 7^^, 121^. In the present passage the addition of the words t^s 
 So^i shows that the final judgment, the goal of tf,v\diai, is spoken of. 
 Lightfoot remarks that a/;ia)/ious is ' without blemish ' rather than 
 'without blame,' being a sacrificial word like reXeios and okoKXr/pos. 
 Hort gives a fuller account of the word in his interesting note on 
 
 1 P. 1^^ Tt/iio) aifiaTL o)s afu/ov aixijifi-ov koX acnrCkov "K-puTTOv, where he 
 traces the way in which the words pMfno^ ' blame,' and djuoi/ios ' blame- 
 less,' come to be used (in ' the Apocrypha the N.T. and other books 
 which presuppose the LXX.') in the entirely unclassical sense of 
 < blemish' and 'unblemished,' cf. Eph. 1* 5^\ Heb. 9i*. In 2 P. 3" 
 d/iu/xijTos seems to be used in the same sense. The word KaTevcoTriov 
 is apparently confined to the Bible, where it occurs in Jos. 1^, 21*^, Lev. 
 4^^, Eph. 1*, d./A<o//.ous KaTevdtiriov avrov iv aydwrj '. KaTei/unra is found in 
 Hom. Jl. XV. 320. For ayaWiaa-i^ see Hort's n. on 1 P. l^ iv u dyaX- 
 Atacr^e ' in whom ye exult.' The verb with its cognate substantives 
 'is unknown except in the LXX. and the N.T. and the literature 
 derived from them, and in the N.T. it is confined to books much 
 influenced by O.T. diction (Mt., Lk., Acts, 1 P., Jude, Joh., including 
 Apoc), being absent from the more Greek writers, St. Paul, and (except 
 in quot.) Heb. ... It apparently denotes a proud exulting joy, being 
 probably connected closely with dydAAo/tai, properly " to be proud of," 
 but often combined with ^8o/*at and such words . . . Clem Str. vi. 
 p. 789 says ttjv 8e dyaWiao-tv ev^poa-vvqv eti/ai (^a/xei/, iiriKoyurpxiv 
 oScrav Tqi Kara rrjv aX'^Oew.v aperrji Bid Tivoi iamdcreiiis Kal Sia)(voreo)'s 
 ij/vxi-Kyji • • • See also Str. vi. p. 815 iv^pavOminv koX ayaWiaOS>ii,€v iv 
 airy, Tovria-n . . . ttjv Oeiav ioTiatriv €vio)(r]6ZiJ.iv.' Dr. Chase notes 
 that it occurs in Enoch 5' to. iry) t^s x''P''S avrSyv TrXrjdvvQ-^cnTai iv 
 dyaAAtdcTEi. 
 
 For the position and genuineness of this doxology see the Introduction and 
 notes in Sanday and Headlam's commentary, and the dissertations by Lightfoot 
 and Hort in the former's Biblical Essays, pp. 287-374. 
 
24, 25] NOTES 53 
 
 25. v-ova 0eij o-wTfjpi •fjiifflv.] See above on ver. 4 ror /awov Seo-ttoti;!'. 
 God is called abyrrjp in Is. 45^5 o-ii yap tl ®eos,...o ®£os toS 'Icrpa^A, a-oiTrjp, 
 ih. ver. 21, Sir. 51^ aiveaio ere ®ebv tov aroiTrjpd ^ov, Philo Con/us. Ling. 
 § 20, 1. p. 418^?l. Tts 8' OVK ay...7rpos tov fiovov (roiTrjpa ®e6v iKPoiqa-q 
 (" -o-at) ; CI. lik. 1*' ■^yaA.Xtao'ei' to irveC^a /aod eirt tu ®£(3 tuj croiT^pi //.ov, 
 else-where in N. T. only in Tit. P, 2", 3* ore yj xP^a-To'T5?s..'.e?re^aV57 to5 
 (Tijyrrjpo'S r/fiSiv ©eoB , . . xaTo. to avToB eXeos €<TwiTev rjp.S.'s Slcl. . .TrvevfiaTO? ayiov 
 ov i^i)(e€v e<^' -^/aSs irXouo-tus Sio, 'I. X. toO crwTijpos ij/x-fiv, 1 Tim. P IlaCXos 
 aTToo-ToXos I. X. Kar iirirayrjv ®eov o-MT^pos ly/xSv Kai X. 'I. ib. 2^, 4^". The 
 later writers of the N. T. seem to have felt it needful to insist upon 
 the unity of God, and the saving will of the Father, in opposition to 
 antinomian attacks on the Law. 
 
 8ii 'Itjo-oO XpuTToO.] It seems best io take Sid with Sofa and the 
 following words. The glory of God is manifested through the "Word, 
 cf. 1 Pet. 4:" Lva iv TToa-LV So^dt,r]TaL 6 ©eos Sta 'I. X. m eo-Ttv -q So'fa Koi 
 TO Kpdro'S ets Toil's aivfivas. 
 
 8<SSa.] The verb is often omitted in these ascriptions, cf . 2 P. avr^ 
 i, 86^0, Rom. 1136,^1627, Gal. l^, Lk. 2i6 So'fa cv ixj^ia-TOK ©ecS. In 1 P. 
 411 it is inserted, w ea-Tiv 17 So'fa koi to icpaTos, and, as we find no case in 
 which ea-To> is inserted, and the indicative is more subject to ellipse 
 than the imperative, it might seem that we should supply ' is ' here ; 
 but the R. Y. gives ' be,' and there are similar phrases expressive of a 
 wish or prayer, as the very common xap'S V'*" k"'' elp-^vr] a.Tro ®eov ■TraTpos, 
 where we must supply Io-to) or yevotTo. De Wette maintained that the 
 following words Trpo TravTos toB alS)vo<;, referring to already existing fact, 
 were incompatible with a prayer ; but it is sufficient that the prayer 
 has regard mainly to the present and future : the past only comes in 
 to give it a fuller, more joyful tone, reminding us of the eternity of 
 God, as in the psalmist's words, ' I said it is my own infirmity, but I 
 will remember the years of the right hand of the Most High,' and 
 the close of our own doxology ' as it was in the beginning, is now, 
 and ever shall be.' I do not see however that we need exclude 
 either interpretation. The writer may exult in that which he believes 
 to be already fact in the eternal world, and yet pray for its more 
 perfect realization in time, as in the Lord's Prayer yevij^TjTu to 6ikri[i.d 
 a-ov 6s iv ovpaviS koI em y^s. The omission of the verb allows of 
 either or both views in varying proportion. Sofa by itself is the com- 
 monest of all ascriptions. It is joined with nfHT] in 1 Tim. l^'' and 
 elsewhere, as here with /AeyaXwo-vn;. It is joined with Kpdrog in 1 Pet. 
 411, 511, Apoc. l^. Puller ascriptions are found in Apoc. 4^1 aftos 
 ct, o Kijpios. . .XaySeti' ttjv Sofav koI ttjv Tip-rfv KoX T7]V SvvajMV, 5^^ tuJ 
 KaOrjjjiivio en\ tm 6p6va...7j evXoyia /cat ^ Ti/irj /cat ^ Sofa koi to KpaTos 
 Ets Tois alwva'S t5>v alunvwv, 7^'^ ■^ eiXoyta Kat ^ Sofa /cat 17 croijyia 
 Kol rj ev)(apiaTia /cat 17 Tifirj koI 77 Swa/Ats /cat ^ tcri^vs tu ©ecu ijjU.Si/. 
 Just before (ver. 10) we have the remarkable ascription 17 a-ayrrjpia. 
 TM ©em ■^fiZv. Compare with this the ascription of David (1 Chron. 
 29^1) crot Kijpte 17 /jceyaXwirvvri /cat ^ Swa/xts Kat to Kav)(ri{jM /cat r/ 
 viKrj /cat 17 tcr;^ws, OTt cru TrdvTinv tZv ev ovpavia /cat eirt yijs SecTTro^ets. 
 For a similar expression in regard to the future blessedness of man 
 
54 THE EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 see Rom. 2^'' Sofa 8e koI n/ir] koI elpi^vr] 'Travrl T(S epyafo/tci/o) to 
 ayaOov.^ An unusual form of ascription occurs in Clem. Rom. 65 ■§ 
 X^ptS Tov KvpLov riiJ,S)v 'Irjcrov X-piarov p-eO' v/jJav xal //.era irdvTuiv wavra^ 
 tGv kckXij/xci'uv inrb tov ®eov koL 8i' avrov' Si' ov avrio Sofa, Tt/xij, Kparos 
 Kai /leyaXtixrvvri, 6p6vos aicovios Sltto rmv aliaviov ets roiii atSvas tuiv aliavoiv. 
 
 /ic7aX(i>a-{vi).] Only found elsewhere in N. T. in Heb. P eKadurev iu 
 Sefta T^s fxeyaXwcrvvrji iv ii/fijXots, repeated in 8^. Dr. Chase notes that 
 
 occurs in Enoch 5* KareXakijcraTe /teyaXovs koi o-kAtj/joiis Xoyous ev 
 (TTOfw/ri a.Ka6ap<riai vfiS>v Kara t^s /ieyaXocrwi/s auToS, 12^ tu Kvpiia rfj^ 
 p.(.yaXoa~avy)<s, 14^^ (a house excelling) ei/ Sofjj koX ev ri/iij xai ev 
 /xtyaXoo-uvg. It is coupled with Sofa, of which it may be regarded 
 as an extension, in the doxology used by Clem. Rom. 20, 61. I am 
 not aware of any other example of efouo-ta in a doxology : compare 
 however Matt, 28^* eSodr/ fioi iratra efouo'ta iv ovpaviS koi lirl y^is- 
 
 irph iravTos ToB aluvos.] Cf. 1 Cor. 2'^ (t^v (Tocjiiav) rp/ ■TTpodpicrev 6 ®c6s 
 Trpb Tu)v aliaviav eU Sofav fip.iSv, Prov. 8^^ irpo rov auavos lOe/i-ekiuicre p.e 
 (i.e. (TO(f>iav), ev apxfj '"'po tov ttjv -ppi Troi^a-ai. An equivalent expression 
 is irpb KaTa/3o\'5s Kocrp-ov found in Joh. 17^* ■^ya.injtrd.'s p.e tr. k. k. also 
 Eph. 1* efeXefaTO ^/xas ev avrS ir. k. k. and 1 Pet. 1^" (Xpio-ToS) Trpoeyvuxr- 
 fievov p,£V TT. K. K., (jjavepiaOivTOl Se eir ea)(aTOV tUv )(p6vij>v. St. Jude 
 speaks of one past age and of several ages to come. On the other 
 hand St. Paul speaks of many ages in the past (1 Cor. 2^), and St. 
 John of only one age in the future. 
 
 els irAvras to4s alwvas.] This precise phrase is unique in the Bible, 
 but ell Tovi ailovai is common enough, as in Lk. 1^^. Rom. 1^^, 5^, 11^^, 
 1627, 2 Cor. 1181, etc., so in LXX. Dan. 2*'**, 6^'^. The stronger 
 phrase eh toiis atuvas rai' alutviav occurs in Gal. 1^, Phil. 4^", 1 Tim. 
 1", 2 Tim. 418, Heb. IS^i, 1 P. 4", 5", Apoc. 1«, etc. John uses only 
 eh TOV a'uSva apparently with the same meaning. Other variations are 
 found in Eph. 3^1 avT<a 17 Sofa iv Ty iKKXrjcria koi ev X. 'I. ets irdcras Tai 
 yeveas Tov aiuvos t<3v alaivmv, 2 P. 31^ avTio ^ Sofa koX vvv koI eh ■^p.epav 
 aimvos. 
 
 ' For a full account of the early doxologies see Chase on the Lord's Prayer 
 {Texts and BtiuUes, i. 3. p. 68 foil.). He states that the common doxology at the 
 end of the Lord's Prayer ((rov kOTtv ^ /3a<ri\eia koX ri Sivaius koI t\ Sdjo eis rois 
 aiSivas ' appears to be a conflation of two distinct forms,' and ' was added to the 
 Prayer in the "Syrian" text of St. Matthew's Gospel.' 
 
APPENDIX TO ST. JUDE 
 
 The force of this word seems to me to have been generally mis- 
 understood by the commentators on Jude ^^, SevSpa (jiOivoTraiptva aKapira 
 3is wTToGavovra €Kpi£fa6h/Ta, where the A.V. has ' trees whose fruit 
 withereth,' corrected in R.V. to ' autumn trees.' The former interpre- 
 tation, is retained in Weymouth's 'trees that cast their fruit' {The 
 N.T. in Modern Speech) and in Stier's 'frugiperdae,' ' fruchtverder- 
 benden.' It is not denied that this is an entirely unexampled use of 
 the word, but it is thought to be justified by the etymology, as 
 illustrated by the parallel SpSs (j^OtvoKapiroi (Pindar, P. iv. 471) used of 
 a tree which sheds its fruits before they ripen, and cftOivoTrmpU ave/iiav 
 XeifiepU KaTa-n-vooi (Pindar, F. v. 161), 'the fruit-withering blast of 
 stormy winds,' also by Ireai diXca-iKapiroi (Od. x. 510). There can be no 
 doubt however that tf>0ivcnrti>piv6^ is an adjective ^ derived from to 
 <l>6iv6Tr(ispov, which is itself, I think, best explained as a compound of 
 <j}6ivovo-a owdpa (cf. ^^tVovTos /ti;vos), meaning the concluding portion of 
 the oTTupa. This latter word is, according to Curtius, compounded of 
 Sir-, connected with owicrto, oirurOev, and Zpa = ' the later prime.' We 
 find topa used by itself both for the spring with its flowers and, more 
 rarely, for the summer with its fruits, as in Thuc. ii. 52, &pa trovs. 
 Perhaps from this double use of the word may have come the 
 ambiguity in the application of oicwpa, of which Ideler says that ' it 
 originally indicated, not a season separate from and following after the 
 summer, but the hottest part of the summer itself, so that Sirius, 
 whose heliacal rising took place (in the age of Homer) about the 
 middle of July, is described as aa-Trjp oirmpivos U. v. 5).' In early times 
 it woidd seem that the Greeks, like the Germans (Tac. Germ. 26), 
 
 ^ In writing this paper I have made use of the article on Asironomia in the 
 J), of Ant., Ideler's Sandb. d. Ohronologie, G. F. Unger on Zeitrechnung in Iwan 
 Miiller's Handb. d. Mass. AUertumswiss. vol. i. p. 561, and Ruehl's ed. of 
 Schmidt's Griech. Ohronologie, pp. 475-81. For the knowledge of the two latter 
 I am indebted to Dr. Gow. 
 
 ^ Dr. Gow reminds me that the termination -ivSs (so accented) is almost 
 confined to adjectives of time, as iapiv6s, BepiySs, x^^f^^p^f^s, SeL\Lv6s, irepvffivds. 
 The two apparent exceptions (ireSirSs, a\T)6ivis) are perhaps of different forma- 
 tion, cf. Brugmann, Orundriss der Vergl. Qramm. ii. pp. 135, 147. 
 
56 EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 recognized only three seasons — ^winter, spring, summer ; and that the 
 last was indifferently named 6epoi or oirwpa : compare Arist. Aves 709, 
 irp&Ta /j.iv (Spas (jiaivo/iev ^/a€is ^pos, ^hjj.uivo's, oiriipa?, with Aesch. 
 Prom. 453, ^v 8' ovSev airoi'S ovre ■)(eLfji,aTOi TeK/j,ap ovt' avOefiioSovs r/po^ 
 ovT£ KapiTLfiov dipovi fiipaiov. But though oirtopa was thus used strictly 
 for the dog-days, when the fruit ripened, it was also vaguely used for 
 the unnamed period which ensued up to the commencement of winter. 
 Thus Hesiod (Op. 674) juijSe fievcLV otvov re viov koX &7ru>pivov ojiPpov koL 
 \iift.G)v' liTLovTa : and oiruipa. appears as a definite season hy the side of 
 the others in a line of Euripides, quoted by Plutarch {Mor. 1028 p), 
 from which it appears that he assigned four months each to summer 
 and winter, and two to spring and oirapa ^ : — 
 
 ^tXi;s T OTnopos SiTTTuxovi rjpo? t icrovs 
 
 (where the epithet ^tXijs deserves notice). It is said that the author 
 of the treatise Be Diaeta (c. 420 B.C.), which goes under the name of 
 Hippocrates, was the first to introduce a definite term ((f)0Lv6irii)pov or 
 fjbeTOTTwpov^) for the new season, the word o-n-iopa being reserved for the 
 late summer, according to the definition of Eustath. on H. v. 5, oTrmpa 
 &pa fiera^v Kup-evf) Bipovs koX toC p.er' avTrjV fiieroTrutpov. And so we find 
 it used by Aristotle {Meteor, ii. 5) at xa^"^"' yivovrai eapos p-lv koX 
 fkeTOKWpov p,aXi(Tra, eira koX t^s oiru>pai, ^eifj.5>vo? Be oXiyoKts, and by 
 Theophrastus (repl Siy/tettov, 44) iav to eap Kal to 6ipo^ i/'i'XP"' 7""?'''ai> V 
 CTKisipa yiviTai Kal to fueroTrtupov irviyyjpov.^ 
 
 There is a good deal of inconsistency about the exact Kmits of the 
 seasons, as is natural enough when we remember that they were first 
 distinguished for purposes of agriculture and navigation, as we see in 
 Hesiod' s Worhs and Bays. Each season brings its own proper work, 
 and the farmer or merchant is reminded of the return of the season by 
 various signs, the rising and setting of stars, especially of the Pleiades 
 and Arcturus, the sun's passage through the signs of the zodiac, the 
 re-appearance of the birds, etc. A more strictly accurate division was 
 made by the astronomers, who distinguished between the various kinds 
 of rising and setting of the stars, and divided the year into four equal 
 parts by the solstices and equinoxes. In the year 46 B.C. Julius 
 Caesar introduced his revised calendar, which assigned definite dates 
 to the different seasons. Thus spring begins a.d. vii. id. Feb. (Feb. 7), 
 summer a.d. vii. id. Mai. (May 9), autumn a.d. Hi. id. Seat (Aug. 11), 
 winter a.d. iv. id. Nov. (Nov. 10).* 
 
 Taking then the Julian calendar as our standard, as it was no doubt 
 
 ' Unger (p. 560) mentions others who shared this view. Among them, as will 
 be seen, is the author of the De Diaeta. 
 
 2 The word ii.iToiroipiv6s is found in our present text of Hesiod (Op. 415), 
 fieTOTTupivhp ofififyfiffavTos ZrjuSs. 
 
 5 Ptolemy, Appar. (quoted by Schmidt) gives the limits of the oiriSpa as follows : 
 21 July, iirdpas apxh 5 15 September, lieroTdipov apxh- 
 
 * See Varro, M.S. i. 28 (where Keil quotes Oeoponica, i. 1. 3, neroirapov 
 &pXfSai drri rvs vph l| eiSwy Aiyoiirrav, Ti\lou 6vtos iv KiovTi) ; Columella, R.R. 
 xi. 2. 57, 84; Plin. N.H. xviii. 68. 7; Ov. fasti, ed. Peter, pp. 20-22. 
 
APPENDIX ON cjieivo-n-copivo^ 57 
 
 the generally accepted standard of the Roman world, we find that 
 autumn begins on August 11 and ends on November 10. There are 
 however other reckonings which it may be worth while to compare 
 with this. Thus in the Diaeta we read (p. 366. 38) (fiOivoTrwpov aTrh 
 'ApKTovpov (i.e. his morning rising about Sept. 15) /At'xpt IIAeiaSmr 
 8vo-£(i)s (the morning setting about Nov. 9), giving less than two 
 months to this season. As the same treatise (Bk. iii. init.) says rbv 
 eviavTov cs Tetrcrapa /iipea Siaipovcnv, aircp fx-aXiuTa yLvuKTKOVtnv ot ttoXXoi' 
 . . . lap 8e aTTo ttn;/ti€piKijs (March 21) fJ-^XP'- II\eia8o)v imToX^? (May 10), 
 his summer must have extended over more than four months. Another 
 reckoning was that from the autumnal equinox, t^Oivcmuspivri lcrrjiJi,epia 
 (Polyb. iv. 37. 2, Plut. Ant. F. 40), to the solstice Sept. 22 to 
 Dec. 22. This does not seem to have been in such common use : the 
 only Latin authority quoted for it in De Yit's Foreellini (s.v. 
 'Autumnus') is Ulp. Bigi. 43. 20. 1, § 32, 'aestatem incipere sic 
 peritiores (? the astronomers) ab aequinoctio verno, et finiri aequinoctio 
 autumnali, et ita senis mensibus aestas atque hiems dividitur,' and even 
 here it is only stated that summer ends on the autumnal equinox, 
 autumn and spring being entirely omitted. Yet Lewis and Short give 
 this as though it were the only reckoning for autumn, while they 
 further confuse the student by the statement that the Pleiades set on 
 December 22 (instead of Nov. 9). Hesychius, quoted both by 
 Stephanus and by Rost and Palm under ^^ii/oirwpos, has the following 
 blundering account of its duration, airo t^s TrevreKoiSeKaTiys Avyova-rov 
 /iijvos eoJS T^9 TrevTeKaiSeKa.Trj'S AeKCfippiov, ol 8e aTro t^s elKoarrrj's Sevrepai 
 AvyovfTTOv eo)s TrdXiv ilKoarrji Bevrepa^ AcKEjU/Spiov. Here it will be 
 noticed that both reckonings give four months for autumn ; and that, 
 while the second reckoning agrees with the astronomers in ending the 
 season with the winter solstice, it does not begin with the equinox. I 
 think therefore that we should change the latter Avyova-rov to Se^n-re^- 
 PpCov. [Since this was written I find that the same change is suggested 
 by linger.] If we make a similar correction in the earlier part of the 
 sentence, changing the former Aeice/i/Sptoi; to l^ioefuppiov, we get the 
 ordinary agricultural reckoning. 
 
 To turn now to the commentators, I may take Trench as represent- 
 ing their view in his Authorised Version, p. 186, ed. 2, where he 
 says, ' The <l>6Lv6iro>pov is the late autumn . . . which succeeds the 
 oirmpa (or the autumn contemplated as the time of the ripened fruits 
 of the earth) and which has its name irapa. to (fiOivea-dai ttiv oiruipav, 
 from the waning away of the autumn and the autumn fruits. . . . 
 The deceivers of whom St. Jude speaks are likened to trees as they 
 show in late autumn, when foliage and fruit alike are gone.' 
 
 I have stated above what I hold to be the origin of the word 
 <f>6iv6Tr(iipov. Trench's explanation is ambiguous and unsuited to the 
 facts of the case, as will be seen from the criticisms in Lightfoot's 
 Fresh Revision, p. 135: 'In the phrase " autumn-trees without fruit " 
 there appears to be a reference to the parable of the fig-tree. . . . 
 At all events the mention of the season when fruit might be expected 
 is significant.' He adds in a note, ' Strange to say, the earliest 
 
58 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 versions all rendered <j)9ivoiroipwd correctly.^ Tyndale's instinct led 
 him to give what I cannot but think the right turn to the expression, 
 " Trees with out frute at gadringe (gathering) time," i.e. at the 
 season when fruit was looked for. I cannot agree with Archbishop 
 Trench, who maintains that " Tyndale was feeling after, though he has 
 not grasped, the right translation," and himself explains <ji6Lvoiru>pi.va 
 aKapwa as " mutually completing one another, without leave$, without 
 fruit." Tyndale was followed by Coverdale and the Great Bible. 
 Similarly Wycliffe has " hervest trees without fruyt," and the Rheims 
 version " trees of autumne unfruiteful." The earliest offender is the 
 Geneva Testament, which gives " corrupt trees and without frute." . . 
 The Bishops' Bible strangely combines both renderings, " trees withered 
 {<j>Ocveiv) at fruite gathering (oTrwpa) and without fruite," which is ex- 
 plained in the margin, " Trees withered in autumne when the fruite 
 harvest is, and so the Greke woord importeth." ' 
 
 The correctness of the interpretation, given by Lightfoot alone 
 among modern commentators, is confirmed by a consideration of the 
 ■context. The writer has just been comparing the innovators, who 
 have crept into other Churches, to waterless clouds driven past by tte 
 wind. Just as these disappoint the hope of the husbandman, so do 
 fruitless trees in the proper season of fruit. If <l>$Lvoiro)pLvd, were equi- 
 valent to y^sifnipivd, denoting the season when the trees are necessarily 
 bare both of leaves and fruit, how could a tree be blamed for being 
 aKapTTov ? It is because it might have been, and ought to have been a 
 f rui1>bearing tree, that it is rooted up. 
 
 If we follow the Julian calendar. Trench's interpretation is evidently 
 impossible. Even if we suppose St. Jude to have been familiar with 
 the scientific calendar, which makes autumn begin with the equinox ; 
 ;since leaves and fruits would even then not be cleared from the trees 
 till autumn was more than half through ; and since the first part of 
 the compound <\}6Lv6im>pov has already spent its force in the change 
 from the dog-days {pirutpa) to the autumn, and cannot act again (as 
 Trench supposes) to change autumn into late-autumn, it follows that 
 ^OLvoTriopLva, would have been a most unsuitable word to express the 
 hareness of winter. How unsuitable it would have been, how little 
 corresponding to the Spatherhst and senescens autumnus of the com- 
 mentators, will be evident from the way in which autumn is spoken 
 ■of in the Greek romances. The scene of Longus' Pastorcdia is laid in 
 this season : in i. 30 he speaks of the temperature as en t^s Stpa's 
 otJtn;s Kau/taTwSous, in i. 28 of the ripening \pi the grapes, /jLeroTruipov 
 S' aK/jbd^ovTos KoX Tov /SoTpvos. At the beginning of Book ii. the 
 vintage is described, and in the third chapter we are introduced to a 
 ■shepherd who speaks of the produce of his garden at different 
 seasons, rjpos poSa, Kplva . . . 6ipov% ix.i^Kiavi'i kol /x-^Xa irdvTa- vvv 
 a/xirckoi Kal avKoL koI poiai Koi fx/vpTa )(\.tapd. Similarly Philostratus 
 (Heroic, i. 5, 6, p. 663) dwells on the delights of autumn, <us toikLXtj croi, 
 
 ^ This agreement is probably owing to their dependence on the Vulgate 
 * arhores auctumnales infiuctuosae. ' 
 
APPENDIX ON <f)0ivoTru)piv6'; 59 
 
 Tj &pa Koi ois cKSeSoiKacrtv iXapol oi jSorpvi, to. BevBpa $' ais Sia/cEirat Travra 
 Kal As a/i^Spocrta ^ 6(r/i^ Tov )(iapiov. We may compare the saying 
 attributed to Euripides (Ael. T.Z?. xiii. 4), ov fwvov rb lap tZv 
 Kakmv jcdXXiCTTOv aXka kol to pxrmmpov; Hor. C. iv. 7. 11, pomifer 
 autumnus fruges effuderit, Epod. ii. 17 decorum mitibus pomis caput 
 autumnus agris extulit; Macrobius (Somn. Scip. i. 20. 6) moUities 
 autumnalis aurae. 
 
EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 
 
 Salutation (w. 1, 2). 
 
 Jude a servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James, to those who 
 have received the divine calling, heloved of the Father, kept safe in 
 Jesus Christ. May mercy, peace, and love he richly poured out upon 
 you ! 
 
 Mercy and love are spoken of again at the end of the Epistle 
 {v. 21) where the readers are bidden to keep themselves in the love of 
 God, awaiting the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ for life eternal. 
 The thought of peace is present to the writer's mind throughout the 
 Epistle, while he utters his warning against the enemies of union who 
 walk according to their own lusts and have not the Spirit (w. 18, 19). 
 In contrast to these, his readers are urged to keep fast hold of peace 
 and to build themselves up on their most holy faith, praying in the 
 Spirit and using every effort to help and save those who are in danger 
 of falling away {vv. 20-23), always looking to Him who is able to 
 keep them from stumbling and present them before His presence 
 without spot. 
 
 Reasons for Writing [w. 3, 4). 
 
 He had been intending to write to them on that which is the 
 common interest of all Christians, salvation through Christ, hut 
 was compelled to abandon his intention by news which had reached 
 him of a special danger^ threatening the Gospel once for all delivered 
 to the Church. His duty now was to stir up the faithful to defend 
 their faith against insidious assaults, long a^o foretold in ancient 
 prophecy, of impious men who should change the doctrine of God's 
 
 ' For this see the Introduction on Early Heresies. 
 
1-3] PAKAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 61 
 
 /ree grace into an excuse for licentiousness, and deny the only Master 
 and our Lord Jesus Christ. 
 
 irao-av (tttov^v woioiJ/U.ei'os. 
 
 It was not to have been a mere extemporized effusion, but a well 
 thought out treatise. Such were the epistles to the Romans and the 
 Hebrews, and such, as we learn from his preface, was St. Luke's inten- 
 tion in preparing his Gospel. . Nor were his readers to be mere passive 
 recipients of an impression from without. They were to contend for 
 the faith (v. 3), to build themselves up upon it (v. 20), to keep 
 themselves in the love of God (v. 21), to use every effort to save 
 those who were in danger of falling away (vv. 22 f.). 
 
 The Faith once for all delivered to the Saints. 
 
 One or two references have been given in the explanatory note to 
 illustrate the idea of a Christian tradition. It may be well here to 
 adduce further evidence as to (1) the_/ac<, and (2) the contents of such 
 a tradition. 
 
 (1 a) That there was a recognized tradition or traditions (irapaSoo-ts, 
 TrapaSoo-eis) in the Apostolic age, appears from 2 Th. V^ KpariLTe ras 
 irapa8do"eis as ISt8a^0ijTe etre 8ta \6yov etTe 8t' eTruTToXfji rjfi,5iv, ib. 3° Kara 
 T^v TrapaSocriv rjv TrapcXajStTC Trap' rifLZv, 1 Cor. 11^ KaOuii TrapeSioKO. vfjuvTai 
 TrapaSoo-ets Kare)(£re. In contrast with this there was a Jewish irapaSocris 
 of which we read (Mt. 15') ■^Kvpcio-aTe tov Xoyov toB ®eov Sta rijv irapa- 
 Boa-tv v/j-lov, Mk. 7* acjievTa rijv ivToXrjV tov ®eov KpartLTe rrjv irapaSocriv 
 Twv avOpmiriav, Gal. 1^* ^ijXut^s vTrdpy(tov tS)V TrarpiKSsv /xov 7rapa8d(re<i)v, 
 and also such oral traditions as those to which the Christianized 
 Essenes of Colossae made their appeal, see Col. 2^ Kai-a t^v 'TrapdSoat.v 
 nw avOptairtov with Lightfoot's note. The cognate verb was similarly 
 used, as in 1 Cor. 11^ quoted above, ib. v. 23 irapcXajSov airb Kvpiov 
 o Kol TrapeSwKa vfiLv (viz. the institution of the Eucharist), ib. 15^ 
 7rape8(i)Ka yap v/jiiv iv irpuTois o KoX irapeXaySov (viz. the Resurrection 
 of Christ), Lk. 1^ Kadtbs TrapiSocrav ■^/uv oi air apx^s avToirTai koi vtt- 
 rjperai yevofJievoi tov \6yov, 2 P. 2^^ vTrocTTpei/'at Ik Trji irapaSoScio-iys auTOis 
 dytas evToXijs.^ 
 
 It is noticeable that, in all the cases in which St. Paul speaks of a 
 Christian tradition, he speaks of it as received by his converts from 
 himself, either by speech or writing (2 Th. 2^*). Sometimes he says 
 that he received a tradition from the Lord, as in 1 Cor. 11 ^^ (as to the 
 meaning of which see Class. Rev. viii. 149 foil., 267 foil.), with which 
 we may compare Gal. l^^' ^^ yvwpt^io vfuv to euayyEA.toi/ to evayyeXio-^ev 
 vtt' ifiov OTi ovK ea-Tiv Kara avOptirrov oiSc yap eyo) Trapa avOpumov 
 ■TrapeXa^ov avTO, ovre iSiBdxOriv, dXXa 8t' aTroKaXvipeiag 'Irjo-ov XpicrToC. 
 Some understand in the same way 1 Cor. 15', but the details that 
 follow ((cat oTt uxjiOt] Krjtjja, elra rois SoiSeKa, etc.) make it more probable 
 that the reference here is to information received from older disciples. 
 
 ^ A remarkable instance of the passive used of a person is given under (1 i). 
 
62 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 The converse term to irapaSiSw/ii is irapaXa/t^SaVo), of which some 
 examples have already been given (2 Th. 3«, 1 Cor. 11 23, 153, Qal. P^); 
 others are Mk. 7* (of Jewish tradition) akka iroXkd ia-nv a wapeXa^ov 
 Kpariiv, 1 Cor. 15^ to tvayyikiov o eiriyyekurdfiriv vfilv, o Kal irapeXd^eTe, 
 . . . 8i' ov Kal crii^ecrOe, Gal. P ei tis vfiSii evayyeXi^erai irap' o wapeXar 
 peri, avdOe/JAi eerTW, Phil. 4' a koX ip,dOeTe kou TrapeXd^ere kol r/KOvcrare 
 Koi ctSere iv ip.oC, raCra irpdo-aert, Col. 2* cos TrapeXd^ere rbv Xpurrov, iv 
 avT^ TrepiiraTeiTe, 1 Th. 2^^ TrapaXafiovm Xoyov aKoiji Trap' '^p.&v tov 
 ®eo5 iSi^acrOe ov Xoyov dvOpunrtav, aXXd, koOws oXtjOS)^ eo'Tiv, Xoyov ®eov, 
 ib. 4?- 7rapaKa\ov/iev v/ias «v Kvptco 'Irjo-ov, ha KaBoii TrapeXd/SeTe Trap' •^p.lov 
 TO TTuis Set v/iSs TrepLTraTeiv . . . tva Trtpia-cnvrfre p.aXXov. 
 
 (16) It is a definite type of teaching, of. Rom. ?>" inrrjKova-aTe Ik 
 KapStas tli ov TrapihoOrjTe tvttov St8a;(^s, Rom. 16^^ TrapaKoXm vfmi aKorreiv 
 Toirs Tas Sixoo'Tatrla^ Kal to. (TKdvSaXa Trapa t7]v SiSap^^v, ^v vfjuls i/idOere, 
 TTOiovvrai, 1 Cor. ll^^ ij/iets Toiavrrjv ow^OeLav ovk iy^ofxev, ovhc al 
 eKKX-qa-lai tov @tov, Gal. 1^ ' though we or an angel from heaven 
 should preach to you any other Gospel, let him be anathema', 2 Cor. 
 11*, 2 Tim. \^^ vTTOTxnrtMTLV €)(€ vyiaivovTiov Aoyo>» aiv Trap' e/toS ^Kovcras 
 iv irtWet, 1 Tim. 1^ iva irapayyct'Xjjs tl(tlv p-r] iTepoSiSacrKaXeiv, 
 1 Tim. 4° ivTpe(f>6p,evoi tois Xdyois rijs Tricrreuis Kai t^s Ka\^s StSocr- 
 KaXiai y, TrapriKoXovOriKas, 2 Tim. 3^* av 8e /neve ev ots e/Aa6es xal 
 iTTUTTwdrji, etStdsirapa Tivmv e.p.aOi'i, Tit. P (to K'^pvyp.a) o eTTUTTivO'qv ey«> 
 kot' eTTiTay^v toC o-o)T^pos ij/uGv ©eoB. 
 
 (1 c) Sometimes it is spoken of as a deposit (TrapaO-^Ki), iropaTi- 
 6ep,ai), of. 1 Tim. 6^* & HifioOte, Ttjv TrapaO-^K-qv <j)vXa$ov, cuTpeTro/jievos tos 
 l3€^7JXovi KtvocjiOiviai, 2 Tim. P* t^v KaXijV TrapaOiJKriv tftvXaiov Stoi irveij- 
 /iOTOs ayiov, 1 Tim. 1^* TavTr/v t^v TapnyyeA.tav TrapaTiOep-aC (toi, 2 Tim. 2^ 
 a ^^Kovo'as Trap' e/ioS . . . TovTa TrapdOov irtorols dv^puin-ois oiTives iKavol 
 €(TOVTai Koi cTepovs SiSa^ai. 
 
 (1 (^ In the pastoral epistles we also meet such phrases as uyt^s, 
 vyuLLViav, irio-Tos A.oyos or SiSacKaXta, cf. 1 Tim. 1^"' ^^ et ti t^ vyiatvovirj/ 
 hiZao'KaXiq, avTiKUTai KaTO. to eiayyeXiov . . . o tTTiaTev&rjV iyu>, ib. 6^'* ei tis 
 eTepoSiSao-KoXei Kai /x-^ Trpqcrip^erai vyiaivoviriv Xdyois tois toS Kvplov 
 'Irjcrov XpUTTOv Kal Ty KaT eio-eySeiav SiSao-xaXia, TiTvffiwTai, 2 Tim. 4^ 
 T^s vyiaivovanji SiSao-KoXtas ovk avt^oVTai aXXa KOTOt Tas tSios imOvfiiai 
 eauTois eTna-wpevtrova-iv SiSao-KaXous, Tit. 1^ avTexpiiivav toS KaTa SLSa)^v 
 TTioTov Xoyov, tva Swaroi y Kal TrapaKaXelv Iv Ty SiSatTKoXlq, ry vyiaivovay, 
 ib. 2'- a-ii Se XaXet a TrpeKU Ty vyva.a/ov(rg StSoo-KoXioi, ib. 2* Xoyov vyKq 
 aKaTayviaa-Tov. The phrase ttio-tos 6 Xdyos is used with more freedom, 
 sometimes with reference to salvation through Christ, as 1 Tim. 1^^ 
 sometimes of a proverb or maxim, as apparently in 1 Tim. 3^ eiTis 
 eTTurKOTnjs opiyerai, KaXov epyo-u e!nBvii.a. 
 
 (2) A comparison with the parallel passage in 2 P. 2^1 suggests that 
 this tradition had two sides ; Jude speaks of it as ttiotis, teaching 
 what we should believe, Peter as evToX^, teaching what we should do. 
 We have the same two sides brought out in the Baptismal Service 
 and Church Catechism. 
 
 (2 a) St. Paul gives briefly the contents of the tradition in 1 Cor. P^'- 
 
3] PARAPHRASE A.ND COMMENTS 63 
 
 ^/iets 8e Krjpva-a-onev Xpurrbv l<TTavpu>fji,evov, 'lovZaioi<; fjiXv cr/cavSaA,ov, 
 Wvta-iv 8e fxtapiav, avTois 8c tois kXijtois . . . Xpicrrov ®eov 8vvafji,iv Kal 
 ®eov o-o^tav. Elsewhere he speaks of it as ' the ministry of recon- 
 ciliation (t^v SwLKoviav T^s KaraXXayrj^) that God was in Christ, reconcil- 
 ing the world to Himself,' 2 Cor. 5^^': So in 1 Tim. P^ ffioros 6 Xo'yos 
 Kttt irao-ijs d7roSo)(^s. a^ios, oTt XpMrTos 'IijcroSs ^X^cv eis tov Kocrfiov afW-p- 
 TojXoiis o-fio-ai, and still more briefly in Rom. 10*'- tovt ecmv to fyqim t^s 
 Wio-Tems o Kr]pv(T(TOfi.eV on, lav Ofi-oXoyYiurj^ to prjfjta iv t<o a-TOfiaTi <tov 
 OTi Kiipios 'Ir/crovi, kol Trurrcuo-jjs ei/ ttj KapSia a-ov on 6 ©cos 
 afrrov ^yetpti/ ck vcKpSsv, a-(o6ricrri, 1 Cor. 12^ ovSeis Swarai eiTreti/ Kijptos 
 1 1; <r o C s el /JLT] iv Trvev/iari dyt'oi. Much to the same effect St. John 
 says (1 Jo. 4^) wav 7rv€t!/i.a o o/xoXoyei 'I.X. Iv crapxt iX'qX.vGora Jk tou 
 ®eov ia-nv, of which the converse is given in 2 Jo.'', ttoXXoI TrXdvoi 
 ii^Xdav eis Tov Kotr/xov, oi /x^ o/ioXoyoBvres 'I.X. ip^6iJi.evov iv crapKi. We 
 may compare Dr. Armitage Robinson on Eph. 5^. 'The confession ort 
 Kupios 'Irj a- ovs was the shortest and simplest statement of 
 Christian faith (compare Acts 16'i ma-Tcvcrov ctti tov Kvpiov 
 lr]o- ovv, Kal a-toOrjoyj <tv koL 6 olkoi arov . . . ). That some confession 
 was required before baptism is seen from the early glosses on the 
 baptism of the eunuch, Acts 8^'', and that this soon took the form 
 of question and answer (iirepuyrrjua) is suggested by 1 Pet. 3^1, where 
 the context contains phrases which correspond with the baptismal 
 creed of the second century'. We may go back to our Lord Himself 
 as sanctioning this tradition in his commendation of Peter's answer 
 {cru et o XptcTTOS o vios tov ®eov TOv faJi/TOs). diroKpLdeis Se 6 'Irjirov? chtei/ 
 avTio Mafcdptos el, ^l/jluiv Bapiosva, on crapi Kal aT/Jia ovk aTreKaXvif/ev (TOi 
 aXX' 6 TraTTjp jxav o iv ovpavois' Kayo) 8e crot A.£y<o oTi erv ei IleTpos, Kai 
 iTrl ravTT) rrj Trerpa olKoSofii,T^(rio fiov Tqv iKKXyfcriav (Mt. 16^^*). Compare 
 1 Cor. 3^^ OifiiXiov dXXov ovSels SvvaTat Biivai irapa tov Ktiixevov, os i<TTLV 
 
 \ri(TOV^ XpUTTOS. 
 
 (2 b) But the tradition also included rules of action. Thus in 2 
 Th. 3^ St. Paul warns his converts a-TeXXia-dat dirb iravros dSeX^ov 
 dTaKTOJS irtpnraTOVvTOi Kal fjirj Kara tj;v TrapdSocriv ^v TrapcXdyStTe Trap' rjfjiSiv. 
 His own conduct was to be a tuttos to them (ib. ver. 9). See also 
 Rom. 6^^ X'^P'* '''¥ ®^^ OTI rjTe SovXot t^s dfutpTLai, v'TnjKOuo'aTe 8e ek 
 KapBlas Ets ov TrapeSoOryre tvttov SiSa)^iji, iXevdepwOevTes 8e aTrb rijs dfiap- 
 Ti'as iSovXwOriTe rg StKatoeruvrj. As the nucleus of the tradition in 
 regard to faith was belief in the Father's love manifested in His Son, 
 so the nucleus of the tradition in regard to practice was the love 
 which is the fulfilling of the law (Rom. 131"), t]ja,t love, of which St- 
 John says (1 Jo. 3^1) avTrj ia-rlv rj dyyeXia ^v rjKovcraTe dir' dp)^^, Iva 
 dyaTTwyLcv dXXrjXavs, to which he refers again in 3^3 as the command 
 of Jesus Christ. Thus the ethical, as well as the doctrinal tradition 
 is derived from the teaching of Christ Himself, not only from His 
 sanction of the old commandment (Mt. 22*"), but also from the 
 words reported by St. John, (13^*) ivToXrjv Kaivrjv 8t8(o/ti vfuv tva 
 dyaTTo/re dAXr/Aous, KaOui^ ^ydmjcra u/iSs, iva Kal v/iils dyairaTe aXXtjXov';, 
 to which the Apostle refers in 1 Jo. 2^. 
 
 Sometimes the word n-apdSocris is used of less fundamental matters, 
 
64 EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 as in 1 Cor. 11^ eTratvG v/uSs on . . . xadois irapeSuxa v/iiv Tas TrapoiSocreK 
 Ka.TixiT€ : but immediately afterwards St. Paul proceeds to point out 
 that there were exceptions to their obedience. Thus women take part 
 in public worship with uncovered heads (1 Cor. IP) and venture to 
 speak in the congregation (1 Cor. 14'*). He settles the former question 
 summarily by appeal to the universal practice of the Churches (11^^), 
 the latter by appeal to a Kvpiov ivroX-^ (14^^). 
 
 It may be worth whUe here to consider some of the terms which are 
 used to express the contents of the irapaSoo-is, and we will begin with 
 ivTok'^. This is used of the Mosaic law in the synoptists and in the 
 epistles to the Romans and Hebrews. In St. John's writings it is 
 mostly used of the Father's will as revealed in the Son, e.g. lO^^ the 
 ' power to lay down His life and take it again ' is spoken of as an ivroX-^ 
 from the Father: ib. 12*9.50^ My Father has given Me an ivroXijv n 
 ctTTW Kai Ti AaXiycTw Kat otoa ort t) ivToXrj avTov ^u)7j aiuji/tog ianv : also 
 of a command of our Lord, ib. IS^i ivroXrjv Kaivriv St'Sw/ti vfuv tva 
 ayaware dW^Xous, 1 Joh. 4^^. The widest significance of the term is 
 found in 1 Joh. 3^^ avrrj ia-rlv ■^ ivToki] avrov, tva ■n-uxTevcriafiev tw 
 oi/o/ittTi Tov vlov aiiTov 'Iijo-oC XpiCTTOi) Koii dyairSj«,€v dW^Xous, on which 
 Westcott comments ' The things that are pleasing, the many com- 
 mandments (of the previous verse) are summed up in one command- 
 ment, which includes faith and practice, the power of action and the 
 form of action, faith, and love.' In 1 Cor. 7^® the ri^pijcris ivToXwv ©cot) 
 is distinguished from the ceremonial law. In 1 Tim. 6^^* Tijp^o-at o-c t^v 
 ivToXrjv acnnXov fiixpi r^s ejrK^avetas ToO Kvpiov, it is used, as Alford 
 says, ' not to desigaate any special command . . . but as a general 
 compendium of the rule of the Gospel, after which our lives and 
 thoughts must be regulated.' In 2 Pet. it occurs twice, in 2^1 already 
 quoted under TrapaStSu/it, and 3^ fivrjcrdrp/ai rijs tSv dirotrToA.cDi' vfiSiv 
 iVToXrj^ rov Kvpiov Kal trcoT^pos, implying that the Lord spoke through 
 his apostles ; and so, apparently, in 1 Cor. 14^', where St. Paul calls 
 upon the prophets and the spiritual to acknowledge that in his decisions 
 on various points of discipline, he is uttering a Kvpiov evToXij. Some- 
 times it is used of instructions about persons (Col. i^") : sometimes of 
 rules laid down by men and condemned by the Apostle (Col. 22^,Ta iv- 
 TaXfjuiTa Koi StSao-fcaX-tas tZv a,v$pu)ir<i>v, Tit. l'^* ixij 7rpo(re;^ovTes 'louSaiKots 
 fivdoi's Koi evToXats a.vdp<i)Tr<ov d.TrocTTpe(jioiJ,iv<ov rrjv aX-qdnav). 
 
 A similar word is TrapayyeXta found in 1 Th. 4^ oiSaTC rtVas irapayyt- 
 At'as iSaxafiev vfuv Sia tov Kvpiov 'IiycroO (warnings against impurity as 
 appears from the context), 1 Tim. P to Se tcXos t^s TrapayyeXtas eu-nv 
 ayoLTTQ, ib. 1^* TavTtjv TtjV irapayye.VtW Traparide/juii (roi . . . Iva o-Tparnn; 
 Trjv KaXrjv crTparelav, and SO TrapayyeXXu). 
 
 A more important word is euayye'Xiov, the good news of the kingdom, 
 as it is called in Mt. 4^3, etc., the good news of Jesus Christ (Mk. P), of 
 God (Mk. P*) ; men are called to believe in it (Mk. 1"), to sacrifice 
 home and life for it (Mk. lO^s*, 8^6) ; it is to be preached to all nations 
 (Mk. 13'°, Mt. 24'*). Paul was especially called to bear witness of the 
 good news of the grace of God to the Gentiles (Acts 20^*, Gal. 2^). 
 He speaks of it as my or our Gospel, Rom. 2^^, where it is said to 
 
3, 4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 65 
 
 include the coming of Christ to judge the world, ib. 16^* tu 8e Swaixevm 
 orrjpi^aL v/iai KaTa to «iayye\tdv fiov kol to Krjpvyina. 'I.X. koto. 
 diroKoA.vi/'iv fjiAxmipiov . . . eis iiroKo^v TrtoTeios ets irdvTa to. tOvrj yvmpur- 
 divTO's, 2 Cor. 4''''^ TTj <l>av€pticrfi t^s dXTjdetas OTjvurraVTes eavrov^ ttjoos 
 iratrav truvetoijo'ti' avOpioTriav ivioiriov toS ©eoB. £i 8e koI tcrriv KeKa\vft- 
 liivov TO £uayye\iov r/iuav, iv TOis diroXXv/iei/ots ia-rlv KeKoXv/ifiivov, h> oil 6 
 deo? Tou aiwvos toiJtou cru^Xcuo'ev to. vorjfiaTa rS>v amarosv ets to firj 
 auyoo-ai toi/ (jxiyrurfwv tov ivayyekiov t^s Sofijs toS Xpioroi), os eoTiv cikuv 
 ®eo5. ou yap lavroils xripvcra'Ofi.ev aXka Xptorw 'Ij^o-qvi' Kvptov, 1 Th. 1* to 
 euayyeXiov ij/i£v oix iyevero ets ii/nos ev Xdyw [lovov, dXka kol iu S-uvd/iiEi koI 
 iv TTvev/iOTt ayttt> xat irkripoKJiopia iroWrj, 2 Th. 2^* etXaTo vfiSii 6 ©cos air' 
 apx^s €is (Tuynjpiav iv dyiao-juu irveu/iaTos xat irtoret dXij^eias ets o eKoXeo-ev 
 v/ias 8ia ToB eiayyeXtou rjiiSiv, 2 Tim. 2* iMrrfiiAvtvi 'Iiyo-olv Xpiorov 
 iyriyepfi,tvov Ik vtKpSiv, ex oTrepjuaTos AauetiS, Kara to eiayyeXtdv /*ov. Its 
 nature is further shown by Eom. 10' toBt' Iotii' to prj/jui t^s irio-Teois o 
 Kifpvo'fTOiJi.fv. OTt eav ojt.oKoyritrg'i ev tw oTOfiwri crov TLvpiov 'Irjaovv, koI 
 iriOTeugs ev t^ Kapota o"oi; OTt 6 0eos avToi' ^yetpey ex viKp&v, coiO'qcnj. 
 From this and other passages it appears that, while the distinctive 
 feature of St. Paul's Gospel was the thought that God was in Christ 
 reconciling the world to Himself, and that he who thoroughly believed 
 this died with Christ to sin and was raised with Him to newness of 
 life (which he sometimes speaks of as an immediate revelation to himself) 
 yet it included the thought of final judgment and the more ordinary 
 topics dwelt upon by the earlier preachers of the Gospel. Nor need 
 we suppose that when he speaks of ' my gospel ' he is always thinking 
 of a difference of subject or contents : he thinks sometimes of the 
 difference of hearers, as when he says TrewioTeD/iat to euoyye'Xtov tiJs 
 dxpoySDo-Ticxs, KaOiii HeVpos t^s 7repiTo/x.^s (Gal. 2''). It would take too 
 long to go through other terms which are employed to express the new 
 message of salvation, such- as dX.'^deta, K'qpvyp.a, to prj/ji-a, rh prjfiaTa, ^mrj, 
 eXirts, Xoyos, irtorTts. 
 
 (3) When St. Jude speaks of defending the faith once delivered to 
 the saints, and of his readers building up themselves on their most 
 holy faith (ver. 20), he refers of course, not to any matter of detail, 
 not to rules enacted for a temporary purpose, such as the decisions of 
 the Council of Jerusalem, but to the very foundation of all Christian 
 teaching laid down once for all. 
 
 This may be regarded as a definition of Christianity — ' the Christian 
 is he who believes that Christ is Lord ' — , or it may be regarded as 
 the minimum required in the way of Christian belief. It is also 
 the seed or starting point, as well as the rule or canon of an endless 
 development. Growth in all ways, in feehng, in understanding, in 
 action, in character, — growth, moral, intellectual, and spiritual is of 
 the essence of the kingdom of Heaven, whether it appear in the 
 individual or in the community. Thus St. Peter says ' grow in grace 
 and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour ' (2 P. S^^) and St. Paul 
 ' one thing I do, forgetting the things that are behind and stretching 
 forward to the things which are before, I press on towards the goal 
 
66 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 unto the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus ' (Phil. 3i*). 
 And again, he declares ic to be his aim yvwvai avrov (not simply ' know,' 
 but ' recognize ' ' feel ' ' appropriate ' L.) koI rrjv 8wa/iiv t^s dvaorao-eus 
 avTov (Phil. 31"). Hence in St. Paul's epistles and elsewhere we find 
 allusions to a higher teaching, a wisdom not of this world, strong 
 meat suited for those that are mature, as opposed to the milk which is 
 proper for infants (1 Cor. 2«'7, 3i' 2, Heb. 512"). Our Lord enjoins 
 that every scribe instructed into the kingdom of heaven should bring 
 forth out of his treasure things new as well as old (Mt. 13*2) . and 
 St. Peter, in reminding his readers that they are all stewards of the 
 manifold grace of God, bids those who speak remember that their 
 words should be as it were oracles of God (1 P. 3"). The whole con- 
 stitution of the Church, all its offices and all its ministers are ets 
 
 OtKoSo/l^V ToS trcO/ittTOS TOV XpiCTToB, JHe^l KaTaVT7)(TU>ll,iV 01 iraVTCS €tS TTjV 
 
 evoTTjTa TTJi 7ri'(rTe(i)S koL t^s iTnyviomu}'; tov vlov rov ®eov, ets ayopa 
 riKeiov, eis /JLerpov ^XiKto.'; tov irXiypu/iaros tov Xpiorov (Eph. 4^2. 13)_ g^ 
 too our Lord looking forward to the future says tri ttoWo. exto v/juv 
 keyeiv, aW ov Swacr^e ySao-Ta^eiv apn- orav Si iKOr) IkiZvo'S, to Trvevfia ttjs 
 aKriOeCa^, oSijy^o-ei 5/*as eU T^v aKrideiav Traa-av (Joh. 1&^^- 1*), and in his 
 final charge iSoii eyui [t,e6' i/iSv el/A irao-ag ras ■^/J.epa's Itos t^s cnivTeXeuK 
 TOV aiSvos. We must beware therefore of laying too great a stress 
 on the aira^ of Jude, as though it forbad us to look for any further 
 accession to the faith or knowledge of Christians in the future. Jesus 
 Christ has once for all brought life and immortality to light through 
 the Gospel, yet He has still further truth to unfold through His Spirit 
 till He comes again. 
 
 On the other hand, if we hold with Plato that, God being the highest 
 ideal (rj i8ia TOV ayaOov), the perfection of man consists in ofioiwa-is 0£<a 
 KaTo. TO SvvaTov and with the old Hebrew Scriptures that man is made in 
 the image of God ; if we believe that the Eternal did at a certain point in 
 the world's history manifest Himself in the form of man and under the 
 conditions and infirmities of humanity ; if we further believe that we 
 have in the Gospels a true picture of this life, and in the remaining books 
 of the N.T. a true account of the way in which His first followers, 
 animated by His Spirit, strove to carry out His plans and buUd up the 
 spiritual temple founded by Him — then the record of His life and teach- 
 ing and those of the acts and words of the men whom He had Himself 
 trained to carry on His work after His departure, — these records can 
 never be superseded ; in every age the eyes of all who are striving for 
 the elevation of our race must continue to turn back to them as furnish- 
 ing the highest ideal of humanity, the clearest conception of divinity. 
 One main instrument of the growth and development, of which we have 
 spoken, will consist in the ever deeper understanding, and the ever 
 wider realization of the lessons of that life, as well as in the openness 
 to see and hear the signs of the divine Presence still at work within 
 us and around us. This is perhaps meant by the concluding words of 
 St. John's Gospel. For the full understanding of Christ's life and 
 teaching there needs the entire experience of humanity, and even so, 
 its significance will still be unexhausted. 
 
3, 4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 67 
 
 (4) There are various ways of misusing the Apostolic tradition. It 
 may be openly denied, as it seems to have, been by the innovators here 
 condenined (ver. 4). It may be entirely neglected without being 
 specifically denied (as in Tit. P^ rots Ipyots apvovvrai.) It may be so 
 modified by subsequent additions as to lose its original character. 
 This was to a certain extent the case with the Montanists, who held 
 that supernatural revelation had not come to an end with the Apostles, 
 but that more wonderful manifestations might be expected under the 
 dispensation of the Paraclete, whom Christ had promised to send. So 
 Tertullian ( FeZ. Virg. 1) after premising ' Regula fidei sola immobilis 
 et irreformabilis, credendi scilicet in Deum omnipotentem ' (then follows 
 a creed ending with the Resurrection of Christ) ' Hac lege fidei 
 manente, cetera . . . admittunt novitatem correctionis. Quale est 
 enim, ut diabolo semper operante et adjiciente quotidie ad iniquitatis 
 ingenia, opus Dei cessaverit ? ' The growth of righteousness is like 
 that of a grain of wheat : ' primo fuit in rudimentis natura Deum 
 metuens ; dehinc per legem et prophetas promovit in infantiam ; 
 dehinc per Evangelium efferbuit in juventutem ; nunc per Paracletum 
 componitur in maturitatem.' ^ The fault of the Montanists was that 
 they confined the looked for teaching of the Spirit to the one channel 
 of ecstatic revelation through the mouth of their prophets, and 
 attached too great authority to these. It was a movement which had 
 the qualities and defects of all revivalist movements. On the other 
 hand there was a simultaneous development of Christian truth on 
 broader and saner lines, in accordance with the great saying of St. 
 Paul, Sera Icttlv aX.r]6rj, ocroi. uefivd, oaa SiKaia, ocra ayvd, ocra TrpotrcjiiXrj, 
 ocra tvcjiriiia- e' Tis apeTiy, koi et Tts eiratvos, ravra koyi^ecrOe, and his 
 favourite refrain from the Psalms tov Kvpiov ij yij koi to TrX-^pwfjLa 
 avT^i. Men such as Justin and Clement of Alexandria, who had been 
 taught of God, not merely through the religious emotions, but through 
 the word received into the heart and interpreted by conscience, reason, 
 and experience,^ such men saw and recognized the work of the Spirit 
 in the poetry and philosophy of Greece, as well as in the tradition of 
 
 '■ Compare the teaching of the Eternal Gospel ascribed to the Abbot Joachim 
 towards the end of the twelfth century, in which it was prophesied that a new 
 dispensation, that of the Holy Ghost, was about to replace the dispensation of 
 the Sou, as that had replaced the dispensation of the Father. 
 
 ^ In my Introduction to the Seventh Book of the Stromaieis (p. xxii foil.) 1 
 have commented on the seeming preference shown for Montanism, as compared 
 with Catholicism, by writers whose views would generally be regarded as more or 
 less rationalistic, such as Hamack and Hatch. Here, it seems to me that a 
 writer, whose judgment is in general less to be relied on than Harnaok's, has yet 
 come nearer to the truth. See Wemle, Beginnings of Christianity, p. 124 
 ' Prophets are amongst the distinctive marks of this first Age of Christianity. 
 But we learn at the same time that their authority was secondary . . . The 
 ultimate authority, the foundation, was in all cases the tradition of Jesus. This 
 might be supplemented by the prophetic word, by the spirit, but never trans- 
 formed. . . To make the spirit of the prophets the ultimate authority would have 
 been tantamount to subjecting oneself to the whims and fancies of men whose 
 religious nature was powerful, while their moral character was immature and 
 undisciplined.' 
 
 F 2 
 
68 EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 the Hebrews, and drew from all quarters material for the building up 
 of the Church. 
 
 It is not of course implied that the developments of Christian 
 teaching which we find in the writers named or in later Catholic 
 writers at any particular period in the Church's history were neces- 
 sarily in the right direction. Speaking generally, these developments 
 are owing partly to the Spirit of Christ working in individuals, and so 
 leavening the Church ; and partly to the interaction of the Church 
 and the World. The Spirit of God bloweth where it listeth; and 
 secular improvement has often reacted with advantage upon the 
 Church tradition. On the other hand there can be no doubt that a, 
 considerable portion of the beliefs and practices of the mediaeval 
 Chiu-ch was afiected for the worse by Pagan or Jewish associations. 
 In the Reformation appeal was made from the existing Church 
 traditions to the traditions of the earliest Church, and above all 
 to the original tradition preserved in the Bible, on the ground that 
 whatever was really aUen from this could be no genuine work of 
 the Spirit. A sad experience has taught us that no Father, no 
 Council, no Pope, no reformer, is infallible. Every generation, 
 every individual, is sent into the world as a new organ of divine 
 truth to deal with new circumstances and new difficulties, and is bound 
 to exercise the right of private judgment on the conclusions left by 
 preceding generations, to the best of his, or their, opportunities and 
 ability. This does not preclude the attainment of practical certainty 
 in religion, any more than in science : nay, as the subject matter of 
 religion is mainly of the nature of inward experience, the sincere 
 Christian, though unlearned, has surer ground for confidence in 
 matters of religion, than the mass of mankind have in regard to 
 matters of science. 
 
 As time passes, the Church as a whole ought to be growing in know- 
 ledge as well as in grace. It would be sad indeed if all the increase in 
 knowledge of men and things, of God's universe and of His mode of 
 dealing with mankind, together with the recorded experience of the 
 past ages of Christianity and all the fresh difficulties and troubles of 
 to-day, not to mention the subordinate helps to the understanding of 
 the written word by means of archaeology and criticism — if all this 
 had been given in vain and left us no further advanced than Christians 
 of long vanished centuries. We do not, it is true, expect to meet in our 
 day the equals of a St. Paul or a St. John, any more than we expect 
 to meet the equals of a Plato or a Shakespeare ; but, since we have 
 Christ's own word that He will be with us all the days till the end of 
 the world, and that His Spirit will lead us into all the truth, we are 
 surely justified in the hope that the sorely protracted fermentation of 
 our times may yet issue in an outpouring of light and life, of knowledge 
 and of earnestness, proportioned to the preceding birth-pangs of a 
 new day of the Lord. 
 
 To return to the immediate point, perhaps the most dangerous 
 misuse of the Christian tradition, as it is the easiest and the commonest, 
 is that which, whether from indolence and indifference, or ignorant 
 
3, 4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 69 
 
 superstition, or a suicidal theory of religion, transforms it into a mere 
 dead fetish, to be regarded with reverence indeed, but not to be made 
 the subject of thought, for fear that thought may land us either in the 
 iScylla of dogmatism or the Charybdis of rationalism. The repetition 
 of a creed is worse than useless, unless the mind finds there food 
 ior imagination, thought, and feeling, as well as a stimulus and ground 
 ior action. It is, I suppose, from an exaggeration of this danger that 
 Deissman (Bible Studies, p. 59) makes the extraordinary assertion 
 ' The beginnings of Christian literature are really the beginnings of the 
 secularization of Christianity : the Church becomes a book-religion.' i 
 
 ^ I have given expression above — I fear rather confusedly — to some of the 
 thoughts which arise as one meditates on the words iirayavi^eaBai rp StoJ iropo- 
 ZoSilirri Triarei. Perhaps the opposing errors might be more clearly distinguished as 
 that which assigns too much, and that which assigns too little weight to the 
 past. Both errors tend to the denial or the ignoring of the eternity and the 
 omnipresence of God, who is always revealing Himself in all that is done, felt, 
 and thought throughout the universe, excepting only (with Cleanthes) iir6aa 
 ^e(ovai KUKol <T<t)€TepriiTiv avoiais. Hence, according to Westcott's fine saying, 
 Christianus nihil in rerum natura a se alienum putat. If we affirm, say, with the 
 Puritans against whom the argument of Hooker is directed, that religious usages 
 were fixed once for all in the Apostolic Age ; or if with others we affirm that the 
 doctrines and usages which prevailed at a particular period of the history of the 
 Church are to be placed on a pedestal, under the mystic name of ' Catholic,' 
 ■supra grammaiicam, beyond the reach of interrogation or criticism, are wo not 
 denying the continued presence of Christ in His Church and forgetting the goal 
 to which St. Paul directed the eyes of the Epheaian Church, when all should 
 come to perfect manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ t 
 In religion, as in science, man rises to perfection in the future through tlie 
 failures and imperfections of the past. 
 
 On the other hand if, with the ordinary modem man, we hold that the final 
 decision of what is right and true and boautiful and good is to be found in the 
 latest utterance of the majority, we are indeed building on a foundation of sand. 
 Each new generation delights in nothing more than in ridiculing the folly of the. 
 preceding generation, forgetting that it is doomed to a similar treatment from 
 ensuing generations, and moreover each generation comprises an infinity of chang- 
 ing and inconsistent majorities. The path of ■ progress in the present and the 
 future can only be discerned by the eye which has been duly disciplined by the 
 study of progress in the past. Not one jot or tittle of the law was to pass away 
 till it had found a higher form in the Gospel. 
 
 Nor is it much more reasonable to look lo science (as the word is commonly 
 understood) to determine what is to be the ultimate form of our religion. On the 
 subject of religion, science through the mouth of its recognized leaders proclaims 
 itself agnostic. It is negative, not positive : it can offer criticisms on the con- 
 tents or deductions of theology, it can supply materials for religious thought and 
 feeling to work upon ; but it cannot itself pierce the veil of the spiritual world. 
 A man may be a great chemist or mathematician, and yet a very poor philosopher, 
 or poet, or historian ; but it is the region of thought to which these latter belong 
 which is, far more nearly than pure science, allied to religion. Religion has 
 certainly learnt much in the past from historians such as Herodotus and Thucy- 
 dides, from philosophers like Plato, from poets such as Aeschylus and Sophocles. 
 Nay, even in our own day, for how much of our deeper thought on religion are 
 not we Englishmen indebted to such poets as Browning and Tennyson ? No man 
 can be a great poet or a great philosopher who does not naturally soar upwards 
 to the highest region attainable by man, and who is not penetrated by the sense 
 of the Divinity within him and around him. And yet even the highest utter- 
 ance of our greatest poets needs to be tested by the comparison of the ' Faith 
 once delivered to the saints ' before we can trust it as a voice from heaven. 
 
70 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 tTraywvi^ecrOaL. 
 
 How are we to contend for the faith ? Our natural instinct is to 
 dislike any kind of contradiction. For another to differ in opinion 
 from us is to cast doubt on our intelligence. To the confident and 
 high-spirited it is a )8A.ao-</»7/ita, an insult : to the diffident it causes a 
 painful feeling of uncertainty. To recover our sense of security or to 
 punish this insult, we feel tempted to put down dissent by ostracism 
 or violence. We form cliques or parties in which the bond consists in 
 the maintenance of a common opinion ; or, it may be, in the participa- 
 tion of a common dislike or prejudice. Where we attach great 
 importance to the opinion or dogma which is questioned, for its own 
 sake, as in the case of religion, intolerance of diversity finds further 
 sanctions. We honestly believe that the acceptance of the dogma 
 would be beneficial to the dissidents themselves. For their own sakes 
 we feel bound to compel them to come in. And the shallower is a 
 man's notion of what constitutes real belief, the readier he is to insist 
 on another's accepting, on peril of persecution, the belief which is 
 pressed upon him. One way then in which men have endeavoured to 
 contend for the faith is by physical force, as was symbolized in Poland 
 and Lithuania by the nobles drawing their swords when the Creed 
 was repeated. St. Paul however has taught us that the weapons of 
 our warfare are not carnal. Another defence was by means of 
 anathemas, such as were attached in former times to some forms of 
 the Creed, and in later days to the decrees of the Council of Trent. 
 The habit of cursing was very common among the Jews, one of the 
 worst examples being Ps. 109 (where vv. 17, 18 might seem to be a 
 protest against what precedes). It is strictly forbidden by St. Paul 
 ' Bless and curse not,' and by our Lord 'Bless them that curse you.' 
 Jude uses the phrase ovaiin ver. 11, which might be an imprecation, 
 but is perhaps better taken as a simple declaration of fact. Another 
 method of defence is denunciation or invective. This is, I think, per- 
 missible, where it is required to arouse the slumbering conscience, or to 
 make the ignorant or obtuse realize what is the nature of the attack, 
 and what the character of the assailants of the truth. Jude has certainly 
 no scruple in using this, and even our Lord has employed it against the 
 Pharisees, but it is not his usual method, and it is not the method 
 lecommended by St. Peter (1 P. S'*) Iroi/uoi del irpos diroXoytav TravTt 
 Tm aiTovvTi vfias X.6yov Trepl t^s iv vfuv eXirt'Sos, a\Xa. /xtTo. irpavTrjTO^ KoX 
 (jyo/Sov, (Twdhrj(nv Ixovre^ o.ya6-(\v. Jude himself adopts this better 
 method towards the end of his epistle, where he instructs his readers 
 how they should build themselves up upon their most holy faith. 
 
 I mentioned ostracism as one means by which people have endeavoured 
 to compel consent to their own views. St. Paul enjoins this in the case 
 of open ofienders against the moral law (1 Cor. 5^), yet our Lord ate with 
 publicans and sinners. He could do this because, though tempted like 
 as we are. He was yet immune from the poison of temptation, carrying 
 about with Him an atmosphere of purity which called out good even 
 
3, 4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 71 
 
 from the most degraded. But in ordinary circumstances there can be 
 no doubt of the wisdom of St. Paul's rule, not merely for safety, or to 
 avoid scandal, but to supply a further motive to the weak, in the fear 
 of forfeiting their Christian fellowship, and to those who have fallen, 
 in the sorrow for its loss and the yearning for its renewal. This 
 discipline is extended to those who taught erroneous doctrine by 
 St. Paul himself in Tit. 3io and by St. John in 2 Joh. i"' " ' If there 
 come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not 
 into your house nor bid him God speed ; for he that biddeth him God 
 speed is partaker of his evil deeds.' Does this mean that we are to 
 have no dealings with those who do not hold the articles of the faith 
 as embodied in the Creeds ? Plainly it has no reference to those who 
 have never heard of Christianity. It is limited to those who are, or 
 have been, professed Christians. Is it true, then, of such, if they can 
 no longer conscientiously repeat the Creed, that they are to be 
 excluded from the society of their fellow Christians on this 
 ground only, apart from other considerations 1 So far as doubt arises 
 from a high sense of what belief means, from scrupulous fear of saying 
 with our lips more than we believe in our hearts to be true, from 
 a consciousness of our own ignorance, and the incapacity of man to 
 fathom the councils of the Most High, or again from open-mindedness 
 and readiness to welcome light from all quarters, and not prematurely 
 to shut the eyes to what may prove to be a very ray from heaven — to 
 deny admittance to our homes and churches in the case of such a 
 doubter, would be blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. But where 
 disbelief, as in the case referred to by Jude, is confident, loud and 
 boastful, eager to startle and shock the simple-minded, without 
 reverence, or seriousness, or sense of responsibility, above all where it 
 distorts religion in the interest of the baser lusts — there, who can 
 hesitate to say that the sentence of St. John is fully justified 1 
 
 A special kind of ostracism was excommunication, which was 
 practised by the Jews (cf. the words de^opi^o), ex/SaWra, aTroa-vvdywyoi, 
 Lk. 622, Joh. 922) and sanctioned by our Lord (Mt. 18i7). St. Paul uses 
 this as a regular instrument of Church discipline in a case of immorality 
 in 1 Cor. 5^* iyoi fiev airhv rto <T(6/x.aTt, Trapiav Be tw 'Trvev/juxTi, ^817 xexpiKa 
 (US irapwv Tov oBrus tovto KaTepyafrd/jLevov, iv tu ov6ii.aTi ToC Kvpiov rjfx.uiv 
 '\r)(rov, (Tvva)(6£VTmv v/xCiv koL tov J/ioC Trvev/j.a.ro'S crvv rfj hwdfiei tov Kvpiov 
 rjixuv 'IijtroC, -jrapaSowat tov TOiovTOV Tip "SiWravS, eis oXeOpov T^s (rapKos, iva 
 TO irvev/jLa cr<j)6y iv Trj '^p-epa t'ov Kvpiov, and in a case of misbelief in 
 1 Tim. 12", where he says (speaking of Hymenaeus and Alexander) 06s 
 irapiSiOKa Tii %aTava, tva nraiSevOuxriv /tij ySXacr^T/jtieiv. The remarkable 
 phrase ' delivery to Satan ' may perhaps contain an allusion to the 
 story of Job. 
 
 Nature of the Threatened Danger (v. 4). 
 
 It is stealthy ; it is serious enough to have heen predicted long 
 ago ; its characteristic is impiety, showing itself in the antinomian 
 
72 EPI8TLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 misuse of the Gospel of God's free grace, and in the denial of God 
 and Christ. 
 
 Denial of a Person. 
 
 The use of dpvio/mi {denego) followed by an accusative of the person 
 is unclassical and seems to be confined to Christian literature. In 
 general apviofiai is opposed to 6iJi.oX.oyem. The N.T. use is illustrated 
 in the Homily 139, on the Adoration of the Cross, wrongly ascribed to 
 Chrysostom : 6 apvovfievoi erepov olov ^ dScA.^oi' 17 tfti\ov . . . k&v /iooti^o- 
 fxevov tS-g tovtov . . , k&v otiovv ■iracr\ovTa, ov TrpoiaTaTai, ov ^orjOei 
 . , . oTTai yap avrov ^WoTpiWat, i.e. it is equivalent to repudiation. 
 So Peter repudiated our Lord. The sin and its punishment are 
 spoken of in Mt. 10^^ otrns 6/io\oy^(r« iv ifiol efjLirpoaOev t&v avOpanriov, 
 6jUo\oy^o-a) Kayo) iv avrio ip-irpotrBev tov Trarpos fiov tov iv rots ofipavow* 
 ocTts Be a.pvq(TeTa.i /i£ efiTrpocrdev tSxv avBpumtav, dpvi^a'o/j.ai Kayo) avrbv 
 ep.trpoa-Oev tov warpos /jlov. In Mk. 8^^ and Lk. 9^^ the phrase oo-tis 
 apvritTeTai fie is replaced by Ss av eirauT)(vvd'g [le koI tovs ip.ov9 \6yov9. 
 In the martyrologies the word occurs frequently, as the confessors 
 were called upon either to deny Christ, or to deny that they 
 were Christians, or what comes to the same thing, to affirm Kvpiog 
 Kai(rap, and offer incense to Caesar or swear by his name. In 
 Apoc. 2^^ it is said of the church at Pergamum ovk rjpvqa-iii rijv mariv 
 IA.0V, in contrast to the followers of Balaam, who did not scruple to eat 
 things offered to idols ; and we read that Basilides justified those who 
 so acted and abjured the faith in time of persecution (Euseb. H.£. 
 iv. 7). It would seem however that what is here condemned is a 
 wrong view of God and Christ, such as a denial of the divine 
 attributes of holiness and justice, wisdom and power, and of the 
 salvation wrought by Christ, the helplessness of man and the need of 
 prayer and watchfulness. See Clem. Al. Str. vi. p. 802 (the heretics, 
 though they profess one God and sing praises to Christ, yet really) 
 aA,A.ov deov TrapevpicTKOviru' Kal toi' ICpurrbv ov)( cos ai Trpoi^ijTeiai 
 irapaSiSoaaiv £/c8e;^ovTai, and the Introduction on the Early Heresies. 
 Confession being a main element in baptism (cf. Rom. 10^*' Kap&iq. 
 7ritrT£U£Tat £is SiKaioa-uvrjv, (TTO/ian 8k ofJioXoye'iTai eU (Turrripiav), the 
 subsequent denial was an diroarajo-ia. 
 
 Illustrations of Sin and Judgment Derived from History and 
 FROM Nature {w. 5-13). 
 
 The judgment impending over these men is borne witness to hy well 
 hnovm facts of the past, and may he illustrated from the phenomena of 
 nMture. God showed his mercy in delivering the Israelites from Egypt, 
 but that was no guarantee against their destruction in the wilderness 
 when they again sinned by unbelief. The angels were blessed beyond 
 all other creatures, but when they proved unfaithful to their trust, 
 
4-13] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 73 
 
 they were imprisoned in darkness, awaiting there the judgment of 
 ■the great day. The men of Sodom (lived in a land of great fertility, 
 they had received some knowledge of God through the presence and 
 teaching of Lot, they had been lately rescued from captivity by Abra- 
 ham, yet they) followed the sinful example of the angels, and their 
 land is still a prey to the fire, bearing witness to the eternal punish- 
 ment of sin. In spite of these warnings the heretics, who are now 
 finding their way into the Church, persist in their wild hallucina- 
 tions, giving themselves up to the lusts of the flesh, despising authority, 
 and railing at angelic dignities. They might have been taught 
 better by the example of the archangel Michael, of whom we are told 
 that, when disputing^with the devil about the body of Moses, he uttered 
 no word of railing, but made his appeal to God. These men how- 
 ever rail at that which is beyond their knowledge, while they swr- 
 render themselves like brute beasts to the guidance of their appetites, 
 and thus bring aibout their own destruction, following in the wake of 
 impious Cain, of covetous Balaam, and rebellious Korah. When 
 they take part in your love-feasts they cause the shipwreck of the weak 
 by their wantonness and irreverence. In greatness of profession and 
 smallness of performance they resemble clouds driven by the wind 
 which give no rain ; or trees in autumn on which one looks in vain 
 for fruit, and which are only useful for fuel. By their confident 
 speaking and brazen assurance they seem to carry all before them ; 
 yet like the waves bursting on the shore, the deposit they leave is only 
 their own shame. Or we might compare them to meteors which shine 
 for a moment and are then extinguished for ever. 
 
 Punishment of the Fallen Angels. 
 
 The Introduction on the story of the Fallen Angels shows how 
 inconsistent was Jewish tradition on this point. 
 
 There can be no doubt that Jude makes a broad distinction 
 between the fallen watchers and the devil. The former are in close 
 imprisonment under the earth until the day of judgment : the latter 
 is still at liberty : he was able to resist Michael when he sought to 
 bury the body of Moses ; and (as Jude doubtless held with his brother 
 and with Peter) he is still the adversary whom we are bound to resist. 
 Clement of Alexandria however does away with this distinction, 
 interpreting the prison of the angels to mean ' vioinum terris locum, 
 hoc est cahginosum aerem. Vincula vero dixit . . . cupiditatem 
 infi[r]marum rerum ; cupiditate quippe devicti propria convert! non 
 queunt ' {Adumhr. p. 1008). This is evidently an attempt to reconcile 
 the present passage with those which speak of an i^ova-ia tov ctkotovs 
 
74 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDB 
 
 (Lk. 2268 Col. 118), and of the ruler t^s i^ovaiat rov &.ipoi (Eph. 22). 
 In his note on the latter Dr. Bobinson, after quoting from the Testa- 
 ment of the Patriarchs and the Ascension of Isaiah adds that ' the air 
 was regarded by the Jews, as well as by others, as peopled by spirits, 
 especially evil spirits,' for which he cites Philo Be Gigant. 2, De Somn. 
 I. 22. 
 
 ivvTTVia^S/ievoi. 
 
 In the explanatory notes I have accepted the explanation of 
 Clement and Bengel to the effect that the innovators live in an unreal 
 world of their own, but I ara not sure that there may not be a further 
 allusion to the words of St. Paul in 2 .Th. 2''ii to yap /tuo-r^ptov ^87 
 ivepyelrai Ttji SLVOfiLa^ . . . Kal Sia tovto iriiiTrti auToTs o Oeos evipyuav 
 ir\avj;5 eis to iniTTf.va'ai avrov^ rtf tj/fv8ei which may perhaps refer to the 
 wild dreams of Gnostic mythology. • 
 
 The Example of the Archangel. 
 
 For the origin of the story see the chapter on the Use of Apocryphal 
 Books. One of the most difficult things in this difficult epistle is to 
 understand the reason why the writer introduces this curious reference. 
 Apparently he wishes to check the spirit of irreverence towards the 
 representatives of authority and dignity, and especially towards the 
 Supreme Authority and the high dignities of that unseen world, which 
 is altogether hidden from the materialists against whom he writes. 
 We might have expected that he would take his examples from the 
 behaviour of holy men in presence of one of these august beings : Moses 
 at the Burning Bush, Joshua and Manoah before the angel of the Lord, 
 Isaiah when he beheld the vision in the Temple, Zechariah and Mary at 
 a more recent period, on their receipt of angelic communications. Or, 
 if this contempt for authority, as is suggested by the allusion to 
 Korah, was also shown towards earthly superiors, what more was 
 needed than such a grave remonstrance as we find in Heb. IS^' 'Obey 
 them that have the rule over you and submit yourselves ; for they 
 watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may 
 do it with joy and not with grief ' 1 It would seem to be altogether 
 going out of the way to take an archangel for our pattern ; but if it 
 was thought worth while to do so, would it not have been more natural 
 to refer to the seraphim who veil their faces in the presence of God, 
 rather than to the apocryphal story of Michael's behaviour towards 
 Satan ? Suppose, to allow our thought a freer range, we substitute for 
 this the Miltonic account of the interview between Satan and 6a*briel 
 at the end of the fourth book of the P.L. Milton's Satan, we 
 remember, is one whose 'form had not yet lost all her original 
 brightness, nor appeared less than archangel ruined and the excess of 
 glory obscured,'! yet there was a certain amount of pXaor^jxia, not 
 
 ! In agreement with this, Bengel in his note saya ' Angeli qui peocarunt, tamen 
 ut oreaturae Dei habent bonitatera . . . et in sua natura praestantissima, quam ». 
 Creatore aoceperunt, characterem retinent indebilem majestatis.' 
 
6-9] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 7& 
 
 merely in the language addressed to him by Zephon in the earlier part 
 of the hook, but in that of Gabriel towards the end, though, after the 
 appearance of the celestial sign, the latter concludes in words of calm, 
 dignity 
 
 ' Satan, I know thy strength, and thou know'st mine, 
 Neither our own, but given. What folly then 
 To boast what arms can do, since thine no more 
 Than Heaven permits, nor mine.' 
 
 We can imagine such a passage being appealed to by one of Cromwell's. 
 Ironsides to put a stop to some vulgar squabble among his comrades | 
 but we can hardly imagine it used in a serm'on, to inculcate either a 
 fitting reverence towards angels or submission to an earthly superior. 
 It might be more appropriately used (much in the spirit of Gamaliel'a 
 answer to the persecuting priests recorded in Acts 5^' ^^), to check 
 the bitter and scornful language of some orthodox controversialist : 
 ' See how the archangel met the taunts of evil personified ' ! 
 
 To arrive at any satisfactory conclusion, it seems necessary in the 
 first place to detei'mine the meaning of ^SXao-^ij/ieo), and its cognate 
 pXcuT<lyr]fiia, in the three passages in which they occur. According to the 
 explanation we have followed, it is used in the 8th verse of injurious 
 speech of some sort towards angels ; in the 9th verse of injurious speech 
 towards Satan; in the 10th the statement of the 8th verse is repeated 
 in other words. In none of these passages, if our explanation is right, 
 would the translation ' blasphemy ' be correct. Blasphemy, in the 
 strict sense, is only possible against God : it would be irreverence to 
 speak against an angel, and in the note it is suggested that one way in 
 which this irreverence showed itself may have been the slighting 
 language used by the heretics in regard to the creative and providential 
 ministration of the angels. But neither of these terms could apply to 
 angelic dealings with Satan, No ! nor to human dealings either. To 
 worship or revere Satan would be the height of impiety. We are to 
 defy him, renounce him, resist him, and he will flee from us. What, 
 then, is the wrong behaviour towards Satan on our part (for such I 
 think is implied by the appeal to the example of Michael) which Jude 
 here wishes to correct 1 It is suggested in the note that the Libertines 
 may have scofied at the idea both of angelic help and of diaboUe 
 temptation. St. Paul had warned those who took part in the idol- 
 feasts that they thereby made themselves partakers with devils. We 
 can well imagine that the Balaamites and the Simonians would mock 
 at this as an empty threat. But will the word p\a(T(j>rjij.€<o bear the 
 sense of x^eua^oi or koiSoplio or iiria-KuyirTa) ? I think the following 
 quotations tend to show that it may : Clem. Al. Paed. p. 297 xoXXovs- 
 ^\a<r(j>r]fiovvTeg eis -yeXajra oil iravovrai, Herodian iv. 12. 1 eis tovtov 
 iroXXttKis airea-Koyij/e Koi fiexP' ato-^^pSs PXa(r<j>rjiJLiai. The more common 
 meaning of pXacrtfirjfjiea} ' to speak evil ' does not seem appropriate here, 
 for there is hardly a place in the N.T. where the devil is mentioned 
 without some opprobrious addition. He is a sinner from the beginning 
 (1. Joh. 3*), a murderer from the beginning, a liar and the father of it 
 (Joh. 8**), a roaring lion seeking whom he may devour (1 P. 5*), tha 
 
76 EPISTLE OF ST. JUDE 
 
 Son of God was manifested that he might destroy the works of the 
 •devil (1 Joh. 3^). The force of Jude's warning seems to be this, ' Do 
 not make hght of the devil, do not belittle the danger of his assaults. 
 Even the archangel invoked the power of God against him.' In the 
 «ame sense St. Paul writes (EpL 6^^' ^^) iv8vcraa-6e rrfv iravoTrkiav rov 
 '©Eol TTpos TO Suvoo-^at v/xSs (TT^vai irpos Tas //.edoSias rov !>ial36X.ov ori ovk 
 ■ecTTLV rnuv fi 7rd\r; Trpos ai/ui Kai (rapKa, aWa irpoi ras apxas, wpos Tas 
 ■iiovaiais, irpos Toirs KO(7/;ioKparopas Tov (TKOTOvi tovtov, irpos to Tircu/xaToca 
 T^s irovr/pias iv Tois eiroupan'ois. So too our Lord (Lk. 12*'^) //.r) (jyo^t]- 
 ■OrjTi diro Tuyv atroKTUvovTuiv ro crlofia koL fiera ravra fi'q f\ovTusv Trepicriro- 
 repov Tt iroi^o'ai. vTroSeifoi Se v/aiv tivo <[>oPi^6^Tf {jtofiyBrfre rov fLtra to 
 ■arroKTelvai ej^ovTa t^owiav IfipaXuv ets T^i/ yKi/vav, on which see the con- 
 clusive remarks of Stier, Words of the Lffrd Jesus, tr. vol. II. 40-50. 
 As iiova-ia is here predicated of Satan, so in Heb. 2^* we find him 
 spoken of as tov to (cpaTos txovra rov BavaTov. Similar warnings are 
 suggested by Lk. 223' s", Joh. IS^'^', Mk. S^'. 
 
 The PROPHEcr op Enoch {w. 14-16). 
 
 The ancient prophecy, to which reference has been already made, 
 was intended for these men as well as for the prophet's own contempo- 
 raries, where he says ' The Lord appeared, encompassed by myriads 
 ■of his holy ones, to execute justice upon all and to convict all the 
 ungodly concerning all their ungodly works, and concerning all the 
 hard things spoken against Him by ungodly sinners' (Like them) 
 ■these men are murmur ers, complaining of their lot, slaves to their own 
 ■carnal lusts, while they utter presumptuous words against God, and 
 ■seek to ingratiate themselves with men for the sake of gain. 
 
 The Context of the Prophecy as it is read in the Book of Enoch. 
 
 I quote the essential part of the introduction as given in the Greek 
 •(p. 326, Charles) cwpa tt/v opcuriv tov ayiov . . . ^v iSti^av fioi ayycXoi koi 
 ^Kovcra Trap' avriiiv iravTa kol eyvinv awro BctapSiv. koi ovk eis t^v vvv 
 -ycveav dXX' IttI w 6 p pm ov tr av ycveav (cf . J. 14 koi toutois) 
 . . . KoL i^tXtvcerai o ayios o /leyas ix rfji KaTooc^crews avTov koI 6 ©cos 
 TOV alSivoi exrl yijv Trar-qaei im, to Stm opos . . . koI ffiav^o'tTai cv rg 8vvd/i» 
 T^s tor;^vos avTov diro tou ovpavov, koi <j>oli-q6ri(TOVTai irdvTes. The Greek 
 •at this point is corrupt and I go on with the translation of the Ethiopic 
 (p. 58 Charles) : ' And the high mountains will be shaken and the 
 high hills will be made low and will melt like wax before the flame. 
 And the earth will be rent and all that is upon the earth wiU perish, 
 and there will be a judgment upon every thing and upon all the 
 righteous. But to the righteous He will give peace (J. 2) and will 
 jprotect the elect (J. 1), and grace (Gr. IXeos, cf. J. 2), will be upon them, 
 
9-18] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 77 
 
 and they will all belong to God and it will be well with them, and 
 they will be blessed, and the light of God will shine upon them. And 
 lo ! He comes with ten thousands, etc' 
 
 The Faithful are Bidden to Call to Mind the Warnings op 
 THE Apostles (w. 17-19). 
 
 The Apostles warned you repeatedly that in the last time there' 
 would arise mockers led away hy their own carnal lusts. It is these 
 that are now breaking up the unity of the Church hy their invidious, 
 distinctions, men of unsanctified minds, who have not the Spirit 
 of God. 
 
 fir i(T)(d.Tov ^(povov. 
 
 It may be worth while here to quote from Westcott's note on 1 Joh. 
 21*. ' The successive partial dawnings of " the age to come " give a 
 different force to the words " the last days " which usher in the age, 
 according to the context in which they occur. In one sense " the age 
 to come " dated from Pentecost ; in another from the destruction of 
 Jerusalem ; in another it was still the object of hope. So also " the 
 last days" are found in each of the seasons of fierce trial which 
 precede the several comings of Christ. The age in which we live is,, 
 under one aspect, " the last days," and in another it is "the age to. 
 come," which was prepared by the travail pains of the old order. As, 
 we look forward, a season of sore distress separates us from that, 
 which is still to be revealed (2 Tim. 3i ; 2 Pet. S^ ; Jude 18 ; 1 Pet. l^, 
 contrast ver. 20) : as we look back we have entered on an inheritance, 
 now through struggles of " a last time." ' 
 
 We find similar references in the O.T. : thus in Gen. 49^ Israel 
 blessing his sons tells them of what should befall iir iaxarmv ruiv- 
 ■q/xepSiv, and this blessing, in the case of Judah, is generally thought to- 
 refer to the coming of the Messiah. In Numb. 24^* Balaam foresees 
 cir' €(r\d.Tov tSv ■^/ji.epSiv the rising of the Star out of Jacob. Moses 
 speaking of the future dispersion of Israel, as a punishment for their 
 sins, still holds out the promise that ctt' Itrxa™ rStv ■fjfi.eplav a time of 
 restoration should come if they turned to God with all their heart and 
 with aU their soul (Deut. 4^"). In a later chapter (3P^) the phrase 
 ea-xcTov Tunr rumpSyv is used to denote the period of the previous falling 
 away. In Job 19^* the A.V. has 'I know that my Redeemer liveth 
 and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth,' but the LXX. 
 has nothing answering to ' latter day,' and the general sense of the 
 passage is much disputed. In Isa. 2^ and Micah 4^ we read that h ■ 
 Tttis eo-x<irais ^/Acpais ' the mountain of the Lord's house shall be estab- 
 lished in the top of the mountains and all nations shall flow unto it.' 
 Jeremiah uses the same phrase of the restoration of Moab (48*'^) and 
 of Elam (4988), and twice over of the repentance of Israel, tjr' itrxarov-- 
 T&v riiiepiav v(yficrov(nv airo (232", 3024). j^ jg ^ggd by Ezekiel of the,. 
 
78 EPISTLE OP ST. JUDE 
 
 invasion of Gog and Magog (SS*' i*), by Daniel in explaining the vision 
 of the four kingdoms (2^*), and in the description of the wars of the 
 Diadochi, which is to be followed by great tribulation and then by the 
 resurrection and the judgment (ch. 12). In this book there is an 
 attempt to give an actual date to the time of the Messiah and to the 
 last times generally (9^^, 121^). Hosea, after announcing that the 
 children of Israel would abide many days without a king, or sacrifice, 
 or ephod, prophesies that afterwards in the latter days they should 
 return, and seek the Lord, and David their king (3^). 
 
 The Final Charge to the Faithful (w. 20-23). 
 
 Use all diligence to escape this danger. Make the most of the 
 privileges vouchsafed to you. Build yourselves up on the foundation 
 of your most holy faith hy prayer in the Spirit. Bo not rest satisfied 
 with the belief that God loves you, but keep yourselves in His love, wait- 
 ing for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ which leads us to eternal 
 life. And do your lest to help those who are in danger of falling away 
 by pointing out their errors and giving the reasons of your own belief ; 
 and by snatching from the fire of temptation those who are in imminent 
 jeopardy. Even where there is most to fear, let your compassion and 
 your prayers go forth toward the sinner, vjhile you shrink from the 
 pollution of his sin. 
 
 iv wvev/ian ayuo 7rpo(reuj(d/tcvoi. 
 
 It is not enough to use the words of prayer. Prayer must be heart- 
 felt, dictated by the Holy Spirit, who makes intercession for us with 
 groanings that cannot be uttered, and through whom we are enabled 
 to cry Abba, Father, and to worship, as the Father would have us 
 worship, in spirit and in truth. Thus we shall be enabled to buUd 
 ourselves up as stones in the spiritual temple of which Christ is the 
 corner-stone, to realize to ourselves the love of God and to be always 
 looking for the mercy of Christ which leads us on to eternal life. Nor 
 must we forget that we are bound to show that same mercy towards 
 our brethren who are tempted, striving for them as we strive for 
 ourselves. 
 
 But what, if we are not conscious of the Spirit in our hearts 1 Are 
 we then to give up praying and striving ? The parables of the leaven 
 and the mustard seed show us that there are many degrees of spiritual 
 growth. In no one is there an entire absence of the good seed. He 
 who is faithful to that he hath, shall find more given to him. Every 
 good thought, every good resolution, every aspiration after better 
 things, every feeling of sorrow and shame for past misdoing or useless- 
 ness, is at least the earnest of the Spirit within us, and should be 
 
18-25] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 79 
 
 thankfully recognized as such, and turned to practical use, as by him 
 who brought his child to Jesus with the prayer ' Lord, I believe ; help 
 thou mine unbelief.' 
 
 Final Benediction and Asceiption {vv. 24-25). 
 
 I have hidden you to keep yourselves in the love of God ; I have 
 warned yoih against all impiety and impurity. But do not think 
 that you can attain to the one or guard yourselves from the other in 
 your own strength. Tou must receive power from ahove ; and that 
 it may he so, I offer up my prayer to Him, who alone is able to keep 
 you from stumbling, and to present you before the throne of His 
 glory, pure and ^otless in exceeding joy. To Him, the only God 
 and Saviour, belong glory, greatness, might, and authority throughout 
 all ages. 
 
NOTES ON THE SECOND EPISTLE 
 OF ST. PETEK 
 
 I. 1. SdjicAv.] See Introduction on the Text. The writer of the 
 First Epistle calls himself simply Hcrpos. In every other passage of 
 the N. T., where the double name occurs, it is S'/xcdv Herpos. Indeed 
 2u/Ae<i)v is used of Peter only in one other passage, viz. Acts 15^*, the 
 address of James at the Council of Jerusalem. The hellenized form 
 St/iuv appears for the first time in post-Alexandrine writings, e.g. 
 Sirach 50i, 1 Mace. 15^*, and seems to be the only one used of i?eter 
 in post- Apostolic times. 
 
 So far as it goes, this is an argimient for the genuineness of our 
 epistle. Our author is at any rate a man of observation and reflexion, 
 and, if he chose to write under another name, would have been careful 
 to copy his model. This applies also to the other points in which this, 
 salutation differs from that of the first epistle. 
 
 SovXos Kal dir<5(rTo\os 'Irnrofi XpioTOv.] The first epistle omits SovXos > 
 Jude, who is followed so closely in our epistle, omits a-iroa-Tokos. ' By 
 the addition of the common appellative SouXos and the use of the pre- 
 Christian name, Symeon, the writer puts himself on a level with those 
 whom he addresses and prepares the way for the epithet lo-drt/Aov which 
 follows. The faith of the ordinary believer puts him in the same 
 position as that of the apostle. In both cases it is the gift of God 
 leading to salvation,' Spitta. See however n. on icroTi/iov below. 
 
 Tots l(r<5Ti(Jiov ^(itv XaxoSo-iv irCoTiv.l Field seems to be right in holding 
 that UroTifKK and 6p,6tliji.o^ ' invariably borrow their meaning from ti/ajj 
 honour,' and not from ti/aij in the sense of price.'^ He quotes Jos. Ant. 
 xii. 3. 1 €V airy tjJ /iijTpon-dXet Avt lO^tCq. iroXtreias auTovs ■qiioure Kal tois 
 evoiKurOtttriv IcroTifxovi direSei^e MaKcSdo't. The same holds good in the 
 great majority of compounds of ri/ti^. So here F. translates ' equally 
 
 1 I see however that it bears this sense in Philo M. i. p. 165 rhv trophy i<r6Tifioy 
 xiffiiif b 0tbs Tiyttvai quoted in Salmon's Introd. to N. T. p. 502, 
 
I 1] NOTES 81 
 
 privileged,^ a faith which carries equal privileges, so putting them on 
 an equality with us, whether us the Apostles, or, if addressed to 
 Gentiles, us Jews. The latter would be in accordance with St. Peter's 
 action in the admission of the Gentiles to the privileges of the Gospel. 
 Jewish arrogance and exclusiveness were the cause of much bitter feeling 
 and danger in the early Church, as may be seen from Acts 15, 21^^'^^, 
 Rom. 2, 3, 9^ 10, 11, Ephes. 2l*-22, esp. ver. 14 airos ydp icrnv 17 elpT^vr] 
 ■^/iStv, 6 TTOt^cras TO. d/j.^dr€jaa Iv, Koi to imaroroixov tov i^payjuot) Kv(ra<s, r-qv 
 €)(6pav ev TJj <rapKi avTov, with which our passage may be compared. 
 On the contrary there is no hint that there was any Jealousy of the 
 position of the Apostles generally, which could explain the use of such 
 words as lo-oVi/xov and iv SiKaiocrvvg. ' It is true that those here ad- 
 dressed are warned against the roXjuijTai avBdSei's who speak evil of 
 dignities (21°) and that they are bidden to remember the teaching of 
 the Apostles (3^) ; which implies a division in the Church, and a 
 disposition on the part of some to question the authority of the 
 Apostles ; but in writing to such persons, it would hardly be appro- 
 priate to weaken the authority of the Apostles by denying to them 
 any prerogative rights over other Christians. The only objection to 
 the view that the equality referred to is that between Jew and Gentile 
 is that we are not told that the writer represents the Jews, and those 
 to whom he writes the Gentiles. It has been suggested that the use 
 of the name Symeon may have been intended to mark the former ; 
 the latter point is discussed in the Introduction. For the compressed 
 comparison (^ju,ti/ = Tjj ■^p.tov) see Winer pp. 777 f. 
 
 The use of the word kayxdvm here is to emphasize the fact that 
 faith itself is the gift of God j so Wisd. S^^ </'ux^s lAa^qv dyaOrji, Plato 
 Phileb. 55 b dvhpCav r/ (TU><l>po(rvvrjv...'^ tl tcov aWoH/ ocr dyada eiXiy^c 
 ij/vxri, I'olit. 269 c <j>p6vt)a-iv elXiJXos, cf. Eph. 2^- ». 
 
 Iv 8iKaio<rtPvx|.] Does this form one phrase with ttlo-tivI Does it 
 mean ' faith in the righteousness of Christ as our justification ' ? Cf . 
 Eph. 1^^ Tr]V Ka6' i/iSs ttlcttlv Iv rm Kvpiia 'It](tov, 1 Tim. 3^^. Or should 
 it be connected with all the preceding words ' those who have received 
 a faith no less highly privileged than ours through the justice of God,' 
 who is no respecter of persons 1 The latter seems to me the more 
 natural way of taking it. For this narrower sense of StKaios cf. Heb. 
 61" ov yap aStKos 6 ©eos e-!TiX.a6ecr6ai tov ipyov v/xSiv, 1 Job. P iav 
 o/JLokoyZp-ev rag dpjipTias ■^p&v, ttuttos iariv koi Sixaios tva dc^ij -qpiv ra.^ 
 ap-apriag, and Clem. Al. p. 116 otl ye p,ia KadoXiKr] t^s avOpfairoTiijTO'S 
 cT(DT-qpia fi iriirTK, leroTiys Se Kal k o iv wv L a tov 8 iKa l o v kui 
 (j} i\av pioir ov OeoS 17 avTT] Trpos TrdvTas, 6 djrdtrToAos 
 ora<^eo-TaTa e^yiJo-aTO, shortly after which follows the quotation from 
 Gal. 326-29. 
 
 TOV 0eov t|)i,uv Kal <r<i>Tijpos 'Iri<rov Xpio-Tofi.] See n. on Jude V. 4 TOV 
 p,6vov Sea-TToTrjv. If we take ®€ov of Christ with Spitta, we may com- 
 pare 2^ below TOV dyopdcravTtt. avrovi Scctttoti/v, Joh. 20^^ (the words at 
 Thomas) 6 Kupids p.ov koi 6 ®eds p-ov, Tit. 2^^, and Lightfoot's n. on 
 Clem. Kom. 2 where similar examples from the early Fathers are 
 collected. On the other hand the next verse clearly distinguishes 
 
82 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 between God and Christ, and it is natural to let that interpret this, 
 as there seems no reason for identity here and distinction there. 
 
 cTMTryp is used of Christ in four other passages of this epistle, l^^, 
 2^", 32, 318, but does not occur at all in 1 Pet. Apart from its use as 
 predicate, it occurs without the article in 1 Tim. 1^ ZlaSA-os diroo-roXos 
 . . . KCLT e1n.Ta.y7jv ®eov (royrrjpos ■^/iSv Koi XpicrToB 'Ii/troD Trjg eXTrtSos ^juSv, 
 and in Jude v. 25 /iovw ©cu (r<o-njpi ■qfj.lav, Ps. 24^, Isa. 45i^._ 
 
 2, x°'P''S ^K'^v Kttl elp'^vi) irX.r|8vvSECi).] See n. on Jude 2. The same 
 formula is found in 1 P. P and (without irX-qOwOeir)) in Rom. F, 
 1 Cor. 13, 2 Cor. P, Gal. l^, Eph. \% Phil. P, Col. P, 1 Th. P, 2 Th. P, 
 Pllilem. 3 X'J'P'S i/*'" Kit elprjvri cltto ©eoC irarpos Kat Kvplov 'I. X. In 
 1 Tim., 2 Tim., Tit. we have the same salutation with eXeos added. 
 The salutation in Apoc. P is xdpK vfiiv koL etp^vij Atto o wv; the final 
 salutation in Heb. 13^^ is simply -q x^pw fiera. ttovtuxv vfiZv, as in Eph. 6**, 
 Col. 4", 1 Tim. 621, 2 Tim. 4^2, Tit. 3i5, to which the words to5 icvpimi 
 ■nfi&v 'I. X. fieff vimS)v are added in Rom. 162», 1 Th. 5^8, 2 Th. 3i8. 
 In Gal. 6^8 and Phil. 4^3, we have the fuller form ^ X'^P's ™'' Kvpt'ou 
 ^/;i<ijv 'I. X. [jiera toS iri/eu/iaros v/;i<i)v. In 2 Cor. 13^3 the names of all 
 three Persons are invoked -^ x«P's t- KvpCov 'I. X. koI ij AyaTr?; toS ®eo5 
 «al ^ KOLVutvia tov ayiov irveviJ.aTos p.iTa. ttovtiov v/iSiv. On x^P" ^^ 
 Hort's n. on 1 Pet. 1^. 
 
 iv liriyviio-si tov 0€ov.] The word eTTiyi/uo-is occurs four times in this 
 epistle (here and 13, P, 22»), once in Heb. lO^s, fifteen times in the 
 later epistles of St. Paul, and nowhere else in the N.T. It is found in 
 the LXX., as in Prov. 2^ eirlyvuxriv ®eoS evpijo-ets, Hos. 4^ ovk t(TTw 
 aXqOeLa . . . ovSe iiriyvaxTK ®€ov IttI t^s yrji, ih. 6''. For its meaning 
 see App. below. 
 
 The preposition h/ denotes that grace and peace are multiplied in 
 and by the fuller knowledge of God, cf. Joh. 17' awnj Se lariii ^ 
 ald)Vio% tfiyf] iva. ■ytvcacricwo't o"e tov fxovov aKr/Oivov ®c6v Koi ov aTreoretXas 
 'I. X., and the words of the Blessing, ' The peace of God which passeth 
 all understanding keep your hearts and minds in the knowledge and 
 love of God and of his Son, Jesus Christ our Lord.' 
 
 Spitta, followed by Zahn {Einl. ii. 61), prefers the shorter form iv 
 fTTiyvrntra rov Kvpiov ■^/ji.Siv, read by P and some of the Lat. verss., to 
 the longer form iv Itt. tov ®£ov koi 'I-hjctov tov levpiov ^ read by BCK, 
 and by X AL+ with the addition of Xpurrov after 'IijoroB. He 
 compares 1 Th. 1^, where the editors agree in a short form against 
 the preponderating weight of MS. authority in favour of a longer 
 form, and Col. 1^ Ap-tftrq atro ©eoC irwrpo's Tj/iStv, of which Lightfoot says 
 it is ' the only instance in St. Paul's epistle where the name of the 
 Father stands alone in the opening benediction without the addition 
 of Jesus Christ. The omission was noticed by Origen and by 
 Chrysostom. But transcribers naturally aimed at uniformity, and 
 so in many copies we find the addition koI Kvpiov 'Ir]a-ov Xpurrov.' 
 
 ' The phrase 'IijtroC toC Kuptou (without Xpurrov) is only found elsewhere in 
 N.T. in Bom. 4" and 1 Cor. 9^ though the converse order i xiptos "Ir/iroSs is 
 frequent in the epp. to the Thessalonians. 
 
I 1-3] NOTES 83 
 
 The use of the sing, airov in the 3rd verse is perhaps in favour of 
 the short form here. 
 
 3. »s irdvTa <i|iiv TTjs Betas 8«vA|iea>s outoO . . . 8e8(i>pt||i.Ivt|s,] The editors 
 differ as to whether this clause should be taken with what precedes or 
 what follows, WH. putting a comma, Ti. and Treg. a full stop at the 
 end of V. 2.^ It is in favour of the latter connexion that all other 
 epistolary salutations in the N.T. close with a full stop ; but Spitta 
 points out that this rule is not followed in Ignatius ad Philad. 1 and 
 other epistles, unless we are to put up with troublesome anacolutha, 
 and that there is the same irregularity in the beginning of the 3rd 
 and 8th of the pseudo-Platonic epistles. What then is the force of 
 this clause, if taken in connexion with what precedes ? It appears to 
 justify the assertion that ' grace is multiplied in and by the knowledge 
 of God,' on the ground that ' His divine power has given us all that 
 tends to life and godliness through the knowledge of Him who called 
 us.' Compare, for similar instances of the use of the gen. abs. with As, 
 2 Cor. 5^* vTrkp XpioToJ) irpeo-/8euo/i£v ois to? ©£oS TrapaKoA.oSi'ros Si ^/j,Siv, 
 Acts 27^" tZv vavrZiv j(aXa(To.vTij}v rrjv a-Ka^-qv . . , ■7rpo<f>d<Tei cos ex irpupas 
 dyKupas /xeWdvTwv CKTeivav, 1 Cor. 4'* <us /nij ipxa/J-fvov p-ov €<j>v(nut6r](ra.v 
 rive's, 1 Pet. 4^^ [/.r] ^m^ecr^e o)S itvov vjj.iv (rvfiPcdvovTO%. In all these cases 
 ms has a subjective effect indicating a feeling or point of view, whereas 
 here such a feeling has almost to be forced into the words, ' may grace 
 be given through the knowledge of God, inasmuch as (we believe that) 
 His divine power has given us all things through the knowledge of 
 Him who called us.' It is perhaps in favour of continuing the con- 
 struction into vv. 3 and 4, that airov is used to define Swdfiew^. If 
 the 3rd verse came after a full stop, we should rather have expected 
 8. 'Ir/croS. 
 
 On the other hand, if we connect this verse with what follows, as 
 is done by Kiihl, Keil, Weiss, Hundhausen, the subjective force of us 
 is apparent. ' Seeing that the divine power has supplied us with all 
 things needed for the attainment of the divine nature, give all diligence 
 for the acquirement of the necessary virtues and graces ' (w. 3-7). The 
 chief objection to this lies in the form of the apodosis, koI avro rovro 
 8e, on which see n. below. 
 
 Spitta, Weiss, and Nestle read to jravTa with X A Ti., preferring it 
 as the lectio difficilior, and explaining it as meaning ' die Gesamtheit 
 welche zu Leben und Frommigkeit dient.' This seems to me 
 very unnatural. I think the reading simply originated in a ditto- 
 graphia of the 1st syllable of ira-vra. Spitta further carries out 
 his idea of the opposition between the Apostles and the community 
 by insisting on the contrast between v^uv in v. 2 and r][u,v in v. 3. In 
 my opinion there is no opposition, the v/xeis of the former are included 
 in the ij/xtis of the latter. 
 
 TfjsOeCos Bwdneus o«Tov.] Of. 2 Macc. 3^* (of Heliodorus) 6 /utv 8ia 
 TW Oiiav ivipyeiav a<^(uvos ippiirro, Job 27^ (and elsewhere), ■m/cvp.a. Oiiov. 
 
 ' I do not understand Nestle's reading. He puts a full stop at the end of the 
 second and also of the fourth verse. 
 
 G 2 
 
84 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Besides this verse the adj. only occurs in the N.T. in v. 4 (where 
 see n.) and in Acts 17^' ovk 6<f)eiKofjLtv vo/jLi^eiv xP^"''? '"'^ ^"o" "i"*! 
 o/jLOLov. The phrase Oeia Svva/ui appears in the Carian inscription 
 quoted in the Appendix, dy<£A,/*oTa eVt^aveo-Taras irapexovra t^s fletas 
 Swa/t«<i)s apcTas, and is common in philosophic writings, e.g. Plato 
 Ion 534 c (the poets speak) Beta. Swdfiei, Legg. iii. 691 e, Arist. 
 Pol. vii. 4 Qiia.'i TovTO Bwdfiew; Ipyov, ^tk kw, roSe (rvvexei to irav, 
 Justin Apol. 1. 32, Clem. Al. Str. i. p. 376 -jfapltiiTai i] 'EAAijvtK-^ 
 dAijfea T^s Ktt^' ^ju.as xai /nyeOeL yvui(Te<iy<s Koi aTroSei^ec KVpioirepa. xai 
 fieta Svva/u(, ib. vii. p. 853. The addition of the gen. avrov does 
 not add to the perspicuity of the sentence, whether we accept 
 the longer or the shorter form of the salutation in v. 2. Without 
 airrov we .should naturally understand ij diia Svvaiws as equivalent to 
 ^ Tov ®£ov Svva[iK, but, as airov stands for tov ®£ov, we are obliged to 
 assign to 6eia a more general force, such as /teyoXoirpeir^s in v. 17. Cf. 
 Eus. c. Sierocl. 4 'Itjcrov? irXcious iirl tov ttJs 6eia% SiSaaKokiai Koyov 
 irpovTp&jiaTO, ib. p,vpia ir\rj6y] tin ttjv Oeiav iavTov SiSatTKoKiav ewayo/ievos, 
 ib. Beta Kol appijTio Bwdfifi tovs fiiv iiravuTTa/jLivov^ avTov rg 9eia SiSaaKoXta 
 paSuds fieruiiv, tov 8e iraycvra Kal irapahoBivTa Otiov Xoyov Kparuvtov, ovS' 
 <as ei<reTi Kal vvv Trjs ivdeov Swd/Jiews rijv dper^i' iTriSeiKwrai k.t.X.. If two 
 Persons are mentioned in v. 2, it would seem most natural to under- 
 stand avTov of the nearer, but Keil, de Wette, Bruckner, Wiesinger, 
 take it of the Father as the leading idea, while Dietlein supposes 
 it to refer to the Deity in general including the Son. There is a 
 similar difficulty as to tov KaXeo-avros, see n. below. 
 
 TO irpis l<»<|v Kal €v<repciav.] ' All that tends to, or is needed for, life 
 and godliness,' cf. Jud. 171° 'I wUl give thee thy victuals '(to Trpos 
 foi^v (TOv), Acts 281" .j,^ Trpos TrjV ^(puav, Lk. 19*^ to. Trpos Aprprqv crov, 
 Jos. Ant. prooem. 6 wotStv^ei/res to, irpos evcre/ieidv koI ttjv a\Xr)v 3xrK7]a-i.v 
 apiTYi^. Weiss explains ' es handelt sich um alles was dazu gehort um 
 in uns das durch die Wiedergeburt erzeugte wahre geistliche Leben, 
 dessen Hauptcharakterzug die evo-eySeia ist, zu erzeugen.' cvo-ejSi^s and 
 the cognate terms are found in the N.T. only in the Acts, in this epistle, 
 and in the pastoral epistles. In 1 Tim. 3^* Christ, the Incarnate, Risen 
 Lord, is spoken of as to t^s ewe^eias /ivorijptoi', ' the secret of piety.' 
 
 Se8(>)pi)|icvi]s.] See n. on Sutprj/jia James 1*'^. The only other passage, 
 besides this and the following verse, in which the word is found in the 
 N.T. is Mk. 15«. It occurs also in Gen. 302" SeScopi^Toi 6 ©eo's fioi 
 SS>pov KoXov, Prov. 4^ Stopov ayaBov Siopovfiai vp-iv. 
 
 Sia Tip liri7V(icr«(Bs toS KaX«iravTos 'Glials.] There is a considerable resem- 
 blance between this passage and Col. l^^ aiTov/xcvot tva irXi)puei)Tc ri\v 
 kjriyvanv toC OeXi^fiaTos avrov iv iraoTj (TOtfiia. koi trwitrei TTvevnaTueg . . . 
 iv ■jravTi €py<i> Kapiroi|)opovvT6s (see below v. 8 OVK aKopTroDs) Koi av$av6pevoi 
 T^ eiri-yvtSo-ei toO 0«o«' Iv irdo-ji SwdjiM Svva)iov)uvoi Kara to KpaTOs Ttjs 8o|i)S 
 aiToS, where we have C7rtynoo-i9 repeated as here, and the words 
 underlined correspond to words in our text. For KoXeVavTos see 
 below V. 10 aTrov8da-aT€ )8e/8otav Vfiaiv t^v kX-^o-iv iroifiarOai, and 
 cf. 2 Tim. 1' (0£o5) toC o-wo-ai'Tos ^/xas xai KoXco-avTOS kX^o'ci dyio oi 
 KOTO. TO. Ipya ij/ifiv dXXa kwt' ihiav -irpoBtcriv, 1 Pet. 1^^ Kara, tov 
 
I 3] NOTES 85 
 
 KoXecravTa. v/xas ayioi' kol avrol ayioi . . ytvqdrjre, ih. 2^ ottods Ta.% dpcTcis 
 i^ayyeikrjTe rov ix itkotovs v/iS.'s KoXeVavTOS ets to Oav/xaarrbv avTov 
 <^<os. The calling of the Christian seems to be generally ascribed 
 to God in the N.T. Here Spitta, with v. Soden, Beda, Cajetan, 
 Estius, etc., refers it to Christ, citing Mt. 9^^ ovk ^X$ov KaXeVai 
 SiKaiovs, 2 Clem. Rom. 9 tl Xpicrros 6 Kvpioi . . . iyevfro (rap^ koi 
 ouTws ?7/x.as eKoXco-Ev. In other passages of this epistle Christ is 
 mentioned as the object of eTrtyvoitris (P, 2^"). Cf also Herm. Sim. 14. 5 
 ei ovv iratra 17 ktiVis Sio. tov v'lov rov ®eo5 ^Sacrra^eTat, Tt So/cets roris 
 KeKXiy/teVous vn-' avToS; In any case the text seems to distinguish be- 
 tween the Possessor of the divine power, and the Caller, through the 
 knowledge of whom that divine power has granted to us all that 
 is necessary for life. The former we naturally identify with the 
 Father, the latter with the Son. See note on kAi^tois J. 2. 
 
 18£^ SoJt] Kal apcrg.] See Introduction on the Text. For the use of 
 tSios as a possessive pronoun, see Blass N.T.Gr. tr. p. 169, and Winer 
 tr. p. 191, of. Mt. 22^ airriKdov os fi-hf eis tov iSioi' aypov, os Sc eiri ttjv 
 i/nTTopiav avToC, below 2^^ im to lSlov i^ipa/ia compared with Prov. 26^^ 
 •eiri TOV lavTov e/jt-trov. Barn. V. 9 tovs ISCovs d7ro(TTo\ovs i^e\iiaTO. It 
 is found also in LXX. Job 2^1 wapiyivovro l/cao-Tos «« t^s iSt'as 
 X'opa's, Prov. 27^, Herm. Vis. i. 3. 4 6 ©eos . . . rrj l8Ca a-o<f>Lq. kol 
 irpovoCa KTLcra.^ rijv iKKXricriav. Plut. Mor. 237 D tous viovs Toirs tSiovs 
 atSeio-^at Trarepas, Chariton Aphr. iv. 6 I8im Seo-jroTjj ^aipeiv with 
 D'Orville's n. Cf. Phrynichus p. 441 Lob. 'to. ISia Trpdrrta' 01 
 TToWol Xiyovcriv, Stov ' ra i/xavrov TrpdrTia ' \4yeiv. The article is 
 frequently omitted, as in Acts IS^" AavetS ISia ya/tS. uTnypcTijo-as, Gal. 6* 
 Kaipw ISCio 6epurofji.ev (so Koipots iSiois 1 Tim. 2^ 6^^, Tit. 1*, as compared 
 with Polyb. i. 30. 10 ^prnftevoi tois 18/ois /caipois), 2 Tim. 1^ oi Kara. Tot 
 fpya Tinmv aXKh. Kara ISiav irp66€<riv. Tit. 2* SouAous iStots Seo-jroTats inro- 
 Taa-aeaOai and below 2^'' eXeyfiv £0-;(€V iSi'as irapai/o/itas. By Sola we are 
 probably to understand the manifestation of the Divine character, 
 which compels the veneration, the love, and the worship of men. It 
 is used of Christ below (v. 17), and in Joh. 1^* 6 Xdyos (rap^ eyevero 
 . . . Kal ideatrd/ieOa Tr/v So^av avTov, Soiav ms /J.ovoyevov's Trapa iraTpog, 
 which is explained immediately afterwards by saying that He was 
 TrXriprj^ xdpiTog Koi oKi^Oeiai. aper^ is perhaps the inner perfection or 
 excellence which is thus manifested. The only other passages in the 
 N.T. in which it occurs are 1 Pet. 2^ ottcos tois apera.'s i^ayytiKr/re tov ck 
 o-KOTov^ £/tas KaXecravTosP- where it is usually translated ' praises ' (in 
 accordance with its use in Thuc. i. 33 and in the LXX., cf. Hatch 
 Essays in Bihl. Gr. pp. 40, 41), below v. 5, where it seems to bear 
 the special sense of ' energy ' or ' courage,' and Phil. 4' oa-a iv^-qim, ei 
 Tis aperrj kol ei Tts eiratvo<;, ravTa Xoyl^earOe, where Lightfoot comments 
 ' some treat dpcTi; and tTraivos as comprehensive expressions, recapitu- 
 lating the previous subjects under two general heads, the intrinsic 
 character and the subjective estimation.' He himself prefers the 
 explanation ' whatever value may reside in your old heathen 
 
 ' See Hort's excellent note in p. 129 of his commentary. 
 
86 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 conception of virtue, whatever consideration is due to the praise of men.' 
 The fact that philosophical terms like diia <f>va-K are used in 2 Pet. leads 
 one to suppose that aperrj has its usual Greek meaning, as in Wisdom 
 8^, 4 Mace, l^f' 5' i'i8j where the cardinal virtues are recounted, of. 
 Justin M. Apol. ii. 2 to SiSaa-Kd\iov t^s Seias ape-nji, Clem. Al. p. 438 
 TTopaSeiy/to Otias operas, Eus. c. Hierocl. i -rg l&icf. Bcottjti koI apery 
 naa-av ta-oxre Tr]v o'lKoviievrjv. It was a debated question whether aperij 
 was to be ascribed to God, see my n. on Clem. Sir. vii. § 88. The 
 Stoics affirmed, against the Academics and Peripatetics, the identity of 
 divine and human virtue. For the phrase cf. Jos. Ant. 17. 5. 6 ive- 
 Trapoivei ry apery rov Otcov ' abused the goodness of Providence,' ib. 
 Prooem. 4. 11 ot pikv oXKol vo/wBerai rok p,v6oK iicucokovOrja-avres ru>v 
 avOpoiniviiiv afjuiprrj/jLaTiov cis rov's Beov^ rio \6yio rrjv auryyvyiv (jLeredtxrav 
 . . . 6 8e ■tip.erepoi vofio64rris, aKpai^vrj rrjV aperijv e)(Ovra rbv 0eov airo^yrp/a^, 
 wfiByj Sell/ Toirs avOpwwovi eKtivrji ireipacrBai fierakaSav, ib. i. 3. 8 (the 
 words of God to Noah after the Flood) ots e^PpiZ/tv tU rr^v ep.^v 
 evcri/Stiav Kol apcri^v, rovroK efejSiawavrd /xe ravnrpf avTOts imOeivai rr]V 
 BiKYiv. Philo Leg. Alleg. ii. 14 (M. 1. p. 75) speaks of t^v aptrrjv Koi 
 fTo^iav rov 0£o5 as rrfv p.rjripa, rutv cru/xiravTcov, Q. det. pot. § 44 (M. 1. 
 p. 222) t5v aperiov, -q /itv ®«oB Trpos aXTjBetdv eort . . . rj hi Mojutreus 
 (TKrjvri, ctu/x/SoXikSs ov(Ta apOputnov apery . . . p.ip.ypa koX a.rreiKovixTp.a t^s 
 OeCas eKiCvy?, ib. 1. p. 635 init. The meaning of the passage then will 
 be : Christ has called us, not through our seeking, but through the 
 attractive power of His own glory, i.e. through the revelation of His 
 own perfection. Wetstein quotes many examples of the combination 
 apery and Sofa, e.g. Plut. Mor. 535 {De Vit. Pudore) irfis ov irapunarai 
 Seivbv elvai ro ryi iSiaq So^tjs koi aperys a<j>eiSe'iv ; 
 
 4. 8i &v TO. rCfiia Kal [Uyurra ^|itv eiraYY^^H''''''''''' S£S<&pr|Tai.1 The verb may 
 be taken here in the middle sense, as before, with ©cos (understood from 
 T^s Oeuii Swa/xeojs aiToC) for the subject ; but the perf. of deponent verbs 
 frequently bears a passive sense, as in Clem. Al. Protr. p. 73 o5 /jLel^ov 
 ovSei' Ik ®eov SeSaipyrai, Paed. i. p. 133 KaivuXaw Kaivy Sui6yKy ScSwpijrat, 
 Str. iii. 1. 4 oTs rovro SeSwpyrai virb ®eov, and the article suits the subject. 
 For the combination of positive and superlative epithets, see Plato Pep. 
 450 E Trepl Ttov fj-eyiartiiv re Kal tfiCXiov, where H. Richards proposes to 
 read (jyikraraiv {C.B. vii. 349). He has supplied me with the following 
 exx. taken from Rehdantz's n. on Lycurgus 29, 8okeT hiKomrarov koI 
 Sy/xoriKov eXvai, Thuc. i. 1 eXTrwras p-iyav re eaecrOai, Kal a^ioXoryuyrarov rlov 
 ■7rpoyeyevyiJ.eviov, i. 84 iXevOepav Kal evBo^ordryv rroX-iv vep.6p.e6a, Xen. 
 Hell. V. 3. 17 evraKrovi koX evoTrkardrov^, Eur. Gycl. 315 Kop.\j/o^ yeinrja-ei 
 Kal XaXicrraTos, Plato Legg. 808 D etri^ovkov kol Bpip,v Kal v^purrorarov 
 BypiiDV, Plato Symp. 205 D o p,eyurro<; koI Bokepoi t/jcos ttovti, Xen. 
 Cyrop. ii. 4. 29 SwaTuroTcov koX rrpoOv/juov, Aesch. ii. 11 oOev &' ^yoC/iai 
 cratj)e<TTdrovi p,oi tous Xdyovs ecrecrOai koX yviopip.ov's vp.iv. In these 
 combinations the difficulty is greatest when the epithets are such as to 
 make it probable that they would vary in the same degree, as here 
 Ti/nio and p.eyia-Ta, and when the superlative comes first, so as to 
 produce an anti-climax. These considerations are in favour of B.'s 
 reading here. Wetstein quotes two examples of the combination 
 
I 3, 4] NOTES 87 
 
 fisyia-To, Kol Ti/xi<i)TaTa which might suggest reading TifuurraTa here. 
 The forms e7rayyeA./ia and eVayyeXia are both classical ; the latter alone 
 is found in biblical Gr., excepting this verse and S^^ below. 
 
 Three explanations of 8i' S>v have been given. Spitta would under- 
 stand them of rjiuv in vv. 1 and 3 {i.e. the Apostles, according to his 
 view) : he then reads to. /Aeyio-ra koX ri/jt-ia ^/xtv iiray/dX-fiara < v/jliv > 
 StStaprirai, ' through whom He has granted to you the promised blessings 
 which are so great and precious to us.' The 2nd view is that St' S>v 
 refers to irav-ra TO. irpo's t,<iyqv KoX evcrej3eiav : SO Keil, Schott, and 
 Hofmann, ' Wie die Erkenntnis Gottes das Mittel ist, durch welches 
 uns alles zum Leben u. zur Gottseligkeit Dienende geschenkt ist, so ist 
 letzteres das Mittel, wodurch uns kostliche u. grosse Verheissungen 
 geschenkt werden.' Against both of these explanations it has to be 
 said that the reference is too distant, and against the second that the 
 promises are not conveyed to us by to. wpos C^W ^^^ ^"^^ included in 
 them. The 3rd view (held by Kiihl, Dietlein, Wiesinger, Briiekner) 
 is far the simplest, connecting the relative 8i' £v with the imme- 
 diately preceding JSt'oi 8o'^ koi apery, ' through the glory and goodness 
 of Christ God has given to us His most precious promises,' i.e. 
 what has been revealed to us in the character of the Incarnate 
 Son is the greatest of all promises, cf. 1 Joh. 3^'^. For the 
 contents of the eirayyeX/iara see below 3^^ I should prefer how- 
 ever to read v/itv with a 68 syr''., instead of ^//iv, on account of the 
 following yivqcrde. See Lightfoot (Philemon 6) on the confusion 
 between the 1st and 2nd persons ' though vplv has somewhat better 
 support, we seem to be justified in reading fiplv as being much more 
 expressive. In such cases the MSS. are of no great authority.' So 
 here the preceding fifiMs would easily lead to iiplv being written for vpHv. 
 tva SuL ToiiTwv -y^viiaBe 9eCos Koivwvol if>vo-ca)s.] The reference in Stct toi5- 
 Tuv is to eVay7«A./xaTa (as Dietlein, Wiesinger, Schott, Keil, Kiihl, 
 Weiss), not to ra irpos ifo-qv (as de Wette, Hofmann, Spitta), nor to 
 Sofg Ka\ aper^ (as Bengel). Our nature is changed to divine by the 
 moral power of hope and faith kindled in us by the promises. The 
 phrase 9«£a i|>4o-is is Platonic, see Gritias 120 d-121 A/ie^pt inp fj tov diov 
 <f)V(Ti^ auTOis k^pKCi . . . <l>v<7fu>'S fletas irapafievova-i^s iravT avTOi's rjiii^dri, 
 Rep. 366 C diia <f>v<r€i Srvcr\tpatvu>v to aSiKciv, Legg. iii. 691 (fivaris Tis 
 avOpioTrivri p,ep.iyp.evq Otia tivX Swd/ici, Phaedr. 230 A Beiai Kol dru^ou 
 fioCpai ff>v(Tei iJi.eri\ov, 253 A ifftaTTTOfifvoi Oeov ry I'-vrip.'g ef iKeivnv 
 \ap.pd.vov(ri to. idrj KaO' o<rov Swarbv Otov dvOpioTria ixeraa-yftiv. Rep. vi. 
 500c, Protag. 322 A 6 dvOpunroi Beiai ju,eTecrx« fioipas. It is found 
 also in Xen. Sell. vii. 1 . 2 Sokci raSra ovk dv^poiTrivij /xaWov r] Bclo. (jtvcru 
 KoX Tvxn BiiDpia-Bai, so Aristotle Part. Anim. iv. 10, Epicurus ap. Diog. 
 L. x. 97, 113, Seneca Epist. 92. 30 homo Dei pars est, Epict. Diss. ii. 
 19. 27 6iov ei dvGpiinrov iiridvfiovvTa yevevOai koi . . . irepi t^s wpos tov 
 Ai'a Koivwvtas ^ov\.tv6p.ivov. It will be noticed that in these passages 
 the participation of the divine nature is spoken of sometimes as 
 innate, sometimes as attained by effort (as in Arist Uth. x. 7. 8 c^' 
 oaov ivSixerai dOavaTi^iiv). The same idea occurs in slightly altered 
 form in Heb. 3^* /leroxoi tov XpioToS ycydva/xev, 6* jueroxovs yei'jj^en-os 
 
88 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 wvivfiaroi ayiov, 121" ^jj ^^ [leraXa^tiv t^s ayiomjTOi avTov, 1 Joh. 1^, 
 1] KOivavia ^ rifteripa /icra rov iraTpoq Koi fiera tov dioS avTov 'I.X., 
 1 P. 51 o Kal TTJi iieWovffrj'S airoKaXviTTecrOai So^s kolvwvo^, 2 Oor. 3^^ 
 rrjv oo$av Kvpiov KaTOTrTpi^o/xtvoi T-qv avrrjv exKova iJXTaiJ,op^ovp.e6a airo 
 Sd^s ets Sdfav. The phrase or its eqtlivalent also occurs in Apoc. 
 Petri op. Method. Symp. ii. 6 17 fiaKapia. ixeivr] ^vcrts tov 0eoB, Jos. c. 
 Ap. 26 'A/i£vu^Et Betas SoKOvvri, ii.eTiar)(r]Kiva.i (jsva-ews, Philo M. 2. p. 
 329 ij ajx.era,p\-qTO% koX //.aicapios Kai rpurevSaCiJimv Oeia ejjva-is, ib- p. 343 
 7] pxiKapia @e.ov tjiva-i'S, ib. M. 1. p. 5l ou yap &v eireToXfii^a-e toctovtov 
 avaopaixiiv o av6pu>mvoi vovs ftis a.VTikaLJBi(rBa,i ®eov ^vaetas ct fir] avros 6 
 ®£os av€(nra(rev avtov irpos eavTov, ib. 647 ocroi Xoyiierjs KeKOLv^Kacri (jjvcremg, 
 and in many of the Fathers, e.g. Iren. iv. 20^ f-eroxri ®eov ia-rlv to yivwa-Keiv 
 @eov Kai wTToKaveiv Trj'S 'xprja-TOTiqTos avTov, Clem. Al. p. 471 17 8e -^fierepa 
 Inverts ifiTradrjs oiicra iyKpaTeiai SetTai, 81' ^s avveyyi^nv Trctparai rg ^eta 
 (f>va^el, Euseb. c. Hieroel. 6 Oeiav p.\v tjuvaiv, euepyeriv oStrai' xat cnoTtipav Kal 
 Trpovorr)TiKr]v T%v ovTtov, avBpwiroK ttote es o/ii\iai' eA^cTv oiScls av airupyoi 
 \dyps, 16. 7 ^ yap ouk droTralTaTov . . . Bclav (fivinv avOpanrois i-7ri\a,fi\l/a(rav 
 {i.e. on ApoUonius) ctkotioV ttov kol p.iwv66.hiov airoT«A.«iv, ov)(l SI 
 es aiSva T^i/ aperrjv iirihuKwcrOai. i Quotations will be found from 
 Origen, Hilary, Athanasius, Jerome, and others in Hundhausen's 
 n. on this verse. The phrase is profusely used by Greg. Nyss., 
 of. Anim. et Besurr. 224 a cTreiSav ^ ^'"XJl TavTa rot iroiKt'A.a t^s 
 ijivo'etii'; aTTOCTKeuatra/iCKi; Kii'ijfiaTa dfoeiSrj'S yivrjTai , . . Tr]V -uirepe^^ouo-av 
 p,ip.£iTai ^on^v, To2s (Sudjuao'i t^s ^et'as ffivaetoi c/i/iop^ni^eio-a, 228 D ^ 
 6e£a <^u(ns 17 Trijy^ wda-rji ia-Ti Trjs dpcr^s, Catech. 46 D, 48 B, 51 B, 
 52 A, 54 D, etc. The same idea receives a stronger and more 
 startling expression in the OeoTroCrjo-is of Athanasius and other 
 Fathers, see Westcott on the epistles of St. John p. 319 and my note 
 on Clem. Al. Sir. vii. § 3 ia-op-evia Oea. 
 
 airo<j>v7ovrEs Tijs Iv t^ Kovfja h linSv)i,C(^ i|>6apas.] The negative prepara- 
 tion for the positive glorification, as in James P^ a-rroOififvoi pvirapiav 
 Se^airde tov \6yov, cf. Plat. Theaet. 176a tjavyii {ivdevSe iKeure) 
 6p.ouDo-(5 6£(o Kara to SwaTov. The ace. is commonly used after 
 airo<j>tvy<i>, as below 2^^' ^''. In fact this is the only recorded instance 
 of the gen. with this verb. Winer (p. 532) mentions other com- 
 pounds of oTrd, airaXXoTpiovv (Eph. 2^^. 4^^), atftlcTTaarOai (1 Tim. 4^), 
 which have the same construction. To these may be added dTro- 
 SiSpacrKO) Philo Alleg. p. 90, airoKpvirrea'Oaj. ib. p. 88, aTroriiweiv, airo- 
 PaCviiv, aTTokveiv. The gen. whether with or without a preposition 
 serves to intensify the danger which has been escaped, cf. Mt. 3'^ 
 ijivyiiv dir' dpyjjs, 1 Cor. 10^*. Sometimes the simple <^Euy(a takes the 
 gen., as in Soph. Phil, 1034 rrji voo'ov Tretftevyevai like ire^uyoScurai 
 Tuv Oiiov xopov Philo i. p. 88. On the word <f)OopoL see Appendix. It 
 is here defined by iv iirtSviiiq., ' the corruption caused by, consisting in, 
 lust ' ;' and then its environment is stated to be the world, on which 
 see James 4* with the notes in my ed. pp. 218 f. Also compare 
 Rom. 8^1 avTT] ■fj KTL(TK iX.ev6epti}6i^a-tTai aTro t^s SovXeias r^s <j>Bopa.s eis 
 Ty)v ikivOepiav t^s So^Tji Tutv TtKVbyv rov ®eov. Gal. 6' o aireipmv eis ttjv 
 crdpKa . . . 6epia-ei <f)$opdv, 6 8e crir€ip(i>v ets to irvev/ui . . . ^xa^v alwviov. 
 
I 4, 5] NOTES 89 
 
 The author is fond of these compact articular phrases, see 2^ 
 below. 
 
 5. Kol ouTo TOVTO U.] Sco for Ktti Si 2 Tim. S^^ koI iravre? 8e ot Sc'Xovres 
 ^^v, 1 Tim. 31" Kttt oStoi Se SoKi/jLa^ia-Ocnirav, Rom. IP^ KaKeivot Se . . . 
 €VK£VTp«rfl^(rovTai, Mt. lO's, 1618, joh. 6", 8i«' ", Acts 32*, 22^^ 
 Heb. 921, 1 Joh. P Kttt ij Kotvtovi'a 8e with Wescott's n., and Madvig 
 Gr. Gr. § 185. 2, 'By annexing a Se to /cai the new member 
 acquires prominence as a special corroboration and enlargement of 
 the preceding (and too, and also).' For classical examples cf. 
 Prom. 972 ^\i8oivTas olSe toiis e/tovs eyo) £)(6pov? i8ot/tf Kai (Tc 8' iv 
 TovTots XeytiJ, Xen. Cyrop. i. 1. 2 otp^^ovres /acv citrt Kai 01 jSovkoXoi 
 Toiv /8ou)i' . . . Ktti TravTes 8e 01 KaXovjuEi^oi vofiets. In all these cases 
 8c has its ordinary connective use : here (if we suppose the con- 
 struction continued after ^dopas) it would be used in apodosi, as in 
 1 Cor. 1^2. 23^ eir£t8^ 'lovSaioi cnj/XEta otToBcrtv . . . ij/ieis 8c Kqpv<f(Toix,af, 
 1 Cor. 2^'l*' a 6<j)€a\iJ,bi ovK cISev . . . fj/jiiv Se dTrcKaA.-ui^o' o ©cos 
 according to AKord's interpretation, and B in 1 Pet. 4^8 d 6 Swcaios 
 fioXii (Tia^erai,, 6 8e d(rcj8^s irov Kfrnveirai ; I cannot however believe 
 •that any writer would have introduced the apodosis by this cumbrous 
 and awkward phrase. If we wish to begin the apodosis with this verse, 
 we must read Kar auro with Blass (JV. T. Gr. p. 171 n.) for Kai avro. 
 
 For the advprbial use of airo toSto see Kiihner's Gr. Gr. 
 vol. ii. p. 267, Plato Protag. 310 E avra ravra kol vvv ^koj irapd. ere, 
 Xen. Anab. i. 9. 21 airrb tovto ovnep li/cKa <j)L\oiV ucto SeT<r5at, ws 
 OTJVcpyoirs cp(ot, Kai avTos cTreipoTo erwcpyos tois <^i\oi<s eivai oh id ipsum 
 propter quod opus sibi esse existimabat amicis ut adiutores fiaberet, 
 ipse amicis adiumento esse condbatur, Euseb. c. Hierocl. b fin. avrd tc 
 TOVTO yoTji avTL <l>i\o(r6(f)ov >^u>pa.6r)<Terai. What then is the exact 
 reference of the phrase in this place ? It has just been said ' God has 
 given you precious promises in order that through them you may 
 become partakers of the divine nature.' The writer continues ' Aye, 
 and for this very reason, viz. because it is God's will, do you do your 
 part in order that the divine will may be carried out'. 
 
 <nrovSf|v irao-av iropeio-cve'^KOVTcs 4mj;opT)Yii<raT«.] The irapd and «ri serve 
 to show the subordinate nature of human effort (along with and in 
 addition to the grace of God) in giving effect to the Sa>pr]p.a twice 
 mentioned above. The word irapeurtfiipeiv is used by Demosthenes 
 (Lept. 88, 89, 99, 137) of moving an amendment to an existing law. 
 It is also used of smuggling, importing through by-ways, also of 
 heretics introducing unmeaning phrases Kcvoi^ajvias dvo/iora Epiphan. 
 Haer. xxvi. 1, and 16, also Index 11 p.vBoKoyia's irapctcri^epovTcs. Cf. 
 TTapuaaym below 2^. 
 
 The phrase e'ur^ipopuu o-wouSijv is very common in later Greek, see 
 Polyb. xxii. 12. 12, Diod. i. 83 01 S' o;^A.ot irao-av el<Te<ft€povTO (nrovSrjv, 
 ib. 84, xviii. 34, xvi. 3 tjuXoTi/jiiay €l<Ttj>tp6f».evoi, Jos. Ant. xx. 9. 2 iraxrav 
 eiu-YjviyKaTo crirovSriv koi irpovomv, and the Inscription quoted in the 
 Appendix. The prefixing of Trapd alters the sense as in irapepyov, 
 irapdwfitjioi, irapamos, TrapaTrpdcrcriii, irapa/SXairTco, irapafj}6iyyo/Ji.ai, 
 irapaxl/dWm, TrapaSpdio, ■TrapaSwaartvu), etc. The meaning is well 
 
90 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 expressed by Aug. De Fecc. Meritis, ii. 5, quoted by Hundhausen 
 ' nee ideo tantum soils de hac re votis agendum est, ut non suhin- 
 ^eratur adnitendo etiam nostrae efficacia voluntatis.' 
 
 4irixopT]7^i(raT6.] ('supply,' 'provide'). Used twice in 2 P., viz. here 
 and in l^^ TrXoucruos lTrL)(pprfYrj6'^<reTai f) eicroSos, and thrice by St. Paul 
 in 2 Cor. 9^" 6 iiri.)(opijya>v crirep/w, t^ (nreCpovTi koI apTov cis fipSicnv 
 Xoprjyi^crei, Gal. 3^ 6 eiri^optfySn/ vfuv to irvevfjui, Col. 2^* irSv to aZfjLa 8ta 
 tS)v . . . a-mSea-fiiav i'Trixoprjyovp.evov. The simple verb means literally 
 to be a xopryyos, i.e. (in its first sense) one who leads the chorus, (in its 
 second sense) one who defrays the cost of the chorus, and then, 
 generally, one who supplies the costs for any purpose. Hence the 
 verb is used absolutely, as in Xen. Mem. iii. 4. 3 ocraKis ' AvTurOevrjg 
 Ke\opriy7]Ke, Tracri rois ^opots veviKqKi, Plut. Mor, 13 E i<jiei(rto irori, dAAo 
 Kox •j(opriYf\<Tov ('spend'), Antiph. p. 117 Xa/xirpus ypprf^wv ; in the 
 passive Xen. £esp. Ath. i. 13 ^oprjyovo'i /tcv ol irXoutrioi, xopT^yeiTai 8' o 
 Srjixoi : sometimes it has for direct object the person benefited as in 
 Polyb. iii. 78. 8 (the Celtic population) Sai/rtX&s e^opij-yet to a-TpaToTreSov 
 Tois iiTLTrjSeiois, ib. 49. 11 (TiTia koX rots aK\oi<s RrmjSeiois a.<j)66vm% 
 ey(opi^yi/]<re to xTTpaToTreSov ; sometimes the assistance given, as in 
 Died. ii. 35 ^opij-yoCo-a ras rpoc^as d^fldvus, and similarly in 2 Cor. 9i* 
 just quoted, and in 1 P. i'-'- <us If to-^iJos ^s xoprjyii 6 ©cos. The com- 
 pound is found once in the LXX. (Sir. 25^'-) yvvrj kav eirixopijyij (if she 
 supports) T& dj/Spi avTri<s (is a cause of shame) ; the simple verb is more 
 common, e.g. in 1 K. 4'^ xoprjyctv tw ySao-iXet, 1 Mace. 14'" raw Troketriv 
 exop'^yrjcre PpmfiaTa. It is frequently used by classical writers in the 
 same wide sense, e.g. in Aristotle's definition of the cvSai/twv (Eth. i. 
 10. 13) Tois EKTos aya6oL<s ixai/Gs K£;)(opi7yi7/xEi/os, Dio. Chr. vol. i. p. 52 
 (Teubner) ^Xios x°PVy^^ """^ KaWurTov opaftATiov, <jiu>?. The rarer compound 
 occurs in Dionys. Hal. {Ep. ad Pomp. 1) tos oTJi'Td^cis iinxoprjyovvTos 
 (TOL Z^j/ciivos, Strabo xi. 14. 16 i^ einropiav oIkiov tirt^^opijyou/iti'at, Diog. 
 L. V. 67 irXiiaTa iTrexoprjyovv uvtS, Aristid. D. ii. p. 194. 9, i. Clem. R. 
 38 6 ttXovo-ios iirixopriyeiTO) tw irT<i)x<3, ib. eVepds etrTiv o lirtxopi)7MV avra 
 T<|v lYKpAreiav, Theoph. .4m<oZ. 73 b, where eirC seems to have an ac- 
 cumulative force, ' to add further supplies,' ' to provide more than was 
 expected or could be demanded.' 
 
 tv TJ xto-Tti T^v dper<iv.] Faith is the foundation of a series of seven 
 virtues, each of which is apparently described as rooted in the pre- 
 ceding. We have similar lists in Rom. 5''' ^ dXii/ris vtto/xov^i' Karepyd- 
 t,eTai, 7j Se vTro/tov^ hoKifir/v, r) 8e SoKL/xri ikmSa, ^ 8e cXirls ov KaTaia-xwei, 
 which is itself an expansion of James P'' to SokC/uov v[iS>v tJjs iri'o-Tcois 
 KaTtpyd^crai iJiro/iov^v rj 8e v'tto/xovt) Ipyov TeXeiov e)(«T(o iva ijTe TeXetot. 
 Blass (TV. T. Gr. p. 301) adds the following examples of this 'kind of 
 climax which consists in each clause taking up and repeating the 
 principal word of the preceding clause,' Rom. 8^^'- o6s Trpocyvw, koX 
 irpoutpurev . . . ous St irpoiopurev, tovtovs koi eKoXtaiv koI ovs tKoXea-ev, 
 TOVTovi Koi iSiKaimirev ovs 8e fSiKaimtrev, tovtov; koL iBoiaa-ev, ib. 10^*, 
 Herm. Mand. v. 2. 4 tx t^s dc^poo-u'viys ylverai iriKpia, Ik 8« t^s Jri/cpias 
 ^v/Aos, eV 8c ToC ^D/AoS opy^, cK 8e riys dpy^s jii^vis. Cicero uses gradatio 
 'to express the Gr. KXtfiai. Examples are given in the Ad Serenn. 
 
I 5] NOTES 91 
 
 iv. 25 e.g. ' Africano industria virtutem, virtus gloriam, gloria aemulos 
 comparavit.' 
 
 The list here agrees with the ordinary description of Christian 
 growth in so far as it begins with irL(TTi.^ and ends with ayd-nt], inter- 
 mediate between which comes yvoitris according to Clem. Al. Str. vii. 
 §§ 46, 55 f. We will consider the other steps as they are brought 
 before us. Since faith is the root of the Christian life (Eph. 2^ ;^aptTt 
 lorre arecrwa-ixevoi 8ia TritrTetus), the other virtues may be said to be con- 
 tained in it. It is not quite so clear that each of the series is in like 
 manner dependent on that which immediately precedes, though this 
 would suit 1, 2, and 7. Possibly the writer may have used iv as the 
 connecting link in his climax without considering whether it retained 
 its full force in each case; or he may have intended to mark, not 
 the addition of a distinct virtue, but the infusion of a new quality 
 in the preceding virtue, which would suit 5 and 6 ; or again he may 
 have had in his mind the poetic use of ev 8e (perhaps derived from the 
 repeated iv Se used in describing the successive compartments of the 
 Homeric shield in II. xviii.) to express addition, as in Soph. Oed. C. 55, 
 Track. 206. Other lists of virtues and graces will be found in 
 Gal. 5^^ *• 6 8e Kopiros tov TrvcvjUOTOs ctrnv d-ydirT|, x<*P"' ^'■PV^Vi fCKpoOvfua, 
 XpijoTonjs, ayaOiaiTvvr], ttCo-tis, irpavTYi?, lYKpareia, 2 Cor. 6* ■ (where 
 S. Paul appeals to his sufferings and the spirit in which they were- 
 borne) ev iTrojiovfj ■r-oW.'^ . . . iv ayvorriTi, iv 7v<6<r«i, iv [/.aKpoOvfua, iv 
 XP'Jo-TOTTjTi, iv TTvevfj.aTL ayito, ev ayiirtj avviroKpiTia k.t.X., 1 Tim. 6^^ SiWe 
 SiKaiocrvvrpf, eiiripaixv, irCoTiv, d^Airriv, iitofi.ovfiv, irpamraOiav, Apoc. 2^* 
 oTSa tTov ra tpya, koi T'^v aYdirtiv, Koi rrjv irCo-Tiv, (cat Tr/v SiaKOviav, koL 
 TTiv imof.ovi\v crov, where the words which occur in our list are in thick 
 type. It will be noticed that aydirrj occurs in all the four lists, ttio-tis 
 in three, virofiovq in three. It is just these three which are chosen for 
 mention in 1 Th. P and 2 Th. l^' *, where vTroiiovr] iKitlSos takes the 
 place of the single IA.irts in 1 Cor. 13^^. In none of the longer 
 biblical catalogues, whether of virtues or vices, does the arrangement 
 seem to rest on any more distinct principle than that in our text. We 
 may compare also Hermas Vis. iii. 8 (explaining the vision of the Seven 
 Virgins) Kparovvrai Se inr' aXXi^ktav ai Svvdfiei^ avTutv koX aKo\ov6ov(nv 
 aXXijXaK, KaOloi /cat yeyewrj/iivai cttrtv. €k T-qs nCcrrsuis yevvarai 'E-yKpctrciar 
 eK rij's 'EyicpaTeias 'A7rX(m;s, iK Trji AttXotjjtos AKaicia, iK Trjs 'Axa/cias 
 Se/iVOTTjs, £K Trj's 'S,eixvoTr)TO<i "Ettutttq/ii], iK rrjs EirurTrjfii^s 'Aydiri], 
 which is perhaps modelled on this passage ; Barn. ii. t^s ovv iriarecas 
 ■^fiaiv eicrlv ^mjOoi ijioPo^ koX iirojiovVj, rot 8e aviJLii.ay(pvvTa fifuv /xaKpoBv/iCa 
 Koi e-yxpoLTeia* Tovrwv /ttcvovTUV ra Trpos Kvptof dyvG)^, crvvev<l>paivovTa.i avrotf 
 iTO^ia, <TVve(TK, iiruTTTjiJLTj, yvuo-is. In i. Clem. R. 1 Trtcms, ercrejSeto, 
 yvSxris are found together, and in 62 we have ircpl yap ■Kla-r&as koc 
 /jteravoia's koI yvrjcrla^ aYOirijs Kat EyKpaTECas /cat cr<a<j)po(rvvr]'s Kai viroiiovils 
 Trdvra tvttov ixjirjXa^-qo'aix.f.v. 
 
 optT^jv.] 'Moral energy.' Strenuus animae tonus et vigor Bengel, 
 equivalent to 1 Pet. 1^^ dva^(fl«ra/*ei'ot ras ocr^vas Trjs Stavotas vjjbwv. It is 
 found in this sense in 2 Mace. 6^^ tov iavTov Odvarov vTroSeiyfia yevvaio- 
 njTos Kat ix.vr)ix6<Tvvov dpcr^s /careAtTrtv, 4 Mc. 9^^^ 121* 1712^ piut;_ j/j,^^ 
 
92 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 169 C apenj's eXirts 6 ©cos iarriv, ov SeiXCa? Trpotfiacri's. Since it is here 
 simply one in a series of virtues, this seems better than to take it in 
 the more general sense of virtue, as in 2 Mace. 15^\ 3 Mace. 6^, 
 Wisd. 4}, in which ease it would answer to the epya of James 2^® 
 •jrtcrTts x<opli tS>v Ipyun' veKpd i(TTi, ef. 1 Joh. 5*', ^. 
 
 ev 8^ TJ dpETJ Ti)v •yvficriv.] This agrees with Joh. 7^^ idv tis ^eXj; to 
 dtkiffia avTov ttokTv, yvaureTai. irepl t^s 8t8a;^s, only that the object of 
 -yi/5<ris is not here limited to doctrine. It agrees ako with the rela- 
 tion between moral and intellectual virtues in the systems of Plato 
 and Aristotle. 
 
 6. 4v 8i T^ Tviio-ei t^ lYKpdTcuxv.] The Seventh book of the Ethics 
 contains a graduated scale of good and evil states in reference to our 
 power of resisting temptation. The highest is (rta<j>poarvvri, where 
 passion is entirely subject to reason, the lowest dKoXao-ui, where resison 
 is entirely subject to passion. Between these come iyKpireia 'self- 
 control ' or ' continence ' where reason wins the day against resisting 
 passion, and dKpaaia ' incontinence ' where passion prevails in spite of 
 the resistance of reason. It is of course true that knowledge 
 strengthens the motives to self-control, but it is equally true that hope 
 or fear or simple submission to authority may induce a habit of self- 
 control, in which case the converse holds good &cfie\ios yvcoo-cws ■^ 
 roiavTtj cyKpdreux (Clem. Al. Sir. vii. p. 874), and again BffUKios aperq<s 
 ■tf iyKpareia {ib. Str. ii. p. 484) ; cf. also Str. iii. p. 538. It closes the list 
 of the fruits of the Spirit in Gal. 5^, cf. 1 Cor. 9^ xas 6 aywvL^op.evo'i 
 iravTa eyKpareverai, ib. 7* el he ovk eyKpwrevovTai, yafit^trdTiiKrav, Gen 43''l 
 (of Joseph restraining his tears) iieX.$i>v iveKpareva-aTo. It was one of 
 the topics of Paul's aiddress before Felix. 
 
 4v tJ ^KparcCa t^v iiro|iov^v.] For mo/xovq see my note on James P. 
 It corresponds to the Aristotelian Kaprepia, which is distinguished from 
 iyKpareui in Magn. Mot. ii. 6. 34 ij pxv iyKpdreid ea-ri irepl riSovas koI o 
 iyKparrj's o Kparmv tSv ■^Sovlav, rj 8c Kaprepia Trepl Xviras' o yap Kaprepiov xat 
 {mofievuiv ras Xviras, ovros KaprepiKoi eoTiv. The cognate verb is used of 
 Moses (Heb. 1 1^'^) tov yap aoparov ais op&v eKapTepr](rev. 
 
 Iv Si rfi {nro|iovti ripf cicrepcuiv.] The martyr in 4 Mace. 5^ ^ com- 
 bines virofunni, eva-e^eia, and <j>i\ti} eyxpdreta. No doubt cvcrc/Scia here, 
 as in V. 3, is in tacit opposition to the darePei's against whom a large 
 part of the epistle is directed. Its action may be illustrated by the 
 case of Moses just referred to. It was no callous insensibility, no 
 feeling of pride which supported him, but the sight of the Invisible. 
 
 7. Iv 8i TTJ cvo-cpcCf -rip/ ^(\a8cXif>Cav, 4v 8i tiq i|>iXaSEX<fiC^ Tf|v oyAiniv.] Cf. 
 1 Joh. 4^" idv T« eiTTri on 'AyairS tov ®e6v, kol rbv a8eX.<f>ov aurov /ttitrg, 
 ij/evcTTrji icTTiv and Westcott's n. on 1 Joh. 2' ' Brethren are those who 
 are united together in Christ to God as their Father ' (Joh. 20", 21®, 
 Matt. 1250). ^iXaBekijiU (1 Th. 4», Rom. 12io, Heb. 13i, 1 Pet. l*^, where 
 see Hort, 3^) leads up to dyaTn). Cf. 1 Th. 3^2 v'/tSs 6 Kwptos irXcovaorat 
 KOI ■irepura'ev<rai rg aydwg eU oAAijXous icai eh ■n-dvra's. The R.V. ' in your 
 love of the brethren, love ' is surely most unfortunate. It implies 
 that the word Ay<£7n; is repeated in the original, and gives an extremely 
 harsh and most un-English, if not an illogical and unmeaning phrase. 
 
I 5-8] NOTES 93 
 
 The ' brotherly kindness ' of the A. V. may not be an exact equivalent 
 of the untranslatable <f>iXaB£X.<f>ia, but it might easily be explained by 
 a marginal note. In profane Greek (including Josephus Ant. iv. 2. 4 
 where Moses' feeling for Aaron is called (jjiXaSeXipia) <j>iXd.8eX<l>o^ and 
 (^iXaSeX^ia are only used literally of the affection between actual 
 brothers. Among the Israelites patriotism was so strong that they 
 regarded one another as brothers (see my note on James 1^) and 
 thus (^iA.aSc\^o9 is found with a wider meaning in 2 Mace. IS^* (spoken 
 of the prophet Jeremiah) 6 <j>i\<xStXff>oi ovtos Scttiv o iroWa Trpoa-ev^o- 
 [i.ivos irept Tov kaov. The noun (ftiXcSeXijiCa occurs twice in Clem. R. 47 
 ■fj TTcpi^SdijTos tji- and 48 ^ cnfLvi) t'^s <^. rjuStv dyv^ ayioyri. Wetstein 
 quotes Themist. vi. 76 to the same effect as Pope's ' God loves from 
 whole to parts, the human soul Must rise from individual to the whole,' 
 (f>iXaStX(j)La wcrirep a.p\T] Koi (rToixelov t^s irpos airavTa^ avdpunrov^ evvoiai 
 . . . CTreTai T<a ^lAaSeX^u filv 6 ijuXoiKcios, ru (jiiXoiKeiia Se 6 <jiiX67raTpK^ 
 TO ^iXoirarpiSt Se 6 <l>iXdv9poiTroi. We may compare Plato's famous, 
 description of the development of cpws {Symp. 210). 
 
 The relation between the seven virtues may be thus stated. Paith 
 is the gift of God already received; to this must be added (1) Moral 
 Strength which enables a man to do what he knows to be right ; 
 (2) Spiritual discernment; (3) Self-control by which a man resists, 
 temptation ; (4) Endurance by which he bears up under persecution or 
 adversity ^ ; (5) right feeling and behaviour towards God, (6) towarda 
 the brethren, (7) towards all. 
 
 8. TaBra vap ijitv iirdpxovra Kol irXtovAWTO.] ' The possession of these 
 qualities and their continued increase.' irXeovdifa in classical writers is 
 a term of disparagement, implying excess, to be, or to have, more thaa 
 enough, to exaggerate. In the N.T. (except in 2 Cor. 8^* 6 to ttoXv- 
 {(TvXXeias) ovK iirXeovaaa', xal 6 to oXiyov ovk rjXaTTovija-iv, which is a 
 quotation from Exod. 16^^) it is eulogistic, implying increase or 
 abundance of what is good, as in 2 Cor. 4^* tva ij X^'P'* TrXeovda-acra Sia, 
 Tuiv irXaovwv Tr/v iV)(api<TTLav Trfpur<rtvcrrj eh rr/v So^av tov ®eov ' grace 
 being multiplied through the more {i.e. through the increase in the 
 number of the disciples) may cause the thanksgiving to abound unto> 
 the glory of God,' Phil. 4^^ eTi^iyrS tov Kaptrov tov irXeovdtpvTa el's Xoyov 
 vixStv 'I long for the fruit that increaseth to your credit,' 2 Th. 1* 
 virepavidvei -q iricTTis vfiS>v Kol irXeovd^ei r) aydirr) cvos eKaiTTOv irdvTiov 
 vfi.S>v €is d\Xi}A.oDs ' your faith groweth exceedingly and the love 
 of each one of you all toward one another aboundeth,' Rom. b^^ 
 vouoi TrapeuTijXOei' tva TrXeovdarj to ■n-apdirTiap.a,, ov Se eirXeovaa^ev ff 
 ap-apTia inrepeTrepiaa-evcrev fj x"P" ''"'hei'e sin abounded, grace did 
 abound more exceedingly.' In the only other passage of the N.T. in 
 which the verb occurs (1 Th. 3^2) it has a transitive force vp.a,<s Se 6 
 Kvpios TrXeovdo'ai (' make you to increase ') koi •n-epicro'evtrai Ty dydirrj. It 
 will have been noticed how often the verb Trepio-a-evio is joined with 
 TrXeovd^ta in these passages. There is indeed a remarkable similarity 
 
 1 We might have expected that (3) and (4) would be immediately subordinate: 
 to (1), preceding yvSais. 
 
94 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 between them both in their uses and in their history. The prevailing 
 classical use reminds one of the firjSkv ayav, the Aristotelian [lecrov, the 
 Greek hatred of the airapov, a trace of which may be found in Eccles. 7^^ 
 ' Be not righteous overmuch.' But to the fervent Christianity repre- 
 sented by St. Paul there can be no excess of good. The Greek words 
 expressive of excess fall far short of the intensity of his feelings of 
 love, of hope, of joy, of adoration, and he is driven to invent new 
 phrases to meet the new experience. See Rom. 5^ quoted above. So 
 in 2 Cor. 7* he cries vTre/yirepura-evoiJuu Trj xap^, in 1 Tim. 1'* vvep- 
 cirXeovacrev ij xdpK tov Kvpiov ^p-Siv, in Eph. 3''"^ t^ Swa/iivio virep iravra 
 ■7roi.TJ<rai vTrepeKTrepura-ov Ssv alTovp-eOa ^ voovfiev, cf. 1 Th. 3"^", 51'. The 
 veiy word vrnp^oX-q chosen by Aristotle to express the vice of excess 
 (Eth. N. ii. 8. 1 8uo ovaSsv KaKiwv rrji fiev Koff virep^oXriv, rrji Se icar' 
 SOieuj/iv) is employed to express surpassing goodness, as in 1 Cor. 12*i 
 £Ti KaO' virep^okrp' oSbv SeCicwfU, 2 Cor. 4^'^ to vapavrtKa iXatfipov -nji 
 6kiij/eo>i Koff inrepPoXiiv £is VTrepPoXip/ auovutv jSapos So^s Karfpyat^erai 
 yjiuv, Eph. 3^' yvStvai ttjv vTrepPdWovcrav t^s wcoo-eais aydirnv tov XpuTTOv, 
 ib. 2T, 2 Cor. 310, ib. 9". 
 
 oiK apYotis oi6k aKopirovs KaOCirrqa-iv els Tf|v tov Kvplov i)|utv 'Iijo-ov XpurTov 
 hrlyvatrw.'] The Greek naturally means ' make you not idle nor unfruit- 
 ful for the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ ' ; but some editors 
 having regard to the statement made in ver. 3, viz. that God has given 
 us all things needed for life and godliness by means of the knowledge 
 of Christ, consider that this knowledge, being the foundation of a 
 virtuous life, cannot be here spoken of as its crown or end, and they 
 would therefore translate eis ' in ' or ' in reference to ' and KaJdumjtriv 
 ' show.' So Schott ' lasst euch nicht trag noch friichteleer erscheinen 
 in Beziehung auf die Erkenntniss J. Ch.' A more correct translation 
 is V. Soden's ' wenn diese Dinge bei euch vorhanden sind und sich 
 mehren, macheu sie euch nicht erfolglos noch fruchtlos fiir die 
 Erkenntniss unseres Herm J. Ch.' ; and Hundhausen has well disposed 
 of the imagined difficulty in the words ' wie die christliche Erkenntniss 
 dieGrundlageundfortwahrende Voraussetzung aller christlichen Tugend- 
 en ist, so ist sie andererseits auch in gewissem Sinne Ziel derselben, 
 insofem die Seele durch die TJebung und das Wachsthum in den 
 christlichen Tugenden, zu immer lebendigerer, immer klarerer und 
 voUkommenerer Erkenntniss Christi gelangt.' That knowledge should 
 follow on virtue was stated above v. 5 ; that it is not a fixed quantity 
 given once for all, but an ever growing capacity, appears below in 
 31* av^avtre iv ^aptTt Koi yvuxrei tov KVpiov ■^/juov. Just in the same way 
 St. Paul (Col. 1® foil.) after speaking of the growth of the Colossians 
 in faith and love from the day that ■^KovtraTc koi iiriyvare ttjv x^piv tov 
 ®eov . . . goes on to tell them of his prayer Iva ■irX.r]p<o6fJTe ttjv 
 eirlyvmcrw Tov OtX/qfJUiTOi avTOV iv Tratrj; <70<^ia Kal OMvioei irvevfiaTuen 
 , . . iv TravTt fpy<o dyaOia (capTro^opowTes (cai av^avo/ievoi Tg kniyvma-a 
 TOV ®eov : cf. Phil. P wpocrojp^o/xai iva ■^ dydm] vp-uiv eri jiaXKov 7repuT<rtv<rn 
 iv iiriyvuxTci koX Tratrjj alaOrjirei. So we read in Heb. 12^ d,<l>opS)VTei eis tov 
 T^i vLo-Teuis dpxrjybv xai TcXeiwTjji'. Above all, see Joh. 17^ compared with 
 1 Cor. 131^ apTt yivtoa-KO) ex /lipovi. It is surely a mistake to suppose 
 
I 8, 9] NOTES 95 
 
 that the writer of our epistle regarded the knowledge of God and 
 Christ as merely the first step toward a holy life. We cannot argue 
 from ver. 2 that grace and peace originate in knowledge ; but only that 
 they are capable of being multiplied in and through knowledge. Nor 
 does ver. 3 assert that knowledge precedes the faith and virtue of 
 ver. 4 : it only asserts that God has given us all that is needed for life 
 and for godliness through the knowledge of Christ. Of course some 
 knowledge of God is needed before we can either fear Him, or trust 
 Him, but each step forward in the Christian life deepens and widens 
 our knowledge and makes that knowledge more effectual in moulding 
 our conduct. yrjpdcrKm 8' oZet iroXXa SiSatTKo/jLevoi is an experience which 
 the Christian has no need to learn from others. 
 
 Ka6UrrT|a-iv.] It is curious that there is no other precise example of 
 this use in the N.T., common as it is in classical Greek. The nearest 
 are the passives in Rom. 5^^ d/<.ajDT(i)A.oi KaTeordflrjo-av ol iro\A.oi, k.t.A,. 
 
 We have still to ascertain the exact force of eU after dpyovs and 
 cucdpn-ovs. 'Not idle for the attainment of knowledge' is simple 
 enough, but the phrase ' not fruitless for knowledge ' or ' fruitful with 
 a view to knowledge ' is perhaps, as Schott says, a less natural expres- 
 sion. Still I think we should find no difficulty in such a phrase as 
 ' his prolonged and laborious studies were fruitful for the advance (or 
 the attainment) of knowledge ' or ' bore fruit in knowledge,' where 
 ' in ' expressive of result would be equivalent to the Greek eis. The 
 use of the word uKapn-ovs is perhaps borrowed from the aKaprra of 
 Jude V. 12. 
 
 9. u 7ap (i.-f| irdpeoTiv Tafira, Tin|>\ds eo-Tiv.] The thought of the last verse 
 is repeated in a negative form. As the diligent practice of the virtues 
 above mentioned conduces to spiritual insight, so their absence 
 conduces to, nay, actually constitutes spiritual blindness. 
 
 |i,v(Dird£<i>v.] The only other recorded example of this word in the whole 
 of Greek literature is found in Ps. Dionys. Bed. Hier. ii. 3, p. 219, quoted 
 in Suicer, where, after speaking of the Light which lighteth every man, 
 he continues ' if man of his own free will closes his eyes to the light, 
 stiU the light is there, shining upon the soul /njuiim^ovtrg Koi diroorrpe^o- 
 fj.€vri (blinking and turning away).' Suidas gives the following inter- 
 pretations, nvtoird^m = Tv<f)\a>TTm (corrected from MS. to <^uAdTToi) : 
 uvwiritpixa/oi = /xi;(oird(;a)v, irapaKa/xfivuiv (half -closing the eyes), dxpois TOis 
 6<l>6a\[ioK Trpocrex*"' (observing, as it were, with the edge of his eyes). The 
 same explanation is given under the form i/ivioiriaa-ev.^ Spitta thinks that 
 
 ' Dr. Bigg (p. 239) is of opinion that the correct form of the verb is either /ivo- 
 sr«£feii' (of. viranrid(etv) or livairfiv (of. ofuMireij'). But o^vaireiv is not formed from 
 oiva^, which does not exist, but from the Aristotelian oivanr6s. So iTtaviiCeiv 
 comes from fmdnnov, like d»Tit£fo> from avrlos, o-xETXiafo) from crxc'T\ioj, iSiiifw 
 from rSioj. Nouns ending in -an)' or -oi(< usually give rise to verbs in -ifai, as Ai9io;J/ 
 aieimlQa, fitiKw^ fi.ai\aml(a, ir/c(<A.oi^ aKoKoTrlQa, and so /iiiiaji/<, ' gadfly ' or ' goad,' 
 livanri^a. When it was desired to find a verb for the other sense, /ivanrdCa was 
 chosen (like irapxaCa from irip^, eirT)Au7<if(» from ii\u{), though juuwin'ofa) would 
 have been perhaps an easier formation, as we find nvawia, /ivairlas, uvutrlaffts. 
 The form -ei/o? is also found in derivatives from words ending in -ai//, as Sanrfia, 
 K\anreia ; see Lobeck's careful investigation of the whole subject in his 'Pjj/joTi/idy 
 
96 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 the word is distinguished from the preceding rv<f>\6i because it implies 
 ' wilful blindness,' with which v. Soden agrees ; but there is nothing of 
 wilful blindness in the /iviaij/ ; if he screws up his eyes, it is in order 
 that he may see, not that he may avoid seeing, cf. Arist. Prohl. 
 xxxi. 1 6 8ia Ti 01 fivunres crwdyovTes ra ^Xecjiapa opSxriv ; . . . tva aBpooy-' 
 Tepa rj oi/'ts cfiij 8i' eXarTovos i^iovara, Koi /i^ tv6vg i^ avaimrTafi.ivov 
 i^wva-a Siatriratrflg, and Cope's n. on Bhet. iii. 11. 13 'the involuntary 
 contraction of the half-closed eyes of the short-sighted man is compared 
 to the sputtering of the lamp, when water is poured upon it ' : aij,<f>u> 
 yap a-vvdytrai ' because both are contracted.' The relation between 
 [/.vaiTT. and Tv<f>X6i is not that of climax, but of correction or limitation.^ 
 This is well explained by Beza, Estius, and others, of the near-sighted^ 
 ness which confines the view to earth (Jude v. 10, 2 P. 2^^). Cf. 
 Anton, iv. 29 o Karafivuyv t<3 voepu ofi,ii.aTi, Greg. Naz. Amim. et Res. 
 186 A 01 wpos Tfyv KotTixov 6pS)vrf9 irpos tov Sia roi/rov SriXovixevov 
 a,ix,pXvwtrov(Tiv, Clem. Rom. i. 3 ev t^ 7rio-T£i a/t/SX-uonr^o-oi, Clem Al. 
 p. 116 a.fi.pkvmTrovvTi'i inpi Tr\v oXrjO^iav. Hippol. Ref. v. 16 where 
 Isaac's blessing of Jacob is called d/i/SAvmjros cvXoyio, Plato Rep. vi. 
 508 C aii.pXvuiTTm}(r!, re koi iyyvi tjaaivovrai tv<I>XS)V. The vulg. and boh. 
 translate ' manu tentans.' 
 
 X^Ot|v Xa^tiv,] The phrase occurs in Timocles Dionysiaeusae (b.c. 340) 
 6 yap vovs tS>v IMutv XrjQrjV XajScov, Jos. Ant. ii. 6. 9 i/tSs /3oi5Xo/tai Kai 
 airoiis XrjOrjv eKiiviav Xa;8dvTas ^Setrfci, ib. iv. 8. 44, Ael. V.H. iii. 18^ 
 Hist. An. iv. 35, cf. Job 7^^ e7roi'^o-(o t^s dvo/tias /aou Xij^ijv, Deut. 8^^, 
 Wisd. 16^1 : other exx. in Wetstein. Such phrases as X^qdr/v ix^iv^ 
 iroLetcrdai, Ip-troieiv are common in the best authors. For a similar use 
 of Xa/jL^avm see 2 Tim. 1^ moixvrjiTiv Xafi/Sdviav t^s Triorems, Heb. 11^* 
 irtipav XaySovres (t^s OaXdaarrji). This forgetfulness is itself an example 
 of failure in the knowledge of Christ. One whose eye is fixed on the 
 example of Christ, who remembers with gratitude what he has received 
 from Christ, and looks to Him for daily supplies of the Bread of Life; 
 cannot forget the time when he was incorporated with Him in baptism, 
 cf. Col. lis. 14. 
 
 ToO Ka6api(r|iav tuv irAXai oOtoO a|i,apTiuv.p Cf. Heb. 1^ 8i' iavTOV 
 KaBapuT/JLov 7rof);<ra/*«vos t<bv aiJ,apn!av ij/ifiv, Joh. 3^* lyei/ero ^ijTiyo-is . . . 
 Trepl KaOapuT/jiov, i.e. as to the meaning and value of John's baptism. 
 It is used elsewhere in the N.T. of the ceremonial washings of the 
 Jews. We may compare 1 P. 3^1 o (<o 1) koi rji^as avrCrvwov vvv o-wfa 
 /SaTTTKr/ia, ov crapKos aTro^co-is pvirov, dXXa crweiSijo-ews ayaO^'i itreprnTrnia 
 CIS ©edv, 1 Cor. 6^^ xai ravrd Tives ijre' dXXa dTrcXovtracr^e, dXXa ^yido-^ip-c, 
 Eph. 5^^'' o Xpio-Tos riydirtja-iv ttjv CKKXijo-t'av xai kavrbv irapeSwKev virkp 
 avTTji' iva avTriv ayidcri Ko.Oapia-a's rm Xourpw tov vSaros iv p^/xart. Tit. 3* 
 EO'oxrei' ■^ij.a.i 8ia Xovrpov iraXiyyci/ecrias xai avaKaivattrvii^ nTcv/xaros dyt'ou, 
 Rom. 6^, the words of Peter in Acts 2*^ fieravoi^a-aTe Kal ^aTTTitrOrfrvt 
 
 pp. 216-233, and Pathologiae Serm. Or. Prolegomena, pp. 439-483, where many- 
 examples of the double form -aCm and -ia(a are given. 
 
 ' Hundhausen, following Ti. and Treg., prefers the reading of i^AK afiapTi)- 
 liirav on account of its comparative rarity and because it might naturally be 
 altered to suit Heb. 1*. 
 
I 9, 10] NOTES 97 
 
 Ikocttos ifJ.S>v in tu) ovo/iari 'IijtroB XpioroS €is ai^eatv afiafyruov, koi 
 Xriful/taOe T-qv Scopeav ToB ayiou iri'eu/taTos, and of the Baptist in Lk. 3°, 
 also Job 7*^ Siart ouk cttoi'^o'o) t^s avofiiai /aou X^^ijv koi Ka$api(Tfji,ov rrji 
 d/xa|DTias /Aou ; Barn. 1 1^^ KaTaPaCvofia/ eis to liScop yifiovTcs otfiapTiSiv 
 KOI pvTTOv, Kol dvajSaivo/icv Kapirot^opovvTi^ ev T13 KapSCq., Herm. Mand. 4. 3 
 Irepa /yierdvoia o^k eoTiv ei /a'^ eKfivrj ore eis uScop KaT€firifji,cv koi ekd^oinv 
 a<f)€(nv ap.apTLS>v tS>v irporeprnv . . . e8ei yap rov e'lXrjcfioTa S.<f>i<riv ap-aprium 
 fir/KiTL d/iaprdvctv, Sim. 9. 16. Spitta denies the reference to baptism, 
 and would explain it by what follows in 2^'^'^% 1 Joh. 3' ' he that hath 
 this hope purifieth himself even as he is pure.' 'The cleansing referred 
 to is that wrought by the effort of the converted man himself. When 
 it is said that he forgets this, it means that he has lost the knowledge 
 of Christ, which made it possible for him to put away sin.' It seems 
 to me that the passages already quoted, the use of irdkai, denoting pre- 
 baptismal sin, of the word Kadapia-fiov here and of ^larurGivTa^ in Heb. 
 6*"^ prove conclusively that the writers must have had the thought of 
 baptism in their minds. It corresponds to an appeal to the baptismal 
 vows among ourselves, cf. 1 Pet. 4^, and see note on to ScvTepov Jude 5. 
 To the passages quoted there on the forgiveness of post-baptismal 
 sin, add Hippol. Bef. vi. 41, (The Marcosians) ii,eTa ro )8airTto-/xa ercpov 
 iirayyiXXovTai, o KaXovcriv aTroXyrpoiiTLV, KaX iv rouT(a d.vao"Tp€^ovTes KaKois 
 Tous avTols irapa/nevovTai iir eXTTtSt T^s diroXuTpmo'eciJS, <i)S Swa/iO'ous fiera. 
 TO dwa^ PairTia-OivTWi Q PaTma-drjvai) irdXiv rvx^iv atfiicriW'; k.t.X. Second 
 baptism was practised by the Elkesaites, as we learn from Hippol. 
 Bef. ix. 15 (whoever has committed any enormous sin and seeks for- 
 giveness) PairTurda-Ou) Ik Sevrepov iv ovojiaTi vij/i(TTOV 6eov koi tov vlov 
 avTov K.T.X. Callistus Bp. of Rome is accused of doing the same 
 (ib. ix. 12). For the use of the article with the adverb in place of 
 attributive adjectives, cf. below 3^ o tote Koa-p-os, 3^ 01 vvv ovpavoi, 
 1 Pet. 21" ot iroT£ ov Xaos, Gal. 42s ri avm 'UpovtraXT^p,, Joh. 8^3 vp.€ii 
 €K TuJv KciTca i<TTi, Phil. 31* ■q avus kXtjo-ii, James 4^* to t^s avpiov, Xen. 
 Mem. i. 6. 14 twv TrdXat <ro<j)5>v dvSpZv. 
 
 10. 81A iiaXXov, dSEX<|>oC, tnrovSd<raTc.] We have Sio OTrouSdcraTe again in 
 3'*, and 810 in ij. 12 below and in 1 P. l^^. Here its force is ' Since 
 there is this danger of the coming on of spiritual blindness, be still 
 more on your guard.' He had already bidden them o-ttodS^v TrSo-av 
 irapaa-fveyKOii in v. 5 and now appeals to them more earnestly under 
 the name dSeX^ot, which is found here only in the Petrine writings. 
 The aorist imperative is expressive of urgency, see Jude 21, and 
 Abbott Johannine Vocabulary/ p. 49, nn. 
 
 PePaCav 4(ifflv ripi KXfjcriv Kol EKXo-yfiv iroKi<r8oi.i] The only other passages 
 in the N.T. in which €/cXoyiy occurs are Acts 9^^ (where Saul is described 
 as a-Kevoi fKXoyrjs), four times in Rom., and once in 1 Th. The heavenly 
 calling and election (on which see n. on KXr]Toh, Jude 1), witnessed to 
 in baptism, do not supersede effort on man's part. The word ySe^aios 
 occurs several times in the Epistle to the Hebrews, cf. especially S" 
 
 ^ Ewald and Hundhausen prefer the reading of {i^A syrr. sah. boh. (airovSdaaTf 
 Ilia Sih Tuc KaKuv iiiHv tpywv 0i0aiav . , . iroirjirSe), which is also thought possible 
 by Hort. 
 
 H 
 
98 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 eaj' Trjv jrappTjoriav . . . t^s eXiriSos /texP' TeXous ^e^aiav Ka.Tacr)((i>/iey, 
 lb. V. 14 idi'irep t^v apxw ''^^ vrotTTaa-eois fi^XP'- TeXous ^e^aiav Kard- 
 <rxa>/J.ev. ;8«^. Trowto-^at = jSe/Satotiv 'to certify/ 'confirm,' 'attest,' the 
 ordinary periphrastic use of the middle of Troiem, like cnrov^v -n-oiovfifvoi 
 Jude 3. The word ^Se/S. occurs again in v. 19 below. Por kX^o-is cf. 
 n. on KaXeVavTOS above P, Eph. i^'^ wapoKaklo v/i&i a^iois ■ir€pnraTTJ(Tai. 
 Tiji (cXijcrcws 17s £KX^^jjr« fitra irdtrrji TaTreivo<f>po<rvvi]9 k.t.X., Phil. 3^'* 
 esp. Tots fiLirpocrOev iirtKreivofievoi SuoKca eis to /Spa^eLov T^s avto KXijo-ECUf. 
 
 TaCra iroiovvTEs] Repeating the ravra of w. 8, 9 with reference to the 
 preceding list of virtues. 
 
 oi (li) irrala-rfri iroTe,] As a blind or short-sighted man might do 
 (Joh. 1118). „» ^^ ^j^j, gyijj ia ygry coffimon in the N.T. and is also 
 found in the LXX., cf. Winer, pp. 634 foil, tttoiio is found in James 
 21", 3\ and Rom. ll". See n. on anraurTo's, Jude 24. 
 
 11. ofiTojs ydp] = TttiVa TrotoiVTes, cf. 1 P. 3^ 
 
 irXovo-^fiis «rtxop7iYi)6<)o-eToi 4(itv.] If you provide the above-named 
 virtues in full measure (irXeom^ovra v. 8), you will be richly provided 
 for the entrance into the Kingdom, see n. on v. 5. For irXouo-tms 
 compare Col. 31* 6 Xoyos tov XpurroS IvoLKtlrta iv v/uv irXovortms ev iracrji 
 a-o(j>La, Philo Vit. Cont. M. 2. p. 476 cro^ia TrXoDo-tws Kai a^Oovias to. 
 SoypuiTa )(opr]y€L, Heracleon op. Orig. m JbA. torn. 13, § 10 rois /tera- 
 Xap-PdvovTas rov dviodo' eirixppnrjyovp.evov TrXoucrtws Kat aurous eK^Xvacu £ts 
 T^v irepaiv aliovtov ijmjv to, liriKe)(ppriyr]p.a'a awrots. irXouros t^s Sofijs and 
 similar phrases are found in St. Paul's epistles, see Lightfoot's n. on 
 Col 1" yvaipicraL tL to irXovTOS t^s So^i tov pvaTTjpLov tovtov . . . o icrriv 
 XpuTTOi iv riixlv, r] eXTrls t^s So^s. For the thought compare Lk. 6^ 
 St^oTe Kat hoBricreTai vplv /ierpov KoXbv Trtiruirpivov (reaaXevix.ei'ov vwtp- 
 tK^yvvofJiivov SvMT0V(TLV cls TOV KoKvov vfuov. Thc USO of i7ri)(Op7]y^<o here 
 suggests the ordering of a triumphal procession, cf. Plut. Vit. 994 o 
 Stj/iOi iOeaTO Tas deas d^etSoi? irdw \opriyavfi.eva'S. 
 
 i] cto-oSos tls rif/ ali&viov pturiXctav.] 'A glorious entrance into the 
 eternal kingdom shall be provided for you,' lit. ' the entrance into the 
 kingdom shall be richly, unstintedly, provided for you.' Cf. Mt. 25^ 
 S€VT€ 01 eiXoyr/fievoi tov iraTpos /tou KX-qpovofiricTaTe ttjv ■^oifiaa'ixitrp' vp,iv 
 /Sao-iXctav aTTo xaraySoX^s K6<rp,ov, Joh. 14^ iropevofiai eToifiaxrai tottov vfuv. 
 In the N.T. e'o-oSos is used not of a place but of an action, cf . Heb. 
 IQl' exovre^ Trapprja-iav eh Tipi tia-oZov tS>v ayuav ' boldness to enter into 
 the holy place,' 1 Th. 1", 2i, Acts 13^*. It is curious that the phrase 
 oioivtos Paa-ikiCa does not occur elsewhere either in the N.T. or in the 
 Apostolic Fathers. 1 The earliest other examples appear to be 
 Aristides Apol. xvi (quoted on 2^ below) and Clem. Horn, x, 25 
 a[<i>vta9 /Soo-iXcjos kXtjpovo/jmu From the Index published by the 
 Lightfoot Trustees I leam that dtSto; fi- occurs in the same viii. 
 23, xiii. 20, Ep. Clem. 11. In the LXX. we find jj PaaiXaa (tov 
 /Sao-iXcia TrdvTtov tZv altivtov (Ps. 1441'), Kvptos ySourtXeiW tov 
 aiSiia Koi iir ailova Koi in (Exod. 15'*), i^ovo-ia aiwi'io; (Dan. 4'1 
 7>*), cf. Ps. 1016, Lk. 133, alu,vios K\r,povop.ia Heb. 915, g^'^a ai'<inos 
 1 Pet. 51". The usual biblical equivalent is t,iar) ojmvuk often found 
 
 ' III Mart. Polyc. 20, where oodd. b p have aldviov 0., Lightfoot reads 
 itrovpivtov 0aai\tiav with cod. m. 
 
I 10-12] NOTES 99 
 
 with KX»?povd/ios, etc. as in Mt. 1929, Mk. 10", Lk. lO^^, 18i8, Tit. 3^, 
 Heb. 91*, James 2^ 1 Pet. 1*. St. John prefers ex^Eiv ^(o^v which 
 occurs in his Gospel 3^^- i^' ^^, 5-*' .39, G*"' *''• ^*- ^^, and indeed passim. 
 The former expression implies that the life is thought of as future, the 
 latter as already present. St. Paul seems to speak of it as future in 
 Rom. 2^ 521, 622, 2 Cor. 4"' is, Gal. 68, 1 Tim. l^\ 2 Tim. 4^, Tit. P ; 
 perhaps as present in 1 Tim. 6^2 ein\al3ov rijs alinncw ^(o^^, cf. Col. 1^^, 
 Eph. 2^ : Jude {v. 21) refers to it as future. We must beware however 
 of supposing that these views are mutually exclusive.^ The unity of 
 the divine life in man, whether here or there, and its perfection in the 
 life which follows this, are equally declared in Col. 3^ ainOdveTe yap (in 
 your baptism) /cat ■^ ^<orj ifiiav Ke/cpuTrrat o-iii' tw XpicrrS iv ™ ®ew- orav 6 
 XpwTTOs <j)avepij>6y, ij t,uirj y]ft,S>v, Ton koX v/aeis (ftavepiixrecrOe iv oo^y, and in 
 1 Joh. 32 vvv T€Kva ®eov ia-fxiv, Kai oiliTra) i<j>av€pu)6ri Tt iao/xtda- oiSa/tcv 8e 
 OTL, iav <j>avepa)dfj, oiJi,oioi aiiTW icro/JieOa, on oi/'o/^e^a avTov Ka6u)^ io'Tiv. 
 The same double view is seen in the use of the phrases /SacrtXeta toO 
 ®€ov, tSiv ovpavSiv, etc., which stand sometimes for the Gospel dispensa- 
 tion or the Church on earth, and sometimes (as in 2 Tim. 41* pvirerai p.e 
 o Kvpioi diro TravTos epyov irovrjpov Koi tru)(rci cis T^v jSatriXeiav avrov rrjv 
 i-irovpavLav) for the glory hereafter. In this passage, as in our text, 
 the kingdom is spoken of as belonging to Christ, compare also Mt. 162^, 
 where it is said of the Transfiguration (to which our author refers 
 immediately below) that in it the disciples should see the Son of Man 
 ipXOfievov Iv TTJ PaoiKda avrov, soMt. 2818, 1 Cor. 152* j^h. 1836, Eph. 5^ 
 Kk-rfpovopLLav iv ry ^aa-iXua tov Xpio-roi) Kai ®£0V, Apoc. 111^, Lk. 2229' 30^ 
 23''2, and Messianic prophecies in the O.T. as Ps. 2^. 
 
 12. 8t!) )i.c\\'<io-(i> tt«V 4(ids inroni(».vifjo-K«iv irepV tovtuv.] It seems best to 
 explain 816 by the two preceding verses, stating the negative and posi- 
 tive results of attending to his advice r ' You will not stumble, you will 
 have a glorious entry into the eternal kingdom.' With a view to this 
 he proposes to be continually reminding them of these things, viz. < 'f 
 the promises referred to in v. 4, and of the way in which their faith 
 was to be buUt up in virtue and knowledge (vv. 4-8). 
 
 [leXX'^irai.] See Introduction on the Text. The only parallel cited for 
 this use of the future tense is Mt. 24^ where, after prophesying of the 
 false Christs who should appear before his Second Coming, our Lord, 
 continues fieWya-ere Se StKoveiv ■n-oXe'p.ous, which some take (like the 
 present p.ek\<o in Mt. 2i3 fiiXkei ^rjTelv) as a periphrasis for the future. 
 But p.eX\jj<7<i) suggests a further future contemplated from the ground 
 of a nearer future, implying ' you must then be prepared for, you must 
 then expect,' a meaning which is out of the question in our text. I 
 think therefore that Field' is right in reading jneX-^cnu 'I shall take 
 care to remind you.' This thought of the duty of reminding his 
 readers, appears again in w. 13 and 15, and in 31. ad implies a pros- 
 pect of frequent communication between him and them. 
 
 KaCirep c18<Jtos.] Cf. for construction Heb. 5^, 7^ 12". In Heb. 43 
 we find the unclassical Kalroi rS>v epyaiv yevvjOevTwv. The connexion with 
 vTropLip-vqa-Kav in Jude 5 is diSerent. There the use of the verb 
 ' remind ' rather than ' teach ' is justified, because the readers already 
 
 1 C . Charles' Eschatology, pp. 315, 362 foil. 
 
 H 2 
 
100 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 know what he is about to say : here the writer seems to apologize for 
 venturing to remind them of what they already know. 
 
 lo-Tt|pi7|j.^vous«vTTiiropou<rtioXrie€C(}.] When Jesus warned St. Peter of . 
 his approaching fall, he added the word of comfort koI ctv ttotc hnarrpl- 
 i/ras a-Trjpurov tovs dStX^ovs o-oi;. The same word is used in 1 P. 5^" 6 ©eos 
 Trda-rji X"P''''os ••avTOi KarapTiVet, a-rripl^a, a-Oevwcrei, and the cognate 
 noun in 2 P. 3" <f>vXa(7(T€cr6e iva firj ry tHiv aOea/Juav TrXavjj <Twaira)(6€i/Tes 
 tKTricrrjTi Tov iSiov a-TTjpuyfjiov. Of. Rom. P^' ^^ iimroOS) ISetv vfj.5.i...eK to 
 a-Trjpi.)(6rjvai ipS.'s, tovto St ia-Tiv (rvvTrapaKXr]6rjvai iv vplv Sta. t^s Iv dW^Xois 
 TTia-TiWi, ib. 16^^ Tto 8e Snivafiivto vp.S.'S o-Trjpi^aL, Jnde v. 24, Rom. 14*. 
 This metaphorical sense occurs in Sir. 5^" taSi ecmjpiy/xci'os iv a-vvecret. 
 (TOV, ib. 6^", avToi a-rqpiii rrjv KapSiav crov, and 22'^ KapSia ia-Trjpiyp,evi] iiri 
 SiavoTQp.aTO's fiovX^i iv Kaip<o oi SeiA.ido-ei, Ps. 5P^ Trvev/JbaTi ■^yefiovLK^ 
 a-T-qpiiov p.i, ib. 112*, Clem. R. 35 ia-nfipiy/ievr] rj Sidvoia rj/jiuiv Sia 
 irtcTTctDs irpos tov ®e6v ; but is not found in classical authors. It is 
 difficult to see the force of irapovtrrj. Editors refer back to Trapea-TLv v. 9, 
 but this would add nothing to what is already expressed in the sentence. 
 If we take Trapovcnj in a strict temporal sense, it might suggest, like 
 Phil. 3^^, and Kparci o €;<«ts in Apoc. S^i, that there is a wider, higher 
 truth than they have yet attained, but that they are to make the best 
 of what they have got. If this is so, it seems to take us back to the 
 state of things described before the 5th v. where they are said to have 
 received all that is necessary for salvation through the knowledge of 
 the Saviour. In Col. P'^ Paul speaks of the hope which the Colos- 
 sians had received iv tw Xoyta t-^s aX.rjOela's tov fvayyiKiov tov wapovros 
 CIS i/uSs, translated byLightfoot 'which reached you.' So the meaning 
 here might be ' stablished in the truth which has come to you,' but it 
 is not a natural expression, and the close resemblance to Jude m. 3 
 and 5, together with the parallels in Jude 3 rij aira| wapaSo^eioTj '''"'s 
 dyiois TTtcTTei and 2 P. 2^1 seem to me to favour Spitta's emendation 
 ■n-apahoOiCuri for T-apova-g, 'stablished in the truth handed down to 
 you.' Such repetitions are not infrequent in 2 P.^ 
 
 13. 8£koiov sl 'fjYoS(i.oi.] His first reason for reminding them was the 
 gain to his readers, his second his duty as an Apostle, cf . Phil. 3^ to. 
 a^Tct yp(i<f>eiv v/uv, e/Aoi fi-iv ovK OKvyjpov, vpuv Se dcr^aXes, ib. 1^, Eph. 6^. 
 This duty was now more urgent from the approach of death. For 
 this particular phrase, as well as for the general sense, compare the 
 farewell address of Moses in Jos. Ant. iv. 8. 2 eircl xpovov erSv eikocti 
 Kal eKaTov ^vvo'/xivov Sei /xe tov i^rjv aireKOeiv . . . 8 i Ka i ov ■^yrja-d [i.7jv 
 , . . diSiov T£ vutv TTpaypMTevo'a.a'Oai ttjv Ttav aya6S)V diroXavcrii', kol 
 p, V "q p. t) V e^aauTw . . . jtiijTe vop,tp,<i>v rSv it a povT b>v aXXijv irpoTip,rj(rr)Te 
 SiaTa^iv, p/fj^r evcrelSeiai . Kara^povijo-avTes eis SXXov p.eTaaTi^aTi]a'de 
 TpoTTOv. A little below we read TaCra 8' ovk ovaSi^eiv v/xas irpocOipa/jv, ov 
 yap iir' i^oSov ToC ^^v SutrYepaiVovras KaraXwreiv ri^iovv, e t s t ^ v 
 av a. p,v 7) (T IV (j) i p wv, and at the end iva 8c p-i] Si' apaOiav tov KpeiT- 
 Tovos ^ fjiVCK vp,S)V Trpos TO p^eipov airovtvirr), (TvviOrjKa vpiv koX v6pov%. 
 
 ^ Compare however the Traditions f Matthias quoted in Clem. Al. Str. ii. 
 p. 453 mit. 9 ai paa ov t4 TropdvTo, 0a9iihv toBtoj' irpiTov rrjs ^ttckcivo 
 yvt^ffeois iitroTidf/xfyos. 
 
I 12-14] NOTES 101 
 
 l<|>' Borov tljil «v ToiiT<ji T<? o-Ki)Vii|i.aTi.] Cf. Mt. 9^^ c(^' ocrov fter' airfiv 
 €0-Ttv o VD/t<^U)S, Rom. IP* £(^' oo-ov eifu eyo) e^i/fiv aTroo-ToXos. This 
 seems to be the first instance of the use of orK'^vmijm in this sense : it is 
 used in the literal sense of ' tent ' in Deut. 331^. o-k^vos is similarly 
 used in 2 Cor. 5^ lav fj hrCyuoi ■^/j.Zv o'lKia tov ctkiJvovs KarakvOy, olKoSofirjv 
 «K @eov e;^o/u.£i', olxiav d)(eipoTroi7jTOv aldviov iv Tois ovpavoli, where ctk^vos 
 seems to be so far identified with crw/*a, that the original figure of the 
 tent or hut has to be recalled by the use of the synonym oiKt'a, ib. v. 4, 
 Wisd. 9^^ PpLOii TO ycGSes orKrjvo^ vovv' iroXvtfipovnSa, also in profane 
 Greek, e.g. Plato Ax. 365, Tim. Locr. 103. We may compare Job. 4^^ 
 Tovi KarotKowras oi/ctas TnyXtVas, Isa. 38^2 where the body is spoken of 
 under the figure of ' a shepherd's tent.' Later Ecclesiastical writers 
 have followed our author's use of a-K-qvwiJia, e.g. Ep. ad Diogn. 6 
 d^avaTos 17 'p'^XV ^^ Ovryrw (TKr/vio/jLaTi KaroiKei, Eus. H.E. iii. 31 TLavXav 
 KoX TLerpov . . . Tq<s ixera. TrjV a.TraXka.y7]V tov piov Tutv (rKriv<iifjia.TU>v airoBi- 
 trews 6 xtiipos Se8i7\{orai, with Heinichen's n. Weiss thinks the metaphor 
 has reference to the pilgrim life of the Christian, comparing 
 
 1 Pet. 211. 
 
 SiE'yeCpciv iif.a.% kv ivo^v(\<ra.'\ The same phrase is repeated in 31. 
 Elsewhere in the N.T. Sieyetpo) is used literally of waking from sleep, 
 except in Joh. 6i^ of the tossing of the waves. It is used, as here, of 
 the mind in 2 Mace. 1 5^' l" Trpocrvirofjivrja-ai avrovg koi tov<: dyoJvas ofis 
 yjcrav eKTereXcKOTCs, irpoOvfiOTepavi avTOvis KariaTrjcri' koi tois dv/xoii 
 Sieyetpas k.t.X., ib. 7^ ; Test. Dan. 4 Sieyeipei iv Ovfiw /teya\a) t^c \j/v)(r]V 
 avTov. For the use of iv see Blass G. T. Or. § 38. i, § 41." 
 
 14. elSis 8ti Toxiv^i lo-Tiv T) air(S6£o-i,s toO o-Kr|v<i[iaTos (now.] dTrOTi6eu.a.i 
 is frequently used of putting off a garment as in Acts 7*8 (see my n. 
 on James Pi), and diroOea-K occurs in Lucian Hipp. 5 of the wttoSv- 
 Tijpiov in the bath. Its combination with o-Kiyvw/ta here reminds us of 
 
 2 Cor. 5^"* where ivSva-aa-Oai and eKSva-acrdai are used with reference to 
 the earthly and the heavenly oiiayrripiov. Perhaps it is from this 
 passage that Clement of Alexandria has borrowed the phrase a-apKos 
 airoOecTi's in Str. i. p. 374 and 77 dTro'^eo-ts tSiv ko<t/ji,ikS>v eis ttjv . . . evx^p- 
 icTTov TOV cTK^vous a.Tr6So(7 Lv , ib. iv. p. 636. T a)(i.v 61 has the sense of 
 'speedy' in Isa. 59^, where it is used of irdScs, Sir. IP" iv wpa Taxivrj, 
 also in Theocritus and other post-Aristotelian writers. Some inter- 
 pret it here ' sudden,' in accordance with the use of Ta^vs in Plato Sep. 
 553 D ovK €<tt' SXkr] p,€TaPoX.rj ovTui rap^cia Te Koi io'^ypd, Eur. Hipp. 1047. 
 We may compare St. Paul's words to the elders of Ephesus when he 
 thought he should see them no more. Acts 20^^'^^, and his final charge 
 to Timothy (2 Tim. 41 foil.) Sia/xaprv/oojuai ivunriov tov ®eov koi XpwrToC 
 'lijo'ov, ToC ju.eXA.0VT0s Kplveiv ^fivras koi veKpov^, Kal ttjv iTruj>dvfiav avTOv 
 . . . Krjpv^ov TOV Xoyov' iirl<TTqdi evKaipwi aKatjocos . . . eyo) yap ^S)j (nrev- 
 Sofiai Kal 6 Katpos T'^s dvaXvirewi fiov icfteaTriKev. 
 
 KaOiSis Kal 6 Kvpios ^|j,uv 'Irgirovs Xpio-rbs cS'fjXaxr^v lioi,] One's first 
 thought here is of the prophecy of Peter's death, contained in Joh. 
 2218, 19 2^j ^j veuyrepos, i^iivwei (reavTov Kal ireptefl-aTets ottou ^fleXes" orav 
 8e yijpdtrj;?, e/cTeveis rots \£ipd's <tov Kal dXXos ^uxrei a-i koX omtci orou 
 ov 6e\eK. TOVTO Sk eiTTtv (rqixaivonf iroita Oavdria 8o^d<reL tov ©eov : but a 
 
102 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 little consideration shows (as Estius, Spitta, v. Soden, Hundhausen, 
 and others have seen) that it is inappropriate. The writer says that 
 the Lord had shown him that he must soon die. The prophecy 
 addressed to the youthful Peter in the Fourth Gospel says that, when 
 he is old, he should stretch out his hands (on the cross) and be carried 
 to execution against his will. It is much easier to suppose that Peter 
 may have received an intimation, by vision or otherwise, of his 
 approaching end, as in the famous story of the ' Domine quo vadis.' 
 See Clem. Hom. Ep. ad, Jacob, iirei, ws cStSa^^^ijv diro XpurToO, ai tov 
 Odvarov /jlov TjjyiKacnv ■^fiipau Compare similar intimations in the life 
 of St. Paul (Acts 169, igg^ 2I11, 23", 27^3). 
 
 1 5. oTTonSAo-di 6i Kal IkcLotots ^x^iv ApLds.] This goes beyond the inten- 
 tion, expressed in m. 12 and 13, of continually reminding his readers 
 of certain truths. That intention was limited to his own earthly life ; 
 here he speaks of making provision for them after his death. The 
 form a-TTovSaa-u) is used by Polybius and later writers for the classical 
 a-TTovSda-ofjLai. There seems to be only one other recorded example of 
 the ace. c. inf. after a-irovSa^to, Plato Ale. see. 141 a-irovSaa-avm tovt 
 auTots irapayevea-Bai, but it is not uncommon with the cognate crirevSo), 
 which shares most of its uses. Thus Blass [Gfr. p. 223) compares 
 Herm. Sim. ix. 3. 2 e\eyov rots a.vSpd.<Ti a-TrtvSeiv tov iripr/ov oiKo&op.turQaL, 
 so Herod, i. 74 loTrcvo-av elp'qvqv eoiVTOuri yeviaOtu, Plato Grit. 45 C 
 TOtalTa (TTreuScts irepl aavrbv yevicrOai, Arist. Pax 672 tcrireo&ev €tvai p-ri 
 p-dxas. The infinitive however and even the passive infinitive is not 
 uncommon after a-irovSd^io, see Plato Euthyd. 293 a a-irovh. eTrtSctfai, Eur. 
 Heo. 337 <rrc. p.ri arepriOfivai /Siov. For Ixo) with infin. cf. Mt. 18^5 ^^ 
 €XOVTO? avToS aTToSowai, Eph. 4^^ Tva i^V /AeTaSiSovai rm xpiiav typvTi, 
 Heb. 6^^ «Ka<rTOT£ ' on each occasion,' whenever there is need : used 
 here only in N. T. and LXX. 
 
 (lero T'Jiv i^i\v JSoSov.] The emphatic pronoun contrasts the continued 
 activity of his book with his own decease. The same phrase is used 
 of death in the account of the Transfiguration (Lk. 9^1) IXeyov t-^v 
 cfoSov avTOV rjv tp.ekK.ev TrXr]povv kv '\epova-a\rjp., Wisd. 3^ i\oyi<T07i kiikojo-is 
 ■q efoSos avTuiv, ib. 7* p.ia irdvTtov «r<roSos eis tov /St'ov IfoSds re loTj, Jos. 
 Ant. iv. 8. 2 hr eioSov tov ^rjv, Iren. iii. 1. 1 {ap. Eus. H.E. v. 8.) /tcTar^v 
 TovTutv {i.e. Peter and Paul) l^oSov Map/cos, 6 /iaftji^s xai ipp.Tivevrfi^ 
 Tlerpov, xal aires to. imb Herpov Kqpva-(r6fi.€va eyypatjiSK fi/uv iropaScSuKC^ 
 Did Irenaeus mean this as an interpretation of our passage 1 Did he 
 find in it an allusion to the Gospel which St. Mark was believed to 
 have taken down from the lips of St. Peter 1 
 
 T^v Toiruv |jiv^|jit|virowu<r9at.] The words p.v^p.ri and p.vtia combine the 
 meanings 'memory' 'memorial' 'mention.' The former word is only 
 used here in the N.T. but occurs in Ps. 30*, ib. 97^% Prov. P^, 
 Eccl. \^\ 2^^. The phrase p.veLav ■noieia-Oai is found in Ps. Ill*, 
 Rom. 1^, Eph. P^, Philem. 4, etc. in the sense ' to make mention,' see 
 Robinson on the Epistle to the Ephesians pp. 279 f. ; juvctav ex"" '^^ ^^^ 
 sense ' to remember ' in 1 Th. 3^. The same distinction holds good in 
 
 ' See also Eus. H.E. vi. 14, ii. 15, and cf. Lat. exitus. 
 
I 14-16] NOTES 103 
 
 classical Gr. ; see Aeschin. 23. 5 oiSa/xoS /iveiav Trepl cTwOrjKuiv ireirotr^Tat, 
 Plato Protag. 317 A irepi mv fiveiav iiroiov irpos ejue (for fiviiav Trotettrflai) J 
 Plat. Legg. 798 b (for /j.vEiav «X"'')- Similarly we find ixr/iiiriv TrouicrOai 
 'to mention ' in Herod, i. 15, Polyb. 2. 7. 12, iS. 2. 71. 1 TtVos X"P"' 
 tironjtra/Ae^a T'^v em ttXciov VTrtp toS irpotipij/j.ivov TroX.t/iov /ivjj/tijv ; while 
 li.vriii.-qv fx^Lv ' to remember ' occurs in Plato Theaet. 1 63 d, Polit. 306 D 
 rj Koi f),vqfi,y]v €)(€K ovriva rpoTTov avTo SpSxnv. The distinction however is 
 less rigidly observed in the case of p-vrnt-rj. Thus we find tov koX okiyov 
 Ti irpoTipov p-vrjix-qv si^ov <^a.p,(.vo<; k.t.X., Herod, iv. 81, ib. 79, in the sense 
 of ' mention,' and ixvTJiMrjv iroteio-fiai in the sense of ' remember ' in Thue. ii. 
 54 (as to whether A.i/xos or Xoiixoi was the right reading in the prophecy) 
 Trpos a. €ira(r)(ov Tqv ii,vijfA,irjv iiroiovvTO ' accommodated their memory to 
 their experience.' Even fiveiav ttoiwOcli seems to be used in this sense in 
 Job 14^^ 'Tttfj jnoi xP^^ov iv <i) /ivet'av /jlov Tromjcrri, cf. X-qGrjv iroieicrdai, 
 Job 7^^, Herod. 1. 127. It would seem therefore that either sense is 
 admissible in this verse : the writer hopes to leave something behind 
 him, which will enable his readers either to call to mind (lit. ' to call up ' 
 or 'practise the memory of), or to make mention of the promises referred 
 to in w. 3, 4, 12, Of which the life of Christ is the foundation and 
 embodiment. Are we at liberty to find here an allusion to the Gospel 
 of St. Mark 1 Must not that have been already published before this 
 epistle was written? See the discussion in the Introduction. 
 
 16. ir«o-oi(>iir|Mvois ' (itlBois 4SaKoXoii6^<ravT6s.] In the N.T. eiaKoXovOto} 
 occurs only here and below, 2\ 2^^. It is found in Amos 2* to. /xaraia 
 ...oTs i^KoXovdrjaav ol iraTepes, Isa. 5 6^1 rats oSois avrGiv iirjKoXovBrjcrav. 
 The phrase ixvOok i^aK. occurs, as Wetstein has pointed out, in Jos. Ant. 
 prooem. 3 ol aXXoi vo/xodeTat tols p-vBoi.^ iiaKoXovB-qa-avres riav avOpiairiviav 
 afiapTr]p.d.T<i>v ets tovs 9eovs Tr/v aLcr\vvrjv /ucre^ecrai', which is itself 
 borrowed from Philo M. 1. 1 fivOows irXaa-djji.evos. The act, trocjii^ta is 
 used in the original sense ' to make wise ' in 2 Tim. 3^^, Ps. IS', etc. j 
 and the middle in the sense of ' to be wise,' ' to behave wisely,' in 
 1 K. 4^1, Eccl. 21^. Sometimes the latter is used to express quibbling, 
 as in Sir. 37^° ea-ri cro(^i^o/*€vos iv Xoyois p-tcrryros. Both uses are found in 
 classical writers, as well as the transitive use which we have here, cf . 
 otra irpo<^a(r£0)s X'^P"' o^otjii^ovTai irpos tov S^/jiov Arist. Pol. iv. 13. For 
 the passive L. and S. quote Greg. Nyss. i. 171 d a-ecroKJiurfievri p.->JTrjp 
 ' supposititious.' The phrase here is not unlike Pind. 01. i. 46 f. SeSaiSaX- 
 fievoi. \j/€vSe<TL TTOLKiXois i^aTTarlovTi fivdoi. Apparently the mockers of 3^ 
 spoke of the Christian hope of the glories to come (above v. 11) as resting 
 on fictitious prophecies. In denying this charge the writer uses the 
 word p.v6ot, which is often used in the Pastoral Epistles of the fanciful 
 gnostic genealogies: ' our belief is not founded on fables as theirs is.'i 
 
 1 Dr. Bigg thinks that iivBos here must bear the sense of 'a fiction which 
 embodies a truth — an allegoriam.' ' The False Teachers must have maintained 
 that the Gospel miracles were to be understood in a, spiritual sense, and not 
 regarded as facts." But the first thing we have fco ascertain is. What is the 
 charge made against the Apostles by the false teachers, which our author here 
 repudiates ; and not, What was the error of the false teachers themselves. No 
 doubt the author goes on to retort the charge : ' it is you who are guilty, and not 
 we, of using cunningly devised fables to support your beliefs or assertions. ' But 
 
104 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 lyvapCa-af.ev.] We, who were witnesses on the Holy Mount, yvaipi^a) 
 in the N.T. is generally used of the preaching of the Gospel. 
 
 Stlvoniv Kal irapowtav.] The word irapovaCa is used of the Second 
 Advent below 3* and 3^% twice in James, once in John, several times 
 in the Epp. to the Thessalonians, once in 1 Cor., and four times in 
 Matt. : it is found also in Test. Jud. 22 ems t^s irapavaria? tov ®fov. 
 Equivalents are diroKa\ui/r«, found thrice in 1 Pet., once in 2 Th., once 
 in 1 Cor. ; and im^dvcia found in 2 Th. 2*, 1 Tim. 6", 2 Tim. 4i' s, 
 Tit. 215 . also the verb cjtavepow in Col. 3*, 1 Joh. 3^. More commonly 
 the verb Ip^opju is used, or Tjfdpa Kvpiov or XpurTov : cio-oSos is used 
 in Mai. 3^. 8ilva|i,is has been already referred to in v. 3. Its con- 
 nexion with the irapovaria is shown in Mt. 24'" oij/ovTai rbv vlov tov 
 avapoiTTOv ip^o/juevov eirl rfiv v€<f>£\S)V tov ovpavov [Uto. SwdpLeuxs Kdl So^s 
 ■jToXX^s, and in the Transfiguration, which was to the Three a foretaste 
 of the TrapovcrCa, and of which it was said ov firj yevcruivTai Oavarov ew; 
 av Itiaa-iv Trp/ ySatriXeiW tov @iOv iXijX-rjOv'iav iv ^vap-a (Mk. 9^). 
 
 iirdiTTOi -yei/rie^vTes] = eiroTrreiJcravTcs in 1 P. 2fi, see also 1 P. 2^2, and 
 Aesch. Prom. 299 f . koX <tv Si) irovimr epSiv 7]K£ii Ittoittijs; The word was used 
 to denote the highest degree of initiation in the Eleusinian mysteries. 
 It was employed like other mystic terms by Plato and his followers, 
 from whom it was borrowed by the Jews (Wisdom 14^, Philo i. 
 p. 14:6 fin.) and Christians, see Ch. 3 of my Introduction to Clem. Al. 
 Sir. vii. pp. 1. to Ix. (' Clement and the Mysteries '). 
 
 Tijs tKtlvov |i£YaXEiiSTt|Tos.] The word occurs elsewhere in N.T. only in 
 the account of the healing of the demoniac (Lk. 9*^) i^eifkria-aovTo 
 7ravT€s ETTi T^ fi€yaA.€toT7;Tt ToS ©eoS, and of the goddess Artemis in 
 Acts 19^'', see Lightfoot on Ign. Bom. inscr. p. 189, Jos. Ant.prooem. 
 4 Trjv p-eyoKaoT-qTa tov ©€oB. The phrase to. fieyaXela tov ®eov is found 
 
 the text certainly implies that the belief of the faithful concerning the .coming 
 in glory was affirmed by the heretics to rest upon fabulous statements. Perhaps 
 this may refer to such details as are given in Mt. 2i'^~^^ or to considerable 
 portions of the Apocalypse, such as the precise description of the New Jeru- 
 salem, which few would now interpret in a literal sense. Then comes the 
 question, What were the /iBfloi followed by the heretics themselves? Dr. Bigg 
 says they were allegorical misinterpretations of the Gospel miracles. But can 
 fiS9oi mean this ? It is true that we are told of some who declared the resur- 
 rection to be already past (2 Tim. 2''' ^^), probably misinterpreting the teaching 
 of St. Paul in such passages as Col. 2^^. But this is not the allegorization of a 
 miracle but the one-sided spiritualization of a doctrine. The meaning of /ivBos 
 here must surely be determined by a comparison of the other places in the N. T. 
 in which it occurs. This however is denied by Br. Bigg, where he says (These 
 false teachers) ' differ from the False Teachers alluded to in the Pastorals, in as 
 much as they do not appear to have introduced any myths of their own.' Is 
 there any ground for this assumption ? A few lines before Dr. Bigg had asserted 
 that even in the Pastorals fLvBos might bear the sense of ' allegorism, ' Examining 
 these passages we find that two out of the four are joined with words which are 
 certainly not suggestive of spiritual or allegorical interpretation, viz. 1 Tim. 1* 
 /ijjS^ irpoffex^'" iJ^Oois koX ytv^aKoyiais StTepivrois, ib. 4' roiis 54 fiefiiiKovs Kol ypadScis 
 /iiSous irapaiTov : in Tit. 1" the /ivSoi are defined as 'lovSaiKol and joined with 
 ivToMls hvtpinraiv airotTTpeipoiiivav rjjy aKiiBemv : in the remaining passage there is 
 nothing to mark the character of the nvBot beyond that they suit the taste of 
 those who like to have their ears tickled, and that they set them against the truth. 
 See further in the Introduction on False Teachers. 
 
I 16, 17] NOTES 105 
 
 in Acts 2". For the emphatic kKiivov cf. 2 Tim. 226. The ordinary- 
 pronoun would have been airov following i^y. Bengal says of Ikwov 
 ' remotum quiddam et admirabile et magnum notat.' 
 ^ 17. Xapiiiv— X<57ov v. 19]. The construction is broken off after 
 ev8o'K»;o-a. I agree with Dietlein, Schott, and Ewald that the writer 
 intended to go on eyScjSaiucrcv rbv Trpot^ijTiKoi/ \6yov, for which he sub- 
 stitutes Kai €)(Ofiev ^e^aiorepov, after the parenthetic 18th verse. See 
 Blass pp. 283 foil., Winer p. 442 on varieties of Anacoluthon. 
 
 06oB iroTpiSs.] See n. on Jude 1. 
 
 Ti,|i^|v Kal 8<5|ov.] Alford's n. is ' Honour in the voice which spoke to 
 Him : glory in the light which shone from Him,' and similarly 
 Wordsworth. This, I think, corresponds to the general distinction 
 between the words, rt/*^ being rather extrinsic, Soia intrinsic. We 
 find them combined in 1 P. F, Rom. 2^' ", 1 Tim. 1", Heb. 2''- ^, and 
 sis times in the Apocalypse. Cf. Heb. 1^ tav airavyatr/jia t^s Soirj's. 
 
 <i)Bv»is wexeeto-Tis airi^ roioo-Se.] The only instance of TotoVSc in biblical 
 Greek. It is used here prospectively as in classical Greek, 'to the 
 following effect.' Compare for the use of ^epoi 1 Pet. P* t^v ^epo/io'iji' 
 vfm' x<'-P^v a-nd w. 18 and 21 below. 
 
 virh TTjs (i.£YoXoirpeiro«s 8d?T|s.] In the Introduction on the Text I have 
 stated why I think airo should be read here for iiro. This is the only 
 example of ju.£yaXojrp£ir^s in the N.T. It occurs in Deut. SS^s 5 
 ft,eyaXoirp€'7rri's Tov {TTipeii/jiaTOi ('who rides in his excellency upon the 
 sky,' A. v.), also in 2 Mace. 15^^ /ieyaXoTrpeTreo-Tariyv ctvai Tr]V Trepl 
 avTov virepox^v, lb. 8^^ ^ iwiKX.rjcri's tov a-e/xvov Kal fieyaXoirpetrov^ 6v6p,a.T0t 
 avTov. So 7] fieyaXoTTpeireid aov is used of God in Ps. 8^. The above 
 phrase is found in Clem. Rom. i. 9 reXetios XetToupy^cravTas Trj p,eyako- 
 irpe-n-ei Soiy avTov, with whom the adjective is common, and in Clem. 
 Al. p. 793 T<i)V e/cXcKTOV eKkeKTOTepoi ol Kara, ttjv reXeiav yvioa-iv . . . kol 
 TTJ lityaKoTrpeirecTTaTri Sofg TeTip.7]fji,ivoL ; there is a reference to the Trans- 
 figuration ib. p. 812. Dr. Bigg calls attention to our author's fondness 
 for these ' reverential paraphrases,' instancing 6eia Svvap,is v. 3, Oeia 
 <j)v(Tis V. 4 and gives the following examples, taken from Spitta, of a 
 like fondness in Jewish Apocryphal writers : Test. Levi iv ru avanipm 
 (oipavw) TrdvTtov KaraXvei rj p,€ya.Xrj Sofa, Ascens. Is, xi. 32 et vidi quod 
 sedit a dextera illius magnae gloriae (ed. Charles p. 146 roSra yiKovov 
 T^s Sofijs TYjs p-eyaXtji Xeyov(n]i T<a Kvpiio /ton Kal Xpio-Tw), Enoch xiv. 
 20 17 Sofa ^ p.eyd\.r] eKaOryro €ir' avTW (the throne) : to irepiySoXaiov avToB 
 ■rikiov Xap.irp6Tepov (Charles p. 347), also c. 11. 3. So Heb. 8^ iKaOurev 
 iv Seftgi T^s p.eyaXm(TVvr]i iv Tots ovpavois. 
 
 It may be well to compare with the above account the synoptic 
 narratives of the Transfiguration. 
 
 (1) The change in the appearance of Jesus. 
 
 Six days (Lk. about eight days) after Peter's confession made at 
 Caesarea Philippi Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John, and went 
 into a high mountain 1 (Luke adds ' to pray, and while he was praying ') 
 
 ^ Probably not Tabor, but one of the lower slopes of Herraon ; see Edersheim 
 Messiah, vol. ii. p. 92 foil, 
 
106 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Kai fi€Ttfwp<l>(i>6ri ifiTrpocrOev airStv, koX to. Ifidna avTOv iyevero (rTtX^ovTa. 
 \fvKa, \iav, ola yva<j>tvi tin, rrji yrji ov Svvarai ourus Xevxavai Mk. 9^ foil. ;. 
 Kai eAa/itj/ei/ to irpotroyirov avTov ais 6 ykios, ra 8c l/JUXTia avTov iyevtro XevKo. 
 o>s TO <t>S>i Mfc. 17^ foil.; [iyevfTo) to etSos ToS Trpocriinrov irf pov kol o 
 ifiaTicTfiOi avTov XevKos i^afTTpairrtov Lk. 9^' foil. 
 
 (2) The a/ppea/rance of Moses wnd Elijah. 
 
 KOI &(f>6rj aiiToii 'HXeios irvv MwiJcrei /cat ^arav ain/XaKovvTe? tQ 'Itjo-oO 
 Mk. and Mt. ; koI ISov avSpes Suo a-vve\d\oxrv avrSy omves rjtrav Mwiio^s 
 Kai HXeias, oi 6 <j> cv T e s Iv So irj IXeyov t rjv e^oSov ail to v 
 T]v T^ fiiWev TrXr] p ovv iv 'le pov crak-q p, Lk. 
 
 (3) Th^ words of Peter. 
 
 Kai oTTOKpitieii 6 Uerpoi Xcyet t<o 'Irjcrov "PayS/Set xaXoi' i<TTiv ■^fiS.i uiSe 
 eivai, Koi iroirjiriap.iv Tpeli (TKfjvds, croi fxiav koX McuJ)<r£T ft,iav Koi 'HXtta 
 /iiav. ov yap jjSei ti a.TroKpiO'g, lK<f>o ^ oi yap iyivovTO 
 Mk. and Mt. (except that Mt. has Kvpte for '"Pa^pei and omits the lasfc 
 sentence). 6 Se IIcTpos Ka\ oi p. er ' aiToS ■^ cr av ySejSapij- 
 p, e V o I V TT V (o , S I ay pr] y o pijcr avT €'! 8c elSav Trjv S6$av 
 avTov Kai T o II s Svo avSpas Toiis "■u v £ c Turas airiS. 
 Kai eyeveTO iv tu Sia^iapL^to'Oai auToiis air' avT ov iurtv 
 6 Herpog Trpos tov 'Itjo-ovv, 'ETrio-Tara k.t.A.., pij eiSoos o \cyei Lk. 
 
 (4) The overghadormng cloud. 
 
 KOL iyivcTO v£(f>eX.ri €irto"Kta^ou(ra avTOt<; Kai e-yevCTO cfxavi] iK t^s ve^cXije 
 Mk. ; £Ti auTOU A.aA.oi)vTos tSoi vecftihr) (fxoTivrj iTre(TKiacrev avTovg, 
 Kai iSov ijitavr] iK t^s vi<f>eXyjis \iyovcTa Mt. ; raCra 8c airrov Xiyovroi iyivero 
 ve<f>eX.rj koi iirecTKia^ev avTOVs' i <j} o ^ i^ drja av 8e iv tm cicrcXflciv 
 avT o V ? CIS TY] V V e<j>i\T]v . Koi ipiovr] iyevero iK ttjs ve<j>€X.rii 
 Acyoutra Lk. 
 
 (5) The voice from Heaven. 
 
 oStos i(rTiv 6 uios pov b ayawTjTo^, aKoverc avTov Mk. ; outos ccttii' 6 uios 
 /Aou 6 dyaTTT^Tos, cv ra £«8oKijcra' Akovctc avTOV Mt. ; oSrds i(TTiv 6 vlos 
 fiov 6 eKA.cA.eyp.cvos, airoi) cikowctc Lk. (Compare Mt. 121*.) 
 
 (6) The end of the vision. 
 
 Kai i^aTTLva ircpi;8Aci^ap,cvoi ovkstl oi8eva cTSov p.f6' iavTuiv ct pri tov 
 'It^covv povov Mk. ; Kai dK0V(TavTt^ oi paOryral t^^ea^av erri irpodutirov Kai 
 i<f>oj3i^6'ri(rav cr<ji6Spa. Kai irpoa'rjXdtv 6 'ItjctoBs Kai atj/dpfvoi avrdv cTttcv 
 'Eyep^jjTC Kai /i^ (fiopiUT&c. eirdpavTt^ 8e Tois 6tj)6a\,p,ovi avriov ouScva 
 cTSov ei p,-^ airov 'Ii;oroSv p.6vov Mt. ; Kai cv rm ycvio'Oai ttjv ffxovTjv evpiOrj 
 'Iiycrols povos Lk.^ 
 
 The chief points of resemblance between the Gospel narratives and 
 our epistle are 8d^av in v. 17 and Lk. 9^^ cTSav t^v 8d^av avTov ; cfoSov 
 in V. 15 and Lk. 9'^ eXcyov t^v e^o8ov avTov ; <j)iovrji ii€)(6iiir>]i otto t^s 
 peyaXoTrpeiroBs Sof?;? in v. 17 and Mt. 17^ vci^cXi; <^<i)Teiv^ (the Sheohinah) 
 i'Trea'Kiaircv avTovi, Kai ISoii ^cuv^ iK t^s ve^eXijs J tvSoKrjo-a in v, 17 and 
 
 1 Compare the account in Apoc. Petri quoted in Appendix. 
 
I 17-19] NOTES lOT 
 
 Mt. 17^, as in all the accounts of the Baptism. Schott and others 
 have called attention to a discrepancy between the account here given 
 and that in the Gospels, as witnessing to the independence of our 
 authority. In the Gospels, it is said, the Transfiguration precedes the 
 voice : here the aor. part. ivexOua-qs seems to show that the voice 
 preceded, and occasioned the receiving of the glory (XayScuv rt/i^v koi 
 Sdfav). If we accept Alford's interpretation of ti/ai^ as referring to the 
 Voice this order would be correct as far as that word is concerned, but 
 I do not see that we are bound to suppose Sofav to be equally de- 
 pendent on the Voice. 
 
 6 vids |ioii, o a-yairi]T(5s [»■'"'> oS^cis Io-tiv.J Of. the loose quotation from 
 Isa. 42^ in Mt. 12^^ iSoii 6 Trais /jlov ov -gpeTura, 6 dyaTnjTos /jlov, «ts bv 
 cvBoK-rja-ev ij ifrux^ ju-ou. See note on ' The Beloved,' as a Messianic Title 
 in Dr. Armitage Robinson's edition of the Ephesians, pp. 229-233. 
 
 els 8v iyit «48dKT)o-a.] The construction of cuS. with eis is only found 
 here and in Mt. I.e. Elsewhere, as in Isa. 62*, Mt. 17^ and in all 
 the synoptic accounts of the Baptism, evS. in reference to a person ia 
 followed by Iv. The word belongs to late Greek, not being used by 
 any profane writer before Polybius. 
 
 18. «| ovpavoO lv6x96'^<''<>'V.] Heaven here corresponds to the bright 
 cloud of the synoptics. The repetition of iv€)^6€la-av from v. 17 is 
 characteristic of the writer. 
 
 Iv TM ayl(f Spei.] This phrase, translated ' holy mount,' or ' holy hill,' 
 is frequently used in the O.T. for the temple on Mt. Zion, in which it 
 pleased Jehovah to dwell. We also read of holy gi-ound, as where God 
 appeared to Moses in the burning bush (Exod. 3^), to Joshua (Jos. S^^), 
 of Jerusalem the holy city (Isa. 521, gsis, Mt. 4^, 27^3), and so of the 
 new Jerusalem (Apoc. 21^;. Zahn (Einl. in das N.T. ii. p. 59) gives a 
 quotation from the Gnostic Acts of Peter (ed. Lipsius, p. 67) in which 
 the same name is given to the Mount of Transfiguration : Bominus 
 nosier volens me maiestatem suam, videre in monte sacro etc. 
 
 19. 'i\<Hi.ev pepaidnpov tov irpocJiTiTiKJiv \d-yov.] We should rather have 
 expected tcrxoinev, to suit the preceding ^Kouo-a/xev ; but the present 
 tense expresses a larger truth. The vision not merely attested the 
 prophecies at the time, but (for those who beheld it) it permanently 
 strengthened their faith in them. Cf. above v. 10 ^efiaiav ti)v Kk^aiv 
 TToieLo-Bai. Field illustrates from Isoc. ad Bern. p. 10 Tr]v irap 
 Ik€ivu>v evvoLav /Se^aiorepav eyeiv, Chaeremon op. Stob. Flor. 79, 31 
 (Mein. vol. iii. p. 83) ^e/^cuorepav e^e rr/v <f)i\iav. Charit. iii. 9 
 jSe^aiorepov ea^xov to Oappeiv. Cf. for e^w 1 Pet. 2'^ Trjv avao-rpo^riv 
 eyoyTes KaX-^v, ib. 4* rrjv ayairriv iKTivfj iy(OvrK. The word Trpot^r/riKos 
 is not found elsewhere in biblical Greek except in Rom. 16^^ jxva-rqpLov 
 ypovoi's aiioviOL? aecriyrjfiivov, cjxj.vepuiOtvTO'; Se vvv, Sta re ypafftS)!' TTpot^rjT- 
 LKu>v . . . ets v7raKor]v ■7ricrreo)s . . . yvwpurOivTo?. It occurs in Philo 
 de Plantat. M. i. p. 347 rov rlcrcrapa apiBfibv . . . dTroo-c/^vweiv eoiKCV o 
 TTpotjytfTLKo^ Xoyos, Leg. All. M. i. p. 95 M.unxrq's 8e 6 irpo^y]TiK.o<s Xoyo's 
 A-na-iv K.T.X. and is not uncommon in Justin, e.g. Apol. i. 54 (after 
 quotations from' Deut.) tovtidv tSv irpoifirjTLKStv \6yuiv aKovcravT-es oi 
 Saufioves /\i6vv<T0V etfiaxrav yeyovivai v'lov tov Aios> Dial. 39 rotis (roifxnii 
 
108 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 . . . airo run/ irpotfyifTiKSiv \6yiav aTroBeiicwfiev avorfrov^, 56 (p. 276) 0eov 
 avTov ovra o Trpo<l>7fTiK.o<i \oyos a-tjiuxivu, 77 (p. 302) Trpiv ^ yvStvai 
 TO iraiotov fcaXciv n are p a ij firfT € pa 6 irpoifiiriTiKOi Xoyos c^, 
 110, 128, 129, Clem. Rom. ii. 11. What is the prophetic -vrord re- 
 ferred to 1 No one particular prophecy, but the whole body of declara- 
 tions of the coming glory of the Messiah, such as Mai. 4^, Isa. 60^, 40^, 
 esp. V. 9 Itt opoi ii/r);Xov avd^riBi 6 evayye\i^6p.evoi Suov . . . tlirby rats 
 TTokea-Lv 'loiJSa 'iSoir 6 ©eos vp.S)v. Compare St. Peter's remarks on 
 messianic prophecy in Acts 2^'''^, 3^^^, and Praedic. Petri a/p. Str. vi. 
 p. 804 dva7m5^avT£S ras l3ij3\ov^ as eL)(op,€v tS)V trpofjrtiT&v, a p-ev 8ta 
 irapa^oXlav, a Si 8t alviypATutv, a Se avOevTiKm^i koX avroXe^ii Tov Xpurrbv 
 Tqcrovv ovopM^ovratv, evpop,ev koI •np' irapovcriav airrov koX tov davarov koX 
 TOV o'Toupoi' Kai Tas Xoittos KoXao'ets Trao'as oo'as iiroii^crav avriS oi 'lovSaioi, 
 Kai T^v €yep<TLv kol Tip/ e?s ovpavov^ avakujij/iv . . . ravra oivv ca-tyvovT£s 
 •iiruTTevaapei' tm ®em Sia Twv y€ypapp,eva>v ets airoi'. These predictions 
 were attested, maide more secure, by the experience of the Trans- 
 figuration. I cannot agree with Alford and others in thinking that 
 there is a comparison here made between the apologetic value of 
 miracle (the glory and the voice from heaven) and prophecy, and that 
 the latter is declared to be jSe/SaidrEpos, 'ps presenting a broader basis 
 for the Christian's trust.' The comparison is between prophecy sup- 
 ported by its fulfilment, and prophecy not so supported. So Cyril of 
 Alexandria ap. Euth. Zig. r/peii avrots 6<l>6aXpois ttjv aXiijOeiav ideaaapeBa 
 lier avrov oi/tcs ev tw opei . . . 8ia t^S otj/eoK jSeySatorepos t£v irpo^yjp'wv 
 ripiv 6 Xoyos iyh/ero' a. yap iKeZvoi eiirov, ravra irapuiv 6 XptoTos hnaTdxraro, 
 and most commentators, Orig. Princ. iv. 6 ■q 'Ir/a-ov iinStjpia Swapevov^ 
 imoTTTevecrOat tov vopov Kol Tovs irpo^yrfra^, ras ov Oeui, eis Tofi/u^aves rjyayev, 
 As ovpavCa) vapiTi avayeypappeva^ Clem. Al. p. 778 -ireiruTTevKev Sta T£ 
 T^S IT p <^i]T cia% 8ia Te T^s ira p ov(riai tS pyj ^euSoplvto 
 ®eu, Ktti o ireiruTTevKev £;^et Kal itpaTa t^s eirayyeXtas . . . koli to rkXas 
 T^S ejrayycXtas ;8e)8at<i)s KaTeiX.rf<f>ev 6 8c rr/v iv ots 
 eo-Tt KaTOLOTaxriv /8e)3atav r Stv peWovTiav KaT aX-q^ji iv £i8u)s 
 8t' aydirrj? irpoairavTa T(S piXKovTi. 
 
 a KaXus iroietre irpocrcxovres.] On the phrase KaXws ttoicite cf. James 2* 
 with my n. ; on irpoa-k^av Heb. 2^ ■Trepixra-oTepo}? irpoa-ix^iv tois okodo-- 
 Oeicn, Acts 8^ irpoa-elxov Tots X£yo/t€i'ois. For both cf. Jos. Ant. xi. 
 6. 12 ots {ypappaiTLv) iroirjcrere KaXios pi) 7rpoa-i)(OVTe^. The importance 
 of prophecy is also dwelt upon in 1 Pet. li*'^^, which should be 
 compared with this passage. See too Lk. 16'^, 24^ *• Joh. 1**, 
 Acts 10«. 
 
 US XAx<"p <|>«''''ovTi iv av\f,r\pla t^u.I So John, the last and greatest 
 of the prophets, is described by our Lord as 5 Xu^vos 6 Koiopevo^ 
 Kol <f>aiv<iiv (Joh. 5^). Spitta cites Ps. 119^"* Xvxyoi rots iroa-l /tou o 
 vopoi (TOV, and 4 Esdr. 12*^ * tu superasti ex omnibus prophetis, 
 sicut lucerna in loco obscuro,' cf. also Theoph. ad Aut. ii. 13 
 6 Xdyos atJroS (sc. ®£ou) tpaivmv moTrcp Xv;^os hf oiK-qpaTi. <rwex°l''^V 
 i<l>(oTL(Tfv Tr]V vtt' ovpavov, Ma/rt. Ignat. 1 Xv;^ov 8ikijv BUkov t^v Ikootou 
 ffitoTi^mv 8K£voiav 8ta t^s twv ypa^Sar k^yfyq(reu>% hrervyyavev tSiv KaT ev)(rjv. 
 Cf. Clem. Al. Str. v. p. 663 init. fj plv "EXKypriKri fjyiXoaotjtCa tj « t^s 
 
I 19] NOTES 109 
 
 OpvaXXiSoi toiKev Xa/nrrj&ovi, rjv avaTrrovcriv S.v6pu>woi irapa tjXiov KXenrovrfS 
 evrixytoi to <^Ss" KrjpvxO^vTO'i 8e tov \6yov ttSi/ ekcivo to ayiov iiiKa/Ml/ev 
 tj>ioi. av)(p.ri poi is properly ' dry and parched,' then ' squalid and 
 rough/ found here only in biblical Greek : avx/Jtai^rj^ is the form used in 
 the LXX. as in 1 Sam. 231^. The apocryphal ^pocosZyjoae of Peter § 21 
 has cTSov Kol iTtpov Toirov KaraVTiKpii eicetVoi; avxit-rjpoTaTov. koX rjV tottos 
 KoiKaxTtut^, KoX 01 KoXa^d/^ei/oi . . . (tkotuvov ci)(OV <.t6 ivSviJia> avrdiv, 
 evSeSvp,ivoi Kara tov aipa rov tottou. Suidas explains it as (rrvyvov rf 
 iTKOTUvov, Hesychius as (tkotSSes, and the Vg. has ' caliginosus ' (Itala 
 ' obscurus ') which is the meaning suggested both in our text and in 
 Apoc. Petri. In Arist. de Color. 3 to X.ap,Trpov ^ o-tiA)8ov is opposed to 
 TO avxf-ripov koL dXa/Aircs. It does not seem to imply absolute darkness, 
 but dingy and dusky obscurity as contrasted with ' the brightness of 
 Messiah's rising 'Isa. 60*, Rom. 13^^. The tottos av)(iji,r]p6i may be 
 illustrated by Clem. Al. Protr. p. 87 et /i,^ tov \dyov eyvto/icv koI rovrif 
 KaTrjvya.<T6rjfJi.€v, oiSkv av tSv o'iT«uo/xev(ov opvtOaiv ekairofieOa, iv (tkotu. 
 iriaivd/xEVoi koI 6avd.T(a rpe^ofievoi. 
 
 2<iis o6 '<i|upa 8iavy<i<T|.] For construction cf. Lk. 15^ ^^Tti lus ov eipy, 
 ib. 221^ ov fji,r) Trim . . . I(i)s oS 17 fituriXeia tov ®eov iXBy.^ It seems better 
 to connect e<os oB with <^atvovTt than with the more remote irpoa-e- 
 XovT€s. The rare Siavyd^ui is used of the first streaks of dawn 
 breaking through the darkness, cf. Polyb. iii. 104. 5 a/jui tu Siairyafeiv 
 primo diluGulo ; of a flash of lightning, Plut. Mor. 893 t^ w-Arj-yiJ koI 
 tS o-^'tr/xw Siavyd^ei. The form Siavyiia is found in Plut. V. Arati c. 22 
 7j/tepas ^87; SiavyovcTYji. 
 
 Kal <f>(ii(r<t>^po5 dvarECXxi Iv Tais Kap8£ais 4(Ji»v.] The word tl)u><r<^6po^ is not 
 found elsewhere in biblical Greek, but the synonymous kuta-^opo's 
 occurs in Isa. 14. 12 xSs e^eirttra/ Ik tov ovpavov 6 'E<oo"^dpos o 
 Trpoi avaT iWmv ; 1 Sam. 30^^' airo lwcr(j>6pov lojs 8ei\j/s, Job 3^ fjLi} 
 tSoi i(oa-<j)6pov avaTeWovTa, and in the difficult Ps. 110* ck 
 yatxTpos irpo Iwcr^opov cyevvijo'a (re, explained by Jennings and Lowe of 
 the birth of the Messiah who comes like a rising sun from the womb 
 of the dawn. The coming of the Messiah is also compared to the dawn 
 in Malachi 4^ koX avaTeXei vfiiv tois ^O/Sou/tevots to ovofid /xov 
 ^X. LOS SueaLoavvrjs koL laffts iv Tois Trrlpv^LV avrov, Lk. 176-79 Trpoi^^Tijs 
 vtI/i(TTOv KXriOi^a'ri . . . iToifJid(rai 68ous avTov, tov Sovvai yvSxnv (rtoTr/piai 
 . . . Sia (nrXa.y)(ya eXeous ®€ov yjp.Siv, evicts iTruxKetj/erai rjfias av ar oXi) 
 i^ v\l/ovs, eTT i(f>a.va L tois ev rr k 6t e i k al cr kCo, 6 avdr ov KaO-q- 
 /x£V0is, Apoc. 22^® kyd> f.ip.1 ... 6 a(TT7]p Xajxirpo's, 6 wpojivos, cf. 
 ib. 2^^, 2 Cor. 4*'^ 6 Oeos tov aiuvos tovtov erv^XuKxtv to. vorifiaTa tSv 
 dirto-TCOv ets to firj avy d(T a i t ov <j>WT lo' p,ov tov evayyeXCov t ^ s 
 
 8 d ^17 S TOV XplCTToS. . . OTl O ®eOS 6 t'lTTUlV 'Ek o-kotods ^(Is 
 Xd/xij/ei, OS iXafiij/ ev iv Tais Kap8iats -^ p-Zv pr p6 s <j>ii>Ti<T- 
 uov TTJs yvmo-ecos T^s 8dfi;s Tov®£ovivTrpoa'u>Trto Irj o' ov, 
 1 Joh. 2* ^ aKOTia irapdyerai Kal to ^Ss to aXrjOivov ^Si; ifiaCvei. A 
 difficulty which presents itself here is that the dawn is represented 
 
 ' In Geden's Concordance these and similar examples are gi\ren under the head 
 • eas conj.' Of course o5 {xp6vov) is the relative governed by iois prep. 
 
110 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 as preceding the appearance of the day-star (say, the planet Venus) 
 thus reversing the order assumed by the poets from Homer downwards, 
 ■e.g. II. 23. 226 rifLo^ 8' kuxr^opo^ eifri <j)6m% ipemv eirl yaiav, ovre fiera 
 xpoKotmrXoi {nrtip aXa KiSvarai, rjwis, t^/xos k.t.X.., Ov. Trist. iii. 5. 55 hunc 
 utinam nitidi solis praenuntius ortum adferat admisso Lucifer albus 
 €quo, Heroid. 18. 112 praevius Aurorae Lucifer ortus erat, Virg. 
 Hd. 8. 17, Juv. 8. 12, 13. 158, Milton Mai/ Day ' Now the bright 
 morning star, day's harbinger.' 
 
 Possibly this reversal of the usual order may be owing to the phrase 
 ■Trpo ia>a-<l>6pov in Ps. 110^, which is apparently referred to in connexion 
 ■with our passage by Hippolytus Bef. x. 33 to. Se ■jravra Sioocei o Aoyos 
 Tov @£ov, 6 irpuyroyovoi warpos Trats, ■^ ir pb e (0(t <t>6 p ov <f>iacr<l)6pos 
 ■tfxovi^.^ There may also be a reference to our text in Clem. Al. 
 Protr. p. 70 (o Kvpioi) atjyvTrvL^ei Kai tov ckotovs tovs treirXavtjfi.cvovs 
 ^lavicrTrjcriv eytipe, ijyqtriv, 6 KaOtvSmv, . . . koX eirii^axKTeL trot 6 Hpurro?, 6 
 T'^s dvacTTatretos ■^A.tos, 6 irpo iaMTtfMpov yoTm/i.ei'os, o ^iotjv ^apurdfieyoi 
 aKrla-iv tStais, p. 87 irSs yap ov iroOiivbi 6 tov ev (tkotu KaTOpatpvyfievov 
 vovv ivapyrj irotijcra/i.€vos kcu to. tf) ai cr <j> 6 p a t^s i/^X^s airo^vvai o/t-fiara ; 
 and p. 89 Xa/JLij/ dr <o ovv iv rm a,iroK€Kpvp,p,evia tov avd p <o- 
 TT ov iv T fj Ka p S ia to <j> tas, Kai Tq's yvaxreim al aKTives dvareiXa- 
 T 111 IT a V TOV eyKeKpvp.fi.evov evSov eKifiaivovcrai koX airoarTLK^ovcrtu avOpimrov. 
 Wetstein compares Philorfe Decal. ii. p. 188 ■^Kpi/Scorai Kai PePaa-dvurTai 
 TO. ®£0v \6yia KaOairep ^ucros irupt . . . ot p.ev TOis •)(prqcrp.di<i aiuovvTe^ cTvai 
 KaTairei6ei% a>s ev daKiio (jiuyrl tov aei ^ovov fiuio'ovTai, tovs vo/ious 
 fflVTOtis d(T T e p as Ip^ovres ev ^v \y ffjiairifiopovvTai. 
 Dr. E. A. Abbott compares the whole passage (w. 19-21) with 
 Philo Q. R. D. Haer. § 52, M. i. p. 510 foil., of which the following is 
 an abstract, ' A prophet utters nothing that is his own or private (tStov, 
 cf. V. 20), but is merely a lyre in the hand of God. Human reason 
 must be dormant when the Divine Spirit inspires. Now reason 
 (Xoyio-/ios) is to the mind what the sun is to the universe, for both 
 reason and the sun ipioaKJiopel. When the divine light shines, the light 
 of human reason sets; when the former sets, this rises, -q SiJo-ts toC 
 Xoyur/wv Ka\ to Trept avTOV ctkotos eKcrraiTLV kol 6 e oifio prjT ov p.avLav 
 iyewqa-e.' Dr. Abbott thinks that the use of ^(uo-^opei above 
 implies that the substantive (jxocrtpopoq (often applied to Helios, 
 Apollo, etc.) may stand for the sun ; but ^miTi^opeia simply means 
 'I give light.' It is true that "Wetstein quotes Suidas as inter- 
 preting ^(Do-^opos by ^Xtos, but Gaisford omits this gloss in ac- 
 cordance with the best MSS., and no example of such a use is 
 quoted, so that it could only be resorted to in despair of any other 
 explanation. What then does the writer mean by urging that 
 
 ^ The meaning of this is explained by an earlier sentence in the same chapter, 
 where it is said of the generation of the Logos, that the Father begot first ov 
 \6yov &3^ (pwyfiVf aA\' iyStddeTov . . . &fj.a yap t^ ix tov yevviiiravTos vpoeKBelfj 
 Trpo}T6rOKOs To6rov yev6flfvos iptttvitf ?x^* ^^ eavr^ ras if r^ TlaTpl 
 irpotviioTiSeiiras iSe'as. Thus <pairip6pas (paivi} is the light-giving utterance of the 
 Word, which was iv apx^ vphs Thv &€6v, Th ipus rh &.\Ti6iyhv t 4>wT(^ei Tctyra &v0piovoy 
 4px^fievov els rhv KSfffioy. 
 
I 19, 20] NOTES 111 
 
 those whom he addresses should give heed to the prophetic word 
 shining in obscurity, until the morning breaks and the day-star arises 
 in their hearts ? I do not think it is possible to explain this of the 
 Second Advent in connexion with v. 16 and 3*. The phrase iv rats 
 ■KapStai; vfjiSiv implies an inward coming (Lk. 17^^) as we see in Rom. 2^^ 
 5^, 8^^, 2 Cor. 1^1 6 8« jScjSatuv 7/xas o-iiv v/juv eis Xpio-Tov koi ;(pto-as ^/uSs 
 'Oeds, 6 Koi (T^paytcra/xevos rjfia,^ koi Soirs toi' appafiStva tov irveij/iaTOS iv 
 TOW KapStats vfj.u>v, 4«, Eph. l^^, 3", Col. 3^^ The prophets are 
 -evidently those of the old dispensation, who spoke amid prevailing 
 darkness (Isa. 8^^) and were themselves ignorant of the full meaning 
 ■of their prophecies (1 Pet. l^"). Still they were inspired of God to 
 shine as lamps in the darkness, and cannot be superseded until the 
 Gospel-day lights up the sky and the Spirit of Christ is (Apoc. 22i*) 
 manifested in the heart of the individual. The former clause implies 
 ■' Search the Scriptures,' the latter, ' Accept the Gospel which has been 
 revealed to you and pray for the first fruits of the Spirit whereby ye 
 «,re sealed for the day of redemption. Your experience of the latter 
 •corresponds to the vision which we saw on the Holy Mount, and will 
 •confirm your faith in the former as it did ours.' We have thus the 
 three stages, the prophetic lamp, the Gospel dawn, the inner light of 
 the Spirit. The lower degree of faith in the written word will be 
 ■followed by divine insight. It is because Christ has come and estab- 
 lished His Kingdom upon earth, because He has risen and ascended 
 into heaven, that the spirit of truth has come to abide in the heart 
 •of each individual Christian. Compare Euth. Zig. (from Cyril) o 
 Trpo^ijTtKOs Adyos Toiis iv ayvoca ^(uTaytoyei ecos xadapov vfjuv to tjywi tov 
 <iayye\iov Siacj>avfj /cat 6 votjtos ewtrc^dpos, tovt€<tti ^puTTO'i, iv rais 
 ■KapSiaK vfjLuiv dvareiAi;. 
 
 20. toOto irpwTov 7ivc6<rKovT«s.] Occurs again below (3^) in reference 
 to the coming of mockers in the last times, cf. 1 Tim. 2^ irapaKaXu> 
 •irpSyTov iroMrmv iroiua-Qai Seijcrets and Robinson's Ephesians pp. 278 f. on 
 the epistolary phrase irpo iravTutv. The part. yivaJuKovTes, continuing the 
 •construction of KaX<os ■TroieiTe Trpoa-ixovTs^, defines the spirit and feeling 
 ■with which the iScriptures should be read, ' recognizing this truth first 
 of all.' 
 
 irao-a irpoc|>T|T«ia 7poc|)T)s.J Here we have the Hebraic irao-a — ov for 
 ovScfi-la, as in 1 Job. 2^1 irav i/fcCSos ck riys dXij^ems ovk ccrrtv. The con- 
 verse ov — xa; is also common as Mt. 24^^ ovk av eo-uSij iracra (rdp^, see 
 IBlass tr. p. 178. For irpo<f>. yp. cf. Apoc. 22^ ras ■7rpo<f>y)Taa<s TOV 
 fii^Xiov TovTov, and Acts 8^^ •^ Sk Trepto;^^ t^s ypac^ijs r/v aveyLvma-KH', 
 2 Tim. 31* iracra ypa<^ij 6t6Trvev<7Tos koi w(j>eXijj,oi wpds SiSao-fcaXtW. Here 
 the addition of ypa<^^s seems to contrast the prophecies of the O.T. 
 with other prophecies, such as that of Enoch (of which Jude had made 
 use) or of the ii/evSoirpo(l>yJTai mentioned below. 
 
 ISias «iri\v(r«<i)s ov Yfverai.] Aquila has ivvirvLtov im\va-ts in Gen. 40*, 
 where the LXX. has Siao-d<^?;(ris. Cf. Mk. 4^* Kar ISiav kirekvev TrdvTa, 
 Herm. Sim. ix. 13 £x«s Tr]v imXvaiv tS>v^ dTro/8e/8A.Tj/ievo)V, ib. v. 5. 1. 
 av9a.S-ns el iirepuiTZv Tas iTnXvcrus tuiv rrapaySoXSi'. iireiSij Se ovTU) Trapd- 
 uovoi el, iin\va-(a croi tt/v Trapa^oXr^v tov ay pov, ib. v. 6. 8, 3. 1, 4. 2, 3, 
 
112 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 viii. 11. 1 Tas «7riA.V(reis iratrfiv rS>v pd^Siov, Iren. ii, 28. 3 tSv eu rat? 
 ypac^ats ^rirov/ievcav, oKuiv tZv ypa<l>S>v 'TrvevfiaTLKmv ovtrwv, evia fxkv eiriXvofLev 
 ( = absolvimus) koto xapiv ®tov, h/ia h\ dvaKeia-erai @e£, ib. 27. S 
 parabolae possunt multas recipere absolutiones ( = iTrtXvo-ets), Philo 
 Vit. Cont. M. 2. p. 483 fijrei rts tl rfiv Iv Toi^ Upois ypa.it.iuuTa', rj Koi 
 vw SXXov irpocTTaOev tl iiriXvtTai, Heliod. i. 18 ovapwrmv 67ri\uo-is, 
 ib. iv. 9 wpos rrjv tSiv ayvocyviihiutv evpeaiv koi T(Sv )(pr]cr6ivTmv Ttjv hriXvcriv,. 
 Clem. Al. Paed. ii. p. 172 exoi 8' av Kal a\Xas cttiXvo-eis 6 crrarrip. For 
 the gen. cf. Heb. 12^^^ iraxra iraiJSeia ov SoKei xapoii etvai dAAa X.vinjs, 
 Acts 20^ iyevero yvto/tijs Tov VTro(rTpe(l>av, Plato Apol. p. 28 is pXv iyo) ovk 
 olSlkS), oil irokXrj's fioi SoKet etvai airokoyias- Alford and others urge that 
 ■ytvo/iai requires the translation ' prophecy springs not out of human 
 interpretation,' but its force seems to me sufficiently expressed by 
 'comes under the scope of.' 
 
 The statement that ' prophecy is not a matter of private interpre- 
 tation ' has been variously explained. One explanation is founded 
 on Philo's language quoted above on ■». 19, with which may be- 
 compared Vita Mosis M. ii. p. 125, where Balaam is represented as 
 saying Xiyia yap oiScv tSiov, dXV arr av imji^ijoTj to 6elov, and again 
 6 8e ixov<o$e\s e^ati^njs flco^opeirat koi firjSiv OTJViets, wa-irep ixeravuxTa- 
 p,evov TOV Xoywr/toO, rot VTrofiaWop^va i^eXdXei, p. 126 airoXoyCa j^pai/xei/o? 
 aXriBti, (US oiSei' l8iov \eyoi, Karey^ofJitvoi Si Kal evOovai-Giv Siepfi/ijvevoi to. 
 cTepov. It was the mark of a false prophet to speak to iSiov or a</>' 
 eavTOV. Compare Jer. 23^'' /iaTaiowii/ eawroTs opacriv diro KapBias iavTStv 
 XaXovcTLV Kal ovk diro CTTOfj/rros Kuptou, Ezek, 13* oial tois ir-po^TeioviTiv 
 dTTO KapSi'as avTUiV, koi to KaOoXav [iij ftXiirov(TLV. Of the true prophet we 
 read (Hippol. Antichr. 2) ov yap ef iZia^ Swafi,uo<s i<i>QeyyoVTO, oiSe wirep 
 avToi ejSovXovTO TaiJTO eK-qpvTTOV, aXXa irpu>TOV fiikv Slot toS Aoyou kdoi^iipvTO 
 opOuis, tTtiiTa Si opap-aTtov vpoeSiSdo'KOVTO to p,eXXovTa KaXSs" eW outco 
 ■jreireicriJieyoi eXeyov Tavra dwep avTOi's rjv p.ovoK inro tov ®eov awoKeKpv/j.p.a'a. 
 This is the view taken in a scholium from Oecumenius quoted by 
 Wetstein Xap,pavovcri p.h> airo tov ©eo5 oi irpo^yrjrrai ttjv ■7rpo(j>r]TiCav, aXX' 
 ovv As EKEivoi ^ovXovTai, aXX' us to klvovv airotis Oetov ivepyti -n-vevfjia. 
 Such an interpretation is applicable to the next verse, but is not in 
 harmony with the ordinary force of imXva-K here. Accordingly Grotius 
 altered the reading to eTnyXucrtms, Heinsius to iirtXeva-eta^, with the 
 sense ' Trpoc^TjTeta non est res proprii impetus,' while Alford, following 
 Hiither and Bengel, seems to understand iwCXviTK, not of the interpre- 
 tation of a given prophecy, but of the prophet's interpretation of the 
 signs of the times, which (he says) is not peculiar to himself, but 
 comes from God. The continuatiom of Wetstein's scholium seems 
 to give the more correct view of en-iXvo-is — the prophets knew that 
 the word which came to them was prophetic — ov p-h/Toi koX tt/v 
 (TriXviTiv avTov eVotowTo. So even the holy prophets had very vague 
 ideas as to the meaning and scope of their prophecies, cf. Dan. 12''* 
 Kol iyu) T^KOva-a Kal ov crwrJKa, Kal tlira, K.vpic, tl to. icrxo-Ta tovtiov ; Kal 
 eiTre, Aevpo Aai/f^X, on €fji,Tr£^payijLevoi Kai itT<j>payuTp.ivoL oi Xoyoi luis 
 Kaipov Ttpas, Zech. 4^, 1 Pet. P"' ^^. This agrees very well with v. 21 
 but not so well with what precedes. Why should it be so important, 
 
I 20] NOTES 113 
 
 for those who are hidden to give their minds to the prophecies, to 
 remember that the prophets themselves were ignorant of the meaning 
 of their utterances ? 
 
 Perhaps however we should take this simply as an instruction as to 
 the way in which we are to understand the prophecies : they are not 
 limited to what the prophet himself may have regarded as their purpose 
 and scope, or to any single event of the future ; but reveal principles 
 which will be continually illustrated by God's government of the 
 world, while they find their highest fulfilment in the work of Christ 
 and the establishment of His kingdom. See the words of St. Peter in 
 Acts 3^1 (Jesus Christ) ov Sei ovpavov /xlv Sc'^ao-^at a^t )(p6vo]v a.7ro- 
 «aTao"Taa"€a)S irdvTiav Zv eA.oXijo'ci' 6 ©cos 8ia crro/taTos tSv ayitav Sltt 
 a,lii>vo% avTov ■7rpo<^ijT<5v, Acts 10^^ rovrio jravres oi TrpcxfirJTai ixapTvpovcriv 
 a<f>e<Tiv a.p.a.prriu>v Xa^iiv Sia tov ovo/iaTOs avTOv Travra tov iruTTevovTa eis 
 avTOV, Rom. 15° Xeyo) yap XpLcrrov Skxkovov yiyevrjcrdai ircptTO/i^s inrtp 
 aXr/Oeias ®eov ets to jSc/SatScrai ras esrayyeXtas Twv Trarepoyv, Iren. iv, 6. 1 
 XpioTOS Sio, rvmov koI irapa^oKSyv etryjiuiLveTO firj Svvap,ivu>v vorj6^vai Trpo tov 
 Tr]V lKj3a(rtv tu>v irpotfyrfTevfji.evfOV ikdelv, rJTii iarTLV fj Trapovrria tov li.puTTOv. 
 
 The different interpretations of this difiicult phrase may be classified 
 as follows. Those who agree that iiriKva-K {iiriXveiv) means solution of 
 a problem or explanation of a difiiculty, are divided as to whether this 
 solution should be regarded as preceding or following the prophecy in 
 question. There can be no doubt that according to common, if not 
 universal use, it means the explanation of a given problem or difficulty, 
 e.g. of an oracle (Heliod. iv. 9), of a puzzle (Athen. x. 71, p. 449e), above 
 all of a prophecy. Many commentators however not seeing how to 
 reconcile this explanation with the preceding injunction to give heed to 
 the word of prophecy, have been driven to adopt the far-fetched inter- 
 pretation of a solution, embodied in the words of the prophet, of some 
 practical problem, ' a discerning of the signs of the times' (Mt. 16^). 
 In this way v. 20 would mean much the same thing as v. 21. Some have 
 endeavoured to find support for this interpretation in the word ytVerat, 
 which they would translate 'comes of private interpretation.' This 
 seems to me to be an undue straining of the meaning of the word 
 yivoiiai, attributing to it a force which it could only bear if followed by 
 the preposition €k. It cannot however be denied that this is the view 
 of the passage taken by many commentators, e.g. Bede ' hoc primum 
 intellegere debent, quia nuUus prophetarum sanctorum propria sua 
 interpretatione populis dogmata vitae praedicavit, sed quae a Domino 
 didicerant, haec suis auditoribus agenda commendabant.' So Bengel 
 ' i-irtX-va-ii dicitur interpretatio qua ipsi prophetae res antea plane 
 clausas aperuere mortalibus,' Cajetan, Alford, Keil, Kiihl, Hundhausen. 
 Spitta proposes an entirely new sense of the word e?rA.i;o-ts, translating 
 ' no prophecy is of such a nature that it can be dissolved,' for which he 
 compares Joh. 10^* ov Swarat Au^^vat ij ypa<^i/, Mt. 5^'' ovK ^\6ov 
 KaraKvcrai aWa TrXrfpuxrai, but confesses that he can make nothing of 
 iStas, for which he proposes to read ayias. 
 
 There is similar diversity of opinion as to iSias. (1) A. Lapide, Estius, 
 and the Roman Catholics in general take it as equivalent to iSkotik^s, 
 
lU THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 and contrast this with the judgment of the Church. They also extend 
 the rule to Scripture generally : so Concil. Trident. Sess. iv. Nemo 
 suae prudentiae innixus, in rebus fidei et morum ad aedificationem 
 doctrinae Christianae pertinentium, Sacram Scripturam ad suos 
 sensus contorquens contra eum tensum quem tenuit et tenet Sancta 
 Mater Ecclesia, cuius est iudicare de vero sensu et inter^retatione 
 Scripturarum Sanctarum, aut etiam contra unanimem consensum 
 Patrum, ipsam Scripturam sacram interpretari audeat. (2) CEcumenius 
 interprets it of the prophet himself in accordance with 1 Pet. P"'-, 
 cf. 4 Esdras W^ of Daniel's vision. (3) Luther, Erasmus, Wiesinger, 
 Schott, Hofmann, etc. take it of man's own interpretation, contrasting 
 this with the understanding imparted by the Holy Spirit, who is 
 Himself the source of prophecy. (4) Werenfels, Bruckner, Bisping 
 refer t8«xs to Trpo(t>rjT€ia itself, in the sense 'no prophecy is self-inter- 
 preting ' ; it receives its interpretation from the event which fulfils it, 
 or from a second inspiration. There is truth in each of these, but each 
 appears to me to narrow the saying unjustifiably. The words mean 
 literally 'no prophecy falls under private interpretation,' or to put it in 
 positive form, ' Prophecy is of general interpretation,' i.e. it is not 
 exhausted by one interpretation to which it is, as it were, tied. I 
 reserve the further examination of the passage for the Comments. 
 
 21. o4 -yap 6£X^(ioTt avBpwiroD if>i)^ir\ irpoij>i]xcCa irorl.] Cf. Joh. 1'^ oiSe 
 Jk deXTq/iaroi crapxcs oiihi eK BeXruiaroi dvSpos aW Ik 0eov lyewrjQritrav. 
 We have another example of a final irore in i?. 10 above (where, as 
 here, it means 'at anytime'), also Rom. 7* eycb Sc If mi/ x<*P's vofiov 
 TTori, 1 Cor. 9^ tis o-TpaTivtrai tStjjis oij/mvioK ttotI; so Eph. 2*, Col. 3'^, 
 Heb. V^. With -qvexdri we should probably supply in thought ef 
 ovpavov or its equivalent as in w. 17, 18. 
 
 iirJi 'irveip(i.oTos o-yCou (|>Ep(S|iicvai.] Compare the compounds OetxJMpo's 
 Aesch. Ag. 1150, OeoffioprjTos ib. 1140, 6eo<j}opia Strabo, Biotjtop-qtrK Plut., 
 6€o<t)OpeLa-6ai Menander, Trvev/Aard^opos and 7rveD/AaTo<^opoij/tevos Eccl., 
 and Philo i. 510 quoted above under <j>wa-<t)6poi avaTttXij, also 
 p. 482, tK(TTr)6i (7(.avTrj%, Kaddinp oi Kopv/iavTiiovTei koI Karfxpiievoi, 
 j3aKX€v6ei(Ta kcu 6eo<j>op7j6u(ra koto. Tiva -irpo^-qTiKov linBuaa-fiiOV, Mut. Nom. 
 M. i. p. 609 (of Balaam) ao^uTTiLa p,a.vTiK^ ttjv 0€O(j>6py]Tov irpo^rfraav 
 Ttapeydpaie, de Somn. p. 689 orav i^ Ipcuros dtiov Karacrxidw 6 vovi, 
 aWTeiva's eavrov a^pi futv ahvTiav, opfiy Koi o-irovS'g ttootj )(piop.evos 
 irpo€p)(yiTai, 6eocj>opovfi£voi imXiXriaTai ru>v aSXiav, Justin Apol. L § 33 
 ovScvl S.\Xii> 6eo<l>opovvTaL oi n"po^)jTevovT€s £i p-r] 6f.ua Xoyiii, ih. § 35 
 'Ho-oias OiotfiOpovp.a'O'i t<3 Trvevp-ari t£ irpotjrrfTiKia, Theoph. Autol. ii. 9 oi 
 Se rov ®eov avOpioTroi, 7n>fvp,aT6fj>opoi wvevp.aTO's ayiov koi Trpo<j>ffriu 
 yevofuvoi, vtt' avrov rov ®eov e/mrveuo-^ei'Tcs . . . iylvovro OtohiSaKTOi, ill. 
 1 2 Toiis iravTas 7rvev/iaTO<^o/)Oi)S evt irvevfixiri Oeov \i)uiky)K€vai. For the 
 simple djepSfiivoi cf. Jos. B.J. vi. 5. 2 <j>€p6p.€voi toTs 0v/iots ol trTpariiuToi t^v 
 (TToav v<j)dirTOV(n, Plut. Mor. 205a ^epo/ievoi raw bppjiis. Acts 2* of the 
 descent of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost uxrirtp <t>tpoii.arq% ttvo^s 
 Buxiai, and such phrases as Mk. 1^^ to Trvev/xa avrov iKpdXKa tis t^" 
 epTjuov, Acts 8*^ irvivfia Kvpiov ^pTrcwtv tov ^Ckmirov, 2 Cor. 12 
 Apiroyeira £<t)S TpiTov ovpavov. 
 
I 20-11 1] NOTES 115 
 
 eXdXr)trav dirb ©toO AvSpuiroi.] Cf. Acts 3^1 (Times of Ilestoration of 
 which) iX.d\T](r€v o ®€os 8ia irTO/xaTO^ tu>v ayitov aw' aiCivoi auTOu yrpot^ryruiv, 
 Justin Apol. i. 36 oTai/ Sc ra; Xeftts tmv Trpo^riTiov Xeyo/oieVas . . . aKovrfn, 
 /lit; air avruyv twv ifnTeTrvevarfiifijiv k€ye(r6ai vofnicrrjTe, dW dirb ToB kivovvto^ 
 owTous Oilov \6yov, ib. 37 tol SiSacricd/ueva Sict tujv TrpocjirjTSiv diro Tov ©eoO, 
 l6. djro TrpotriDTTOv toC IlaTpos fX.i)(6rj<Tav Sid Hcraiou oiSe oi A.dyoi, i6. 38 
 OTai' 8e djTO Trpocjolirov toD XpicrToC A.fyj^ to ■trpo^T)TiKov Tri/eC/ua, outcos 
 4>6iyye.rai. The reading oTrd makes a better contrast to ^eXjJ/xart 
 avOpiiiTTov than the ayiot of some MSS. The position of avdpuiTroi at the 
 end of the sentence next to OeoB is emphatic. Though the prophets 
 were men, yet their prophecies came not from mere human impulse, 
 but proceeded from God. 
 
 II. 1. cy^vovTo 8^ Kal il/cvSoirpoiJiiiTaL 4v Tip \ac^.l 
 
 [Compare throughout this chapter the notes on the parallels ih 
 Jude.] 
 
 Besides the true prophets spoken of in the previous verses there 
 were also false prophets among the Israelites. The word ij/evSoTrpb- 
 ^ijTT/s is used of O.T. prophets in Jer. 27^ (LXX. 34^) /tij aKovire twv 
 \fiivhoTrpo(f>y)TSiv ip,!i>v, ib. 26^^ (LXX. 33^) and in Lk. 6^^. We often 
 meet references to these, as in Deut. 13i'-, 18^", Jer. 5^', Ezek. 13 esp. 
 v. 3 oval Tois 7rpo<jyr]T£vov<rtv diro Kapoia'S avrwv ( — ^eX^/Aart avOpatirov 
 in r^i above). Examples of such are Zedekiah (1 Kings 22), 
 Hananiah (Jer. 28). Words compounded with ij/evSo- may either mean, 
 falsely named, a 'sham' or 'counterfeit,' as i/revSd;^pto-Tos Mt. 24^*, 
 i/»£uSa7rdcrTo\os 2 Cor. IP^, i/'£t)8dScA.0os Gal. 2*, {j/evSovep(ov 'a sham 
 Nero' (Lucian), xpevSoKvuiv 'a sham Cynic' (Plut.) ; or they may 
 mean falsely doing the work implied in the second part of the 
 compound, as in i/^evSoo-To/ieoj 'to speak falsely' (Soph.), tj/ivSovpyoi 
 ' one v/ho practises deceitful arts ' (Plato), ij/fvSopKia ' perjury ' (Philo), 
 if/evSo/j-dpTvp ' a false witness ' Mt. 26*°, i/ftuSoXdyos ' speaking falsely ' 
 1 Tim. 4^. Either meaning would suit ij/ev&oTrpo<j)rjTrii, for to prophesy 
 falsely in the narrow sense was at any rate one of the marks of a 
 pretended prophet ; and if we assign to the second half of the com- 
 pound its full sense of the interpreter of God's will, then it will be 
 equivalent to the other meaning, ' a counterfeit prophet.' We may 
 gather the characteristics of the false prophets from the descrip- 
 tions contained in the prophecies of the O.T. They sought 
 popularity by flattering the people and promising them peace 
 and prosperity, while the true prophets told them plainly of 
 their faults and called them to repentance by warning them 
 of impending judgment. The false prophets were eager for 
 gain and dissolute in their life, see Isa. 28^ ' The priest and the 
 prophet have erred through strong drink,' Jer. 23^* ' In the- 
 prophets of Jerusalem I have seen an horrible thing ; they commit 
 adultery and walk in lies, and they strengthen the hands of evil- 
 doers . . . they are all of them become unto me as Sodom,' ib. v. 32, 
 ib. 29'2'-23, Ezek. 13^ 'Woe unto the foolish prophets that follow 
 their own spirit and have seen nothing,' ib. v. 16 'which see 
 visions of peace for Jerusalem, and there is no peace, saith the Lord 
 
 I 2 
 
116 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 God,' Micah 311 'The prophets divine for money.' It will be seen 
 how closely this description corresponds to the description given 
 below of the false teachers. For warnings against ^euScwr/jo^^Toi in 
 the Christian Chiirch, cf. Mt. 24", 1 Tim. 4^. 
 
 Xai5s is used of Israel generally in the O.T. esp. in Ex. 19^ and 
 iJeut. 8 ea-ea-de /aoi Aoos Trepiova-Loi, from which is taken the phrase 
 m 1 P. 2' \a6s ets Treptiroij/criv. Compare also Lk. 2*^ ^Ss «ts airo- 
 KaXv\liiv idvlov Kal So^av \aov crov 'la-patjK, and Acts 26i^' 23, where 
 we find the same distinction between the Aads and the edvr). 
 
 (is Kal «v 4niv «o-ovTai i|»«i)8o8iSdo-Ka\ou] The mention of the false 
 prophets of old leads on naturally to the thought of the false 
 teachers who were even then making their way into the Church. 
 AiSda-Kakof corresponds to Rabbi (Joh. P'). In the early Church 
 teachers are joined with prophets (Acts 13\ 1 Cor. 12^ irpSiTov d-iro- 
 1TT0A.OUS, SevTfpov 7rpo<f>rJTa'S, Tpirov StSaorKaXous, Eph. 41' eStoKtv tous /J.h' 
 dirocTToXoDS, Toirs 8e irpot^rfrai;, tovs Se evayyeKuTTais, tous 8e iroifiiva^ 
 KoX StSao-KaXous). We learn from James 3' that the office was much 
 sought after, see my note there. The word i^cuSoS. is rare, i^euSoSi- 
 ^axTKoXCa. is found in Polyc. ad Phil. 7. For further information see 
 Introduction On the False Teachers. 
 
 otrivcs irapeHrAlovcriv aip^o-eis dirwXeias.] ' Men who will introduce 
 destructive heresies into the Church.' oo-tis seems to have its usual 
 indefinite force, cf. Mt. 7'* irpoa-i-xen ajro t5v ipevS(nrpo<ttr)Tu>v, 
 oiTives . . . fi(Tw XvKoi apirayci. ' There are some places in the N.T. in 
 which oo-Tis cannot be distinguished from os ; ultimately the distinc- 
 tion quite broke down,' Hort on 1 Pet. p. 133. For Trapeurdym. 
 whicH is found only here in N.T., see nn. on Jude 4 wapeixreSmiaav and 
 2 Pet. 1* 7rap€unl>epto, also Lightfoot's n. on TrapeuraKTovs GaL 2*, and 
 Clem. Al. Str. vii. p. 854 virep.vij(rOrp/ tZv irepl tov fir) Seir iS)(€a-9(u irpos 
 Tiviav erepoSoioiv irapacrayofievwv SoyfiATutv. It is frequently used in the 
 Apology of Aristides without any notion of secrecy, which however 
 easily attaches to irapd, as in irapeiaaKTOi. 
 
 mp^o-cis.] Athanasius quoted by Suicer defines the word dsro toS 
 alptixrOai Ti iStov koX tovtio i^aKoXavOeiv. Hence it is used for a school 
 or sect whether in philosophy or science, as in Clem. Al. Str. vii. p. 
 887 Kal irapa tols louSatoi? Kal irapa. Toiq ^okiixidtoltok ran/ trap 'EAXt/cti 
 (j}iXoa'6<f>mv ■TrdfiTToWai yiyoiiix(Tiv aXpiawi . . . Koi oi larpoi, ivavrlai So^oi 
 Kaen]iJ.ivoi. Kara ras olKciai alplaeii, iir utjjs epyfu ^epaTreuoucrtv. Appar- 
 ently the first instance of its use in this sense is in Cicero's amusing 
 letter to Cassius {Fam. xv. 16. 3). So in Acts 5" a*pe<rt« SciSSovKaiW, 
 ih. 15' oip. ^apuTcuiav, 24* Tro(i>TO(rTd,Triv T^s rlav Ha^iapalutv alpecreio^. 
 In our text it is used in a dyslogistic sense, as in 1 Cor. IP' St? yap 
 Kal aipeirets ev v/xiv elvai, ii/a ot SoKi/ioi <l>av€pol yevioVTai, Gal. 5^', where 
 St\o<TTaa-iai and alpea-fK are joined with adultery and idolatry as 
 works of the flesh. Tit. 3^" alptriKov avBpmirov irapaiTov. It is a 
 question whether what is condemned in such passages is sectarianism, 
 that is, the disposition to break off from the general body of 
 Christians, as being spiritually, or intellectually, or even socially 
 inferior ; or whether it is an exaggeration of particular views, such 
 
Ill] NOTES 117 
 
 as millennarianism. Of course the two run very much together : a 
 heretic in the latter sense, that is, one who lays great stress on views 
 which he holds as peculiarly his own, apart from the general belief, 
 is likely to separate himself from those with whom he is out of 
 sympathy; and in like manner one who begins as a separatist is 
 likely to develop particularist views. In ordinary Greek the sub- 
 jective meaning is, as might be expected, older than the objective. 
 Polybius uses it much in the sense of Trpoatpeo-is for 'principle of 
 conduct,' e.g. ii. 56. 9 to /iev ovv dyevi/es koX yui/atKwSes t^s aip€(r£it)i 
 avTov, xviii. 20. 4 ovSiirore ra'uTTjv icr)(y)Ka>ai, r-qv aipeaiv, on Sei TroXe- 
 /jieiv aSiaXuVcos. In the N.T. there seems to be a general agreement 
 that the objective meaning is to be preferred, except perhaps in this 
 verse of 2 Pet. But it is joined in two passages (Gal. 5^" and 1 
 Cor. IP^ where I am glad to see the E.V. has ' heresies ') with words 
 signifying division, which seems to make the subjective meaning 
 ' opinionativeness ' more appropriate, cf. Clem. Al. Str. vii. p. 894 ol 
 ev ol-^crei ol Kara raq aipecrei;. There can be no doubt that Ignatius 
 uses the word in the sense of our ' heresy ' in Trail. 6, where Light- 
 foot's translation is ' I therefore entreat you to eat only the whole- 
 some food of Christianity and to abstain from the noxious herbs of 
 heresy. These false teachers mix poison with Jesus Christ; they 
 impose upon men with their plausible professions ; and the deadly 
 drug, thus disguised with a sweet flavour, is thoughtlessly taken, 
 though death is its consequence,' ib. Eph. 6 ev vixlv ovSe/jiia aipecns 
 KaToiKei where it seems to be equivalent to kuk^ SiSa;^^ in 9. I am 
 disposed to assign the same force to aipceris in our text, as more suit- 
 able to the word irapeurd^ova-iv and receiving a natural explanation 
 in apvov/jiivoL. Spitta, von Soden, and Weiss interpret it in the same 
 way, of opinion, not of schism, but Spitta thinks that aipea-is in 2 Pet. 
 is still by itself neutral, and gets its bad sense from the following 
 qualitative genitive. 
 
 diruXefas.] ' Dangerous heresies,' the gen. qualitatis, as below in 
 V. 4 (TiLpois ^o(^ou, V. 10 iiriOvixia p,iaa-fJiOV, see Sir. 16^ c^i/os d7roj\etas 
 and my n. on Jas. 1^^ aKpoarr]^ i-m^ricrtwvrj^ and p. ccxiv. The word 
 occurs five times in this ep., once in Acts, where Peter rebukes 
 Simon, and is found in Apoc. Petri 1 oSovis koI 8 d y /x a t a iroiKika 
 rijs airuiKeCa's 8 iB a. $o v cr iv. It appears as the opposite of 
 a-arrripia in Phil. 1^*. 
 
 Kal rhv aYopao-avra avrotis Sctrirdrriv apvoil|ievoi.1 ' Denying even the 
 Lord that bought them.' Alford and others have got into unneces- 
 sary trouble about the construction by refusing to recognize that km 
 is used in the sense of ' even ' in the N.T. as in other Greek. See his 
 n. on Mt. 10^" ifjiZv Be koL at rpix^i • . . ■^piOp.rip.evaL iWiv, where he 
 translates ' and yet.' For other instances of this use of Kai cf . Mk. 
 P^ 4^5^ 1 Cor. 2i». For &.yop6.<TavTa see Hort on 1 Pet. P*'" (pp. 
 78-80) ov <}>6apToh eXvrpwOrjTe . . . aXXa. ti/*«i) a'yuaTt, (os a/ivov a[imp.ov 
 Koi aa-rrikov, Xpicrrov : ' The starting-point of this and all similar 
 language in the Epistles is our Lord's saying (Mk. x. 45) The Son of 
 Man came . . Sowat ttiv ^vf^rp/ avrov Xvrpov ovtI iroXKSyv . . . The nearest 
 
118 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 repetition of these words is in 1 Tim. ii. 6 6 Sois iavrbv avrikvTpov 
 virip vdvTiov. For XvTpov/jLai St. Paul uses dyopd^to 1 Cor. vi. 20 
 •^yopaer^e yap Ti/i^Si vii. 23, Gal. iii. 13 Xpurrb's ^/iSs e^Tjyopatrti' €/c t^s 
 Karapas tov vo/jlov, yevop.evos virep rifiSiv Kardpa, So Apoc. v. 9 (of the 
 Lamb) Tiyopacrcus t<3 ®e<a 17/Aas ev t(3 ai/jiaTi <rov. ... In the LXX. kyrpov/icLL 
 is connected with the Exodus ... in Acts vii. 35 St. Stephen boldly 
 says that God sent Moses as dp^ovra xal Kvrpun-i^v. ... In some of the 
 passages quoted Christ Himself appears as the ransomer : elsewhere it 
 is the Father, as in Acts xx. 28, rightly understood and illustrated by 
 Bom. V. 8 (where note lavrov) and viii. 32.' Spitta takes the latter 
 view in our text, comparing such passages as 2 Sam. vii. 23 ' Thy 
 people which thou redeemedst to thee out of Egypt.' On this inter- 
 pretation Seo-TTOTijs would be used here, as elsewhere in the N.T., of 
 the Father ; so Acts 4^* 8ea~iroTa, ' o-u o iroi^cras tov ovpavov kol ttjv y^v, 
 Lk. 2^^, Apoc. 6^". See n. on Jude 4, and Wetstein ' semper 
 Deum Patrem significat, nunquam Filium.' If we take it so, with 
 Spitta and v. Soden, we must understand apvovjucvoi of the various 
 idolatries, and iirdyovm of the consequent punishments of Israel ; but 
 this is rather an awkward construction. Otherwise dpv. describes the 
 nature of the threatening heresy, eir. its effect ' so bringing on them- 
 selves destruction.' Air. Feltoe in his ed. of Dionysius of Alexandria 
 p. 242 notes that ' the use of 8«<rn-dTijs of Christ is said to indicate 
 the end of the fourth century, esp. the Cappadocian divines (Holl 
 on Amphilochius p. 127).' Two examples occur in the doubtful 
 Exegetical Fragments inserted in Feltoe's edition (pp. 248 f.) /3a/3al 
 T^S ave^iKaKLa<s tov Secrn-OTOV, toC /cai tjuX'qa-a.vTO's tov irpoSdnyv, and in 
 pj 242 we have the phrase to Sto-n-oTiKov crS>p.a used of the Lord's body. 
 For apvovfiLtvoi see n. on Jude, and Peter's words in Acts V^ ". 
 
 4irA7ovT€s laurois Toxivfiv AirAXeiav.] The middle is used by classical 
 writers in cases of self-caused evil, e.g. Dem. p. 424. 10 avQalperov 
 avToli eirayovTat hovXtuxv Lys. p. 102. 19 Kivhvvtvio iroA.ii /xei^o} a'Vfi.<j>opav 
 ep,atJT<3 eirayayecrdaL. see Blass pp. 183 f., Jannaris Gr. §§ 1472, 1478. 
 Another instance of the unclassical active is found in Sir. 1^^ p.-^ 
 i^xj/ov (reavrov Li/a p.r) . . . liraydyy; ry <^i'XB "'*"' "Tipi'av. The active IS 
 properly used in v. 5 below. For raxiv^v see n. on P*. Spitta fiuads a 
 difficulty in the doubled participle, on which see Winer p. 433 and 
 Blass p. 250. 
 
 2. iroWol l|aKoXo<J6r)o-ov(riv oirwv Tats d<reX7eCois.] oiruv refers to the 
 i/f«uSo8tSd<rKaA.oi, whose bad example will be largely followed. This 
 verse is parenthetic referring to the deluded followers, while v. 3 
 returns to the false teachers. The heretics are noted for their licentious- 
 ness, see Introduction on Early Heresies, and notes on Jude 4, 6, 8, 
 13, 16, 18, 23, below vv. 7, 10, 12, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, S"". For pi. 
 do-tXyeiais cf. below «. 15 and eio-e/Setais 3'i, also James 2^ with my note. 
 
 8v otts i\ 68J>s T<is oXTiBeias pXa<r(|)ii|i.tie^<reTai.] Cf. Rom. 2^^' ^* (a quota- 
 tion from Isa. 52'') os ev vdpu) KavxacraL, 8ia r^s irapaySaorcms tov vopow 
 TOi' ®t6v aTi/Jid^tK ; TO yap ovop-a ToC Oeov 8t' v/ias l3X.a(r<f>rj[ieiTai iv TOis 
 <i6vt(Tiv, ib. 3^, Tit. 2", James 2^ (where see my note), Apoc. Petri. 7 01 
 fiKa(T<l>rip,ovvTei t^v 68ov t^s 8iKaiocri;vijs. For 68ds see also w. 15 and 
 
II 1-3] NOTES 119 
 
 21 below, and Mt. 2132, Lk. F^, Roin. 3" (btbv dp-fiv-qi), Acts IG^^ {hZhv 
 a-ayrrjpiai), Barn. i. 4, v. 4 68. Siicoiocrwr^s.^ The phrase 68os aXriOtiai 
 comes from Ps. 1192° : it jg opposed to the 'way of lying ' in v. 29. 
 
 3. iv TrXeov^li^ irXao-rots X<J7oi.s 4|i.as e|Jiirop6v(rovTai.] ' Through covetous 
 ness the false teachers will make gain of you by insincere words,' i.e 
 by their flatteries, the opposite of i^iXaSePii^ta dvinrdxptTos in 1 P. 1'^. 
 Contrast with this 1 Th. 2*' ^ ovre yap itotc iv koyia KoXaKia's eyivri$T))j.iy 
 . . oi5t£ irpotjida'tL irXeoi/eftas . . ovre ^TjTouvTes ii avOpwTriov Sd^ov. For 
 causal iv cf. l\ 2i3, 2i8, 2«», Jude 10, Blass 130, 131. 
 
 l|i.iropEvo|iai.] Strictly to travel as a merchant (as in James i^^), then 
 T^ith a transitive force ' to import,' 'purchase,' ' traffic in,' 'make gain 
 or business of,' ^exploiter,' cf. Themist. 298 e^vr. tyjv ffukoa-o^iav, 
 Philo M. ii. p. 536 iveiropeviro rijv \rj0r]v tcov StKacTTtov ' purchased the 
 forgetfulness of the jurors,' Jos. £.J. i. 26. 1 ovSiv ^yeiTo Tr]v KaOaphv 
 S6(Tiv €1 fir] Sl ai/JLaroi i/xTTopevcriTai rr/v ySacrtXeiav, Chion Epist. xi. dpeTijv 
 i/xiroptvo/ieda, oiSevos aXXov irXrjV <^u<re(i)S Kol ^iXoirovla'S wviov, Prov. 3 
 Kpeicraov (rotjiiav iiJi,Tropiv£cr$ai rj ■^pvaiov BrjtTavpovi, Jos. Ant. iv. 6. 8 (ot 
 the Midianitish women) oiS' iiJi.Tropeva6iji,£va.L rijV Zpav rov o-w/xaTO? 
 7rpoaiQKd.fi.eda Ttjv vp-eripav d^Lmarw ' we have not lent an ear to your 
 request with a design of making traffic out of our beauty.' Suicer quotes 
 Greg. Nyss. de Bapt. firj ifiTropevov Tr]v X'^P"' "^"^ f-V iKiricrrii t^s Supcas, 
 Theodoret ras tSiv Trevtynav <TV[i,<j)opa.^ ifiiropevecrOac. The idea is the 
 same as that in 2 Cor. 2^^, 1 Tim. 6'' ' thinking that godliness is a 
 trade ' (7ropio-/x.dv ' a means of gain '). The compound ^pio-Te/iiropos 
 occurs in the longer recension of Ignatius ad Magn. ix. ot ■)(P'-'^'^^I"^''P'"- 
 rov Xoyov KOTrijXtvoi'Tes Kai tov '\t)<TOvv TruA.oCi'Tes and ad Trail, vi. where 
 see Lightfoot's note. 
 
 irXao-Tois.] ' Made up,' ' fictitious,' not found elsewhere in biblical 
 Oreek, cf. Herod, i. 68 ex Xoyov ttXckttov iirtveiKavTe.^ airlav iSiutiav 
 ' banished him, having having brought a charge against him on a false 
 pretext.' Cf. Jos. Vita 65 irpaTTOva-i fjikv ofLoiov ti tois ■n-€p\ a-v/jL^oXaiiov 
 irXaa-To. ypafipara crvvTedeiKoa-i ' they act like those who have forged false 
 •documents in a case of contract,' Philo M. i. p. 1 fivOiKoi's 7rAdo-/tatri 
 rfyv dAijfleiav iiriKp-uxj/avTis. I do not think there is any reference to the' 
 
 <Ti(TO<f>l(Tp.eVOl IXvOoL of P". 
 
 ots rb Kpi|ia ^KuaXaioiKap^et.] ' Over whom the judgment (pronounced 
 against false prophets in the O.T.) has long been impending.' The 
 combination of dpyei and vuorTa^ct reminds one of dpyds and livimrattav 
 in P' ^. The judgment is not idle, but already active in the punish-' 
 ment of other offenders, and gatliering up for these false teachers. 
 ^KiraXai only here and in 31* in biblical Greek, is found in Philo, 
 Josephus, Plutarch, etc The use of compound adverbs, which is 
 comparatively rare in classical Greek {e.g. airapri, €p,vpoa-Oev, Ka6dira$, 
 tioTTLcria, TrapavTiKa), received a great extension in post-Aristotelian 
 writers, see Lobeck's Phryn. p. 45 f. Thus we find the unclassical 
 -inrepdvia, vTrepXiav, ifjidira^, KarivavTL, KarevioTnov in the N.T. 
 
 "' Dr. Bigg quotes Aristid. Apol. xvi oSti) iarlv ti iShs t^s oAijSefos, jirii toi/i 
 iifiovTas airiiv ets t^v aldviov x^'payy^^ ^aaiKclav, which, as he says, appears to 
 be directly taken from this verse combined with 1'*. 
 
120 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ■<i &ir(iXEia avTuv oi vwo-rASei.] The repetition of dn-aJXeia (here per- 
 sonified) for the third time in these three verses is characteristic 
 ot the writer. wa-Tila is only used here and in Mt. 25* (of the 
 slumbering virgins) in the N.T. It is found in LXX. Ps. 121* ou 
 VDO-Tofei ouSe virviacrci 6 ^vXdcra-iov tov 'la-parjk, Isa. 5^^ (of the avengers) 
 ouSe Koiridcrovcnv oiSe vvcrTa^ovo-iv, Prov. 24^^, Nah. 3^^. Compare 
 the scene of the sleeping Eumenides awakened by the shade of 
 Clytemnestra. 
 
 4. A yip o &(hs d'VY^Xwv a(i.opTi]o-dvT<i)v oix 6<|>6£<raTO.] The natural 
 apodosis would have been vnZv oi (jieLo-eTai, but (as above p^i*) the 
 sequence of thought is weakened by the length of the sentence, and 
 the actual apodosis in v. 9 (oTSev KiJpios) takes its shape from the 
 preceding verse, and speaks first of the rescue of Lot, and then of the 
 punishment of the wicked. The absence of the article (which i» 
 present in Jude ") throws a stronger emphasis on angels : even angels, 
 when they sinned, were not spared. For the general structure of the 
 sentence cf. Rom. 11^^ ei yap 6 ®eos rwv Kara (f)V(riv KXadcoi/ ovk etfttltraTOy 
 oiJSc (TOV <t>ei(TCTai, Mt. 6'". 
 
 treipois t6^ov Taprapi&o-as iroplSuKtv.J For creipoTi see Introduction on 
 the text, areipo's or trtpds is properly a pit for the storage of grain as in 
 Demosth. p. 100 ad fin. ev rolg ©paKiois cripois, where the scholiast- 
 explains Tous 6i)travpov% koX to. opvy/iara iv ot? Karidivro to, (nripfiaTa 
 (different kinds of grain) o-ipovs IkoXovv oi ®paKeq koI ot AijSvcs. In 
 the Etym. Magn. it is defined as a fitting receptacle for the storing of 
 wheat and pulse. So Artemid. ii. 24, Varro B.R. i. 57 quidam granaria. 
 habent sub terris, speluncas, quas vocant cnipovi. In Anaxandridas 
 op. Athen.iv. 131 it seems to mean a large bin for holding edible roots 
 (jSoX^ot). It is also used of the stores of grain in an ant hill (Ael. 
 ^.A. ii. 25, vi. 43), of a pit made for trapping a wolf (Longus i. 11), 
 of the pit into which Antigcnes was thrown and burnt alive (Diod. 
 xix. 44, though cropov is read there instead of creipov by one of the 
 editors, see Wesseling's note). In the book of Enoch the watchers are 
 sometimes said to be punished by being bound in chains, see Jude v.Q-y 
 sometimes by being buried alive, see ch. x. 4 f. (of Azazel) ififiaXe 
 avTov eh ro ckotos koX avoi^ov rijv ipyj/iov rijv ov<Tav iv rg ipi^p-fl ^ovSatjX., 
 Koi CKct. ■TTopevOeti /Sake avTov Koi VTroOe^ auriS KWovs ofets Kat Xi6ov9 
 Tpa^^els Koi iiriKdKvtj/ov avrto o-kotoi;, koI oiKijaarco eKei eis tov aiuva . . . 
 /cai <f>u>'s p.ri deoipeiTio, ib. 12 (of Shemjaza and his companions) S^o-ov 
 aiiTov's tTTi ffiSo/iT^KOVTa yei/eas eis Tas va^as T^s yrjs . . . lo)s (rvvreXeaOy 
 KpCfia TOV aimvos tu>v ahovtov, ch. xviii. 14, xix. 1 ' at the bounds of 
 heaven and earth is the prison for the stars of heaven which trans- 
 gressed the commandment of God, and for the angels who connected 
 themselves with women . . . till the day of the great judgment ' ; xxi. 
 contains a further description of the prison : ' and the place was cleft 
 as far as the abyss being full of great descending columns of fire,' 
 bcxxviii. 1 ' the first star which had fallen from heaven was bound 
 hand and foot and laid in an abyss : now that abyss was narrow and 
 
 * The Gizeh text has rip A. omitting tJ ipii/iri (Charles p. 337). 
 
II 3, 4] NOTES 121 
 
 deep and horrible and dark.' Keil thinks there may be a reference to 
 Isa. 24^1' 2^. ' It shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall 
 punish the host of the high ones on high, and the kings of the earth 
 upon the earth. And they shall be gathered together as prisoners are 
 gathered in the pit (eh Seo-^xuT^piov) and shall be shut up in the prison 
 («is d^vpta/ia), and after many days shall they be visited.' Considering 
 what is said in these passages of the punishment of the apostate 
 angels, I feel very doubtful as to whether their place of confinement 
 could be fitly described by the word cnpos, which does not seem to 
 suggest anything awful or terrible. Supposing, as I think we must,^ 
 that 2 Pet. was partly copied from Jude, the relation of this verse to 
 Jude 6 would be more easily explained, if the original reading of 
 2 Pet. were o-€tpats, which as the substitution of a more elegant word 
 for the common-place Secrixoi, would be in accordance with our author's 
 procedure elsewhere. The scholiast to Demosthenes, quoted above, 
 states that the word o-tpds was in use in Egypt. Supposing it to have 
 been better known than the word o-eipa to the scribes of X and B, it 
 might easily happen that the former was unconsciously written in the 
 place of the latter. We also find o-£tpats attested by Didymus, Cyril, 
 Ephrem Syr., Procopius, Damascenus, CEcumenius, and Theophylact, as 
 well as by most cursives and versions. The word occurs in the LXX. in 
 the sense of fetters, Prov. 5^^ irapavofiiai avBpa ayptvovcri, crctpais 8e tZv 
 lavrov a/xapriuv EKatrTOs (Ti^iyyerai. S6<|)ov occurs below v. 17, twice in 
 Jude, once in Heb. 1 2^^, not in LXX. irapaSCSuiii is usually followed by a 
 dative of the person, as Mt. 18^* xapeStoxev avrov Toi'i ^acravicrTali;, and 
 an accusative preceded by cts of the thing, as Acts 8^ TrapeSiSou cts 
 <^uXoKijv, 2 Cor. 4^^ eis Oavarov. We find TrapeSujKaf lavTov's tij a.<reX.yeiq. 
 Eph. 4^', Trap. X'qOy Ti Dion. H. ad Pomp. p. 768, but these are very 
 different from the datives here. While our dative is certainly unusual, 
 I cannot see that it specially favours either of the readings : ' to 
 deliver to pits ' is not easier than ' to deliver to chains.' Von Soden 
 compares Apoc. 20^'^ dSov ayycXov KarafiaLvovra Ik tuv oupavov, ep^ovra 
 rrjv k\€iv rrji a,l3v(T(Tov Koi a.X.v(nv fi.e.ya.\-qv . . . koi iKpdTrjtrev tov 
 ApaKOVTa . . . koX eSijcrev auTov }(t\ia £tij koi i^aXev avTCV cis t^v a^vcraov. 
 AJford illustrates aeipah ^6<j>ov by Wisdom 171" (of the Egyptian 
 plague of darkness) /xia aKva-a (tkotovs iravres i8idrj<Tav : the darkness 
 constituted the chain which prevented them from moving : so in v. 2 
 of the same chapter we have Sea-fjuoi ctkotous koi /*oKpas weS^rai vvkto^ 
 and in V, 15 e^povptiTO eis rrjv d(Ti&ripov elpKrijv KaraKXeicrdcis. i 
 
 raprapiSa-as.] a-ir. \ey. See for the compound KaraTapTupoio Sext. 
 P.H. iii. 24. 210 6 Zeus tov Kpovov KaTiTaprdpuKTiv with the note of 
 Fabricius. In Enoch 20"'' Uriel is the ruler of Tartarus. Charles (p. 42) 
 notices the appropriate use of ' rapTapuxras in connexion with the 
 fallen angels : Tartarus was originally the place of punishment of the 
 Titans.' The substantive is found in Job 40^^ i-n-eXOoiv eV opos axpo- 
 TOfiov, iiroiTjtre ■xa.pp.ovrjv nTpd-trocrii' iv tw raprdpta (where the R.V. hag. 
 the entirely different ' Behold now behemoth which I made with thee ;. 
 
 ' See Introduction on the subject. 
 
122 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 he eatefch grass as an ox,' and in 41^^ rov Se rdprapov t^s a^va-a-ov 
 wa-irep alx/idKioTov (^yijTai), which is again entirely unlike the Hebrew ; 
 also in Philo M. 2 p. 433 (the wicked) virocrvpria-erai KaTwrarw, irpos 
 avTov rdprapov Koi fiaOv o-kotos ii>tx6ck, Jos. c. Ap. ii. 33 (of the Greek 
 mythology) roiis -irpecrfivTdTovs avTUsv {sc. tSiv Beuiv) iv Tw Taprapw ScSc- 
 {levovi, cf. Hippol. Refut. p. 544, 1. 28 foil. Si' ^s en-tyvwo-etos eK<f)ivi«r0€ 
 firepxop.a'yjv irvpo<s Kpiaias a7rf.L\rjv koX raprdpov ifl^epov ofi/ia affywruTTOV 
 • . . KOi Taprapov^MV dyyiKuyv KoXaariov op/xa ael fitvov iv diret\ij. Acta 
 Thomae 32, where the serpent who tempted Eve says eyoJ ei^i 6 t^v 
 afivo-aov tov raprdpov ot/tSj/, Acta Philippi 110. For the reasons stated 
 in the Introduction on the Text, I am inclined to prefer the longer 
 reading KoXa^pp.ivov; T-qpfiv (on which see below v. 9) to the shorter 
 ■rrjpovp.ivov's. The infinitive would be epexegetic after napiSwKev. 
 
 5. apxaCov KiSo-fiov o«k lif>cCcraTo.] The second example of punishment 
 •does not appear in Jude. It is however closely connected with the sin 
 of the angels in Gen. 6. The destruction of the ancient world by 
 water is referred to again in 3" in contrast to the present world which 
 is doomed to be destroyed by fire. Compare Sir. 16^ ovk i^iXdxraTO 
 TTtpl tS>v apxaiuiv yiydvTiav. The omission of the article is common in 
 2 Pet. See koo-juoi airefiiov, -iroXeK 'S,oS6p.<av, just below and Introduction 
 on Grammar. 
 
 dXXd {IySoov Nu« SiKaioa-iivT|s K'fjpvKa i(t>v^<'^C'<'- ] The negative state- 
 ment ouK i<f>ei(raTo is contrasted with the positive (brought a flood on 
 the world of the ungodly at the time when he saved Noah) by dWa, 
 just as the ovk ec^eto-aro of the preceding verse is contrasted with 
 o-eipois irapiSiaxev ; but the contrast is blurred from the fact that the 
 writer wishes to combine the evidence of mercy with that of judgment. 
 He even gives more prominence to the former by putting the latter 
 into the participial form ; though his limitation of the number of 
 the saved to eight prepares the way for the general statement of 
 judgment on the wicked. For SvSoov cf. 1 Pet. 32o ev r/p-ipaK Nuic 
 KaTao"K6i;a^o/i£wjs klJSwtov, eis ^v oXiyoi, rovT t(rTiv okto) ipv\al i(TU>6ri(rav 
 -8i' vSaroi, Clem. Al. p. 812 init. (on the Transfiguration) 6 Kuptos, 
 TeTapros di'ajSas «ts to opos, c/ctos yiverai, Kal <f>u)Ti 7repiXdp,ir€Tai ttvev- 
 fjMTiKiS, Tr/V ovvapiv TTjv air' avTOv irapayvp.vwcra'; ets otrov oTov re rjv 
 ■loeiv ToTs opav iKkeyei(ri, 8i f/38o/iij« a.vaKrjpvcr<T6p,tv(K T^s ^<i)v^s vios 
 cli/at ®eov. The Greeks usually add airds with this peculiar use 
 of the ordinal, but Winer quotes as examples of the omission of 
 the pronoun, Plato Leffg. iii. 695 c Xa^lbv rijv apxr/v I^So/aos, 
 Plut. Pelop. 13 £ts o'lKcav ScuSeVaros KareXOwv. Others compare 
 lj88o/(os (XTTo 'ASdp, in Jude 14 and think that Noah may be 
 similarly described either as 8th from Adam, or the 8th preacher 
 of righteousness. But, if Enoch is 7th, Noah, his great-grandson 
 (Gen. 5) must be 10th (so Jos. Ant. I. 3. 2 ^v 8' aires ctTro 'A8a- 
 p.ov ScWtos) not 8th. Hundhausen refers to J. Lightfoot, Heinsius, 
 and others, as maintaining that Noah might be described as the 
 8th preacher, because Enos, the son of Seth, is said to have been the 
 first to call upon God (Gen. 42<'). But he rightly replies that we 
 -have no knowledge of such a series of preachers, and that Noah is 
 
II 4-6] ]SIOTES 123 
 
 here called K^pv$, not simply as one of a line of unknown preachers, 
 but as having actually warned the antediluvians of the approaching 
 judgment. That such was the Jewish tradition is proved by Spitta 
 from Jos. Ant. i. 3. 1 Nm;^os Se toTs irpaTTO/iivoi^ vir' avrSsv hvcrxipatviov 
 - . . aruBfv eiri to KpelrTOV rrjv Sidvoiav avTOVi Kal ras irpafcis fiera- 
 if>ep€iv. Sib. Orac. i. 128 NiiJe Se/xas ddpcrwov iov Xaoi<ri re wcuri 
 KT^pviov fierdvoiav, ottus (tu}6u)itlv ajravTcs. where also his sermon is given 
 ■extending from 1. 150 to 200. So Clem. Rom. i. 7 Nuie tKi^pv^ev fierd- 
 voiav Koi ol vTraKOv<ravTei i<TU>6ri<Tav, ib, 9 NSe TritTTOS eiipiOeii . . . 
 TraKiyyiveaMv Kocr/xm iKrjpv^ev, Pauli Apoccdypsis (Tisch. p. 68) «yo) et/Ai 
 Ntiie . . . KaX ovk iiTava-dp,r[v toIs dvOpuiwois Kr]pv<rare.iv, MeravotiTC, tSoir yap 
 jcaraKAuo-ftos IpxeroLL, Theoph. ad Autol. iii. 19, also quotations from the 
 Mischna and the Koran in Spitta p. 147. On the other hand it is of 
 great importance to mention the small number of those who were 
 saved in the ark. ' God spared only eight persons out of the ancient 
 world,' which explains the prominent position given to oySooi'. In his 
 reference to Noah and Lot, the author differs from Jude by calling 
 attention to the exhibition of mercy in the midst of judgment. 
 
 SiKau>o-vvi]s K^ipvKa.] The noun K-qpv^ occurs in the N.T. in this 
 sense only here and in 1 Tim. 2^, and 2 Tim. l^i ets o iriOrjv cyu 
 j(rjpv$ icat dir6crTo\oi, but the verb Ktjpv(r<7<a is common. Clement of 
 Rome (v.) speaks of St. Paul as Ki^pvi yf.vop.ivo's Iv rij avaroky Kal kv 
 TTJ Svirei, and so Epict. Diss. iii. 21. 13 (quoted by Lightfoot in loco) 
 ■calls his ideal philosopher K-^pv^ tZv deZv. In the Book of Enoch 
 12*, 15*, Enoch is addressed as 'Thou scribe of righteousness.' Here 
 Slk. k. is contrasted with Koa-fuo dcrepSiv. Noah is called avdptoiros StVaios 
 in Gen 6^, like Lot below v. 9. 
 
 KaTaK\iHr|i&v Koo-fUji aa-t^v eirajas.l See below 3^ 6 Tore Kocrp.o's vSart 
 xaTaKXva-eek diru>\iTo and Mt. 24»8'39 Lk. 17^7, Gen. 6", where the 
 same noun is used. For iird^a^ cf. n. on i-irdyovre's v. 1, and for the 
 form of the aor. Lk. 13^*, Acts U^'', Winer p. 99, Veitoh s.v. 
 ayia, who quotes exx. of this form from Herod. Thucyd. Xen. 
 Antiph. as well as later writers. The aorist participle is, I think, 
 best understood as introducing a condition of things preceding the 
 action of ifjivXaiev : Noah was kept safe in the flood which came on 
 the world of the ungodly. 
 
 6. Kal irAcis SoS(S|i<i>v Kal FoiuSppas reijipcJiras.] Winer (pp. 666-668) 
 and Blass (p. 98) take this as a gen. appositionis, like Rom. 4^^ 
 o-i/jueiov lAo/Je irepiTop,^';, and the Latin urbs Rornae, virtus con- 
 tinentiae. On the contrary A. Buttman (p. 68) and Spitta take it as 
 possessive, ' the cities belonging to Sodom and Gomorrah,' which the 
 latter compares with the more exact language of Jude, SoSo/^a xai 
 To/ioppa Koi al irepl avros iroAeis. I prefer the former explanation, 
 as the latter strictly taken refers only to at ircpl auras TroXew, omit- 
 ting the principal cities. Probably our author introduced the 
 pleonastic ttoXcis here from his recollection of Jude. The very rare 
 T€tf>p6(o, meaning either to cover with, or to convert into, ashes (cf. 
 aWaXoo)), is found in the description of an eruption of Vesuvius (Dio 
 Cass. Ixvi. p. 1094) tZv iv fiea-a Kpavpovfi-evaiv (being parched) Kal 
 
124 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Tt<j>povfiev(ov (overwhelmed with ashes), Lye. Cass. 227 re<l>pw(rai yvia 
 Ari/jivaCw -injpi. iKT€<j)p6ia is also used by Strabo and Plutarch. 
 Philo (M. 2. p. 21) uses the word rcc^pa of the overthrow of Sodom, 
 whose abnormal sin was followed by abnormal punishment, rfpApa 
 fuS. at pXv ivavSpov(Tai iroX.ei's Ta^os tZv o'lKTjTopiav iyeyivTjvTO, ai Se e/c 
 \idtav KoX ivKiav KaracTKeval rlcjipa Koi Xctt'^ kovls. 
 
 KaTa(rrpo<j>j Kar^KpivEv.] For the reading and construction see Introd. 
 on the Text. Cf. also Phryn. (p. 475 Lob.), where other exx. of the 
 unclassical construction are given, also Roby §1199 for exx. of the 
 Latin construction morti damnare instead of the more usual ad or in 
 metalla damnare, and Munro on Lucr. vi. 1232. It might seem 
 however that the ' condemnation to destruction ' should precede and 
 not follow Te<^p(icTas. Von Soden answers that the phrase includes the 
 carrying out of the judgment, citing Rom. 8^ KarcKpive ttjv afiapTiav iv 
 arapKi, and 1 Cor. IP^ Kpii'o/x.cvoi Se virb rov Kvpiov iraiZevop.iOa, Iva /xii 
 <Tvv Tw Koa-fiw KaraKpiOZp-ev. Another possible and, I think, a better 
 interpretation is that the dat. Karaa-Tpofjiy should be here taken as the 
 dative of the instrument. In like manner the Lat. abl. is sometimes 
 used with damnare, causing occasional ambiguity, as Munro says I c. 
 The sense would then be ' to condemn, or pass sentence upon, by de- 
 stroying.' Clem. Al. (Paed. iii. p. 280), quoting Jude, dwells on the 
 lesson to be derived from the history of Sodom. In Gen. 19^* we have 
 Kvpios tPpt^fv iirX ^o&Ofia koi T6p.oppa delov kol inip Trapa Kuptoti cf 
 ovpavov, after which follows in v. 25 koI KaTicTpeil/e ras iroXcis ravrais, 
 the latter seeming to imply an earthquake which followed the rain of 
 fire and overthrew the cities. So Spitta and Weiss. Cf. Strabo xvi. 
 2. 44 of the district by the Dead Sea, which he calls yrj re(f>p<i>8ri's, and 
 says that its appearance bears out the story told by the inhabitants 
 that iirb treier/tSv Kai a.va^v(riqp.a.7i3>v Trt'pos koi 6€pp,S>v vSoltiov a(T(j>a\.TUiSu>v 
 T€ Kol OeuaSSiv i) Xifivrj Trpoireo'oi . . . at re TroXcts KaraTroSciev, also Pliny's 
 account of the eruption of Vesuvius {Sp. vi. 16. 6) 'the cloud arising 
 from the crater was sometimes light, sometimes dark, prout terram 
 cineremve sustulerat, ib. 11 iam navibus cinis incidebat calidior et 
 densior, ib. 14 area . . . ita iam cinere mixtisque pumicibus oppleta 
 surrexerat, ut si longior in cubiculo mora, exitus negaretur, Up. vi. 
 20. 16 tenebrae rursus, cinis rursus multus et gravis. Hunc identidem 
 adsurgentes excutiebamus ; operti alioqui atque etiam oblisi pondere 
 essemus . . . mox verus dies . . . occursabant trepidantibus adhuc 
 oculis mutata omnia altoque cinere tanquam nive obducta.' This 
 shows that Te<j>p6iii must here mean ' to cover with ashes,' not, as most 
 editors, ' to reduce to ashes.' Pliny also speaks of the accompanying 
 earthquake (vi. 20. 3), ' praecesserat per multos dies tremor terrae . . . 
 ille vero nocte ita invaluit, ut non moveri omnia, sed verti crede- 
 rentur . . . iam quassatis circumiacentibus te^;tis . . . magnus et certus 
 ruinae metus.' The truth of this description is proved by the present 
 condition of Pompeii and by the accounts of the late terrible erup- 
 tions in the West Indies. 
 
 iirtSSei-yfia pcXXiivTuv airep^iriv reBeiKMs.] For the reading and construction 
 see Introd. on Text. Compare Glem. Al. 280 evos 8e vToSeiy/naros /un/o-flijo-o- 
 
II 6-8] NOTES 125 
 
 fiai, . . . TO SoSo/itrSv TrdOos, KptVis jnev dSiKijoracri, TratSa'ywyta 8e UKOva'acnVi 
 Phryn, (p. 42 Lob.) condemns viro8. as un-Attic. 
 
 7. Kal SCKaiov Air . . . Ipuo-aro.] Of. Abraham's pleading in Gen. 18^3 
 /ii] crwaTroXeoTjs SiKaLov fiera dcre;8oCs, and Wisdom 10^ avrrj (croijiia) 
 hiKaiov i^aTroXXvfJi,ivoiv acre^Stv ippvcraro, <l>vy6vTa KaTajSacTLOV Trvp Xltvra- 
 irokfuis- The verb occurs again in ti. 9 ; the form ipva-aro is supported 
 by B, see Lightfoot on Col. P^. 
 
 KaTairovov|i€vov.] Cf. Acts 7"^* lSu)v Tiva a8iKOv/xevov r)fjiVvaro koX 
 tTTO^rjcrev ckSi'kijctiv tu Kara-Trovovfjiivto, 3 Macc. 2^ Kupie . . . 7rp6cr)(ei rj/xlv 
 KaraTTovovfLivoii viro di/ocrtov Kat PijiriXov, Theophr. GJiMr. 8 tous aKouovTas 
 jtaTttirovovvTcs rats \pe.vZoXoyiaL<s. 
 
 4iri TTjs Twv d6^(r|i.<av ev arcXYeC^ avao'Tpoit>T)s.l ' By the licentious be- 
 haviour of the wicked.' For other exx. of a compact articular phrase 
 see Introd. on Grammar and 1* t^s iv t(3 koctixw iv iiri6vfji,ia <^^opas, 
 where, as here, an ev-clause is incorporated : cf. 1 Pet. 3^ rrjv iv <j>6l3(a 
 ayvijv ava<TTpocj>'qv, ih. ■». 16 Tr]v ayaOrjV iv Xp«rT<3 ava(rTpo<j>T^v. For the 
 gen. see n. on James 3* iiro ai/c/iwv iXawo/juva, Philo i. p. 609 xaTa- 
 Kci/Toij/icvos VTTO <^pci/o;8\aj8eias. fl.66ir|jios occurs again in 3^'', alone in 
 N.T., also in 3 Macc. 5'^ t^s aOea-iJLov irpoSeVecos Steo-t^aXftevos, ib. 6^''. 
 Not used by classical writers. The cognate aOifiiro's is used in 1 Pet. 4', 
 Philo has eKOea-fLo^ in the same sense, cf. Abrah. 369 oxua.'S iK6ecrfiovi 
 juiETaSuaKovTcs, ib. iKcjjvXovi Kal iKQi<Tfiov<s <ruvoSous (of Sodom), Gigant. 
 288 Tas iKv6fJt.ovi Kal iKdicrixovs o/juKia's t£ Kal fxt^us (of the Watchers). 
 Ifc is a stronger word than avo/io;, because 6ta-[i6s is used especially 
 of a divine ordinance, a fundamental law. 
 
 8. pX^jijiaTi 7ap Kal oko'q Stxaios IvKaroiKwv iv airols.] For the reading 
 see Introd. on Text. The rare eiK. is found in Herod, iv. 204 ^ao-tXeus 
 Se <7^t iSaiKi Kutji/ijv iyKaTOLKrjcraL, Eur. Antiope fr. 198 ef Sv Kivotuiv 
 iyKaroiK-qa-eis 8o/iois. Alford with most commentators takes /3\e/i/«,aTi 
 in the objective sense of ™ jSkeTreiv, where the eye brings the man into 
 communication with an external object ; but the word is generally 
 subjective, where the eye reveals to outsiders the inner feeling of 
 the man : see exx. in Wetstein. I quote one from Philo Conf. Zing. 
 i. p. 406 Kal yap iKTeTfJirjfievoi y\S)cr(rav v€uy«a<rt Kat /8A,e/ijiia<ri Kal rais 
 ■aXXxiK tov (rui/xaTos <T)(i(T€<TL Kal Kivrj(r€(Tiv, oiy^ rJTTOV t^s 8ia Xoyw/ 
 irpoipopas, a av OeX-iaa-iv viroa-rjiJi.aLvov(rLV. Wetstein would interpret it of 
 the look and report of the Sodomites by which Lot was vexed, but the 
 interval between /SAc/i/xart and i^aa-dvi^ev makes this improbable. I 
 prefer the Vulgate aspectu et auditu iustus ' the righteousness of the 
 man showed itself in his shrinking from the sights and sounds which 
 met him on every side ' : lit. ' righteous in look and in hearing he 
 tortured himself at their lawless deeds while he lived among them.' i 
 Cf. Field Notes on N.T. p. 241, Chase on 2 Pet. in Hastings' D. of B. 
 iii. 867. 
 
 '^|iepdv l£ TJii^pas ilfuxV SiKaCay dv(!|iiOis ^pyois ipao-dvittv.J Cf. Fs. 96^ 
 
 ' Perhaps Clem. Al. Q. Div. Serv. p. 950 el $\4iroi(v vphs rhv xipioy irtvei t^ 
 fiKefifiari, KaOdirep els ayaOov Ku0epv/iTov i/eS/ia SeSopKtiTer, ri jSo^Aerai, ri irpoffT<iffaet^ 
 ri ffTjiJtalvetf ri SiSaitri roTs avTov vairais Tb ff{ivOi)fia combines the two meanings. It 
 describes a fixed gaze intent on the actions of the pilot. 
 
126 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 tva.yyf\it,i<T6t rjfiipav ef fj/jLepai to (rwTrjpiov avTov, Jer. 52'* a portion 
 was given to him from the king e| ri/iepas cts ^/i.epav, Gen. 391", Numb. 
 30^*, 2 Clem. R. 1 1 , in a quotation from what is called a, irpoijiijTiKos 
 \6y OS, which corresponds closely with£2 P. 3* ravra ttolvto. ^/covo-a/ior 
 Koi IttI tSjv iraTipmv ij/aGi', ^/ueis 8e rj ijl € p av ii ■^ fie pas 7r/DOO"0£j(O/tev0t 
 ovhiv TovToiv iiapaKafjiev. The same passage is quoted with slight varia- 
 tions in 1 Clem. R. 23, where it is introduced as ij ypa<t>v avrrj. 
 Lightfoot calls attention to these resemblances, and thinks the quotation 
 is probably taken from the apocryphal Eldad and Modad. Hilgenfeld 
 suggests the Assumption of Moses. The phrase is used by Euripides 
 {Rhesus 443) and Heniochus (c. 350 B.C.) in Mein. Fr. Com. vol. 3, 
 p. 563. See Blass Gr. (Ind. s. ■q/nepa). It is equivalent to the Hebraic 
 yi^epa Koi rjin-fpa- of i Cor. 4^®, and rjfiipav koB' fffiipav of Ps. 68'*. 
 
 P(uravC£(D.] Used of testing, questioning, especially by the use of 
 torture ; then for bodily pain in general, as Mk. S' fi-ff fie. /Sacraviarjs, 
 Wisdom 11* fier opyrfs Kpivofievoi do-e/Seis e^atraviiflVTO ; of disease, 
 Mt. 8" heivws Paaavitpfievos, 1 Sam. 5^ iPapvv&ri xelp JLvpiov IttI tovS 
 'A^toTLOvs KOI e^aa-dvurev avrovs ; then of fatigue, Mk 6** ^aa-avi^o/ievovs^ 
 ev Tia eXavi/eiv ; lastly of mental suffering, as in Plut. Vit. 89 6c, where 
 Antigonus says to a messenger who had been tardy in bringing good 
 news, ouTws rjfias Paxravitras Siktjv v(f>e^eis ' you shall pay for keeping me 
 so long on tenterhooks,' Ign. Eph. 8 orav firfhepXa einJBvfiui eplfpeurrax ev 
 ilfiiv 7) Swafievrj vfias ySacavtirai, apa Kara 0£ov ^^re, Clem. Al. Sir. ii. 55, 
 p. 458 fitravoZv i<f>' ols eSpaaev ovKeri Troiei rj Xe'yet, PairavilC/ov he ii^t' 
 ols rjfiaprev r-qv eavTOv i/'ux'^" ayaOoepyei, which is perhaps a reminis- 
 cence of our text. There is a peculiarity in the expression here : 
 we should rather have expected Paa-avicrBeis, just as in Job. 11^* 
 erdpa^ev eavTov might seem to be equivalent to Job. 13^1 erapaxOrj ™ 
 m/evfiaTi, like the French reflexive verb. Augustin however (quoted 
 by Westcott) gives it a special force ' turbatus est Christus quia 
 voluit,' cf. the play 'Eavroi' Tifiwpovfievos- AJford on our text compares 
 our use of the phrase 'distress yourself (so 'vex yourself,' 'trouble 
 yourself,' 'worry yourself,' 'put yourself out'). For eavrdv the writer 
 substitutes ^^xV SiKatav, repeating the idea of justice already em- 
 bodied in Si/caios. In an ordinary writer we should have expected rrfv 
 SiKaCav avTov i/'i^x'?") ^^^ 2 Pet. abounds in anarthrous phrases, and he 
 may even have intended to give it an abstract character ' torturing a 
 righteous soul,' as giving greater prominence to the epithet. I cannot 
 agree with Dr. Bigg's interpretation 'By sight and hearing that 
 righteous man, as he dwelt among them, day by day put his righteous 
 soul to the touch by lawless deeds ' and ' emerged victorious from the 
 ordeal.' Such a use of /Sao-avt^o) may perhaps be supported by PhUost. 
 Apoll. iii. 18 6 <^tXo<TO<f>ri(Tiiv fiiWtov eavrov pacaviaas Im^eipel, but could 
 it be followed by such a dative 1 
 
 dv(i|iois 8p7ois.] The adjective is used (a) of persons who are not 
 subject to law. Gentiles, as in Acts 2*^, 1 Cor. 9*' ; (6) of persons who 
 break the law, malefactors, Lk. 22"' ; (c) of lawless deeds, as here and 
 in Prov. 1'* oi crwrekovvres ra avofia Job. 34'^ i8t o"v tov fiurovvTa avofia. 
 
 9. oIScv Kiiptos cio-cPets ^k ircipa<r)iov pv«r6ai.] Here we have the apo- 
 
II 8-10] NOTES 127 
 
 dosis to €1 yap — ovK e<fteta-aTo in v. 4, modified to suit the second 
 member of the protasis contained in w. 5 and 7 dA.Aa oySoov Nie 
 f<f>v\.a^iv . . . Kttt SiKaiov AiiT ipv(raro. Notice the repetition of pveudai 
 from V. 7. Compare for the general meaning of the passage Ps. 1^ 
 yivfoo'Kei Kupios oSov Si/catW, Kal 68os a(re/3S>v aTroXeiTat ; for infin. with 
 oT8a 1 Tim. 3^, James 4^^, Mt. 7^1 ; for the meaning of ir£ipa(r/ios 
 James 1^ with my note and comments, Apoc. 3^" icd-yto ere Trjp-qa-ia ck rtj's 
 mpai Tov Treipaa/ioO. Noah and Lot were exposed to trial, as standing 
 alone amid mockers and unbelievers. 
 
 olSCkovs 8^ €18 TJiiepav KpCa-£(os KoXaSojiEvovs Tijpeiv.] Forijp,. Kpicr. see 3^ and 
 note on Jude v. 6. The phrase koX. rr\p. agrees with the account given 
 in 1 Pet. 3'^ of i-ots iv ij)vA.aKfj irveup.ao-iv who had been disobedient in 
 the days of Noah, to whom Christ preached, ^avaToi^cis fiiv a-apKi, 
 ^laoTTOLTidih 8c ■n-vevp.ari, and also with the account of the fallen angels 
 in the Book of Enoch (see n. on v. 4 above). 
 
 10. |j.aXio*Ta 8^ Tovs dirCo-w irapKos cv eiri6ii[JLia, p.iao'p.ov iropcvoiJi^vovs. 1 
 Prominence is here given to the licentiousness on which Jude laid so 
 much stress in his description of the sin of the angels and of Sodom 
 (v. 7) as typical of the sin of the libertines (v. 8). So far our author 
 had only alluded vaguely to them by his use of the word aa-iKyeia in 
 vv. 2 and 7. For the compact articular phrase see above on ■«. 5. On 
 oxio-o) o-apKos see Jude v. 7. The word omcroi is often used of following 
 a teacher or leader, as in Mt. 4^' 8cvTe oiria-o) /xov ; so of following Satan 
 in 1 Tim. 5'^, of the worship of Baal in Deut. 4^, Jer. 2'^^ ; then of 
 surrendering ourselves to evil practices or passions, as here and in Isa. 
 65^ Tois TTopcuo/iei/ois oriu ov KaKij, akX. oiricra) rwv afiapriZv avTwv. 
 Similarly in the Baptismal Service the candidate promises that he will 
 not follow nor be led by the lusts of the flesh. Jude's distinctive erepas 
 is here omitted, unless we suppose it to be represented by ij.iaafi.ov. 
 Alford translates i-irLOvfiia fitacrfiov ' lust of pollution,' which he 
 explains as ' lust hankering after unlawful and polluting use of the 
 flesh.' I think it is more natural to regard it as another instance of 
 the gen. qualitatis, so frequent with this author, see above 2^ on 
 aipeo-Eis dTToXcias. For iropevop.evot see On Jude v. IQ and cf. 1 Pet. 4^. 
 |i.iao-|juSs found here only in N.T., occurs in Wisdom 14^^ i/fvp^Sv /xtatrp.ds, 
 1 Mace. 4^^ ' who cleansed the sanctuary and bare out the defiled 
 stones (tov? XiOovs tov p,iacrfiov) into an unclean place,' 2'est. Levi. 17. 
 jU(W/u.a occurs below v. 20, fuaivo) in Jude v. 8. 
 
 KvpioTTiTos KaTa<|)povoBvTas.] See n. on Jude v. 8. Here it seems most 
 natural to understand Kvp. in an abstract sense. Such a variation 
 from Jude's meaning is very common in our author. The leading 
 reference however may be the same, viz., to the irreverence 
 shown towards the angels by the men of Sodom, as well as to the 
 denial of the Lord on the part of the libertines (see 2^ above). 
 
 ToX|n]Tal aved8cL5.] WH. and Treg. separate the words by a comma. 
 I have followed Nestle's punctuation, taking av9. as an epithet of toX/x. 
 with Bengel, Spitta, and others. In a somewhat similar phrase in 
 Jude 1 6 ovToi euTiv yoyyvaraC, ij.iij.^lixoipoi, I have retained the dividing 
 comma, as it seemed to me that the weighty word jxe.p,\fiCfwipoi was 
 
128 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 better able to stand on its own basis. Prom this point the writer 
 addresses himself directly to the libertines. We have no good English 
 equivalent for the substantive to\., ' headstrong dare-devUs ' would be 
 too flattering : perhaps 'shameless and headstrong.' The meaning of 
 To\[ji.rjTi^s is suggested by Jude 9 ovk iToXfjLrja-ev and Jos. Ant. i. 11. 4, 
 where speaking of the behaviour of the men of Sodom, he says o 0eos 
 dyavaKTjjo-as airSiv iiri TOts To\ii.rifi.(un tous ixtv rj/J-avpaxrev. So we find 
 Tokfit] joined with avcLUT-xyvna, in Arist. Thesmoph. 702, Isaeus 60 fin., 
 Antipho 123, Plat. Apol. 38 d, avail's koI Tokn.rip6<s in Antipho 122. 
 ToKfiryr-rj's is found in Thuc. i. 70 oi ph/ koX irapa. hvvafi.iv ToXfirjral koI 
 irapa yvu>p.rjv Kivhwevrai, Plut. V. 988 P ToX/iijras ovTas dyaOovi, Jos. 
 £.J. iii. 10. 2 'lovSoLoi fxev, £t KOI (TcfioSpa roXfii/jTal kol davdrov Kara- 
 (j}povovvT€s, dXXa iroXip.iav direipoi. The only other place in the N.T. in 
 which au^aSiys is found is 1 Tit. V ' the iiria-KOTro's is to be p,rj avOdSrj^.' 
 
 S(SSas oi TpE)iiovo-iv pXao-<|>T](jioOvT£s.] See on Jude 8. For the comple- 
 mentary participle in place of the infinitive (as in Soph. Oed. Col. 128 
 as Tpep.oiJ,ev Xeyetv) see Winer p. 434 foil., and cf. Lycurg. p. 150. 6 
 ovre TrjV aKpoiroXiv • . . irpoSiSovi iffto^i^Oy). This is Nestle's view of 
 the construction, in which I am inclined to concur ; if so, we should 
 omit the comma placed after rpi/iova-Lv by WH. According to the 
 .other construction Sofas is governed by rpe/jiovcnv, for which compare 
 Isa. 66^ Tpip,ovTa Tois Aoyotis /x.oii. 
 
 11. fiwov.] 'Whereas,' 'seeing that,' lit. ' in a case in which,' as in 
 1 Cor. 3' oTTov yap iv vplv ^^Xos koi cpts, o^X' "'"■pKiKoi icrre ; 4 Mace. 2^* 
 (6 v6p,os KOL rfji <I>lX<i>v (rvVTjBeiai Seo-Trd^ei") Kal p,i] vopia"qTe ■TrapdSo^ov 
 fT;'ai, OTTOV ye Koi iy(Opa% iiriKpaTeiv 6 Xoyu^fio^ SvvaraL Sto, tov vofjiov, 
 ib. 6^* SiKaLov i<7Tiv o/jLoXoyeLV r/pS,'; to Kpdroi eli/ai tov Xoyurp-ov, ottov yc 
 Kal tSiv e$(o6ev dXyrjh6v(i}v iiriKpareZ Common in classical writers, as 
 Antipho p. 112 ottou Se prj y)6iXri(T€v kKey)(Oviron^<Ta(T6aLTSiv ir€Trpaypev<i>v, 
 TTcus TTepi y Si/ ovk r/OeXirja-e irvdicrBai, eyxcopei avTW irepl tovtiov €i8ivai ; 
 Andocides p. 12 ottov toivvv xiroTs rots TpiaKOvra wpwre jvq p.\nrj(TiKaKrj- 
 oreLV, Tois peyLcTTUiV KaKUiv aiTtois . . . r) ttov (Ty^oXrj tZv ye dXXiov iroXiTutv 
 Tivi rj^LOvre p-vrjariKaKelv, Isocrat. p. 164 ottou yap 'A^f/voSfopos Kal KoAAi- 
 (TTpaTos, 6 pev tStalnys &v, 6 Si <f)vyd'S, oiKtVat 7roA.£ts oloi t£ yeyovao-i, § ttov 
 PovX-qdevTK rjpeZ^ ttoXAous av tottous toioutods KaTaa')(eiv SxtVTjOeipev, 
 Thuc. viii. 96, Dem. Herod, etc. 
 
 a,-V7£\oi loxm Kal Svvd|jiEi \i.ellovei Svt«s.] This dative is sometimes de- 
 scribed as the dat. of reference. It difiers from the ace. of reference, 
 as the dative of time or place difiers from the corresponding ace. 
 Roby (Gr. § 1210) describes it more exactly as denoting 'the thing in 
 point of which a term is applied.' In classical Greek it is often inter- 
 changed with the looser and vaguer ace, as Xen. Cyr. ii. 3. 6 has ovre 
 TTOTTw dpi raxvi oSre x^P'^'-^ lo-^vpos in contrast with the jrdSas cixus of 
 Homer, cf. Plato Hep. v. 473 B oXiyia-Toi tov dpiOpov, crpiKpoTaToi Tipi 
 Svvapiv, Symp. 190 B ^v ovv Tavra to. yivq layyv heivd. See above 
 V. 8 pXeppaTi SiKaLoi and Blass pp. 117, 118. We find to-^vs and 
 Suvapii combined in the ascription in Apoc. 7^^, Deut. 3^*, Cant. 2'. 
 The latter is the more general word. Our author gives an in- 
 definite reference both to angels and to Sdfai, instead of the very 
 
II 10, 11] NOTES 129 
 
 <iefiiiite reference (in Jude) to the dispute between Michael aad 
 Satan about the body of Moses. This vagueness causes ambiguity. 
 What is the object of the comparison in /icI^ovk ? Dr. Bigg (with 
 Hofmann, Spitta, and Weiss) understands evil angels implied in the 
 word Sd^at. I think it is better to understand men (with Bengel 
 Alford and Keil) i.e. the false teachers who are spoken of as ^Katrijirj- 
 /ioSvres in v. 10. The angels, though far superior to them, abstain 
 from any such pkd(r<fyijiJi,oi icpio-is, as the i/rEvSoSiSaancaXoi indulge in 
 towards 86$ai. Hofmann's objection to this interpretation, though 
 approved by Spitta and others, seems to me to have very little force : 
 he thinks that the assertion of the superiority of angels to men would 
 be an unnecessary truism. Are we sure that it was recognized as a 
 truism by the libertines ? Anyhow the main object of reasoning is to 
 show the connexion between what is questioned (here man's right 
 fiXao-<l)riij.€iv Sofas) and what is supposed to be unquestioned (that man 
 is inferior to angels). 
 
 o4 ({>cpou(riv KoT axlrav irdpot KvpCia pX(i(r^i])jLov KpCcriv.] Who are meant 
 by avTuivl When did the angels abstain from bringing a railing 
 accusation against them? What is the force of Trapa Kvpiiol To 
 answer the first question we must go back to the railing of the false 
 teachers. This was certainly directed against the Sdfai by whom 
 Jude, as we have seen reason to believe, means angels, including evil 
 angels, as we learn from his introducing Michael's behaviour to Satan, 
 •by way of example of the manner in which we should behave towards 
 the Sd^ai. Are we then to understand our author as simply putting 
 Jude's meaning into vague words ; and, if so, why does he do it ? I 
 think with most of the commentators that this is on the whole the 
 right view, and that the particularities of Jude are omitted, like the 
 name Enoch afterwards, in order to avoid direct reference to apocryphal 
 writings. Is it possible however to find any explanation of the 
 plural ? Dr. Bigg suggests that there may be a reference to Enoch 9, 
 where it is said that men complained of the evil done by the fallen 
 angels and their children. The four great archangels — Michael, Uriel, 
 illaphael, and Gabriel — lay their complaint before the Lord saying 
 .' Thou knowest all things before they come to pass, and Thou knowest 
 this thing and every thing afiecting them, and yet Thou didst not 
 speak to us. What are we therefore to do in regard to this ? ' The 
 sentence of God is 'Bind Azazel hand and foot' (Enoch, ch. 10). 
 Much the same suggestion had been previously made bj' Spitta, who 
 however joined it with the reading Kvpiov, which he strangely 
 interprets in reference to the declaration of judgtnent from the Lord 
 against the sinful Watchers, a judgment first intrusted to the arch- 
 angels (Enoch 10*), and then delegated by them^ to Enoch (12*),- and 
 by him announced to Azazel (IS^). Accordingly Spitta's explanation 
 is ' whereas the angels, though greater in power and might (which he 
 
 ' It is not clear that this is done by the four archangels. The watchers {i.e. the 
 iinfallen Watchers) are here said to' summon Enoch and enjoin him to visit the 
 fallen Watchers and announce to them the sentence of judgment. 
 
 K 
 
130 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 regards as a periphrasis for a.pxd.yyt\oi), decline to carry an announce- 
 ment of degradation {pXAa-(f>rjfjiov Kpio-iv) from the Lord ' ; and he illus- 
 trates this from Test. Levi 15 koI kt^ij/ea-de ovtiSur/iov kol alcrxyvqv alwvLov 
 TTopa T^s St/catoKp«rias rov ®eov. I think this explanation impossible for 
 many reasons, chiefly because it holds up an act of disobedience on the 
 part of the angels, as a model for men, and because it justifies 
 pXaa-tfyrinia. There is much more to be said for Dr. Bigg's view. If 
 our author wished to generalize the special case named by Jude, he 
 might take advantage of the incident referred to in En. 9. The 
 archangels did not take it upon themselves to condemn the sinful 
 Watchers, but made their appeal to God. 
 
 I take irapa Kvpiio to represent the words of Jude dAAa eiTrev 
 'EiriTt/A^o-at o-ot Kvpios. The consciousness of the Divine presence keeps 
 the angels from any injurious word. 
 
 For the phrase (jtipova-iv Kpia-iv cf. Kpia-iv iireveyKeiv in Jude, and John 
 1'8^* TtVa Kwrrjyopiav <f>ipere Kara.^ tov avOpwirov tovtov ; Acts 25^* ol 
 Karifyopoi ovSe/uav avriav etjtepov &v cyo) {/■irevoovv, Acts 2.5'^ iroXAa koX 
 Papia amcfl/xaTa KaratfiipovTes, Aristotle Bhet. Al. XXX. 12 Sia^okiiv 
 Karatfiepeiv. 
 
 12. oiroi 8^, lis dXo^a liao, . . . <|>eap^(rovTai.] The expression in Jude 
 V. 10 is far simpler and more natural. 
 
 7«7£vvrin^a <|>v(riKcL els dXcixriv Kal (f>eopdv.] 'Born creatures of instinct 
 for capture and destruction.' Cf. Job. 18^'' eyu £ts tovto yevev- 
 vqixoi . • . Tva /jLapTvprjcru) rg d\i;deta, Juv. i. 141 ' animal propter 
 convivia natum,' and a rabbinical quotation in Wetstein's n. ' quidam 
 vitulus cum ad mactandum adduceretur, R. Judam accessit caputque 
 in ejus gremium reponens flevit. Sed ille, Abi, inquit, in hunc finem 
 creatus es.' For <j)va-iKd. compare Plut. Mor. 706a on the pleasures 
 arising from music, which are not limited, like the pleasures of taste, 
 to the irrational and instinctive portion of the soul (eis to d\oyov koX 
 <l)V(TiKbv atroTeXevTSta-aL t^s i/"'x5s, a\ka tov Kpivovro^ aTrrd/Aci/ai koI rov 
 (l)povovvToq). One would rather have expected <r<f>ay^ than ^dopav, 
 which is not more appropriate for animals than for men. But it seems 
 to be the intention of the writer to use a word which is applicable to 
 both, as shown later on, iv ry <j)6opa avrZv <j>6ap-^a-ovTai. We must 
 therefore compare aXwa-iv with such passages as 1 Tim. 3^ Tva u.n ets 
 6viiSi(rp,ov e/tireerj; Kal irayiSa tov Sia/3dA.ou, 2 Tim. 2^" koI avav^d/uxriv eK 
 T^s Sia/BoXov TToytSos l^u)ypriiJi.€voi vir' aiiTov eis to ckciVov OeKqfia, 2 Tim. 3* 
 aixf^aXmTi^ovTCi ywa.iKa.pia crta-utpev/xiva d/iapriais, Eccles. lO^^, Xen. 
 Mem. ii. 1. 4. ovkovv 6 ovrto TreTraiSeu/teVos ^ttov av Sokcl a-oi viro twv 
 oLVTiirdXiov T] TO. XoiTro, ^<Sa d.Kio'Kea'Oai ; . . . yaorTpi SeXea^d/xeva . . . rn 
 eTridvfjiia rov ^ayctv dyd/xei/a Trpos to SeXeap aXia-KeTai, k.t.X., and v. 18 
 below. 
 
 iv ots oTVooSo-iv pXair<|.Ti(i.oBvT{s.J In the N.T. pXaa-KJiyjiiilv is usually 
 followed by the accusative as \n v. 10 above : in classical Greek by eis, 
 which also occurs in Mk. 3^^. If we are to expand the relative phrase 
 into hf TovTOL<i a, the frequent confusion between ei's and iv in late 
 
 ' B and WH. om. xard. 
 
11 11-12] NOTES 131 
 
 Greek may account for the use of eV here, compare 1 Esdr. 1*^ i^e/ivK- 
 rripia-av iv tois ayycXots avTov. It is better however to give it a wider 
 sense ' blaspheming in matters of which they know nothing.' Others 
 expand the clause as follows, TaCra iv oTs ayvoovmv, for which they com- 
 pare the totally dissimilar Sir. 5^^ iv ixeydXia koI ev iJ.i^p^ it.rj ayvoci. 
 The point of the phrase is explained by Test. Aser 1 /xij yiviarOi &': 
 SoSojua, ^Tis rjyv6r)(ri tovs dyyeXous Kvptou Kai d5ru)A,eT0 ecos atSvos. 
 
 Iv Tg (^8op^ ttirfflv Kttl (|>eap^a-ovTai.] A very rhetorical phrase to express 
 Jude's ev TOTJTois <f>6eipov7ai. We may compare it with ev ifiTraiyfiovrj 
 c/tTraiKTai 3* below, and Philo i. p. 693 /JouXerai SioiKieras 17/ias tGv 
 fr(ofi.a.riKU>v, air^p iv pviru Kai <j)6op5, <f>6eipofiivri Koi <l>6€ipovari 6empfi- 
 Tat, Kk^pov ij/v^'s AaySeti/ /xeTo. tSv d.<j>ddpT(ov Kai o.<l>6apcriai a^Lutv 
 apermv. What is the reference in avTuiv ? Probably we should explain 
 it of TO. aKoya, of whom <j)Oopd. was predicated above ; but what is the 
 sense of saying that ' the libertines shall also be destroyed in their 
 destruction ' 1 Looking back to the parallel in Jude, we find two sorts 
 of knowledge contrasted ; the one, belonging to the spiritual order, is 
 declare') to be beyond the reach of the libertines (oo-a fiiv ovk oiSaa-iv 
 corresponding to iv oh ayvoovcnv here), who in both epistles are said to 
 rail at the objects of this knowledge (Sdfat) : the other kind of know- 
 ledge belonging to the natural order, the region of sense, is that of 
 which the libertines are made cognizant, like brute beasts, through their 
 animal nature, viz. those sensual gratifications, which are the cause of 
 their destruction, as they are of .the snaring and destruction of the 
 brutes. This latter kind of knowledge is not distinctly mentioned by 
 our author. Perhaps he did not think it deserved to be called know- 
 ledge ; but he enlarges on the comparison of the brutes, saying that 
 their end is destruction, and that, if men degrade themselves to their 
 level, they will also share their destruction. Another way of taking 
 it is Bengel's, ' In corruptione sua (airSiv) plane corrumpentur,' reading 
 Karatjidaprja-ovrai for koX (ftSap., meaning, 1 suppose, ' their own corrupt, 
 hearts will bring about their destruction ' But would not this require 
 aiTiiv or at any rate a more emphatic position for a^Tcov? Spitta, 
 understands avrCiv of the Sdfai, who are referred to as Kar avTwv 
 in V. 11, and explains iv oh as iv rourots o^s (because 8d^ai = 
 ayytkoi) ; this iv tovtois is then replaced by iv rfj ^Bopa. airiov,. 
 depending on KaTa<t>6ap-i^crovTaL ; ' der TJntergang der So^ai wird auch 
 der der Libertiner sein (w. 4, 11, 12).' He further explains the- 
 reference to the dXtam^ of the brutes by the use of a-ipoi in v. 4. 
 The difficulty of this explanation lies in the fact that it destroys, 
 the relation between the second (jiOopd (that of the angels, according tO' 
 Spitta) and the first tpdopd. (that of the brutes), and again in the con- 
 fusion between good and bad angels. 
 
 The general meaning seems to be the same as that of Rom. S^'*"- 
 01 Kara crdpKa ovres to. rrji <rapK05 t^povovcnv, oi Se Kara. irvev/jLo, 
 ra Tov TTvevfiaTO?. to yap ^povrifia t^s arapKO'i Odvaro's' ro Se <j)p6vri/ji,a toC 
 TTvevp-aro^ ^ayi] Kai elpi^VT), and 1 Cor. 2^* i/^u^^i/cos 8e avOpanro's ov Si^^erai. 
 TO. TOV irverp.aTos rov @(ov, p-iopia yap ai™ icrnv, Kai ov Svvarai yvSivaiy. 
 OTL TTvev/jLaTLKZ^ dvaKpiviTai. See further in the Comment. 
 
 K 2 
 
132 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 13. dSiKouficvoi |xur8&v dSiKCas.] For the reading see Introduction on the 
 Text. The reading Ko/uovfutvoi resembles Col. 3^* 6 yap aSiKmv Ko/iia-eTcu 
 o TfiiKijirev, Barn. iv. 1 2 6 Kvpioi wpivei rbv Kocrfiov e/caoTos, ko^ois iiroajfriv, 
 KOjUiEirai . . eav tj vovtjpo^, 6 fiurOoi t^s irovrjpiai fft,irpo(T6eu avrov. But 
 there seems no reason for a future here. The principal verb 
 <j)dapri<rovTai. is followed by seven present participles before we reach 
 KaToXeiVovTes, which forms part of the escort of the next principal verb 
 iirXavrjOria-av. This series of participles is broken, like v. 10, by ex- 
 clamatory substantives in apposition, &m\.oi koi fuofioi in ■«. 13, and 
 Karapas rcKva in v. 14, though the latter is perhaps best taken with the 
 next sentence. The first participle dSiK. is closely connected with the 
 preceding verb : the second is connected with the subsequent clauses, 
 which serve to bring out its separate features : the third and fourth 
 are merely appendages to the second. Spitta, putting a full stop after 
 the fine-sounding Ka.Ta<f>6aprj<TovTaL, thinks that the participles stand for 
 finite verbs as in Hebrew. Cf. Blass G.T. § 79. 10, Jannaris § 2168. 
 If dSiKovjuevoi is correct, it is another example of the author's love 
 of far-fetched and artificial expressions. The simple thought 
 which underlies the phrase is probably 'being punished for their 
 «8tKta' (cf. dStKous in v. 9), a thought which may have recalled to 
 his mind Rom. 6^* Ta yap oyfimvui t^s d/iaprios flavaros, and perhaps Mt. 
 ■6^ a.vi)(pva-iv Tov p,ur6ov avruiv. The corresponding verse in Jude speaks 
 of /ua-dos in connexion with Balaam, and our author uses the phrase 
 li.ia-6o<s dSiKtas himself in reference to Balaam in v. 15. But, as he 
 would reflect, Balaam never received the promised wages of his 
 iniquity. Balak, who had hired him, never paid his hire (Numb. 24^^). 
 And is it not the same with these libertines, who sacrifice so much for 
 the sake of wealth and popularity, and yet are defrauded of their wage 
 by death ? So Tischendorf appears to take it translating ' decepti 
 •circa fiurSov dStictas.' The construction aSiKctv Tivd n 'to wrong a 
 person in any way' is common enough, cf. Acts 351", (ja,l. 4^2. 
 But in classical writers the ace. rei does not seem to extend beyond 
 the cognato dSticrj/ita : p.La-6ov a.-iroa-Ttpovp.ti'oq would rather have been 
 used for the sense 'defrauded,' which is here supposed. See how- 
 ever Plut. Cato Mi. 17 (p. 766) eiputv \pia. TraXata tm ^potriia ttoXXovs 
 ■o<^etA.oi'Tas KoX iroWois to Srjp.6(nov, a/ia Tr]V ttoXlv In-aucrcv dStKou/ne'vrjv Koi 
 dSiKoCo-av. The B.V. has ' suffering wrong as the hire of wrong- 
 doing,' which is much the way in which it is taken by Dr. Abbott, 
 who would understand dSiKtav after aSiKovfjuvoi, translating ' they 
 receive from God what they call injustice as the requital of their 
 injustice,' and by Hofmann ' Schlimmes erfahrend als einen Lohn 
 fiir Schlimme?,' which may be compared with Ps. 18^^ ' With the 
 froward thou wilt show thyself fro ward.' The difficulty of this is 
 that p,uT0ov dSiKtas is used below of the literal reward offered to 
 Balaam. But this playing on the double use of p.ia-06<s is not unlike 
 the play on ^Oopa, above, and l^ uSaTos koX 8i' uSaros in 3^. 
 
 ■fjSovfiv ^7oil|i«voi T*|v ^v iiv-ifi^ Tpv<j)'()v.] Here again we have a very 
 ambiguous sentence. Both ^Sov»; and rpvtji-q may be taken either in a 
 
II 13] NOTES 133 
 
 good or a bad sense, while iv ■qftipq. has been variously interpreted. The 
 word rpv<j>ij occurs elsewhere in the N.T. only in Lk. 7^^ where oJ iv 
 (juarurju^ ivh6$m koX rpvtfyg vTrdpxovTK are contrasted with the Baptist, 
 the reference being to a luxurious life with no special blame attached. 
 In James 5^ tTpv^jyo-are is joined with eo-jraraX^craTe in a bad sense, 
 like cvrpv^ao) here. Exx. of rpvtjy^ in the bad sense are found 
 in Herm. Mand. vi. 5 (of the works of the Evil Angel) irokm-fXtia 
 fi.t6v<rp.dTtM> Koi TroiKiKmv TpvtfiZv Koi hnOvpia ywaiKoa/, ib. viii. 3, xi. 12 
 o SoKmv TTi/eu/ia £X*"' '"'/">' iavTov /cat d v a 1 8 1^ s iariv koI iv rpv^als 
 n-oXXais dvaorpc^o/UEi/os Kal iv crepais iroAAais d tt a t o t s. koi p. i a- 6 ov % 
 kafifidvei T7J i Trpo<l>7]Tciai avTOv, ib. xii. 2 irSicra Tpv^-q p.iapi 
 ioTi KoX KCVTj ToTs SouXois ToC ®eov, Sim. vi. 2 oStos ayyeXos rpu^^s koi 
 d IT <£ T 17 s ioTiv, ib. 2 TTO/acvovrai dTrarais Kat Tpu^ais /laraicus, 
 l6. iv. 4 T^s T pv<j>y s Kal dwdriys wpo eori /tea, t^s 8e fiaadvov ij wpa 
 X' ■^p.€pStv 8vvap.iv ex"> *'*'i s" passim. On the other hand rpv^ij is 
 used of the gifts of wisdom in Prov. 4' 'va S£ rg a~g Ke^dXy a-Ti<l>avov 
 \apiT<iiv, (TTetjiavta Sc rpv^s iirepao-TrtoT; (rou, and of the divine blessing in 
 Ps. 36*. ' Thou shalt make them drink of the river of thy pleasures ' (rbv 
 j(eip.dppow T^s Tpv<f>^i aov jroriets oiTous), moreover the garden of Eden 
 is called 6 TrapdSeio-os t^s rpv^yj's (Gen. 215, 313,24^ Ezek. 3P). In 
 the N.T. ■qSovT^ is used only in a bad sense, see Lk. 8", Tit. 3*, James 
 i'- *. In one place in the LXX. (Prov. l?') it has a good sense, KpeiWo)!/ 
 i^<i)juos p.e6' r/Sovrji iv tlpT^vg, f) oTkos ttoXX/ov dyaOStv p,eTa p.d)(r]i. I doubt 
 whether we can find ^Sov^ in an entirely good sense outside the 
 Epicurean school, but Philo's definition would suit here, see M. 2. 
 p. 164 Tov irapaVTOi koX vop.uTOhno<s ayaOov ^avraaria Sityeipti Tr/v x^v^rpr 
 . . . Ka\eiTai Si tovto to irdOoi tjSovij, M. 1. p. 39 mrevSei. irav i,mov 
 (US iwi dvayKatorarov Kal <rvvcKTiK(OTaTov TeXos, ijSov^i', fcai p,dXuTTa 
 dvdpum-os, or Aristotle's (Uth. J!/", x. 4) Tran-av evepyeiav reXeiot 17 ^Sati/ij. 
 I. think this justifies the reading of the R.V., 'Men that count it 
 pleasure to revel in the daytime,' agreeing with Assumpt. Mays. iv. 4 
 ' omni hora diei amantes convivia,' Ewald 'Welche jeden Tag (rather 
 ' am Tage ') zu achwelgen f iir die hbchste Lebensfreude aohten,' v. 
 Soden ' Als Lust betrachtend die Sohlemmerei am Tage,' and Keil 
 ' Den Tag, der zur Arbeit bestimt ist, mit Schwelgen hinzubringen f iir 
 Vergniigen achten sie.' For the phrase h/ rip.ip^ cf. 3 Mace. 5^^ hr 
 vvktI koX r)p,£pa, Kom. 13^^ <us iv ■^p.ipa ev<r)(iip6vu><i irtpiiraTTqa'mp.tv, prf 
 Kiapois Kal p,e6afs, p,r] KOirais koj, dcreXyciats, 1 Th. 5* rjpili Se rjpipai ovres 
 v^tjuo/xev, also Joh. 9* ecos ij/xcpa ivriv, Joh. 11' idv Tts irepiirarlj iv Tg 
 rip.€pa, ov irpoa- KOTiTii. The mbre usual expression in classical Greek 
 would be fipApa^ or p,i6' ■^p.ipav. For the thought see Isa. 5^^, Eccles. 
 10*^. Dr. Bigg's rendering is 'counting our sober daylight joy (the 
 Agape) mere vulgar pleasure,' which keeps closer to the ordinary meaning 
 of the words in biblical Greek ; but the meaning given to Trjv iv yp-ipa, 
 rpv^riv is very far-fetched, and it is by no means certain that the Agape 
 was then a daylight meal.^ Spitta reads rpo^jj for Tpv<f>-q, translating 
 
 ^ See my Appendix C to Clem. Al. Strom, vii. 
 
134 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ' Als Lustbarkeit befcrachten die Libertiner die tagliche Mahlzeit, die 
 doch nur den Zweck hat den Mensehen fiir die Arbeit des Lebens 
 die nbthige Kraft zu geben.' The objections to this are (1) that iv 
 rjiJ-ipq. is not equivalent to Kaff ruiipav, cf. Mt. 265», Lk. 1 P, (2) that 
 there is nothing wrong in a man's finding pleasure in his daily bread 
 {Eccles. 51*), but rather in a morose refusal to enjoy what God has pro- 
 vided for enjoyment (1 Tim. 4*). Weiss interprets rifv iv fiij.epa. rpro4)rp' 
 ' luxury which according to its nature can only last as long as it is 
 day, i.e. during our earthly life.' 
 
 inrCXoi Kal |/iu|jloi.1 o-ttiXos is late Greek for the classical lajXii 
 (Phryn. p. 28 Lob.), used of moral defect in Eph. 5^ tva Trapaa-rqa~g 
 avTos iavTio iuSo^ov Trp' iKKXr/iriav, p-r) i}(ov(rav tnri\ov t) pvrioa tj ti tSv 
 ToiovTiov, AAA' tva y ayCa koL a/xco/tos; of a person who discredits the 
 bo'iy to which he belongs in Dion. Hal. Ani. iv. 21 (speaking of 
 slaves manumitted in reward for disgraceful services) ets rovrovs 
 SvcreKKaOdprov? cnrCXov? airoPXeirovm 01 troXKoi Sv(r\epaivcyv(ri. The 
 adjective aa-wiXos is used below 3^*, also in 1 Pet. P' niiia oIijmtl, 
 a)s ap.vov apiMpov koX oxtitlKov, Xpto-ToS, as well as in 1 Tim. 6^*, James 
 V-'^ ; and the verb airiXom in Jude 23, James 3®. As the word 
 (TTTtXas- in the parallel passage of St. Jude is also found in the 
 sense of o-n-iXos in one solitary passage, so the <r7rtA.os of 2 P. is also 
 found, though rarely, in the sense of ern-iXas, only with the gender 
 changed to the feminine. Hence confusion was easy. For a dis- 
 cussion on the general bearing of these parallelisms, see Introduc- 
 tion on the Relation between the two Epistles. For pM>p.os see 
 note on Jude v. 24, and Lev. 21^^ iras w ia-nv iv avrZ pMp.os . . . ovk 
 iyyul ToS irpoireveyKiLV to? 6v(rLa<s t<3 0£m (Tov, ori p,a>pMS iv avrS, where 
 it refers to ritual blemish : in Sir. IP^ irpoa-exe airo KaKovpyov . . ■ 
 fufiTrore fiMfiov els tov aiSiva 85 trot, ib. 18^* iv dyaSots p-i] Sms pMp^v, 
 lb. 20^ pJSipM<s -rrovrjpoi iv avOpdnna \j/evSoi it is used as in pro- 
 fane Greek, in the sense of 'blame,' 'reproach,' 'disgrace.' With 
 the exclamatory a-irCKoi koI pMp.01 may be compared roX/Aip-ai avfloSeis 
 in V. 10, Karapas rixva in v. 14, and the denunciatory terms intro- 
 duced by ovToi eia-iv in «. 17 and Jude w. 12, 16. 
 
 ivrpv^&vres iv rats dirdrais oirav.'] For readings see Introduction on 
 the Text. Cf. Isa. 55^ ivrpvtfr^a-ei iv dyaflots ^ i/^x^ ^f^v <good sense), 
 ' Let your soul delight itself in fatness ' R.V., 57* iv rivi iverpv<l>if- 
 0-aTe ; (bad sense), ' Against whom do ye sport yourselves ? ' R. V. 
 Both meanings are common in profane Greek, see exx. in 
 Wetstein. Hofmann understands it here in a metaphorical sense 
 * revelling in their deceits,' and explains it by SckedlovrK ^rux"* "* 
 the next verse. Ewald takes it literally, supposing that dirdrri is a 
 sort of pun on the dydirTj of Jude, ' Diebesmahle ' for ' Liebesmahle.' 
 It might also be taken absolutely, as in Xen. Hell. iv. 1. 30 hrorShrTw/ 
 8e avTW tGv 6epair6vT(av pawrdi, e<^ alv KaOi^ov(rw oi Ilepo-ai paXaKloi, 
 ■g<r)(yvd7j ivTpv<fnj(Tai, and Philo M. 1 p. 232 ivcuijipaivtTai koi ivTpv<f>S. 
 ■jrpo Turv aXXmv, dpiyi<Ti KaX axparoK 2ti 8c dprioK leal -irXiQpeai Ke^fpri- 
 p.£voi dyaBovi ; in which case iv tous dTraTais might be joined with 
 <rwevu>)(oviievoi, to explain how it happened that the libertines were 
 
II 13-14] NOTES 135 
 
 admitted to the feasts of believers. On the whole however I prefer 
 Hofmann's rendering. 
 
 (ruvEvuxov|j.cvoi vjiiv.] The participle denotes the circumstances of the 
 preceding action. The phrase ■^ iirovpivioi evaxia is used in respect 
 to the eucharist by Clem. Al. Paed. ii. p. 166. 
 
 1.4. d(ti6aX|io{is 8x'»^«s litirrois |ioixaXC8os.] A striking expression to 
 describe the man who sees an adulteress in every woman, or in plainer 
 words, who cannot see a woman without lascivious thoughts arising 
 in his heart, such thoughts becoming as it were stereotyped, and 
 betrajing themselves in his looks, cf. Mt. 5^^ irSs 6 jSXerrcov yvvauca 
 irpos TO eTrt^ujU^crat avTTJs, ^jSt) ifjuii)(e\icrev airijv iv rrj KapSia avTov, Plilt. 
 Mor. 528 E 6 ficv p-^Tiop Tov avaicrx^vTov ouk f<j>rj Kopas iv rots opL/iatTiv 
 e^^ctv, oAAa TTopvas (a saying attributed to Timaeus by Longin. 4, 5), 
 Gell. iii. 5 (Arcesilaus) cum oculos ludibundos atque inlecebrae 
 voluptatisque plenos videret : ' nihil interest,' inquit, ' quibus 
 membris cinaedi sitis, posterioribus an prioribus ' (cited by Wetstein). 
 For the metaphorical use of /^eo-Tos see Mt. 23^* ea-mOev fiea-roC tore 
 xmoKplcr eio%, Eom. l^^ /ieo-Toris (ftOovov, Prov. 6'*, Xen. Symp. 1. 13. 
 (loixaXCs found in Rom. 7^, James 4*, Mt. 12*^, and late Greek 
 ■writers (see Phryn. p. 452 Lob.) instead of the classical fioixfvrpia. 
 The reading p,ot;^aXias found in t^ A and some versions is a vox 
 nihili. 
 
 aKarairavo-Tovs a|i.apTCas.J For readings see Introd. on Text. For 
 the construction cf. 1 Pet. 4^^ iriiravTai a[iapTLas, and •ycyu/iva(r|tiei'jjv 
 'wXeoveftas below : see my note on James P^ airetpao-Tos KaKoiv. 
 The late word dx. is only found here in biblical Greek. It is used by 
 Pplyb. 4. 17. 4, Plut. Mor. 114 E aKaTairaiJoTai tr«/t<^opa (TW€(r6iJ,e6a, ib. 
 924 B, Vitae p. 734 c fi [lovapxia to a.KaTa.Trav(TTov TrpoarXa^ovira, 
 ib. 1039 C dKarawatjo-Tos a-pyrj. The classical equivalent is airava-roi, 
 used with gen. by Eur. Swppl. 82 airava-TO'; yomv. 
 
 Sc\cdtovT£s ijnixds do-rijpiKTovs.] For the rare late Greek do-T^ptKTos . see 
 below (31*), and n. on a-njpi^m (1^^) : it is used by Longinus ii. 2 
 (great wits) Sixa eirto-Tij/tiys d(7Ti}ptKTa kol a.vipp,a.TUTTa. For ScA.. see 
 below V. 18, Xen. Mem. ii. 1. 4 quoted above on v. 12, and my n. on 
 James P*. 
 
 KapSCav 7e7D(iva(r|i.^vi]v irXcove^Cas ^x^^^s.] Cf. Heb. 5^* tuiv Std Tr]V efiv 
 TO. aurOryrripm. •yeyu/tvacr/iefa «;(dvTO>v Trpos Sidjcpunv. Wetstein illustrates 
 the construction from Philostratus Heroic, iii. p. 688 flaXaTTiys ovirta 
 yeyv/ivacT/j.evoi, ib. iv. p. 696 TroKiiLiav woWiiiV yeyv/ivacr/xevos, ib. xi. p. 708 
 croiftia.? rjSrj yeyvfivafrfievoi, Alford adds Clem. Ham. iv. 7 irdtrijs 'EWijvik^s 
 iraiSeias i^a'K.rni.h'Oi, Hes. Op. 649 vauTiA.tijs <re(TO(j>UT[i.evoi. Exx. of this 
 'genitive of the sphere' are also to be found in Lat. e.g. 'vetus 
 militiae,' ' prodigiorum peritus.' For irkcove^ia see above v. 3. 
 
 Kardpas tckvo.] For this Hebraism = Kardparoi, cf. re/cva maKorji 
 I Pet. 1^*, TtKva opyrji Eph. 2^, reKva (jjiaro^ ib. 5*, TtKva aTrmkeiai Isa. 57*, 
 rtKva aSiKia^ Hos. 10', and 01 viol Trjs direi^ias Eph. 2^, 5^, 6 mos t^s 
 iirmketas 2 Th. 2% Joh. I712, Winer p. 298 f. Spitta quotes Ps. 9510 ^^v 
 ^XavZvTai Ttj KapSia koI ovk tyvuMrav rds oSous /wv is mfiotra iv ry opyfj 
 ftov Et eia-ekevcrovTai. For Kardpos cf. Deut. IP^ ihov iytb BtSmfiC 
 
136 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER : 
 
 ivunriov v/imv (rtjuepov rrfv tvXo^idv koI rriv Kardpav, Ps. 109 tveovtraro 
 Kardpav is Ifuinov, koI eixrrjXdev oxret vSutp eis ra eyxara avrov. It seems 
 better to connect this phrase with what follows rather than with what 
 precedes. 
 
 15. KOToXeCirovres evBeiav oSbv eirXav<i9t|<rav.] For the readings seft 
 Introd. on Text. For the metaphorical 68os see above on v. 2, 
 1 Sam. 12^3 Sei'fo) vfuv t^v oSov t7]v ayaOiiv Kal rqv cvBiiav, Ezra 8"i 
 ^■qTrj(rai irdpa tov ®eov 6&bv iiOaav ■qp-tv, Ps. 107", Isa. SO^l, Hos. 14» 
 tvOeiai at oSol tov Kvplov, Koi SiKaioi iropevaovrai hi auratSi Acts 13 " 
 (of Simon Magus) tuurrpi^imv ras oSovs Kvpi'ou ras ci^etas. For the 
 absence of the article see Introd. on Grammar. For irXavdopai. of. 
 Jas. 5i9'2o, 1 Pet. 225. 
 
 e|aKoXou6^<ravTes rfj oSip tov BaXaA)i tov BiSo-op.J See Introd. on Text. 
 For e^a/c. cf. above 1'^ 2^. For Balaam see n. on Jude d. 11. Alford 
 compares Num. 22^^ q^^ ajTreia ^ oSds crou cvavrCov i/iov. 
 
 8$ iiirSitv a8iK(as ■ii'Yairr|o-«v.] See Introd. on Text. For a similar use 
 of ayawdo} cf. Lk. 11*^. Balak's offer was a bribe, a reward of wrong 
 doing, because Balaam was fully aware that Israel was under the 
 protection and blessing of Jehovah, and yet he consented to go with 
 the messengers of Balak when they came for the second time to ask 
 him to curse Israel. Compare the two equations in the first epistle of 
 St. John. Tj ap.apTLa io'Tiv ^ dvo/xia (3*) and TrScra dSiKia apaprCa i(m,v 
 (5") with Westcott's notes ' Sin is the assertion of a selfish will against 
 a paramount authority,' ' By whatever acts, internal or external, man 
 falls short of God's will, as it is spiritually apprehended, he sins.' So 
 here Balaam is guilty of irapavopia. because he consents to dSucta. 
 
 16. ^tT^iv Si ^o-xev lS£os irapovoiitas.] The only other recorded 
 instances of lA-eyfis in biblical Greek are in Job 21* ju^ avBpmTrov pov t) 
 iXeyii^ ; ' is my complaint of man ? ', ib. 23^ Ik xfipoi pov ^ e\«yf« e<rn;- 
 where R. V. has ' even to-day is my complaint rebellion.' Cf . Philostratus 
 Vit. Ap. ii. p. 74 ov TTtxpos irpos Tas eXey^eis V- Here tx.'^ is used with 
 the noun as a sort of periphrastic passive of the cognate verb, as in 
 alnav ex*)- For tSios see above on 1^ [Sia 86^., Winer p. 191 f., Jannaris 
 Gr. Gr. §§ 1416 f. Dr. Bigg after Huther and Hofmann regards it a^ 
 merely equivalent to avrov, comparing Mt. 22^ oi 8e djucXj^o-ovres 
 air^XSoi', 09 piv eis tov iSioi' aypov, os Se iiri rqv ipiropiav auToB. There 
 can be no doubt however that in the great majority of instances in- 
 the N.T. iSios retains its emphatic force, and so the R. V. has ' own ' 
 both here and in Mt. 22. Weiss translates it 'eine Zurechtweisung 
 der ihm characteristischen irapavo/iias,' Dietlein ' die ihm als TTrbilde 
 der Liigenpropheten eigene iropavo/tia,' Wiesinger ' er der andern ein 
 Prophet war, musste durch eine Eselin sich die eigene irapavop. 
 vorhalten lassen,' KeU ' iSias steht nicht einfach fur ovroS, sondern 
 hebt hervor, dass die Trapavopia einen stehenden Zug seines Charakters 
 bildete.' Hundhausen explains it as follows : ' Balaam, der als Prophet 
 den Willen Gottes und das gbttliche Gesetz am wenigsten hatte 
 Ubertreten soUen, selbst dawider handelte, und er der als gotter- 
 leuchteter Prophet andere zurechtzuweisen berufen war, sich ob seiner 
 eigenen Frevelthat von einer Eselin musste zurecht weisen lassen.' 
 
II 14-16] NOTES 13T 
 
 Perhaps it is simpler to explain as follows : ' He who was bribed by 
 Balak to curse Israel was rebuked for his own disobedience by the- 
 disobedience of the ass and thus hindered from receiving the promised 
 reward.' irapavo|iCa is not so strong an expression as dvo/uia. It is not a 
 general defiance of law, but rather a breach of a particular law. It 
 occurs here only in the N.T., but is found in classical Greek and in 
 Prev. 5^^ ■jrafmvo/j.lai avSpa aypivmKTiv, ib. 10^* &(TTTtp kotitos ofi.iJ.atra'y 
 ouTojs TTapavofiia tois )(pu)iJi,evois air^- 
 
 iirotvYiov . . . lK(&Xvcrcv t^v tov ^poi^^rov irapa<j>povCav.] An example 
 of confirmatory asyndeton, which would have been more usually 
 expressed by the gen. abs. virolvyiav KioXvcravTos. The indefinite 
 wro^vyiov is sometimes used for the more common ovos in biblical 
 Greek, as the ass was the familiar beast of burden among the Israel- 
 ites, see Mt. 216, Exod. 420, 20", 23*' », Josh. 621, Jud. 1", Job 24*. 
 Among the Greeks and Romans the term inroCvyiov or iv/mentum 
 would be more naturally understood of the mule, though it is used to- 
 include the ass in Plut. Mor. 178 b. In Plato Legg. xi. 936 e we 
 find vTTo^vyiov distinguished from the horse. 
 
 &<f>uvov.] As cfxovT^ is used of the sound uttered by any living thing- 
 (Arist. de Anim. ii. 8. 9), the epithet a^uvos is properly applicable 
 only to creatures which are entirely mute, or to lifeless things, as by 
 Aeschin. 88. 37. A distinctive force is given to the word by the 
 reference to the human voice which follows. In 1 Cor. 14^" a<^(i»'os 
 is used of the gift of tongues in the sense 'without signification.' 
 
 «v dvSpuirov if><t>v^ (ttBE-yldficvov.] For exx. of the use of h/ to express- 
 the instrument, see the Index. ^Biyyofuu is found in N.T. only in 
 this Epistle (here and below v. 18) and in Acts 41*. The aorist parti- 
 ciple is taken by Alford and others as contemporary with the aorist 
 verb following, but ckwXvo-ci' is really consequent upon tjideyidncvov v. 
 the present participle might be translated ' in human speech,' being, 
 simply descriptive of the action ; the aorist denotes a logical antecedent 
 to the action, 'by speaking in man's voice'; see Acts 13^ vrjo-Tiva-avTes 
 KOI irpoa-evid/ievoi . . . airiXva-av and Introd. on Grammar. 
 
 ixdiXva-tv tJ|v toO irpocj)^iTou irapaij>pov<av.] ' Hindered the madness of' 
 the prophet.' The beha-viour of the ass caused Balaam to see that he, 
 was confronted by the angel of the Lord, and that he could only utter 
 the words permitted by God. Observe the contrast, the madness of 
 the prophet, whose eyes had been opened, rebuked by the vision 
 of the ass. The ordinary termination of substantives derived from 
 ^prjv is -oaiivq, as ■Trapa^potrvvrj in Plat. Soph. 228 D, from Trapd- 
 <f>pu>v 'delirious' (another form is irapa^povr;cris LXX. Zach. 12*);: 
 sometimes -ovj; as in ev<l>p6vri, dtfypovr), Sv<r<l>p6vr]. Lobeck gives a long 
 list of nouns in -ocrwrj in Pathologia Serm. Gr. pp. 230-240, such 
 being the prevailing formation for derivatives from nouns in -a)v 
 which shorten the vowel in the gen., but we find dS-i/juovta (rarely 
 aSrjfioa'vvr)) from a&^fum/, yarovia (rarely yeiTO<rvvrj) from yeiVoJv, tiSai- 
 /iiovia and KaKoSai/iovia (very rarely ev'- and KaKo-SaiiJi,o(Tvvr]) from 
 Saifxaiv, a7n]fji.ovia as well as dinjfioo-uvij from dir^/j.uv. Probably the- 
 author was led to select the form ■TrapaiftpovCa from the assonance to- 
 
138 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 the preceding Trapavo/iia. Philo i. p. 609 speaks of Balaam as Kara- 
 xtvTov/xevoi VTTo ^pci/o)3Aaj8cias Trji eaurov. 
 
 17. oiroC elo-iv miYaV dvuSpoi koI ofiixXai iirh XaCXairos l\awrf[i£vai.] For 
 ovTol eicrtv see n. on J. 16. The author may have thought that, in 
 splitting up the metaphor, he was adding clearness and point to the 
 parallel in Jude v. 12. For the former metaphor of. Job 6'*, Jer. 14* 
 foU., for the latter Job 7', SQi*, Hos. 6*, 13^. Xai\ai/r is used of the 
 jstorm on the Lake of Galilee in Mk. 4:^'', Lk. S^s. It seems an unneces- 
 sarily strong expression here. Compare however Wisdom 5^* IXttIs 
 do-eySoSs ws (^epd/tevos ^oB9 inro ave/iov, Koi <Jis ira)Qni) viro AatXowos 
 ■SuoxOeia-a Aeirr^. Philo i. p. 611 uses it metaphorically XatXiTri Kevrjg 
 8d|^s [i,ri avapTracrdrjvai.. We should hardly think of a mist as promis- 
 ing rain, indeed Aristotle (Meteor, i. 9. 4) asserts the contrary, ofdx^v 
 ■a~rjit.eiov fiaXkov icmv eiSias fj vSwriav olov yap icTiv ■q o/jj-xXtj ve<f>eX,7i 
 ayovoi, and so in the De Mundo i. p. 394a ; Plato however defines 
 ifttX^r) as TO ei depos £is vSa>p iov, and is on this account condemned 
 by Theophrastus (De Sensu et Sensili §§ 90), who makes a mist a sign 
 -of fine weather, orav opIx^V yA/ijroi, vSmp ov yiverai, ij eAa-rrov 
 (De Signis c. 4).^ Possibly the author may have had in his mind Gen. 
 2^, where a mist is said to have supplied the place of rain in the 
 garden of Eden. For IXam. see n. on James 3*. 
 
 ots 6 l6^os Tov o-K^Tous T«T(ipi)Toi.] Thls clause, taken from Jude 13, 
 is there appropriately used of the meteors, which flame out for a 
 moment and then disappear in the blackness of darkness for ever ; 
 but here it is quite unsuited to the preceding figures of the springs 
 And the mists. The masculine ols is used because the false teachers 
 are typified by these figures, cf . Winer pp. 1 7 6 f. Spitta quotes Micah 3* 
 (iirl Tois TrpodyriTWS Toirs irXavSvras rov Xadv aov) Sta tovto vuf vfiw ecrrai 
 <f opacreus Kai (tkotm ecrrat v/jllv €K /iavT£ias Kai ovcreTai o t]\u>s eirt 
 -rovs irpoi^ijTas k.t.X. contrasting it with Dan. 12^. 
 
 18. 4ir^po-yKo ■yop iiaroioTHTOs <|)6e77^H'''""-] For virepayKa see note on 
 .Jude ver. 16. The verb ^^eyyo/tat is used from the time of Homer 
 ■downwards of any kind of utterance or sound of man or animal, or even 
 •of inanimate things. It is repeated here in the author's way from v. 16. 
 jiaraioTTis a biblical word used only by ecclesiastical writers, cf. Ps. 4^ 
 IvaTt dyaTraTc /laTaioTJjTa ; Ps. 39® ra. (nJ/iiravTa /biaraiOT~)/s, Eccles. 1^ /juiT. 
 fiaTaicm^TaiV, Rom. 8^" ry /xaratdnjTt fi ktutk virerayr), where it is used of 
 what is empty, passing, and transient. In Ps. 26* ovk tKaOura /lera. 
 ■trx/veSpiov fiaTatoTT/Tos, Ps. 119^^ a.iroo'Tpafiov tovs o^Oakfiov^ p-ov tov /ir/ 
 iSciv /laTaionjTtt, Ps. 144* av to crTopa cXdXijo-c paTaionfra, Eph. 4'' /djkcti 
 vp-aq wepuiraTeiv (ca^ws Kai ra Wvij irepi-jraTfi. iv juaTatdn^i tov voos avT&v, 
 it is used of moral instability, of men without principle on whom no 
 reliance can be placed. Here it seems best to understand it in the 
 former sense of emptiness. The false teachers use big words, make 
 high professions, which have no corresponding reality. The word 
 occurs in Bam. i^" ^vy<op,t.v diro Trdo-ijs /xaratdnjTos, Polyc. ad Philipp. 
 7 8to diroXwrdvTes tt/v pxiTaiOTtfra tuv ttoWoii', cf. ih. 2 djroXiTrovTcs 
 Trp/ Kevrjv juaraioXoytav. For the genitive see Introd. on Grammar. 
 
 ' Quoted in Ideler's note to the Meteorologica. 
 
II 16-18] NOTES 139 
 
 ■yop here introduces the reason why the false teachers are com- 
 pared to wells and mists which encourage false hopes of water. Their 
 fine words are equally delusive. 
 
 8cXEii,t|ov(riv 4v 4iri,6v)i,Cais o-apK&s do-EX^cCais.] For SeA.. see V. 14 above. 
 It is a question whether o-op/cds should be taken with the word that 
 precedes or the word that follows. The rhythm suits the latter, and 
 so Alford translates ' They entice in lusts by licentiousnesses of the 
 flesh ' ; but the usage is in favour of the phrase iviOv/iiai crapKos, as in 
 Eph. 2^, 1 Pet. 2'! oLirixea-daL t&v crapKiKiav iiridvit,iwv, where Hort says 
 'this is the only place in the Epistle where St. Peter uses o-ap| or 
 •o-apKiKos strictly in the Pauline or ethical sense. Two points need 
 -attention with respect to it ... the flesh includes much more than 
 sensuality, as a glance at Gal. 5^^ foil, will show, where hatreds 
 and envyings form part of a list which begins with fornication and 
 •ends with revellings. On the other hand the term "flesh" is not 
 applied to any part of human nature, absolutely and in itself, but as 
 placed in a wrong relation, that being allowed to rule which was 
 meant to serve' (shortened). Other examples are Rom. 13^^ r^s o-apKos 
 irpovoiav firj TroLeia-de eis eTriOvfiiaii, Gal. 5^^ TrvevfJLari irepLTrareZre Kot 
 •€iri6vfi,i,av cropKos ov fir/ reXecnjTe, ih. v. 24 ol ToS Xpiorov r-qv crapxa 
 ■faTavpuia-av (tvv tois TraOrnxacnv koI rats «irt^u/*tais, 1 Joh. 2^^, above 
 V. 10 Toils oiria-ui (rapKos ev eirLBvfiia f^Lacrfiov vopevofiivovi. It might 
 seem also that since iiriOv/jLia, though commonly used in a bad sense, 
 is a neutral word to start with, while aa-iXyeia is always bad, it 
 was more appropriate to define the former by adding o-apKos. 
 There are however two kinds of misconduct denoted by do-cXy^s 
 and the cognate words, (1) petulance, insolence, and (2) lasciviousness. 
 Of (1) we have exx. in Plato Legg. ix. 879 d where da-eXyaiveiv is used 
 ■of one who wantonly strikes another, Isocr. p. 174 e rts av vTri/jLeive 
 rijv airiXyuav rSiv ■Trarepav t5>v ■^p.eTspwv, where it refers to tyrannical 
 treatment of the allies, ib. 398 b, where it refers to striking, ib. 240 b 
 acreXyfis Karr^yopitv t^s irdXecos. and generally in classical Greek, see 
 •other exx. in Wetstein i. p. 588. In later Greek it is used almost 
 •exclusively in the sense of Polybius' periphrasis (37. 2. 4), axriXytia 
 -iripi Tots a-uifji.aTiKas eirtSu/tias, to which (rapKos atrekyeiaig here corre- 
 sponds. For the plural of abstract words see on aa-tXyeiaK v. 2 
 -above and Blass p. 84. The meaning would then be * They ensnare in 
 lusts through fleshly indulgences,' iv denoting the sphere (' Ankniipf- 
 ungspunkt', Kiihl) in which the bait is applied, aa-iXyeia the bait 
 itself. Or, perhaps, it is better to take iv as expressing generally 
 the way in which they seek to ensnare their victims (through their 
 lusts as distinguished, say, from ambition or curiosity), and the dative 
 axreXyeiaii as the precise means employed to attain this result.^ Cf. 
 1 Pet. 4* TO /3ovXevfji,a tSv kOvaiv KaTeipyd<Tda.i ireTTopcu/ievous iv dcreA.'yeiats, 
 
 K.T.X. 
 
 reit 6\lyai d/jro^tiyovrai rois iv vX&vin dvao-Tpc<^o|i.^vovs.J See Introd. on 
 the Text. There are two diiBculties here : (1) should we read the 
 
 ^ Codex P with some of the versions has the genitive aaeXyetas, which might be 
 translated ' lusts of fleshly wantonness,' of. above v, 10 ^iri9. ji.iaaii.ov. 
 
UO THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 present (with most authorities) or the aorisfc participle (with KLP 
 etc.) 1 (2) what is the force of oXiyus ? If we read dTro^tuyovras, it 
 implies an inferior degree of Christian progress, especially if we give to 
 oVyus the meaning of ' slightly,' ' a little,' ' scarcely,' ' but just.' Such 
 a description does not seem in harmony with what we gather as to the 
 state of those addressed in ch. i. or at the end of ch. iii. It would 
 seem to refer rather to a minority, to novices and catechumens, who 
 were in special danger from the false teachers (i^o Kiihl). On the other 
 hand, if we read the aorist, as in v. 20 airo^uyovTts to. /xtafr/iara tow 
 k6(tii.ov and in 1* airo^vyovrn t^s ev lin6vix.ia ^OopoM, we get an exhorta- 
 tion which is suited to the general body of the Church, and which 
 would agree better with other interpretations of oXtycas mentioned 
 below. This rare adverb is found in Anthol. xii. 205. 1 irois rts oAtos 
 dn-aXos Tov yeiVoi/os ovk oXiyus ('in no slight degree') /te KvCi,ii, Isa. 10^ 
 i^oXodpcvaai idvq ovk oAiya (Aquila oXiyojs). So understood it would 
 mean 'those who were slightly escaping,' i.e. 'just beginning to escape 
 from.' We find it used in a different sense in Hippocr. Aph. ii. 7 to. ev 
 TToXkm 'xp6v<a XeTTTUi'd/ieva (rdifiara V(o6pS>i iiravarpetfieui Sti. ra 8e iv okiyio- 
 dXtyms where the Latin has celeriter. Taking it thus, we might explain 
 the word here of those who waste no time in turning from their sins to 
 God. Another way of taking it would be to give to dXiyus the sense of 
 dXiyov, and read dTro^uydn-as, ' those who had all but escaped.' ^ The 
 other reading ovtws a.iro<j)vy6vTa<s is illustrated by Arist. Vespae 997 
 ovTios atrecjivyev.^ 
 
 The clause Tois Iv irX&vw a.va<rrpt^f.lvovs has been explained (1) of 
 the false teachers; (2) of the heathen; (3) as in apposition to- 
 the preceding clause. This last explanation is that given by Jerome 
 adv. lovin. ii. n. 3 'qui paululum effugerant et ad errorem reversi 
 sunt,' Aug. de Fid. et Op. c. 45 'eos qui paululum effugerunt, in 
 errore conversati,' the Vulgate itself ' eos qui paululum effiigiunt, qui ia 
 errore conversantur,' Luther ' diejenigen die recht entronnen werden 
 und nun im Irrthum wandeln ' (from Hundhausen). This third view 
 is now universally abandoned. An objection to (1) is that the false 
 teachers are the subject of the verb SeXed^outrtv, and that the clause 
 would then be a rather futile periphrasis for eowo-us. Spitta answers 
 this by referring to P where tov KaXeo-avros refers, if not to the 
 preceding airoC, yet to 'Itjo-ov in v. 2. In the similar passages 3^^ ry 
 tSiv aOiar/jitav irXdvt) (rwaira^deiTts, 2^ rrji tSv aditr/imv «v oireX7t£^ 
 dvairrpoij>f|s, and 2^* SeXed^oi/Tcs ilrvxa-s atrnijpiKTovs, there seems little 
 doubt that the reference is to the false teachers. So v. Soden 
 (entice those) 'welche zu wenig von den in der Irre wandelnden 
 (die Libertiner selbst bezeichnend) sich abkehren. Weil sie nur wenig, 
 nicht ganz, von jenen sich gewendet haben, sind sie ihren Lockungen 
 immer noch erreichbar.' The second explanation is supported by 
 
 ' See however n. on iiro^uyiJi'Ttj v. 20 below. 
 
 ^ In Plato, Alcib. sec. 149 A, where the MSS. have riWa irivra ouie 6\lyots ivSt- 
 ftrripus ri/iaaiv Ijirtp q^eis, Buttmann, reading i\ty^, says in his note, 'Yoci 
 iKiyas, cuius parcissimus est veteribus usus, nuUus omnino hie locus est.' He 
 refers to Hippocr. I.e. where he translates 6Kiyus brevi and vuSpms hnte. 
 
II 18-20] NOTES 141 
 
 Weiss, who understands the verse of recent converts ' die sich noch 
 lange nicht ganz von der Gemeinschaft heidnischen Lebens losgesagt 
 liahen ' ; Hundhausen ' oi iv irXavj/ avacrTpe<ji6fi,tvoi bezeichnet die 
 Heiden von denen jene Christen durch ihre Bekehrung zum Christ- 
 •enthum sich losgemacht haben ' ; Keil ' Die in Irrthum wandelnden 
 sind die Heiden die ihr Leben iv wkdvy fiihren. Dem Wandel der 
 Heiden noch nicht ganz entronnen, lassen die Christen sich durch die 
 Schwelgereien der Verfiihrer leicht kodern ' ; and so Wiesinger, Alf ord, 
 Schott, Bruckner, Hofmann, Kiihl, and Dr. Bigg. I agree with the 
 latter explanation, mainly on the ground that, if we understand the 
 ■clause of the general subject of the sentence, it will not do to translate 
 ' the false teachers entice, by means of fleshly indulgences, those who 
 are barely escaping from those that live in error ' (viz. the false teachers 
 themselves) : we must at least suppose a difference in time, and read 
 aTTotfivyovTai, implying that the false teachers were now making a 
 second attack on those who had to some extent escaped them before. 
 But there is nothing here to suggest a previous attack. The author is 
 warning against a new danger now beginning to develop itself. On 
 the other hand, if we suppose the heathen to be meant, this will be the 
 ■concrete form of the abstract which we find in v. 20 dTro^vyovras to. 
 luaxTfiara tov Koa-fiov.^ The word irXdvrj would suit either interpreta- 
 tion. It is used of heretics below 3^^ and Jude v. 11; of heathens in 
 Rom. 1'", Barn. 14^ 'Ir/aovs tos TrapaSeSoju.ei'as t^j t^s irXdvrjs avofiCa \}iv)(aii 
 Tjfuiiv XvTpiaa-d/jijivo^ e/c tov (tkotovs, and generally. 
 
 19. ^fvecpCav airois «Trayy6XX<5(jievoi.] The participle gives a further 
 explanation of the phrase SeKed^ova-iv dcreXyeiats, see quotations in n. on 
 Jude V. 4. 
 
 airol SoSXoi iirdpxovTcs rfjs i|>9opas.J The participles ETrayy. and xnr. 
 xire contrasted by asyndeton instead of by [lev and Se. For <j)6opd see 
 Rom. 8^1 and Appendix below. 
 
 ^ ■yip Tis •fJTTijTai, TovTi;) SESoJiXuTai.] The act. -qTrdm is found in Polyb. 
 and later writers : the pass, is used with the dat. (not of the personal 
 agent, which is expressed by iiro with gen. as in 2 Mace. 10^^, but of 
 an overmastering feeling) in Ael. W.A. xiii. 22 eXe'^avrts aypv/rvoi koi 
 VTTVtti /A'^ rjTTa>ix,tvoi iTujTOTaToi tjyvXdKiav, Plut. Yit. 766 ^TTU/ievos Tots 
 SiKaioK 'defeated on the merits of the case,' even by Thuc. iii. .38 
 dKofji jfiov^ ijo-o-ci/aevoi, and vii. 25. 9. SouXdw is followed, like 
 ZovXev(o, by the dat. of the remoter object, cf. Mt. 6^* oiSeis ^vvwrai 
 Sva\v KvpioK SovXfveiv, 1 Cor. 9^* 7ra<rii' i/jiavTov iSovkuMra, Rom 6^^ 
 iSov\.u)67]T£ Trj SiKaiocrvvrj, Tit. 2' otvw iroXXQ SeSovXwfiei/aq, 1 Sam. 17' 
 (the challenge of Goliath) iav eyw Trard^w airov, IcncrOi ■tjp.iv cts hovXovs, 
 Joh. 8^ ttSs 6 TTOiiav T-qv a/jLapriav SoCXos eartv T^s apjipria^, Rom; 6*®, 
 Tit. 33, Plato Phaedr. 238 e, Xen. Mem. i. 6. 8, Julian Oraf. vi. p. 198 
 J3iov atSoiois Kol yaa-Tpl SovXevovra. Estius remarks ' ex jure belli victor 
 victum et captum sibi faciebat mancipium.' 
 
 20. it ■yap i'lro^vyovTn to |ii<i(r|<.aTa toO Kdo-pov.] We naturally suppose 
 
 1 Spitta's objection to this view is founded on the assumption that the Epistle 
 is addressed to Jewish converts, as to which see Introduction. 
 
142 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 the subject to be continued from eirayycWd/tevot and BeX.ed^ovacv, as- 
 Schott, Keil, Kuhl, Hundhausen, Weiss, v. Soden, Alford, Plummer,. 
 and Plumptre ; but Estius, Bengel, Dietlein, Hofmann, and Dr. Bigg 
 suppose a change of subject, on the ground that aTrofftvyovres here must 
 refer to tovs oA.iy<i)s aTro^cuyovras of v. 18. It would seem however 
 that the persons here spoken of have got beyond the stage of progress- 
 implied in 6\ty. aTro<l>. even if we read the aorist there. They have 
 obtained a fuller knowledge of Christ («v ewtyvwo-ci tov Kvplov) and 
 of the way of salvation {riiv ohov t^s hiKaioa-vvri^ eiriyvoBo-u'), see above 
 P' ^. The force of yap is seen in the apodosis, 'their last state is worse 
 than the first,' which confirms the preceding statement that they are 
 SoSA.01 T^s <ji6opas. No doubt is implied by the hypothetical form («r 
 yap ijTTtovTai . . . yiyovev avTot's) : it simply expresses a general 
 principle. For p.Ca(rp,a which occurs here only in N.T. see n. on 
 p.ux<Tp,6i in i>. 10 above. Both are found in the LXX. Compare for 
 the sense 1* a.'iro<j>i<y6vTt's t^s iv t<3 KoupM ev iTridvpLia {jidopas and 
 1 Pet. 4S. 
 
 hi hnyvJia-a toO KvpCov Kal <rii)Ti)pos 'IricroB XpioToO.I See on 1* and 3'*. 
 
 ToiiTois 8^ irdXiv IjiirXaitfoTes •<iTTuvToi.] The participles kfiirXaKevres and 
 aTrofjxvyovTes are opposed to one another by Se : the emphatic toutois is- 
 used instead of aurois because of the intervening clause. It is 
 governed by ip,ir\aK£vreg and must be understood with •^rtoi'Tat. For 
 eju-TrX. see 2 Tim. 2*, the only other passage in which it occurs in N.T., 
 oiSeis cTTpaTtud/tevos c/iTrXeKerat Tats tov piov Trpayp-aTiais. It is found 
 once in LXX. 6 crKoXiais oSois iropivop-evo^ e/ixA-aKijo-erai Prov. 28^ . So 
 Eur. Hipp. 1236 fivlaunv e/AirXaKcts. 
 
 ■y^YOvev airots ri. Scrxaro \ilpova tov irpiJTuv.J This is the moral of the 
 parable of the Return of the Evil Spirit (Mt. 12*5, l],. 1126). cf. 
 Heb. 6**, 10"^, n. on Jude v. 5, Herm. Sim. ix. 17. 5 nves ef avranr 
 i/iiavav eavroirs ■ • . kol ttoXiv iyevovro otoi irpoTepov ^(rav, p.aX\.ov 8i xal 
 Xeipoves, ib. 18^. 
 
 21. KpetTTOv Yap t[V airols p,'f| eircyvuK^ai tj|v oShv rfp SiKaiO(Hlvi)S.] For 
 the omission of av with imperfect indicative in the apodosis, especially 
 in verbs having something of an auxiliary force, as expressing necessity, 
 propriety, possibility, etc., see Jelf § 858, Blass p. 206. Exx. are 
 1 Cor. S'" <o<^et\€T£ apa ck tov Koa-pxiv l^tKdeiv 'then must ye needs go 
 out of the world,' Heb. 9^^ eirei eSct avTov iroXXaKis Tra^eTi' ' else must he 
 often have sufiered,' Rom. V Tip/ imOvp-Lav ovk rjSeiv ('I had not known 
 sin '), ei p.-q o v6p.o% e\eyev Ovk iiri6vpij(r€K, Xen. Anal), vii. 7. 4 ai(r;(pov ^v. 
 More frequently KpetTTov is used with the present, or the verb is 
 omitted, as in 1 Cor. 7* KpeiTTov iariv yo/AEtv rj irvpova-OaL, 1 Pet. 3"^ 
 KpiiTTOv ayaOoTroLovvTai 7ra(r;^£tv ij KaKOTTOiovvrai, Exod. 14^^, Prov. 25''*, 
 Xen. Oecon. 20. 9 irpoKaTakap/3a.v€iv ra hriKaipa KpiiTTOv tj p-rj. For the 
 phrase cf. above 2' ^ oSos t^s akr/OeLa'S, d. 15 KaTa\c«rovT£s ttjv tvOeiav 
 6801', Mt. 2P'^ rjkdfv 'luidwrj^ wpos i/uSs ev oSco BiKcuoa-vvm, Prov. 21^^, 
 Job. 2413. 
 
 {j eiriTvoOo-iv 4iro(jTp^i|»ai.] For the dative instead of the ace. with inf. 
 see Acts 15^'' tSoiev rfptv . . . CKA-c^a/iccois (al. -ph/ovs) avSpas Tripij/ai 
 Trpos vjuas, ib. 27^ iverp^^af (tw IXavA-cd) Trpos tovs <^tA.o-us iroptvOevTi {al. 
 
II 20-22] NOTES 14S 
 
 -OevTo) iiri/jLikeiai Tv^^etv, Blass pp. 241 f. For V'TrocrTpiij/ai «k see 
 
 Acts 1225. 
 
 ^K T^js irapa8o0€i<n]s avTots a'yCas IvtoXtjs.] Cf. note and comment on 
 Jude V. 3 iirayiavi^faOai ry S,7ra$ n-apaSodcun; tois dyiois iricrrei, and the 
 use of ivroX.^ below in 3^ and 1 Tim. 6", 'l Joh. 323. The fact that 
 our author speaks of Christianity as command, while Jude speaks of 
 it as faith or gospel, refutes the view that the latter is exclusively 
 practical, the former exclusively theoretical. 
 
 22. 0Ti|ip4ptiK«v airots rh rfis oXi)6oOs irapoi|j[,Ctts.l 'They exemplify 
 the truth of the proverb,' more literally ' the (warning) of the true 
 proverb has happened to them,' cf. Mt. 21^1 to t^s otjk^s 'the case of 
 the fig-tree,' James 4^* to rrj^avpLov, Xen. Oecon. 16. 7 avejxvqa-driv to tS>v 
 dXiiuiv, OTi OaXaTTOvpyoL ovreq o/tus . . . t-^v /xev KaKrjV yrjv tj/eyorvcri, T^r 
 S' ayaOrpf iiraivoviri, Plato Phaedr. 230 C irdvTiov he Ko/Jixj/OTaTov to t^s 
 irdas oTL iKttvq iriiftvKe k.t.X. Wetstein quotes Lucian Dial. Mort. viii. 1 
 tovto eKtZvo TO TTj's TTa/Qoijuuts, 6 vt^poi Tov XiovTa. For o-i)/ti)8. cf. 
 1 Cor. lO^-* Tavra Se t-uttikSs trvvt^aLvev EKeivois. 
 
 K«wv eirt<rTp^<|fas ht\ rb ISiov l£^pa)i.a.] This proverb is found in Prov. 
 26^^ (UOTTcp Kvtov OTav iiriXOr] iirl tov iavTOv e/jtCTOV Kal /uarjTb'; 
 yivTfrai, outcos atftpiav rg eavTov xaKiq, dvacTTpei/ras ettI ty/v iavTov dfjuipTiav. 
 It is the nature of proverbs, as being familiar to everybody, to suffer 
 abbreviations, like ovos irpos Xvpav, ' a stitch in time,' etc. : so here we 
 must supply such a thought as 'the renegade is ais kv<ov.' For 
 iiruTTpiif/as cf. Gal. 4^ ttS? hriarTpiijitTe irdXiv iirl to, ■jrTti))(a. a-TOL)(cla ; 
 The only other recorded exx. of i^epa/m are Diosc. vi. 19, Eustath. 
 Opusc. 248. 91, but the verb eiepdm is not unf requently used in a general 
 or figurative sense, as well as in the literal sense of a vomit or purge, 
 cf. Demosth. 963, 993 k^epa to vScap of emptying the clepsydra, Plut. 
 Mor. 904 aepa Ovpa^e i$ep5, of expelling the air from the lungs, Arist. 
 Vesp. 993 <j)€p' iiepda-m Tas ij/'qifiovi ' let me pour out the voting pebbles 
 from the urn,' iS. Ach. 341. So Kwreiepdio 'Epict. iii. 13.-23 ^■^ 
 Kare^ipa avTU)V to cravrov tjiXiyp-a, tb. iii. 21. 6 aKOvtraTi p-ov erp^oXia Xevov- 
 TO's. uTraye, fijret tlvihv KaTf^epdcrei^, cf. /tercpdu), Siepdw. Warfield 
 notes that i^epdta is used by Aquila in Levit. 18^^ 'that the land 
 vomit not you out also, as it vomited out the nation which was before 
 you,' where the Hebrew word is the same as that used in Prov. 26^^ 
 quoted above. Wetstein gives two instances of the use of this pro- 
 verb by rabbinical writers. It is also found in Epiph. Haer. xxv. 1, 
 where he says of Nicolaus ov p,rjv ets tcAos •^vcyxe Kpareiv t^s avrov 
 aKpcuTia^, dXKa jSouXi^^eis is kuuv eTri tov Itiov ep,tTOV €irujTpi<^€iv, irpo- 
 (jidcreig Twai eirevoa, which seems to be taken from this passage with 
 the change of i^ipajxa into the more common word. 
 
 Ss Xouo-a|i^vti ets KuXwrnbv ^opPcipov.] The former proverb contrasted 
 two states, repentance typified by the purging, apostasy by the 
 return to the vomit. And so Hippoljrtus, apparently referring to this 
 passage, says Ref. ix. 7 (p. 440^8 Duncker), speaking of Zephyrinus and 
 Callistus Trpos phr Sipav aiSovp,€voi kol inrb Trjs aXrjOtiai a~wayop,€vot 
 (? crw£;(o/ievot) <op.oX.6yow, /x€t' ov 'ttoXv 8e iiri tov avTov Popfiopov dvtKv- 
 XlovTo. Dr. Bigg however, following Spitta, takes the sense to be ' not 
 
144 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 that the creature has washed itself clean in water (as the R.V.), still less 
 that it has been washed clean (as A. V.) ^ and then returns to the mud ; 
 but that having once bathed in filth it never ceases to delight in it ' : 
 and he compares Arist. Hist. An. viii. 6 ras S' vas koI to \ovea-6ai iv ttijXw 
 ■(iriatvei). Other passages are quoted by Wetstein to the same effect, as 
 Ael. H.A. V. 45, Varro E.B. ii. 4 (volutari in luto) est illorum requies, ut 
 lavatio hominia The objection to this explanation is that the provei'b 
 is quoted in illustration of the saying to ecxara xeipova rmv ■n-pwrm', 
 whereas Dr. Bigg recognizes no distinction of first and last. More- 
 over \. eis kvXlo-ijlov ' bathe into a wallowing ' would be an extremely 
 harsh construction ; we should have expected j8opj3dpa> or iv ^opPopm. 
 It is true we find tKoxuro ets tovs koivows XourpSi/a?, ' he used to go 
 to the common baths to bathe' (Ath. 438 e), but ets Kvkuriwv goes 
 far more naturally with iiruTrphliacra. The ancient writers on farm- 
 ing, while they notice that the pig shares the liking of other 
 pachydermata for rolling in the mud, insist upon the importance of 
 having water near their feeding-ground, see "Varro B.R. ii. 4 in 
 pastu locus huic pecori aptus uliginosus, quod delectatur non solum 
 aqua sed etiam luto, Colum. vii. 10 non, ut capellam aut ovem, (suem) 
 bis ad aquam duoi praecipimus, sed, si fieri possit, juxta flumen 
 ■detineri . . . nee uUa re magis gaudet quam rivis atque caenoso lacu 
 volutari. A modern writer on stock-keeping defends the pig from 
 the charge of uncleanliness 'from the evident signs of enjoyment he 
 manifests when scrubbed and washed : when pigs are served so once a 
 week it helps very considerably to keep them in health.' ^ p(ippo- 
 pos is found in biblical Greek only in Jer. 38" (LXX. 45") 
 of the miry dungeon in which the prophet was confined. Both 
 KvXur|i<Sv read by most editors, and KvXicrixa, which is supported by 
 most uncials, are extremely rare, the former occurring elsewhere only 
 in Hippiatrica^ p. 204. 4, the latter in Hippiatr. p. 210.8. For the 
 meaning of the termination in -p.oi see Lightfoot on Phil. p. 111. A 
 commoner form is kuXio-tjoo, which is used by Xen. de Re Eq. v. 3 of a 
 rolling place for horses. 
 
 Yorst (de Adag. N.T. c. .4) adds the following illustrations of the 
 proverb, Lucr. vi. 975 foil, nobis cacnum tetei'rima cum sit spurcities, 
 eadem subus haec iucunda videtur, insatiabihter toti ut volvantur 
 ibidem, Clem. Al. Protr. p. 75 oi Se Trcpi TeX/xara koX fiopP6pov<s, to. 
 rihovrji ptv/iara, KaXivSovfievoi avoi'ijTOvs €K/8d(r(coi'Tai rpotjxli, vcdScis Ttvcs 
 avOpwiroi. ves yap, t^ijaiv, rfiovrai /Sopffopat /iaXAov ij Ka6apu> vSari. 
 Compare Bywater's note on Heracl. Fr. liv fioppopta ^^atpeiv, Hor. 
 
 ' The use of the middle does not necessarily imply that there was no assist- 
 ance in bathing, see Horn. Od. viii where the middle is used in 427 and 449 of 
 the bathing of Odysseus ; but in 454 we find the active used of the same bathe, 
 Thv 5' l-neX oiv S/itma! Kovaav koX xpiffa" ihaitf, as to which of. a. 360-365 ; and so in 
 later times the use of the middle does not exclude the help of the BaKavtis and 
 aKetirrris in the public baths. The word here implies neither more nor less than 
 ' after a bathe of the ordinary kind,' i.e. in clean water. 
 
 2 Roland, p. 71. 
 
 " This is an anonymous compilation of the tenth century containing quotations 
 from earlier writers. 
 
II 22-III 2 J NOTES 145 
 
 Epp. i. 2. 23 foil. Circae pocula nosti, quae si cum sociis stultus cupi- 
 dusque bibisset, vixisset canis immundus vel arnica luto sus, Epict. 
 Diss. iv. 11. 29 wireKOe koI xotpca hwXlyov Iv iv /Sopfiopi^ fii] KvXii^Tai . . . 
 /i^n iinros KukieraL iv jSopjSo'po), /jti^Ti kviov yevvalo^; 
 
 III. 1. Here the writer turns away from the Libertines and their 
 victims to the faithful members of the Church, as Jude does in v. 17, 
 both marking the transition by the use of the word ayairrjToL 
 
 TaiTt\v f\Si\ SEVT^pav i]iXv 7pd<|>u eirioToX^jv.] ' This is now the second 
 letter that I write to you.' For the idiomatic use of ^8ij with the 
 numeral compare Joh. 2P* toSto tjStj rpirov l<^avepm6ri 'IiycroSs, Horn. 
 Od. ii. 89, Plato Prot. 309 d. For a discussion as to the earher letter 
 here alluded to, see Introduction. 
 
 h> als.] Gonstr. ad sensum ' in both of which,' cf. below v. 6 8l' &v, 
 which some explain of vSaro^, Acts 15^^ Kara irdA.iv Traaav Iv ats Kar-qy- 
 yu\ap.€v rbv koyov, Winer p. 177, Jelf § 819 foil. 
 
 SirycCpo) ifMV iv imo^vfyra ri\v elXiKpivfj Sidvouiv.] Repeated' from 1^^] 
 The word Sidvoia received a technical sense from Plato (.ffiep. 511 d), 
 corresponding to Coleridge's 'Understanding' (German Verstand), as 
 opposed to voBs, Coleridge's ' Reason ' (Germ. Vernunft). With earlier 
 writers it means simply ' thought,' 'mind.' ^ So in the LXX. Gen 17^'^ 
 'A^paap, iyekaaev koX etTrcv iv Trj Siavoia aiiTOv 'said in his heart,' 
 Deut. 6^ dyaTT^o-eis K.vpiov tov ®€ov i^ oXijs t^s Stavotas trou, Num. 15^^ cni 
 8uurTpa(l>r](retr6e oiricro) tZv SiavoiSyv vjjmv, and in N.T. Col. P^ ixOpovi 
 Ty Siavota, 1 Pet. 1^^ ava^oMrdfitvoi ras ocr^uas t^s Stavoiias i/iZv, where 
 see Hort. 
 
 The etymology of elXiKpiviis is uncertain. It is used first of unmixed 
 substances, as of pure air; then logically of abstract ideas, as Xen. 
 Mem. ii. 2. 3 ctXtxpiviys rts av dij aSiKia 17 axapia-Tia ' ingratitude would be 
 the essence of injustice,' Plat. St/mp. 211 e «t tu yevono to koSmv iSecv 
 eiXiKpivh ; and lastly of ethical purity, as in Phaedo 81 c, where the 
 ^v)(7} akiKpivrj^ is contrasted with the ^vxr] /ieniaa-fievr] Kal aKaOapTo^. 
 This last is the sense in which it is used in the two passages of the 
 N.T. where it occurs, viz. here and in Phil, li" iva ^re eiXiKpivei's koI 
 aTrpotTKOTToi, and the same is true of the substantive in 1 Cor. 5* dXA.' Iv 
 d^u/iois £tXiKpivtas KOI dXij^etas, 2 Cor. P^^ 2^^. It is also found in 
 Wisdom V" {(ro<j)ia iarlv) aaroppoia rrj's tov iravTOKparopoi 8d^i;s elXiKpivi^i, 
 Perhaps it should be translated here ' pure,' uncontaminated by the 
 poisonous principles of the libertines. 
 
 2. |».vr|cr8fivai tmv irpoa(n\[Uv<i>v pT||idT(ov imh r&v aylav irpo<|)T|T<3v.] For the 
 epexegetic infinitive following, on SiEyEipu) iv wojuv^o-et (not, as von 
 Soden, on ypa.<j>m) cf. Winer 399 foil., Lk. 1^* S.vTtXdfieTo TratSos avrov 
 p-v-qa-Brprai iXiovs, ih. v. 72. The governing phrase here has much the 
 force of ■trporpeiria in Xen. Mem. i. 7. 1 dper^s iiri/jLeXflo'dai TrpoerpeTrev. 
 The only difficulty in the expression seems to be the slight pleonasm ' I 
 remind you to keep in mind the warning ' instead of ' I remind you to 
 be on your guard against.' With the writer's liking for the compact 
 
 ' This seems to be still its use in Phaedo 66 a outJ ko6' outV elKixpivet tS 
 Siavoif Xpincvos, as it is contrasted with the bodily senses, not with any other 
 mental faculty. 
 
 L 
 
146 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 articular construction, we might have expected tS)v vtto tS>v ay. wpo^. 
 irpoaprjiiivoiv prj/idTwy. Probably his reason for preferring the looser 
 construction here was the wish to avoid an uninterrupted succession of 
 genitives. Of. James 1^ amiria wapa. rov StSovros 0£oS iraxrw oarXuK with 
 my n. As in V^''^\ the writer again combines the evidence from 
 prophecy with the witness of the apostles to the coming of Christ 
 in glory. For the epithet ayios cf. Lk. F*. 
 
 Kol Tfjs Tfiv otiroffTciXuv iyjav cvtoXtjs toO KvpCov KaV a-«Ti)pos.] ' Of the 
 Lord's command delivered by your apostles.' It is a double possessive 
 genitive, as if we were to say ' Shakspere's speech of Mark Antony,' 
 meaning ' the speech put into Mark Antony's mouth by Shakspere.' 
 For other instances of the ' reduplicated genitive ' see Blass p. 99.^ 
 For the use of the word hrrokri to express the teaching of our Iiord see 
 above 2^, Job. 12*", and Comments on Jude p. 64. By 'your apostles 
 is meant, not necessarily ' the Twelve,' but the missionaries from whom 
 they first received the knowledge ox the Gospel, of whom the writer 
 claims to have been one in 1^®. We find the same phrase used in 
 Phil. 2^ 'Eira^poSiTov rov aZt\<ftov koi (ruvepyov koX (rwcTTpaTuoTrjv /lov, 
 v/jMtv 8e air6<rTo\ov, 2 Cor. 8^ R.V. ' whether any inquire about Titus, he 
 is my partner and f eUow-worker to you-ward ; or our brethren, they 
 are the messengers of the churches (ottoo-toXoi iKKX-qa-vSa/), the glory of 
 Christ.' In both passages the genitive is subjective referring to persons 
 sent by the church. We have however an example of the objective 
 genitive in Rom. 11^^ cyo) iOviov airocnokoi, and Clem. Rom. 44 oi 
 diro<rToA.oi ^/«ov h/viacrav ita rov Kvpiov tjiimv . . . ori epis ecrTcu. hrl rov 
 ovofiaTOi TTJs eiria-KOTnji, which Lightf oot calls ' an exact parallel ' to our 
 text, and explains by a reference to § 5, where the phrase tous ayaSov'; 
 aTToa-ToXovs is used of Peter and Paul. If our epistle was really 
 addressed to the church in Rome (as to which see note on 3" eypcaj/ev 
 v/uv), this would give a special force to the phrase twv airoaToXiov vpwv. 
 See the discussion in the Introduction. 
 
 3. toSto xpSrov ^tviJo-Kovres.] This phrase was used above (1^") in refer- 
 ence to the right appreciation of prophecy : here it is used of a certain 
 portion of the message of the Apostles, which was now of special 
 importance, viz. the warning against unbelieving mockers. The 
 participle should have been in the accusative agreeing with the subject 
 of ftArqcrOrivai. For a similar anacoluthon see 1 Pet. 2^i- 1^ Siya-inp-oi, 
 TrapaKaXS) ms irapoucous a.-!r£)(e<r6ai tSv (rapKiKmv hriOvfuHiv . . . Tr]v 
 a.raaTpo<j>riv vfiMV exovrei koXt^. In both cases there is an interval 
 between the participle and the verb, and the writer continues his 
 sentence as if he had begun with an imperative, instead of with a 
 phrase equivalent to an imperative. 
 
 €ir' iay^rav rav '^|Mp«v.] This idea is variously expressed in the N.T. 
 John regularly uses rg ia-xaTg rjl^ipa, as in &39.ta.u.5i^ 737^ ii24_ 12« ; 
 iv Tttis i(r)(a.TaK ij/xepais is found in Acts 2^^, ev ecrxdrats rifilpax^ in 
 2 Tim. 31, James 5* ; ev xaipia la-\a.Tia in 1 Pet. 1* ; i-n' ioyarov xpovov 
 (al, Tov ^(povav) in Jude v. 18 ; iir' icrxp-Tov twv rip-epSiv tovtwv in 
 
 ' BlaBS himself is inclined to insert Sti after rrjs, as in the title of the ^iSaxh, 
 A. Kvplov 5i4 Tuv SiiSeKa liiroirT6\av to7s tSvefftv. 
 
in 2-4] NOTES 147 
 
 Heb. 1^ ; iir icrxaTov rutv -xpovmv in 1 Pet. P" (where €a-;(aTov is 
 substantival) ; «7r' la-xartov tZv ij/iepSv here (where ia-xa-Tuiv is a predi- 
 cative adjective, used like summus mons ' the top of the mountain '). 
 Blass (p. 156) quotes Barn. 16^ A.cyei yap tj ypacjir] ^ Kot ia-rai kit' 
 Icr^aTtav rS>v ■^[t.epiov kol wapaSuxreL Kvpio's to, Trp6/3aTa ets KarcL<j>6opa.v, 
 and Harm. Sim. ix. 12. 3 ett' itrxariav twv rnj-eplov t^s a-wreXeiai.^ See 
 Lightf oot's translation of the same phrase in 2 Clem. Rom. xiv, ' when 
 the days were drawing to a close,' where he refers to the following 
 instances of its use in the LXX. Gen. 49^, Deut. 4^" (al. Ik i<rxdT(o), 
 Dan. 228 iqu Hos. 3^, Mic. 4i, also Westcott on 1 Joh. 2^« (p. 69). This, 
 temporal use of im is a further development of such phrases as we find 
 in classical authors, iirl Kvpov, i-irl t^s e/x^s fdijs Herod, i. 38, iirl y^pcos 
 Arist. Sth. i. 9. 11, iirl tSsv dp^^atW ^(poviav Arist. Pol. iv. 3, i-in t^s vvv 
 ffKiKia.'s Isocr. p. 75 § 194, irorepov v/uv evSo^oripa Sokci i) iroXts etvat ctti 
 tZv vvv KaipZv ^ im ruiv irpoyovuiv Aesch. Gtea. p. 79 § 178. The exist- 
 ence of these scoffers is a proof of that which they deny. It is one of 
 the appointed signs of the approach of the last day. Cf. 1 Joh. 2^8 
 where the activity of the antichrists denotes on iaxo-Tri mpa ia-riv. 
 
 IXevirovTai . . . «v €|iirai,7(iiJvT| l|i,iratKTai.] Cf. Mt. 24^ ttoAXoi ekevtrovTai 
 iirl Tw ovo/juiH iJi,ov, XiyovTS's 'EyoS ei/ti o Xpioros, and, for ev, 1 Cor. 4?^ 
 Tt Ofkere ; iv pct/SSo) e\6o) wpos ip.as ; 2 Cor. 2^ iv Wmj irpos vp.os iXOtiv. 
 The verb e/iirai^m is common both in classical and in biblical Greek, 
 but the latter uses the unclassical formation in ^ {e.g. iviirai^av 
 Mk. 152*'), from which are derived the unclassical ipiiraiKTiii, found in 
 Isa. 3* as well as in Jude v. 18; ifiiraLy/jLOi Heb. IP^, Ezek. 22*, 
 2 Mace. 7^; ifj-iraiyp-a Ps. 37'', Isa. 66*; iiLiraxy p-ovy] which only occurs 
 here.* For the formation of the last see above n. on ■irapa<l>povia 2'^ ; 
 and compare koAAovj;, KXavOpLovrj, iriurp.ovri, TrXTjcr/tov^, <^\iyp.ov^. Por 
 the repetition of the cognate word see my n. on James ?>" TrpocrevxS 
 TTpoa-ijviaTo, Winer 281 foil. 
 
 4. iroB eoTiv i\ liro77«XCo Tijs irapovirCas aiJTOD ;1 The Second Advent had 
 formed the subject of the Apostles' instructions to their converts (above 
 118) and the writer reverts to it again below, v. 12. Besides the more 
 general intimations of the 0. T. on such subjects as the future triumph 
 of the Messiah, the glory and blessedness of His Kingdom, the 
 renewed heaven and earth, of which we read in Isa. 60, 65, etc., the 
 first recorded promise of this Advent in the N. T. is contained in Mt. 
 10^* (the directions given to the Twelve before their first mission) oi 
 /X.1J reXetrj/Te ras iroXei's 'lapayjX, lus eXfljj o uios tov avOpamov ; the next is 
 before the Transfiguration, Mt. 16^* dcri riveg tSiv mSe ia-TrjKOTiov omi/es 
 ov far] yeutroii'Tat Oavdrov, e<i)s av ISomtiv tov vlbv tov avOpunrov ipxo/icvov iv 
 Tg jSao-iXeta avTov (cf. nn. on P^ above) ; the third shortly before the 
 Betrayal, Mt. 24* (the request of the Apostles) rt to a-i^p,eiov t^s tr^s 
 
 1 Hilgenfeld has pointed out that the reference is to Enoch 89'^' ''• *', though 
 the words koI tarai — rinepiiv are wanting there. 
 
 ^ Blass is, I think, mistaken in identifying the two constructions, by making 
 iax^Tav gen. of tA ^itxoto. 
 
 ' Stephanas gives a reference to Cyr. Alex. v. 21, which I have not been able 
 to find. 
 
 L 2 
 
us THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 irapovcia^ Kai (rvvrekciai tov alwvoi ; Mt. 24^ ov fxr] Trapikdri i] yevea. avrrj, 
 ea)S vavTO, ravra yevi^Tai, Mt. 24*^ yp-qyopelTe ovv, otl ovk otSare iroiq, 
 yjii.ipq, 6 Kvpioi vpMv epxerai ; then the announcement of the angel after 
 the Ascension, Acts 1^^ ovros o 'IijtroJs 6 dvaXapPavofneuos a.<j)' v/xS>v eh 
 TOV ovpavov ovTtjii iXeva-eraL k.t.X. The circumstances of this Coming are 
 described more at length in Mt. 2427-31, 1 Th. 4i«' i^, 2 Th. F"*. That 
 the Coming was looked for shortly, appears from James 5*' ', Apoc. 
 26 25^ 311^ and above all from St. Paul's expectation that he would 
 himself live to see it, 1 Cor. 15^2^ 1 Th. 41^' '7. There are however 
 signs of disappointment and impatience at the delay of the promised 
 Coming, as in James S^ '• pj3.Kpo6vp.-q(rare, aSeXxjioi, ecus ttjs irapova-iai . . . 
 (TTrjpi^aTi Ttts KapSiai, Heb. lO'^'' {nrofjuovrji 'X*'''^ xpeiav iva to OiXyjiw, tov 
 ®eov TTOLrjiravTei KOfiurri(T$e Trjv lirayyeXiav' €TI yap fjuKpbv oarov ovov, 6 
 ep)(op,evoi rj^ei koI ov xpovi<r€i, cf. Lk. 12*^ )(povit,u 6 Kvpioi fnov €pxe(r6ai: 
 and stress was laid upon the fact that the day and hour were known 
 only to the Pather (Mt. 2438), and that the Coming would be unex- 
 pected, like that of a thief in the night (below v. 10, Lk. 123^), as 
 former judgments were (Mt. 2437-3*). j'op ^j^e rhetorical use of iro5 cf; 
 
 Lk. 8^^ TTOV f) TTlCTTtS, 1 Cor. 1^" TTOV CTOKJiOS ', TTOV ypap,pXlT£Vi ; 1 Pet. 4^3, 
 
 Judg. 6^3 TroS c(7Ti TravTa ra Oavfuairia. avTOv a Stij-y^travTO fjpMi oi irarepES 
 rifiuiv ; Ps. 42* TTOV ia-Tiv 6 ©eds aov ; Isa. GS^*, Mai. 2^7 ■n-ov eo-Tiv 6 ®eos ttjs 
 SiKaioavvT]^ ; Eur. Herac. 510 iroS raS' ev xpijo-ToTs irpeTru; and the similar 
 use of TToios in Arist. Nub. 367 irotos Zei5s ; 
 
 a+' % 70lp ot intT^pES inoif.ijirfra.v.'] Cf. Lk. 7*^ dt^' ijs dariXBov ov 
 SU\nrtv KUTaifuXovad. /jlov toiis wdSas, Acts 241^ ov wXetous ei<Tiv p.Oi rip-ipai- 
 SuScKa d^' ^s avejSfjv eh 'lepova-akT^p,, Herm. Sim. viii. 6. 6 jSXoreis 
 iroAAoiis [leTavevorjKOTai atf}' ^s eXdXTjcras, abovfe P' ecus ov, Blass p. 140. 
 The elliptical a.<t>' ov is used in the same sense Lk. 13^^, Apoc. 16^*, 
 and in classical writers, ot irar^pes is understood of the first fathers of 
 mankind by some, owing to the phrase which follows, air' apy^i 
 KTicreuii : the meaning then would be ' there has been no change since 
 the creation, or the death of Adam.' This however is certainly not 
 the prevailing sense in the N.T. It is used sometimes of Abraham 
 and the patriarchs before the time of Moses, as in Lk. l^^, Joh. 7^^ ; 
 sometimes of Moses and his contemporaries, Joh. 6*', Acts 73^ ; some- 
 times of the times of the propTiets, Lk. 6^3, Acts 7^^, Rom. 9^, 11 28, IS^, 
 Heb. 1^. In Judges quoted above, the fathers seem to belong to the 
 preceding generation, and so in Jer. 312* (the fathers have eaten sour 
 grapes). Acts 151" (neither our fathers nor we were able to bear), and 
 in our text.i None who claimed to belong to the Christian body, as 
 these libertines did, could deny that the prophecies of the O. T. had 
 to a certain extent received their fulfilment in the first advent of 
 Christ. After the admission of the Gentiles and the rejection of the 
 
 1 Another way of explaining irwripei would be to understand it of those who 
 were held to be authorities in the early Church, see Westoott's n. on 1 Joh. 2" 
 ypitpu ifuv, iraTcpes, where he says that this term is applied to prophets, priests, 
 and teachers in the O.T., and compares Mt. 23^ Acts 7'*, 1 Cor. 4". This how- 
 ever seems to be hardly possible in a letter purporting to be written by an 
 Apostle. Cf. Abbott Joh. Oram. p. 410. 
 
in 4, 5] NOTES 149 
 
 Jews they could not say 'All things continue as they were.' Again, 
 neither patriarchs nor prophets had asserted that the Messiah was 
 to come in their own days ; on the contrary they eagerly inquired as 
 to the time signified by the Spirit within them (1 Pet. P"), What 
 excited the hopes of the Thessalonians was not the vague prospect 
 held out in the O. T., but the definite declarations of the Lord and 
 His Apostles. The long-past deaths of patriarchs and prophets made 
 not the slightest difference to them. What did make a difference was 
 the time that had elapsed since the Lord had departed from earth. 
 The natural and inevitable difiiculty felt by a later generation of 
 Christians was the apparent non-fulfilment of the promise that the 
 Farousia would be accomplished during the lite-time of the earlier 
 generation. Compare the interesting quotation from an apocryphal 
 writing in i. Clem. Rom. 23, in which the doubters say raSra ■^Kova-a/j.ev 
 Kal i-iri tSiv Ttaripiav r/filov, Kal ISov yeyijpaKa/iev koI ovSiy ^/iiv tovtidv 
 o-u/ijSe/Ji/Kei/, which is repeated in ii. Clem. R. 1 1 in slightly different 
 words, ^/icis Se ■fj/j.ipav i$ ■^fiipa's wpo(r8ej(o/i.evoi. ovSev tovtuiv iiapd.Kafi.ev. 
 Lightfoot in his note says 'it seems hardly possible that the two 
 (2 Pet. and the quotation) can be wholly independent.' Whichever 
 was borrowed, we are justified, I think, in interpreting the obscurer 
 language of 2 Pet., by the quotation. The phrase di^' ijs — cKoi/u^^ijo-av 
 seems to be a loose expression for ' The fathers have fallen asleep, and 
 things are stUl going on without alteration,' perhaps mixed up in the 
 mind of the speaker with another thought, 'Now that they are 
 gone, we can no longer hope for the Parousia, which was promised in 
 their days.' Spitta's extraordinary explanation, by which, regardless 
 of the intervening yap, he joins a<l>' ^s (irapov<rios) e/coi/t^fliyo-av in the 
 sense ' die Vater sind entschlafen von der Parusie weg, ihr Tod hat sie 
 entzogen,' has received no support from later commentators. The 
 sleep of death is a common expression in classical (cf. Soph. M. 509) 
 as in biblical Greek (Mt. 27»2, Joh. ll", 1 Cor. 156). 
 
 irdvTa ofiTus Sio|i^«i. dir dpx'Hs KTio-ews.l ' All things remain as we see 
 them {in statu quo).' In the following verses this statement is shown 
 to be erroneous : heaven and earth have undergone great changes 
 within the memory of man. SiajjiAiei, cf. Heb. 1^^ '■ avToi avoXovvrai, 
 a-ii Si Sia/tiei/ets, Ps. 119^". dir dpxTis ktCo-sois 'From the beginning of 
 the world,' cf. Mt. 24^1, Mk. 10^ ib. 13^. ktCo-is is used here not for 
 the act of creation (a phrase which must at any rate exclude all but 
 the first day's work), but for the created universe, as in Rom. 1^^. It 
 is not to be understood as a restatement of d<^' ■^s k.t.A.., but as intro- 
 ducing a further difficulty : not only has the promise of the irapovaia. 
 not been fulfilled before the disappearance of the first generation of 
 Christians ; but a change such as is involved in the irapovcria. is contrary 
 to the whole experience of man. 
 
 5. Xav6dv6i 7op oirovs toOto S^Xovras 8ti] ' For they shut their eyes to 
 this fact that', cf. Acts 26^^, v. 8 below, Plato Pa/rm. 128 c Trpfirov /xev 
 <r£ TovTo XavOdvii oTi. For 84Xovtos cf. Libanius Prog. 129 C Ikwv dyvocov 
 a roil jSacriXeBo-iv 6<l)£iKiTai (quoted by Wetst.), Aesch. Cho. 19 yei/oB Si 
 crviJ.[iiaxo^ diXwv ifMoi, Soph. Phil. 1343 o-vy^olpei OeXmv, and Col. 2^^ 
 
150 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ixrjSeU vfiLas KaTaftpafieveTio 6i\mv, according to some interpreters. I see 
 no ground for supposing (as Schott, Keil, Kiihl, Spitta, and v. Sedan) 
 that TovTo is to be taken as the object after ^eXovTas. 
 
 oipavol fjo-av — tu toO 0«ou Xi$7(p.] It is a question how we are to take 
 the construction of this sentence. It is evident that we must under- 
 stand rjv with y^ from the preceding ^aav ; but are we to understand 
 the predicate of yrj with ovpavoil That is, must we complete the first 
 clause by supplying ef vB. koX Si vS. a-vvea-TuiTeg . . . Xoyto 1 There can 
 be no doubt that tw . . . \6yia belongs to both clauses, and, if so, the 
 construction would seem to require a-mnaTSyrt's, which carries with it 
 the connected words e^ vS, koX 8t' ^S. A further reason for suppljring 
 the entire predicate to both clauses, is that the heavens and earth 
 make up the xoor/ios (w. 6, 7, 12, 13) and that the water by which 
 o Tore k6(tju}% was destroyed belonged alike to earth and heaven 
 (Gen. 71^, 8^). Spitta, it is true, lays stress on IxTroAat as used 
 exclusively of heaven, on the ground that the rabbinical school of 
 Sharmnai, cited Gen. \^ iv apy^y iiroirj(Tev 6 ©cos tov ovpavbv koL tt]v 
 yijv, as proving that the heaven existed before the six days' work 
 began, but the same text might be used to prove the pre-existence of 
 the earth. Similarly, we read in 4 Esdr. 6^^ Domine locutus es . . . in 
 prime die dicens. Fiat caelum et terra ; et tuum verbum opus perfecit. 
 What may be argued is that the ovpavo^ is distinct from the a-Tepeaim, 
 which the Jews believed to have been created as a mere appendage to 
 the earth for the purpose of upholding the clouds, and to be itself 
 supported by the mountains as by pillars (Job 26^^, 2 Sam. 22*). 
 Below, however, a higher use is assigned to the arepea/ux, viz. to 
 support the sun and moon and stars (Gen. 1^*1''), and in Ezek. l^^'^' 
 we read that the throne of God was over the firmament, which is also 
 identified with ovpavd? in Gen. 1*. Compare the article on Cosmogony 
 in Hastings' D. of B. For the plural ovpavoC see Robinson's n. on 
 Eph. 4^^", Charles' Slavonic Enoch pp. xxx-xlvii, and my notes on 
 Clem. Al. SProm. vii. §§ 9, 10. 
 
 For the irregular construction (caused by the attraction of the 
 nearer subject yrj) ovpavol rjcrav . . . (rwea-Tuxra instead of cruveo-roiTcs, cf. 
 Heb. 9® SSpa re koI Bvaiai TrpoartjiipovTai /iri Swdp-ivai k.t.X. The reading 
 of X truvea-TSiTa (WH. marg.) was probably a correction, the neuter 
 plural applying equally to the two preceding subjects. Lastly we have to 
 investigate the word o-uveo-rStra. The transitive tenses are often used 
 in the N.T. in the sense ' to bring together,' ' introduce,' ' commend,' 
 ' put in a favouraWe light.' In Gal. 2'* ■napa.pd.Tqv ifiavrbv (rwioTaru) 
 means ' prove myself a transgressor.' The intransitive uses are Lk. 9^^ 
 Svb avSpas (rwe<TTu>Tai avrS ' two men standing with him,' Col. P^ rot 
 TTavTo. hf auTcS fTvve(TTqKiv which Lightfoot translates ' all things hold 
 together in Him.' Sometimes it implies the composition of a whole 
 from its elements, as in Philo i. p. 330 Ik y^s koX ^Saros koX alpo's koX 
 irvpbi (rwioTTi oSe o KO(7/ios, Plat. Tim. 32 B : hence it is used more 
 generally (as here) in the sense of being 'framed,' 'formed,' 'brought 
 into being.' 
 
 oipavol ijo-ov SKiraXoi koI 7fj.] 'There were heavens of old and an 
 
Ill 5] NOTES 151 
 
 earth.' It seems better to give an indefinite force to the statement. 
 When a definite heaven and earth are spoken of just below, we have 
 the article 6 totc koit/^os, oi vvv oipavoC. For ex^aXai see n. on 2^. 
 
 1$ iiSaros Kol 8i liSaTOS crwtoTutra rcy tov 0eoS Xd'yip.l ' Built up out of 
 water and through water by the word of God.' This appears to refer 
 (1) to the general evolution out of chaos, to which the names a/Sutrcros 
 and vSmp are applied in Gen. P;! (2) to the stages by which the 
 heaven and earth were built up, the oTEpeu/ua (here called ovpavoi) 
 being made on the second day to divide the waters from the waters, 
 and the land being separated from the water on the third day. The 
 cause of these movements was the word of God, as it is written 
 (Gen. 1*) tXirev 6 ©eos, Tevr]6i^<i) <^Gs, Koi iyevero ^5s, cf. Heb. IP, 
 Ps. 33^ Tu Xoyo) ToD Kupiov 01 ovpavoi icTepemOrja'av. In i. Clem. R. 27. 4 
 iv koyio T^s /AeyaXaMTuVTys auToB <rvve<TTi^(TaTO to, irdvTa koI hr \6yio Svvwrai 
 avTo. KaToxTTpofiai, as in this passage, the word of God appears as the 
 cause alike of creation and destruction. The meaning of e^ uSaros 
 is plain, the only question being whether i^ has a local, or a material 
 force, a distinction which was probably not in the mind of the 
 writer ; but 8i' ^Saros has given rise to much discussion. In reference 
 to the heaven it is explained above, as being equivalent to dva fiia-ov or 
 fuera^, differing from its ordinary spatial use in that it here implies 
 rest, not motion through or between. We find an analogy to this in 
 the tropical use of Sux to express a state, as 8i' TjoTj^tas ttvai, 8ia 
 airc)(6iLa% yiyvcaBai, 8ta irivBovi ro y^pas Siayctv Xen. Cyr. iv. 6. 6, tov 
 Sia Trepiro/i^s irapaySanyv Rom. 2^^, 6 Sia irpocTKop.p.a.TOi icrditov ib. 14^", 
 and also in certain adverbial phrases such as Sia ■}(cipmv ex^iv, cf . Aesch. 
 Sv/ppl. 193 ayaXfuira i)(ov(Tai Sia ^ipZv ivu>vvfiu>v 'holding in their left 
 hands,' Soph. Ant. 916, Arist. Pol. v. 8. 8 Sia ;)^etpSi/ fiaWov exouo-t rr/v 
 iroA-tTBav, also in the sing. Plut. Vit. 63 {Numa 6) Sia xeipos cxovra rots 
 lyvias ' holding tight in hand,' Av. Vesp. 597, Luc. Demon. 56 Sia o-To/naTos 
 ra.'s Karriyopiai e^eiv ' to have Aristotle's categories between your lips,' 
 Peregrin. 18 rovro Sio. o'Top.aTos ^v airacriv, Theocr. 14. 27 )(ap,iv .rovro Si' 
 cJtos eyevTo. If this is an allowable use of Sid, we may explain it in 
 regard to the earth from the Jewish belief that the earth rested upon 
 water, cf. Ps. 24^ a-uTos iirl daXacraSiv iOe/J-ekimcrev avT-i^, xat iiri iroTa/iiav 
 riTOLfijacrev avnjv, Ps. 136*, Herm. Vis. i. 3. 4 tu l(r)(yp<a pruiari iri^^a^ tov 
 ovpavbv Kal fle/ieXuotras Tr}v yrjv €Tri vSaTtav. If we suppose an allusion here 
 to the Jewish belief as to the waters on which the earth is founded, 
 the waters above the earth may be explained, as in the case of the 
 cTTepiafia, of the waters stored up above the firmament (Ps. 148*). 
 
 There are many dilEculties in the interpretation of this passage. The 
 explanation of Sid given above is that of Grotius, Beza, Hammond, and 
 Mede, but recent commentators ^ generally assign to Sia its usual force 
 
 ^ See also Apoo. 11' and 13', where the abyss from which to Bnpiov ascends is 
 also called 6d\a(r(ra. 
 
 ^ Dr. Bigg seems to have a leaning to the other view ; and Weiss, Hofmann, 
 and De Wette boldly adopt it, translating 'durch das Wasser hindurch, 
 zwischen dem Wasser . . . denn der Himrael ist naoh Mosaischer Kosmogonie 
 als feste Decke zwischen die irdischen iind uberirdischen Wasser hineingetreten.' 
 
15? THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ' by means of,' adducing in support Clem. Hom. xi. 24 ra navra to 
 vSoip TTOici, TO 8e vSiDp VTTO TTvev/xaTOi KLVT^areoii Trjv yevecriv kaiJ-jSavei. How 
 then are we to interpret it (1) of the heavens, (2) of the earth? How 
 can the firmament be said to be created by means of water ? I have 
 not been able to find any satisfactory answer to the question in the 
 commentators. Some, like Keil, put a comma after cKiraXat, and are 
 content with an explanation confined to the earth, alleging that it was 
 made by means of water, because the transference of part of the 
 water to the clouds and of another part to the sea gave rise to the dry 
 land. Others refer to the erosive effect of water, or to the need of 
 rain or mist (Gen. 2^) in fashioning and preserving the earth.^ 
 
 6. 8i' 8v 6 r6r€ k<So-|ios fiSari KaTaxXvo-Oels oirfSXero.l I have followed 
 min. 31 in reading ov for S>v of the great body of MSS.,^ as o and u> 
 are frequently confused in MSS., and no satisfactory explanation of 
 Si' S>v has been given ; whereas ov refers to the immediately preceding 
 Xoyu and is taken up again in v. 7 by tw avTw Aoyo). We might have 
 had a dative of cause here, as in w. 5 and 7 and in Heb. IP naTrfpTurOai 
 Toiis aiSvas p-qfLaTi ©eoB, were it not that the dative was wanted for the 
 instrument rSaTi. Sometimes indeed the Xd-yos itself is regarded as the 
 instrument, as in Heb. 1^ 8i' ov roiis aiSvas iiroiricrev, Joh. P iravTa 
 8i' avTov iyivero ; but 8ta with ace. is found in Ps. 1191** 8ia tov Xdyov 
 crov l^ijuov fii, Apoc. 12^1 ivlicijcrav avTov 8ia tov koyov rijs //.apTupias 
 avToiv, Ps. 1 6* 8ta Toil? Xdyous tSv p^ciXeuv crov eyo) itjivKa^a 68ovs (TKkrjpds, 
 Joh. 6*^ o Tpuyyoiv p-e Kaxeivos ^■^o-et 8i' ip.e. ' It was owing to the divine 
 word that the world of that date was destroyed by a deluge,' cf. below 
 u 12 St' rjv (Trapova-iav) ovpavol irvpovp.ivoi XvQrj(T0VTa.i, Apoc. 4^^ Sia to 
 OikqpA a-ov rjcrav koI eKTia-drja-av, Heraclit. xii. (Byw.) StjSiiWa . . . 
 )(i\i(ov irioiv cfi/cvecTai TJj tjiwvrj tia, tov Oeov (paraphrased by Clem. 
 Al. p. 358 <Tvv ®eS), by Iambi. Myst. iii. 8 tjj to5 KpaToCvTos «vepyeta), 
 Pet/r. Apoc. (p. 14. 2 Klost.) dv£7riSe'^s (o ®e6s) ov to. TravTa eirtSecrai xai 
 Si' ov lo-Tiv . . . aTTOt^Tos OS TO, TTo-VTa iTTOLTfjcrev koyio 8wa/ieuis aiiTOv. 
 
 The most usual explanation of 8i' mv regards c^ u8aTos koI 8i' ^SaTos as 
 the antecedents ; but this is really making two different substances out 
 of the different uses of one substance, which is again repeated in the 
 singular in the same verse. A better sense is made by referring to the 
 remoter subjects ovpavoi and y^, since both are spoken of as causing 
 the deluge (Gen. 7^\ 8^) ; but the fact of their remoteness makes this 
 connexion very improbable. We should rather have expected such a 
 phrase as o/ims 8e e/t tovtw. Moreover the heaven and the earth 
 constitute the world which they are said to destroy. Wiesinger thinks 
 the antecedents are vSwros and tw to5 ©coC Xdyu, but then we have one 
 of the antecedents introduced again as the instrument in vSoti ; and 
 there is something awkward in making a compound antecedent out of 
 two ideas which stand in different relations and in different cases in 
 the preceding sentence. 
 
 1 Wetstein has three quotationa from Artemidorus (ii. 13, 17, 34), in which a 
 distinction is made between roiis ^| SSotos (fishermen) t) Si" SSaros (merchants) 
 ?X'»"''as T^v ipyafflav. 
 
 ^ I learn from Nestle {Textual Criticism of N.T. p. 326) that this change is 
 also supported by Sohmiedel in his new edition of Winer's Or. 
 
Ill 5-7] NOTES 153 
 
 6 t<5t6 k<So-|i,os.] Of. n. on 1^ tGv iraA.at afiapnlov. By koctjuos is 
 meant the material world made up of heaven and earth, which are 
 here stated to have perished in the deluge, as we read below of the 
 future destruction of the existing material world by fire.'- 
 
 dirciXero.] The Mosaic account gives no support to this story of 
 the absolute destruction of the earth, far less of the heaven by the 
 deluge j but Spitta shows that the same language is used in Jewish 
 legends, e.g. Enoch x. 2 ^ vopevov wpos t6v NSe . . . /cat S^Xcao-ov 
 avTio TeXos eirepp^djucvov, oTi r/ yrj o.-ir6\X.VTai iracra, ih. 83^"^. 
 'I saw in a vision how the heaven collapsed and . . . fell to the 
 earth. And when it fell to the earth, I saw how the earth was 
 swallowed in a great abyss . . . and I said " The earth is destroyed," ' 
 Joseph. Ant. i. 2. 3 irpoeLpijKOTOi a<jiavicr[Ji,6v 'A8a.[/,ov rZv o\wv e<Tt<r6ai, 
 Tov iJ,ev KaT l(T)(yv irvpos, tov erepov Be Kara fiiav koX irXrjdo^ •uSaTos. 
 So the term irakLyyevea-ia is used of the reappearance of the earth 
 after the flood, 1 Clem. Rom. 9 N5e Trto-ros eipedelg 8ta t^s XeiTovpyias 
 avTov iraXiyyevea-uiv Koa-fia iKrjpv$ev, where see Lightfoot's note. It 
 is evident from vv. 7, 10, 12' below that the writer looked forward 
 to a fundamental metamorphosis of the existing universe through the 
 final conflagration, and this naturally leads him to take an exag- 
 gerated view of the deluge, which he regards as a parallel destruc- 
 tion. Hence the present heavens and earth are distinguished from 
 the antediluvian in the next verse.^ 
 
 7. 01 S^ vBv ovpavol KaV <j yf\.'j A more correct expression would 
 have been either koI -fj vvv yfj or koX yrj. In the, latter case ytj would 
 have shared in the article ol. 
 
 T^ aJTcp \6-<ia Tc6r|(ravpi<r|jivoi eto-lv irupC. *] ' Have been treasured up 
 for fire by the same divine word.' So Wiesinger, Schott, Hofmann, 
 Spitta, Plummer, Bigg. The construction however is unusual, and 
 it is not easy to catch the exact force of the metaphor in Orja-avpii^io, 
 which I take to mean 'set apart for,' 'destined for,' cf. 4 Mace. 12'^ 
 (of the judgment on the persecutor) Ta/xieveTai ere rj Oeia 81K17 altoviio Trvpi. 
 Others take ■irvpi with the following Trjpqvfjtevoi, which is a more usual 
 construction (e.g. Jos. Ant. i. 3. 7, where Noah on coming out of the 
 ark prays that there may be no future deluge, KaKoBai/jLovea-Tipovs yap 
 etrccrOai tl nqprjOeiev iripw KaTa/cXiitr/im), understanding reOrjo: absolutely, 
 in the sense ' are kept in store ' (Alf.), ' Himmel und Erde, wie ein 
 
 Cf. the Stoic definition of the K6(r/ios in Stob. Mel. i. 21, pp. 444 f., aiamiiw, e'^ 
 ohpavov Kol yris koX tuv iu toiitois (p^ffeoiv, and the account of its alternate destruc- 
 tion and renovation by means of water and fire, irore /niv exTnip^crBai rhv k6itiiov, 
 •ffOTe Se ix rod irupij ffvvtffTairBai irdAiy (Simplio. ap. Byw. Heracl. xx.), a doctrine 
 attributed to the Babylonian Berosus by Seneca N'. Q. iii. 29. In the iniripatris 
 we are told rb, aroixeia tpBeipetrBai (Diog. L. vii. 134), and that life retreats back 
 into the fiery seed named Zeus, from whence it is gradually diffused again 
 throughout the universe (Plut. Mor. 1077 d). 
 
 ^ Spitta gives the wrong reference ' En. 84. ' 
 
 ^ Methodius in his De Eesurrectione (p. 78 Jahn), quoted by Dr. Bigg, denies 
 the annihilation of the present earth and heaven, oli fi^v sis aiTiti\eiau eKeiaerat 
 irncTcX? . . . 5ii hviyKi] i't) Kal t^v yriv bB9is koL rhv avpuvhi' fierk riiv iK<p\6ya><nv 
 iaetrBai. 
 
 * See Introduction on Text. 
 
154 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Schatz der unangegrijGfen bleibt . . . mit aller Sicherheit und Sorgfalt 
 fur zukunftigen Zeiten aufbewalirt sind ' (Hundhausen). This seems 
 to me very unnatural. We may speak of 'laying up treasures in 
 heaven ' or of ' treasuring up to ourselves wrath against the day of 
 wrath' (where the datives i/uv and a-tavrio leave no doubt as 
 to what is intended), but to say that the existing universe is 
 simply 'treasured up' is to me unmeaning. Heaven and earth are 
 not stored away, but in constant use ; and Hundhausen's interpreta- 
 tion of 6r)aavpi^m to 'keep safe' is, I think, inadmissible. R.V. has 
 ' stored up for fire ' in the text, and ' stored with fire ' in the margin. 
 I do not think Ori<Tavpi^ia capable of the latter meaning; other- 
 wise it would suit the passage well : as the old world was stored 
 with the water which eventually caused its destruction, so the new 
 world with fire. Dr. Bigg illustrates this from a passage of 
 Irenaeus (i. 7. 1) in which he states the belief of the Valentinians in 
 regard to the final conflagration to i/jitjiioXivov tS Koa-fuo irvp iKkd/jitj/av 
 Kol i^atf>6iv Koi KaTcpyao-d/ievov iracrav vXtjv crvvava\ui6i^(7-ea-6ai avry. 
 
 It may be well here to sum up the different features of the o-w- 
 TiXiia Tov aMsvo's (Mt. 13^^, 24^, 28^") as they are presented to us in 
 this epistle, leaving the details for the notes on the different verses. 
 This world, including the earth, the heavens, and the o-Totxeta, will be 
 destroyed by fire' at the Coming of the Son of Man {w. 4 and 12), 
 otherwise called the ' day of the Lord ' {v. 10 and v. 6), or the ' day 
 of Judgment' {v. 5). The destruction by fire will then be as com- 
 plete as that by water in the Deluge (v. 6). The overthrow and 
 disappearance of the present world will be followed by the creation 
 of new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness 
 {v. 13). 
 
 The particular feature brought before us in this verse is the destruction 
 of the existing world by fire. A similar belief prevailed among the 
 Greeks, see Heracl. xxii. ■n-vpos avra^tt^SeTat iravra kol irvp aTravrtov, with 
 the passages quoted in Bywater's notes on xx. — xxv., Plato Tim. 22 b. 
 TroWai . . . (j>6opaL ytyovatrw avOpioTrmv koI icrovrai, Trvpi fiev koi v^oltl 
 fjieyia-rai, to which Plato ascribes our ignorance of the past history of 
 mankind. So Censorinus (xviii. 11) 'est praeterea annus quem 
 Aristoteles (cf. Meteor, i. 14. 19 with Ideler's n.) maximum . . . appellat, 
 quem solis et lunae vagarumque quinque stellarum orbes conficiunt, cum 
 ad idem signum, ubi quondam simul fuerunt, una referuntur ; cuius anni 
 hiemps summa est cataclysmos, quam nostri diluvionem vocant, aestas 
 autem ecpyrosis, quod est mundi incendium. Nam his alternis tempor- 
 ibus mundus turn ignescere, tum exaquescere videtur.' The chief 
 upholders of this doctrine at the time of the Christian era were the 
 Stoics, whose views are compared with those of the Christians by Justin 
 M. (Apol. i. 20) Koi St/SvXXa 8c koi "Yo-TaoTnjs ytv^crevBai tZv <j)6apTuiv 
 avdX.to(Tiv Sia Trvpoi Iffiacrav. ol ktyo/xtvoi 8e SriotKOi <j>iX6crofl>oi koi avrbv 
 TOV 6ebv eh irvp avaKviirOai Soy/jLaTi^ovtriv koi av 'TrdXiv Kara fierajSoXrjv tov 
 Koa-tiov yeveV^ai \iyov(Tiv, also Apol. ii. 7. In like manner Tatian 
 (ad Graecos 3 and 9) finds fault with the Stoics for their notions of 
 the iraXiyytvco-ia, which followed the eKTrvpcocris : they have no conception 
 
Ill 7] NOTES 155 
 
 of a transfigured heaven and earth to last for ever, but merely of 
 a repetition of the sins and sorrows of the preceding age. So Origen 
 {Gels. iv. 11 f.) answering the charge of Celsus, that the Christian 
 belief in the KaTaKhxTixo^ and eKTrvpuons was derived from the Greeks, 
 remarks that, according to the latter, these catastrophes occur at fixed 
 periods in necessary alternation, and that the last catastrophe having 
 been that of water, the next must therefore be that of fire ; whereas 
 Christians impute both to the wise justice of God. When God is 
 spoken of as a ' consuming fire ' (Deut. 4^* etc.), it is meant that it is 
 His nature to destroy evil and to refine and perfect what is good. 
 Seneca gives a fine description of the periodical conflagration in. 
 his Consol. ad Marc. 26. Cf. Cic. N.D. ii. 118 with my notes, and 
 Numen. op. Eus. Pr. Ev. xv. 18 dpccrKci tois Stuikois t^v 0A17V oio-iav eis 
 TTvp fierafiaXXtLv olov ei's cnrcpna. For other references see Zeller Phil. 
 Gr. iv. p. 133*. For the Sibyl, referred to by Justin above, compare Sih. 
 IV. 172 TTup earai Kara yaiav . . . Kocrino^ aTras [ivkyj/jlo, koI o/Ji,/3pifiov ^X"" 
 aKOva-€i. (fiXe^ei Sk )(/96va Tracrav, airav 8' oXecru yevos avSpSiv Koi iracra? 
 T€ iroAcis, iroTa/iovi afia ^Se 6a,Xa<T<Tav, cKKawci 8e re TrdvTa, kovk 8' ccreT' 
 aWaXoecrcra. As we have evidence in this epistle of familiarity 
 with Stoic phraseology, such as dela ^vcrv; and aperrj, it is probable 
 that the writer's conception of the end of the world may have been 
 influenced by Stoic teachers ; and the Sibylline Oracles testify to 
 opinions which were then common among Jews and Jewish Christians. 
 Hippolytus {Refut. Haer. ix. 30) represents the Jews of his time as 
 looking forward to the coming of a Messiah, who was to renew the 
 glories of David, but would eventually fall by the sword, t^retTa p.er' 
 oil iroXv TTjv (TwreXeiav koI eKirvprntriv tov iravTo<s iTruTTrjvai ; and we 
 have seen the same belief expressed in the passage of Joseph. Ant. i. 
 2. 3 quoted above. On the other hand Philo argues for the eternity 
 of the world in his treatise De Inc. Mundi, where he distinguishes 
 between two senses of the word Koa-p.o's, in one of which it is inde- 
 structible qua materia], in the other destructible qvM form and 
 arrangement. What was there in the O.T. to suggest or encourage 
 such beliefs ? 
 
 The most striking resemblances are to be found in Joel 23"' ^i Scoo-o 
 Tepara iv ovpavS /cat iirl rrji yrji alp.a Koi irvp Koi aT/xiSa Kairvov- 6 ■tjXio's 
 p.eraa'rpa^aerai ets <rKOT0S koX -q creX-i^vrj eh aXfia irplv IXOtiv rrjv 
 yjp,ipav 'K.vpiav ttjv /xeydXriv koi €'7n<l>avrj, ii. 3^^' ^^, Ps. 50* 6 ®eo9 
 e/i<JMvS)i rj^ei . . . Trvp evavTiov auToC KavOrjiTtrai KoX kvkXio avrov 
 KaraiyU o-^o'Spa, ib. 18813, Isa. 296, SQSO^ 344^ 516^ BG". 16, Nahum P^e, 
 Mai. 41, Dan. 7^' l" 6 Opovo's ovtoS <j>Xo^ irvpoSf ol TpO)(OL avrov irvp (fyXeyov, 
 ■jTorafios TTvpos eiXKev £/iwpoo-6ev airoS, and in the promise made to Noah 
 (Gen. 91I' 1^) that the earth should not again be destroyed by water. 
 For the N.T. see 2 Th. P'* iv ttj a,TrOKaXv\j/ei tov Kvplov 'hjcrov oltt' 
 ovpavov fiir' d-yye\o)v ivvap-va^ avrov, iv Trvpl (j>Xoyos SiSovtos eKSoojcrtv 
 Tots p-i] ei8ocrtv Ocdv. 
 
 TTipovfjLEVoi ets ^|J.^pav KpCo-cus Kal dirioXcCas rav atrepHv dvSpciTrwv.] So we 
 read of angels reserved for Judgment in 2*, of unrighteous men 
 reserved for judgment in 2^, of the blackness of darkness reserved for 
 
156 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 false teachers in 21^ ■ -while here it is the heavens and earth which 
 are reserved for the same office of vengeance. 
 
 8. iv Si toOto ^i\ XavSav^u ii|ias.] See above on v. 5. The false 
 teachers deliberately close their eyes to the revolutionary changes 
 which the universe. has already undergone. You, my beloved, will not 
 forget these ; but there is one thing in particular which I should wish 
 you to bear in mind. For tv tovto cf. v. 3, tovto Trpurrov, Phil. 3^* tv 
 hi, Mk. 1021 1^ ^oj i^npfi. 
 
 8ti. |i,Ca <i|Upo irapa KvpCip iti yflMi, ^ti].] 'With the Lord one day is 
 as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.' The latter 
 clause, of which the former is the corollary, is taken from Ps. 90* 
 XtA.ia errj iv 6<j}da\ii.oi's a-ov ois ^ ■^/lipa r] i\6U ^Tts Sirj\6e, koI <j>v\aK7j iv 
 vvKTi. The general truth underlying both is that the measures of 
 time are relative to man : to the Eternal, who is onmipresent in 
 time as in space, all times are equally near. None but God knows 
 the duration of His yjnipa Kpia-eui's, which scoffers say is now past and 
 gone without injury to any one. Some interpreted this verse to mean 
 that each day of the creation implied a thousand years of the earth's 
 duration, so Barn. 15* a-wcTiXea-ev iv If rip-ipais — tovto Xeya otl iv 
 efaKicr^iXtois eTiaiv crwT£\e<Tei Kijpios ra oru/tiravTa. ■^ yap r]p,ipa. trap' 
 avTia )(i\ta err]. koI KaTeTravirev ttj rip.ipq, rij IjSSofii; — tovto \eyet oTav 
 i\6u>v o utos avTov KaTapyiqaei tov Kaipov tovtov koI Kpiva tov% cute/SeTs koX 
 oXXa^ii TOV r/Sxov koX tt/v creX.ijvTji' koL toijs dcrrepas, Tore KaXuis Kara- 
 irava-erai iv rfj rnJ-ipa rrj ijiSofirj, Slavonic Enoch xxxii foU., Justin M. 
 Dial. 81 TO eiprj/xivov otl r/fiepa K.vpLov <us )(iXlci err/ k.t.A.., Iren. v. 28. 3 
 otrais "f/fi.epaii iyivcTO 6 KoiTfWi rocravTaLi ^iXioVTatrt cr«iTeA,etTai . . . rj 
 yap fifxipa K.vpiov ws xlXia cnri, ib. v. 23. 2, where there is a similar 
 allusion to this verse. Wetstein adduces parallels from rabbinical 
 writers, who explained the apparent non-fulfilment of the warning 
 against eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge (Gen. 2^^ y 8' av 
 ■^IJ^pq, <j>d.y7]Te dir' avTov, OavaTW atroOavetarOe) by reference to the 
 difference between the human day and the divine day ; so Just. M. 
 Dial. 81, p. 308. 
 
 9. o4 ppaSvvei K^pios Tijs eira77«X£os.] The verb j8p. (here used intransi- 
 tively, as in 1 Tim. 31^) occurs also in Gen. iS^", Isa. 46'* t^v a-uynjpiav 
 rr]V Trap' ifiov ov ^paSvvlo. This is the only recorded instance of its 
 being followed by a genitive, which may be compared with that after 
 va-repeiv, vcrTepC^eiv, XairecrSat (for which Winer quotes Diod. xiii. 110 
 vcrTepovv t^s PorjOeia^) ; or it may be taken as the genitive of the 
 sphere, for which cf. 2'* irkeove^ia?. 
 
 dSs TIV6S PpoSurfjTa ^jyoOvToi.] ' According to some men's notion of 
 dilatoriness.' Alford makes ySpaSirr^Ta predicate ' account (his conduct) 
 tardiness ' ; but, if that meaning were intended, it would have been 
 simpler to omit JSpa&vT^Ta, translating ' as some men hold ' : with 
 ISpaSvT^Ta the meaning must be 'the Lord is not dilatory in any 
 injurious sense, He is not powerless, or careless, or indifferent.' The 
 word jSpaSuT^s is classical, but not found elsewhere in bibUcal Greek. 
 Wetstein appositely quotes Plut. De Sera Numinis Vindicta p. 549 B 
 (the delay of punishment has this bad effect) rrjv ttCo-tiv tj ^paSur^s 
 
Ill 7-10] NOTES 157 
 
 d^atpctTOi rrji irpovolai, and App. B.C. iv. p. 1052 juiySc fipaBvT^a, Tts 
 fiyda-Oia ttjv i[nrfipiav. For Tives see n. on Jude v. 4. I understand 
 it of the ifiTToiKTai of v. 3 above. 
 
 dXXi |i,aKpo6v|j.ci «ls ipids.] See Introduction on the Text. Of. below 
 V. 15, Ps. 86", Isa. SO^s, Jonah i^, 1 Pet. 32« ^^tSexero ■^ rov ®cov 
 fxaKpoOvpLia iv 'fip.ipai'i NSe, Rom. 2* toC ttXovtov . . . rrji [iaKpoOvfiLai 
 Karacfipovei'S, ayvoSiv on to )(prj(TTov tov ®eov eU iiiTOLVOidv ere ayei ; 
 Wisdom 121^' 2"^ Harm. Sim. viii. 11. 1 /iaKpoOvp.o'i lav 6 Kvpioi OiXei t'^v 
 kX^ctiv t-^v ytvop,ivrjv Bia tov vlov avTov (rm^scrOal ; Clem. Horn. xvi. 20 
 fj.aKpo6viJ.eL, eh p-erdvoiav Ka\ei. The construction with cis is only found 
 here: wpo's is used in 1 Th. 5i* ; eVi in Mt. IS^S' 29, Lk. 18^ 
 James 5'. 
 
 |i^ PovXa|uv^s Tivas &ToX^<r6ai dXXd udvras £is lurdvoiav xcopfjirai.] Cf. 
 1 Tim. 2* (God our Saviour) wovtos dv^pcuiroDS 6e\et o-cu^'^vat /cai ets 
 iirCyvuxriv SLK-qBew eXeelv, Rom. 11^2, Ezek. IS^s. Clem. R. i. 7. 5 Jv 
 •yevea Kal yeveS. fieTavola^ tottov IScokev 6 SecriroTr/s Tots jSo-uXo/Aevois 
 iiria'Tpa.(f>rjvai eir avTov, ib. 8. 5, Justin M. Apol. i. 28 ^ eTnfj.ov7] tov 
 /j.rjSi'irm Tavra irpSfai toi' ©eov (referring to ■ the final judgment) 8id to 
 avOputTTivov yevo's yeyivrjTac irpoyivmaKei yap Tivas eK /iCTavotas o'uiB'rjfTea'Oai, 
 Wetstein illustrates x*>P^o''" from Plut. dejhim. 19 oXiyov Se a-m^povrj^ 
 o'as, Ktti CIS p-eTovoiav eiri Tois ■irpa)(det(n, ^wpijcis, but I have not been 
 able to find this : cf. Prov. 14^^ iravovpyo's epy^eTai eis fJ,trd.voi.av, Rom. 2* 
 dyetv €ts fLerdvouxv. R. "V. translates Ttvas hj ' any ' giving it the force 
 of ixtjheva : if so, should we have had the plural ? The Vulgate has 
 aliquos, and some of the commentators think there is an allusion to 
 the preceding Ttves. Perhaps we may give the force' of the plural by 
 translating ' not desiring . to make exceptions. ^ For diro\«'o-6at 
 compare wirilikeia above 2i' % 3^, and below S^^. 
 
 10. ijSei a ■i\V.ipa. KupCou us KX^im]S.] Cf. 1 Th. 5^ oiSoTe oTt lyjucpa 
 JUvpCov 0)5 KXeTTTJjs iv vvKTi ovTcos ep^CTai, Mt. 24^^, Lk. 12^9^ Apoc. 
 33, 1615. 
 
 Iv ^ 01 ovpavol poi.£i)Sbv iropeXsticrovTot. ] For the adverbial termination 
 cf. KXayyrjSov, Kovaftr/Sov, Xv<T(r7]S6v, /ioXtttiBov, pv/j,rjS6v, and the cognate 
 pot/SSijSdi/. The word is onomatopoeic, expressing the whizzing sound 
 produced by rapid motion through the air, as the flight of a bird or an 
 arrow, and is then used for the rushing movement itself or the 
 accompanying crash or roar. Cf. Wisd. 5^1, Cantic. 4^5 tfipiap vSaTOi 
 ^(IvTos Kot poi^ovvTO's airo tov AtySdvov, other exx. from Homer to 
 Lycophron in Wetstein. It is used of thunder in Luc. Jtip. Trag, 1 
 S> [j.eyaKoa-fj.apd.yov crTepoirag poi^rjfia, of the music of the spheres in 
 Iambi. Vit. Pyth. c. 15. and Oecumenius says the word is especially 
 used of the noise caused by a devouring flame.^ This explanation 
 would suit the passing away of the heavens, of which we are told in 
 
 1 Abbott in his Joh. Gr. § 2586 d gives examples of the singular tis following 
 oh or lii), where it is equivalent to liijSets. I do not remember any other instance 
 of the plural. 
 
 2 Keil prefers to understand it (with the Vulg. magna impetu transcurrent) 
 simply of a sudden disappearance, comparing Wisd. 2* irapeAeiJireTai S fiios ri/iav 
 iis J'x'"! veip4\r)s. 
 
158 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ■y. 7 that they are set apart for fire, and which the author seems to 
 have regarded as forming a solid firmament according to the old Jewish 
 conception. That the day of the Lord would be terror-striking to the 
 ear as well as to the eye was a natural conclusion from the account of 
 the giving of the law on Sinai (Heb. 12i^, cf. Enoch 1*) as well as 
 from Jer. 2530'3i, Joel. 3^«, Isa. 42i3 1 Th. 4i«. The adv. ^oi^rjBov is 
 found in Lycophron Cass. 66 (of Oenone hurling herself into the grave of 
 Pans) TTvpyuiv aTT axpuiv irpos vedSfiijTOi' v€kvv poi^'^Sbv kK/3pd,<Taa'a 
 Kv/i^Sa^ov Sejuas, Nicander Theriaca 556, and the other form poi^rjSd in 
 the Alexipharmaca 182, 498. 
 
 oToixtin 8^ Kavirov|uva XiiB'iio-CTai.] For the absence of the article see 
 Introduction on Grammar. The word a-Toix^'ia ^ ' elements ' is used in 
 Heb. 512 of the elementary principles of religion ; it occurs twice both 
 in the Ep. to the Galatians and in the Ep. to the Colossians (thrice with 
 the addition tov koo-/*ou), where its meaning is disputed. In Gal. 4' mro 
 TO. (TTOL)(eia TOV Kotrp-oro y^/iiOa SeSovXaijuei/oi, the patristic commentators 
 generally understand it of the material elements, or of the heavenly 
 bodies ; for (1) cf. Philo i. 162 to. ria-a-apa o-rotxeta e^ S>v (rweKpaOr] 6 
 Kotr/ios, Wisd. 7^^, 19^^, Hermas Vis. iii. 13 6 icdo-/ios 8101 na-a-aprnv 
 <rToi\iiu>v KpareiTai ; for (2) Theoph. ad Autol. ii. 35 6 ficTos v6p.o% oi 
 /xovov K<i>\vei TO E(S(a\ois rrpocrKweiv, dWa koX tois crTOt)(£iois, ^\mi), aeXr^vrj 
 rj Tois Xowrois acTTpois, Justin M. Apol. ii. 4, ad JDiogn. 7. Sometimes 
 these are joined with the seasons defined by them, as in the Sibylline 
 description of the final conflagration (ii. 206) koI to'te yrfptvira a-Toixeta 
 TTpoiravTa to. Koo'p.ov, arip, yaia, 6a.\a,<T(Ta, ^aos, ttoAos, -qp-wra, vvktcs, 
 Clem. Horn. x. 9 oiSe to. t,Za, irpoo'Kvvownv, ovSi o-Toi;^Eta to. vtto ®€ov 
 ye.y£irqp.a/a Ko\aKCvova'iv, Xeyco 8e rj\iov, (TtXrivrjv, acrrpa, y^v, 6dKa(nTav, 
 K.T.k. Spitta suggests a third interpretation, of the angelic powers 
 who were supposed to preside over different departments of Nature ; 
 objecting to (1) on the ground that, if a-Toi)(ela meant the material 
 elements, it would not here be placed between ovpavoi and y^, but 
 would have either preceded or followed them. He thinks that in 
 Gal. 4 the following verses show that orToixeia is used of objects of 
 worship {w. 8, 9) tote p.iv ovk eiSotes ©eov iBovkioo'aTf tois ^wei p-rj 
 ov<nv Oeois • • ■ vw 8e . . . ttSs iiruTTpicj>€Te irdkiv lirl to. ao'Bevrj koI irTOixa 
 a-TOLx^la ; He shows from the book of Jubilees and from Enoch that 
 
 ' Thia word, originally used of the letters of the alphabet or the lines of the 
 dial, is said to have been first used of the material elements by Plato (Favorinus 
 ap, Diog. L. iii. 24), cf. TJieaet. p. 201 E ^Si^koui' aicoieir rivav 8t» ri itiv ■KpSna 
 olovKep^X (TTOiXEiO) e| SiV Tifie7s re ffvyKelfieSa koX r&Wa, \6yQV ovk ^x**'* Later 
 writers distinguished between the aroix^Ta and first principles, cf. Suidas s.v. 
 Siaipepoviri S' apX"' ""' aToix^Xa Tif tAj jiev eivai ayevvhTovs xal a<l)6dpTovs, to 5e 
 (TTotxe'o KUT^ tV eKiripaa-iv ipBetpcaBai, Hippol. Philoeoph. i. 22 (Diels Doxogr. 
 p. 571) 'Eirfnoupoj opX"^5 1"'" tSi/ '6\av iireSero ar 611.0VS Kol Kfviv . , . ix Se tuv 
 ar6ti(iav avve\QovoStv yevetrBai koX rhu 6ehv Ka\ tA <rToixE*a KoX Tci ev avrois iriipTa. 
 This distinction was not always observed ; see (for Aristotle) Zeller vol. iii. 
 p. 442', and for the Epicureans Lucr. ii. 392, 410, 463, 979, iv. 941, etc., where 
 elementum = ' atom ', also Hastings' D. of B. under ' Element,' Diels' DoxogrwpU 
 Oraeci (Index) and his excellent history of the word in the treatise entitled 
 Elementum. 
 
Ill 10] NOTES 159 
 
 the Jews believed the various powers of nature to be under the control 
 of spirits.^ Similarly Spitta explains Col. 2* Kara to, o-Totxeta toC 
 Koaftov KoX oi KaTO. H-purrov, and 2^" airfOdveTe <rvv XptoTcp airo tZv 
 <Troi)(eimv toS koo'ij.ov by a comparison of 2^" /jltj ovv rts Kpiviria iv ppiLcrei 
 ^ iv TTocrci rj ev fiepet eopr^s ^ vovft,ii)VLa.<s. These things belong to the 
 6pr)<TKtia T&v dyye'Xcov with which St. Paul charges the Colossians (2^^) ; 
 but such apxai koi e^ovcriat (21^) are not to be compared with Him in 
 whom KaroLKei ttSv to irX.-^piafx.a Trji ^corr/ros (2^).^ In support of this 
 -view Spitta quotes the KijpDy/xa lUrpov {ap. Clem. Al. Str. vi. p. 760) 
 firjSe Kara 'lovSatoDS cripeirSf, kol yap ekcivoi, /lovoi oiop-evoi tov ®€ov 
 yivuuTKUV, ovK iTTLCTTavTai Xarpivovm dyyeXots kol a.p\ayyiXoi%, fJLrjvi re kol 
 <Te\i^vri. Koi iav p-r] treX^vij i^av^ (rd^pwrov ova dyovtriv k.t.A.., cf. 
 Lightfoot's n. on Col. 2^^ The stars and the angels were closely 
 associated in Jewish thought, see Job 38^, Enoch 692186^ 415-9, 43^ 
 with Charles' note. 
 
 To the natural objection that we cannot conceive of spirits being 
 burnt and dissolved (Kaucrov/ieva Xufl^creTai) Spitta replies by quoting 
 Test. Levi 4 xal tov irupos KOTairr'^o-o-ovTOS koI ird<rj;s KTitrecus Kav<TOvp,£vr)i 
 (MSS. KXovovp.evrj's) kol tSiv dopdruDV ■jrvevp.d.Ttov rqKop.iv<i)v, Enoch 68^ ' who 
 can endure the rigorous judgment passed upon the angels, before which 
 they melt away.' Spitta discovers another argument in the reading 
 XvOrja-ovTcu, found in AKL, etc., where he thinks the plural implies a 
 living conscious subject. 
 
 This view is accepted by Kiihl and v. Soden. On the whole 
 however I prefer to understand oipavoi with Aug. Civ. Dei. xx. 24,^ 
 Bede, Estius, and Hundhausen, of the firmament or lower heaven, 
 distinguishing this from the starry heaven in which the <TToix<^ia are 
 set. That the stars were involved in the destruction of the last day 
 was a part of Jewish belief,* as is evident from Isa. 34* koI roic'/io-ovToi. 
 ■Tracrat al Svvdp,€K Tusv ovpavuxv koX eA-iy^o-erat o ovpavos As /Stpkiov Kat 
 ■jrdvTa TO. dcrrpa irecreiTaL ais ^uAAa ef dp,ire\ov, a passage which our 
 
 See especially En. 50'^'' where mention is made of the spirits of the moon 
 ■ and stars and lightning, the sea, the hoar-frost, the hail, the dew, the rain, etc., 
 Apoc. 16'. The names of the angels who preside over the seasons are given in 
 En. 82. In the apocryphal Test. Salom. (Fabr. p. 1047) Solomon questions 
 certain spirits which are brought before him rives ta-re; ol Se i/toflujuaSbi' ii^riaav 
 . . . rjfieis ^Cfiev ra \ey6fieva aroix^iaf ol KotrfiOKpdropes tov xStTfiov to6tou, Ep. ad 
 Diogn. 7 God sent to save man, not an angel ^ Apx""''''' ^ tico tuv Siewoi'Tav ra 
 4irlyeia ^ nva tuv treviffTevfievav tols 4v ovpavoZs StotKiitrets, but Him by whom He 
 had made the world, oi ri /ivffTiipia iriaras vivra (pvAdaaei to (rrotx^M (sun, moon, 
 etc.), cf. Eus. H.E. iii. 31 with the notes in Heiuichen's ed. 
 
 2 Compare with this Lightfoot's notes on Gal. 4' and Col. 2^, where he argues 
 in favour of the first interpretation given above of <rToix"o, viz. 'rudimentary 
 instruction belonging to the sphere of material and external things.' I learn 
 from Dr. Bigg's note on this passage that Ritsohl and Everling (Pauliniache 
 Angelologie, 1888) share Spitta's view as against Lightfoot. 
 
 3 Possunt illi caeli intellegi perituri, quos dixit repoaitos ignl reservandos. 
 
 * Aug. I. c. takes the other view, that the stars remain intact, and that only 
 those elements will be burnt ' quae in hao ima mundi parte subsistunt procellosa 
 et turbulenta.' He does not define what these elements are, or how they are 
 related to the two great categories, heaven and earth. In another passage quoted 
 by Hundhausen {En. in Psalm. 101) be speaks more doubtfully. 
 
160 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 author evidently had in mind, Joel 2^- ^, 3^^, Mt. 24^ 6 ^\ios <tko- 
 Tia-Oija-tTai Koi f) a-eX-qvri ov Smrei to c^eyyos avr^s koI ol &<7Tipts -irea-ovvTai 
 awo Tov ovpavov koX ai Svfa/iicis rtov ovpav&v craXevOritrovTai, Apoo. G^^'^*. 
 
 Kovo-<5o(ictt.] A word, employed by medical writers to express feverish 
 heat, used (here only) of the burning of inanimate objects.^ It may 
 perhaps be intended to denote a conflagration arising from internal 
 heat, such as a volcano. I see no reason for questioning this use of 
 the word. The writer is certainly not one who shares Caesar's 
 prejudice against verba inusitata ; and though KaJtros, from which it ia 
 derived, is generally used of fever, it also occurs in Proclus of ordinary 
 heat.^ So Kavfunitfo in classical Greek seems to be confined to the 
 medical sense, but in the N.T. (Mt. IS^, Apoc. IG^) it is used of the 
 scorching eflFect of fire. Dr. Bigg suggests, after Veitch p. 309, that 
 it may be an irregular future of Koiiu ; but there is nothing to justify 
 the use of the future here. 
 
 XtiflVjo-eToi.] Occurs also in w. 11 and 12. It is used of breaking up a 
 structure as in Joh. 2^, as well as of dissolving a compound into its 
 elements. 
 
 Kol YT Kal TOL Iv oir^ Sp^a c4pe9<iirtTai.j For readings see Introduction 
 on the Text. I agree with Plumptre that Ipya is to be understood 
 here of aU that man has wrought on the surface of the globe.* The 
 common-place amendment KaTaKariverai is accepted by v. Soden, 
 Eundhausen, Bruckner. I do not think any one is quite satisfied with 
 Hort's suggestion pvrja-eTca or Siapvrja-eTai. The reading of Sah. (ov^ 
 £«p£^j7o-£Toi) makes excellent sense, as may be seen from Gen. 5^ 
 (Enoch) ovx evpuTKero, Apoc. 16^" Traa-a vqaro's £<^uye koX optf ov^ eupe- 
 Orjo-av together with the parallels quoted in the Introduction : if the 
 negative were accidentally omitted in the archetype, the other read- 
 ings would be easy to explain. Weiss and Plummer attempt to 
 get the same sense by making evpeOi^a-eTai interrogative, but this, as 
 Spitta says, is extremely harsh : it should at least have had a iroS 
 prefixed, as in 1 Pet. 4'^. Nor is there much more to be said for 
 the rendering given by Steinf ass and Dr. Gwynn ' the works of man 
 shall be discovered and brought to judgement,' for which the latter 
 refers to Ezek. 28'^ tvpiOi] rot aSucrj/mTa h> aoi. This separates 
 between the earth and the works in it ; and would require <^avE- 
 piadtjaeTai, rather than ivptOiqcTeriu. If we are not to accept ovx 
 evpeOijcreTaL, I am rather disposed to suggest opdijo-crai, cf. Mt. 24'* 
 ■^XjOev 6 KaraKkvcrfWi Kal ypev airavra^, Joh. 15*, 17^*, Acts 8^, 22*^, 
 Isa. 16^" ap6i^<TeraL tixftpoirvvri, ib. 57^^ avSpcs Sucoioi a'povrai koL ovSeU 
 KaravotZ* 
 
 ' Stephanus gives one example of its figurative use (Hesych. Antirrhet. p. 315) 
 noTiCei vovv iK voWov ■xfi6vov KavffuBtvra t$ &(r6j3c(^. 
 
 '' Dr. Chase in Hastings' D. of B. s.v. 'Peter' states that xavaos is used of 
 burnt soil in Athenaeus and Hesychius, referring to Sophocles' Lex., but I have 
 not been able to find the passages there cited. 
 
 ' Cf. Melito Aped., quoted by Dr. Biggs (p. 205), Ultimo tempore eritdilnviam 
 ignis et ardebit terra cum montibus suis et ardebnnt homines cum simulacris 
 quae fecerunt et cum operis sculptilibus quae adoraverunt. 
 
 * Dr. Abbott suggests irvpadiitriTcu, as in v. 12, or irvpfvBiiafTai, as in Plat. 
 
Ill 10-12] NOTES 161 
 
 11. ToiiTuv oSv irovTwv \vo)i,ev(i>v.] For the reading see Introduction 
 on Text. The pres. part, implies ' since these things are in process 
 ■of dissolution.' The seeds of the destruction which will overtake 
 them at the last day are already at work within them. For the tense 
 cf. Joh. 21^* 6 /iaflijT-qs exeivos ovk aTroOvytTKet. 
 
 iroToiroiis Set iirdpxEiv {i|j.a$.] The classical 7roSa;ros (formed like SXX.O- 
 SaTos, ■n-avToSaTTos) is equivalent to Lat. cuias, as is shown in Plato 
 Apol. 20 B Tts Kai iroSairds ; Eijiji/os, e^ij, Hapios. In later writers it 
 is found, generally in this form jrorairos, in the sense of ■jroios, as in 
 Mt. 8^^ iroTaTTOS i<TTiv oStos on koI oi a,vtix.oi . . . VTraKovovcnv ; 
 Lik. 7^* iyivaxTKev av Tt's koI TroraTrrj 7) yvvfj, 1 Joh. 3^ iSere iroraTn^v 
 ayonTjv ScScDKev rjiuv o iran^p, Petri Apoc. iva tSiu/xcv Trorairoi el(ri rrjv 
 fioptfyfiv, see Lobeck Phrynichus p. 56. Alford seems to me to give 
 the precise contrary of the meaning of iirdpxeiv in his note ('"what 
 manner of men ought ye to be when the event comes ? " : vir- seems to 
 imply some fact supervening on the previously existing state '). I 
 understand it to mean ' what ought ye to be now, beforehand, in readi- 
 ness for the time when the Lord shall come as a thief in the night 1 ' 
 cf. 1 Pet. 4^ and (for iTrdpxav) Dem. Olynfh. p. 32. 20 tovt ovv Sfl 
 irpoa-avar to. 8' oX\a wdp^^ct, ' this one thing, promptness of action, 
 must be added : quickness of intelligence and all other requisites are 
 your birth-right.' 
 
 iv a7(ais ovo<rTpo(()ots koI EiirepECais.] For the abstract plural compare 
 above 2^8 doreXyeMiis, Jude v. 13, 1 Pet. 2\ James 2^, Blass p. 84.^ For 
 avcurTpo^-q see above 2'^, 1 Pet. V-^ ; for eia-i/Seia above l^' *■ ^. Alford^ 
 is perhaps right in connecting these words with the following 
 participles. 
 
 12. n'poirSoKaVTas Kal cnrevSovras rfivirapovo-Cav ttjs tov 0eoS i()|t(Epas.] For 
 other examples of the transitive force of- a-jrivSm see Isa. 16^ iK^ryrSiv 
 Kpifw, KOI inrevSoiv SiKaiotrvvrjv, Pind. Pyth. iii. 110 fL-q fitov aOdvarov 
 a-irevSe, Eur. Suppl. 161 ev\(>V)(iav y eo-Trevo-as avT ev/SouAtas, where the 
 sense is ' to desire,' ' to be eager for ' ; also Hom. Od. xix. 137 ol 8e 
 ya.ji.ov (TireuSouo-iv, Eur. Med. 150 rts crol irore . . . tpos, S fLwrala, (Tireycrei 
 Oavdrov reXevrdv ; Esther 5^ KwracrTreva-aTe 'A/jAv, where the sense is 
 ' to hasten,' ' to accelerate ', cf. Sir. 36^ (or 33*) a-ireva-ov Kaipov koI 
 livrjirOryn opKia-p.ov, i.e. ' hasten the time of the promised vengeance,' 
 Deut. 32^^, Baruchi Apoc. 83i altissimus accelerans accelerabit tempera 
 sua et adducens adducet horas suas. The latter is the sense preferred 
 here by most editors. ' In Mt. 24^* we are told that one condition 
 of the Advent was that the Gospel should be first preached to all 
 nations : it was also to be the subject of prayer " Thy kingdom come " ; 
 and we find an even closer parallel to our text in Peter's speech in 
 Acts S^^'' fjHTavoT^aaTe ovv Kal hna-rpixf/aTe eis to k^aXu^Orivai vfiMV ras 
 
 Legg. 84:3 b. He observes that ■nvf6a is corrupt or corrupted in Prov. 10''''', 
 Lara. 4', and other passages where it occurs in the LXX. 
 
 ' Bremi (exc. vii in Isocr.) cites oX^fleiai de Pace § 38, Evag. § 5. o. 1, deAntid. 
 § 170, § 260, § 283, ad Nicod. § 20 ; Kapreplai Evag. § 42. c. 19 ; |U6tpi(Jt5)t« Paneg. 
 § 11; ■7rpa6T7ires PhUipp. § 116. c. 49, deAntid, § 214; treiivirriTes Archil. § 98; 
 ft\av6puiriai Philipp. § 116 c. 49, etc. 
 
 2 So too Spitta. 
 
 M 
 
162 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 d/Mprias ottus av eXOtixnv Kcupol dvaij/vieati (R.V. " that SO there may 
 come seasons of refreshing ") diro irpoiruyiTov toS KvpCov, /cat dirooTetX;/ 
 . . . Iijcrow 'S.puTTov, ov Sci ovpavov p,fv 8e$a(r6ai oi)(pi -j^avrnv anroKaTa- 
 o-Too-eois iravTw ' (from Plummer). Compare 4 Esdr. 4^ usque quo spero 
 sic 1 et respondit arohangelus et dixit Quando impletus erit numerus 
 simUium vobis . . . Et respondi et dixi . . . Ne forte propter nos non 
 impleantur justorum areae, propter peccata inhabitantium super 
 terram. For n-poo-SoKuvras cf. irpoa-SE^ojuEvoi Jude v. 21, 1 Cor. V 
 /xij vcTTeptta-OaL cv p.rjSevl xapLapnn, direKSe)(pfievovi Trjv a.TroKa.\vtl/iv rov 
 Kvpiov r]p.S)V 'I.X. 
 
 The word iropowo-to in biblical Greek is elsewhere used only of a 
 person, not of a day. ' The Day of God ' is an unusual expression for 
 the Day of the Lord (Joel 2", Mt. 4*, v.\Q above) : we find it however 
 in Jer. 461" <tijg p^y of the Lord God of hosts,' and in Apoc. 16^*. 
 
 8i IJv oupavol irvpovfievoi Xve^o-ovrai.] In v. 10 the connexion was 
 only one of time {iv ■y), here it is one of cause. The presence of the 
 Day of God is the cause of the destruction of heaven by fire. 
 
 mip^u is used of gold tried in the fire (Apoc. V^, S^^), of fiery darts 
 (Eph. 6i«), of strong feeling (1 Cor. 79, 2 Cor. ll^^), of incendiary fire 
 (Herod, vii. 8). 
 
 Kttl <rToix«ta KaiKrovp.cva T^JKerai.] Some editors have found a difficulty 
 in the repetitions of this verse. It appears to me to make a very 
 effective refrain, and to be quite in the writer's manner. Spitta 
 wonders why the clause koX y^ • • • eipe6i^a-erai should be inserted 
 in w. 10 and omitted here ; but a refrain is not a catalogue, and the 
 rhythm of the sentence would have suffered from the addition. For 
 T^KCTot, Hort suggests r^^erai (which is used in a passive sense by 
 Hippocrates vi. 110).i The same word is used of the mountains Isa. 
 64^' ^, of the heavens Isa. 34* raic^aovTai irSo-ai at Swd/xtK t5>v ovpavZv, 
 Micah 1*, Nahum P' *. 
 
 13. Kaiyovs Si oipavoiis . . . Kara to lird'y^^H''* a^ov ')rpoir8oKup,cv.''^1 The 
 
 reference is to Isa. Q5^''-^^ and 6G^. See also Apoc. 21^, Isa. 51*. 
 Hence we must understand airov of God, not, as Spitta, of Christ. 
 The figure chiasmus (xaivovs ovpavovs — y^v Kuti/^v) is used for the sake 
 of variety, as in Mt. 5^^ luTa tv ij fila Kfpaia. Here, as in u. 8 above 
 {fiia rip-ipa <us \i\ja erri KoX ^ikia trq a>s ■qp.epa pXa), it has the further 
 effect of improving the rhythm, and giving additional emphasis to the 
 closing Kaivjjv. On the other hand, in Isaiah and Apoc. 21* the 
 epithet is repeated in the same order ovpavov Kaivav — ■yrjv Kaivrp/: so 
 
 1 Alford explains the text as the 'present of destiny,' comparing Kvoiiivar 
 above ; but how then are we to account for the future \u9^<roi/Toi ? 
 
 2 Charles in his book on Esohatology (1899) points out that the opposite view, 
 of the permanence of heaven and earth, is that which prevails in earlier Jewish 
 writings as in Ps. 148*-*, 104'. He thinks that the doctrine of a new heaven and 
 earth was probably derived from the Persian religion, that its first Jewish 
 expression is in Enoch (45*' *, 91'° ' The first heaven will depart and pass away 
 and a new heaven will appear') and that the passages quoted from Isaiah are 
 later interpolations and inconsistent with his general teaching. I cannot say 
 that I find his arguments convincing. The doctrine is much more vaguely given 
 in Enoch than in Isaiah, and we do not expect rigid consistency in prophetic 
 
Ill 12-15] NOTES 163 
 
 Joh. IQl® yevrja-iTat fiia woCfwr], els iroi/iijv, Zech. 14^, 2 Cor. 7* TroW-q fioi. 
 Trappr/cria Trpos vfias, iroW-q fiboi Kau;(5j(ns wep vfiZv. 
 
 tv ots 8iKoio<r«vii KOToiKtt.] Cf. Isa. 321 paa-iXev's Sixaios ^amXevarei, ib. 
 V. 16 f. Kat avwTra'va-iTai iv rg ep^juu Kpijua Kat 8iKoioir<Pvr| iy tw Kap/u^Au> 
 KaroiK^o-ci. Ktti eo-rai to ^pya Tfis SiKaiomSvijs tlpi\vi\, koi /cpaT'^trei ■q SiKaio- 
 (rvvT) avdiravcTiv . . . koI KaToiK'<|cr€i o XaJis oiroB ev •ir6\ti Elp^vT|s. Right- 
 eousness is said to have its home in the renewed heaven and earth, 
 because (1) the people shall be all righteous (Isa. 60^1, Apoc. 2W, 
 cf. the picture of the natural effects of virtue in Butler's Analogy 
 Pt. I, ch. 3), and (2) because the Lord, the source of all righteousness, 
 is the light and glory of the new Jerusalem (Jer. 23^, Isa. 11*' ^, Ql^o- n, 
 5019' 20^ Apoc. 2122'23), in contradistinction to this present world, of 
 which Satan is called o apx<ov Joh. 12^1. 
 
 Iv ots, i.e. in the new earth and heaven. For the construction of the 
 relative see above 3^. 
 
 14. SuS, aYainjToC, ravra vpotrSaKuvTCS.J For 8td see above l^"' ^^. It is 
 only righteousness that can dwell in the new earth ; therefore cleanse 
 yourselves from all unrighteousness. As in Jude v. 20, ayairryroC intro- 
 duces the direct appeal to the true members of the Church. 
 
 inroiiSdcraTC &inri\oi Kal a)ui|i.'r|Toi airio eipcBTJvai.] Cf. above, notes on 2^^ 
 a-mkoi Ktti juuijuoi. For the complementary construction of ciped^vai 
 see Phil. 3^ ("va) evptOm ev avrio /jltj f)(u>v IpJqv BiKaioavvriv rr/v ex vofiov, 
 Gal. 2^^ eipedrjfiev dp.apT<i)\oi, 2 Cor. 5^ oil yv/jLvol evpe9r](r6fi,e6a, 1 P. 1'^ 
 with Hort's note. For the dat. see Eom. T^" ivped-ij p-oi -q ivroXr] -q eh 
 ^onjv avnq ets Odvarov, where it does not express the agent, but the 
 person interested, ' the command, which was for life, turned out in my 
 case to be for death ' : so in Apoc. 20^1 tottos ov\ evpidri airois. In 
 Rom. 10^", evpeO-qv tois e/*e firj ^ijToItriv, it approaches more nearly to 
 vTTo with the gen. Jlere the dative is ethical, depending on the adjec- 
 tive rather than on the verb, ' to be found without blemish in His 
 sight,' when He appears to judge the world, as in Diod. xvii. 4: Jin. 
 jSovXojUEVos ™ jSatriA-ci a/i£/iHTOv avrbv SiatjivkaTreiv.^ Blass compares 
 Eph. 1* aval dyx<u/;iov$ KaTevunriov avrov, Col. P^ wapacTT^crai vju.as 
 ap-tofiovs Karevunriov avrov {Gr. pp. 112 f., 185). So Jude v. 24 o-r^o-ai 
 Karevi&Triov t^s Sd^s avrov afiiofiov^. 
 
 iv elp^vij.J Peace and righteousness are joined together in Ps. 851", 
 Isa. 321'^, quoted on v. 13 above, and James 3i', where see my note. 
 
 15. ripr To5 Kuptov r\fMV |j.oKpo8v(i.£ov o-(OTT|p£ov TJY€t<r6«.] A stronger 
 expression of the statement in v. 9, where the readers are taught to 
 look on j8pa8i;T^s as /xaKpoOvfiLa. Here they are taught to look on 
 imKpo6vp,ia as crmT'qpia, i.e. as intended by God to lead to their salvation, 
 if rightly used. Cf. 1 Pet. 3^" ore A.Tre^iM)(iTo ■q tov ®eov /i,aKpo6vfiia ev 
 rip-epais NtSe. 
 
 Ka6^s KaV 6 avairrjTbs i\f&v d8EX<|>bs IIoCXos — ?7poi|/6V 4|itv.] A similar 
 phrase is used by Paul of Tychicus (Eph. 6^1, Col. 4^), of Onesimus 
 (Col. 4^, Philem. v. 16). So Epaphras is called o dyaTrijros o-dvSovXos 
 (Col. V), Philemon ayairqTo<s Ka\ crvvepyo's (Philem. v. 1), Timothy reKvav 
 ayamjTov (1 Cor. 4^^, 2 Tim. P), while the phrase 6 dyoTnjTos p-ov is 
 1 For this quotation I am indebted to Dr. Abbott. 
 
 M 2 
 
164 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 used of Epaenetus, Ampliatus, Stachys, and Persis in Rom. 16. It 
 would be a very natural phrase for St. Peter to use of St. Paul, 
 especially in a letter written to those who were themselves acquainted 
 with St. Paul and had probably read the severe strictures contained in 
 Gal. 211-". That the warm-hearted, generous Peter bore no grudge 
 against his 'brother' for his animadversions, and was (at any rate in 
 later life) in full sympathy with his teaching, is evident from the 
 whole tone of the first Petrine letter. This does not of course prove 
 the genuineness of the present letter; but it shows that there is 
 nothing opposed to it in this kindly mention of St. Paul, joined, as it is, 
 with the gentle caution which follows. For fujuHyf compare Acts 15^ 
 <niv TOis dyamjTots ^fjuiv Bapvd^q. koX UavXa, 1 Th. 3^ TifwOeov tov 
 aSeX^ov ■^/juiiv, 2 Cor. 1^, Philem. v. 2 'kpxiinrio T& frwarTpaTuirri fjiiMV 
 KOI T-g Kar oIkov aov eKKXtjoria. It may be understood either of the 
 Apostles, or, as I should prefer, of Christians generally. 
 
 Who are those to whom St. Paul is here said to have written ? Can 
 we identify them with the recipients of any of his extant epistles ? It 
 seems to me that the phrase Kadms iypcul/cv can only refer to the pre- 
 ceding injunction, the importance of which injunction is shown by the 
 reiteration in tw. 9 and 15, to the eifect that the long-suffering of God 
 was to be regarded as an evidence of His goodwill to men. We find 
 the equivalent to this in Rom. 2^ koX ttjs |iaKpo6v|i(a5 xarai^povcK ayvoSnr 
 on TO ■}(fin)(TT0V rov OeoB eis iierdvoidv o'e Aya ; 3^' ^^ cis ecSei^iv t^s 
 Sucaioavirqi avrov . . . ev ry avo^ tov ®eov ; ib. 9^^' ^' deXoiv 6 @cos 
 ivSuiacrOai ... to Suvarov aiitov ^veyKev iv ttoAA^ |jLaKpo6u|i.Cf (tkcvt) opy^s 
 KUTripTur/iiva eis airdXtiav, tva yviopurrj rov irXovrov r^s 8o^s avToS eirl 
 aKtmj eXiov^, 1 1^^' ^^. Hence Oeoumenius, Grotius, Dietlein, Ewald, 
 Plummer argue, as I think, rightly that our epistle is addressed to the 
 Romans, see Introduction on this subject. Others however assuming 
 that those addressed are inhabitants of Asia Minor, as in 1 Pet., are 
 driven to find a different reference in KaBm lypai/rcv. So Wiesinger, 
 Schott, Hofmann, Keil, Kiihl, v. Soden, Weiss think the epistle to the 
 Ephesians intended, because that was certainly known to the author of 
 1 Pet., and because we find in it admonitions to a godly life, based 
 upon the hope of the inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God 
 (Eph. i^O-S*). It is unnecessary to point out the vague generality of 
 such a reference ; how little there is in it that is distinctive of one 
 epistle rather than another. Hence Cajetan, Benson, and others have 
 supposed an allusion to the epistles to the Galatians and Colossians 
 along with that to the Ephesians. Com. a Lapide and Jackmann prefer 
 the first epistle to the Corinthians, the former because of the resem- 
 blance of 2 Pet. 316 Kara rip/ Matrav afrrw o-o^iav to 1 Cor. 21, 12*, but 
 this point is too unimportant to justify the reference : the latter on 
 the more plausible ground, that 1 Cor. iii and iv are illustrative of 
 portions of our epistle ; but, as these portions do not belong to the 
 section in question, we cannot accept this as a natural explanation. 
 EstiuSj'Bengel, and others, prefer the epistle to the Hebrews, assuming 
 that 2 Pet. was addressed to Jewish Christians, and that the author 
 would have admitted the Hebrews as a writing of Paul. Bengel rests 
 
Ill 15, 16] NOTES 165 
 
 this hypothesis on the fact that we have repeated references to the 
 last time in Heb. l^, 9^% lO^s. 37_ De Wette, with whom Plumptre and 
 Alford agree, widens the reference so as to include the whole passage 
 dealing with the Second Coming (S'-S^^) and thinks that the writer 
 must have had in mind 1 Thess. 41^-5" and 2 Thess. 2^"i2. Lastly 
 Pott, Morus, Spitta, and Zahn {Einl. ii. 46) consider that the reference 
 is to a lost epistle. Dr. Bigg is undecided. 
 
 Kara Tf|V SoScto-av air^ cro(|>Cav.] Cf. Paul's own words Kara rifv X"/'"' 
 ToC ®£oC Tijv io6ii(Tav ft,oi 0)5 oro^os ap^firiieruiv OefieXiov eOrjKa (1 Cor. S^"), 
 yvovTii Trpr X^P'" T^'' ^oOeiadv (iOL 'IaK(i)j8os Kat Ki;<^as . . . Sextos eSiaxav 
 e/xot (Gal. 29), 1 Cor. 26'-, Col. 1^», and Polycarp (ad Phil. iii. 2) oSrt 
 yap eyo) oiHre aWos o/JuiLOi ifiol Svvarai KaTaKokovB^irai, rg (roijiiq. rov 
 fujxapLov KaX h>S6^ov Uavkov . . . os koI (xttuv v/Jiiv typaifiiv cn-tcTToXas. 
 
 16. &i Kal Iv irdo-ais rats lirurroXais, XaXuv Iv airais irepl rouruv.] See 
 Introduction on the Text. "We must understand ypa.(j>£i after As- Of 
 course ' all his letters ' does not necessarily include all the epistles 
 which have come down to us under the name of Paul ; nor on the 
 other hand is it necessarily limited to them : it means simply ' all the 
 letters known to the writer.' We may assume that the early Christian 
 teachers would naturally communicate their writings to each other, 
 and that these would be read as containing the teaching of the Spirit 
 for the Church at large. At the same time the phrase Trawais rais 
 eirto-ToXois would be more naturally understood of a collection of letters 
 made after St. Paul's death. If he were still living, we should rather 
 have expected rats aAA.ats £7rtcrTo\ats. In later Greek X.a\St is used, 
 much like \ey<ii, of serious speech (cf. above P^) and of writing (here 
 and in Heb. 2*, 2 Cor. 11^'). We may translate the phrase ' where he 
 touches on these subjects.' Some commentators seem to me to press 
 too far the meaning of this sentence, using it to weaken the force of 
 the preceding verse, as though the distinct reference to one epistle of 
 St. Paul was destroyed by the addition, that 'the doctrine there 
 taught was in harmony with his other writings,' and as though the 
 Ka.6u>i of V. 15, following immediately on the reiterated statement of 
 the great truth naKpoBv/iia a-iarripia, must be set aside because of the 
 vague plural wtpi tovtiov. The addition of the phrase XaXAv irepl 
 TovTiov is intended to show that the precise connexion before noted 
 between the one doctrine and the one epistle is now widened into a 
 connexion between a whole class of doctrines and the whole body of 
 the known Pauline writings. What then is the more general teaching 
 here referred to 1 It is the teaching as to the Coming of Christ, its 
 meaning and its end, as contained for instance in 1 Cor. 15. It is the 
 teaching of mercy in judgment, of which fiaKpoOv/xia awn^pia, like the 
 parable of the fig-tree, is one great example. Calvin in his note says 
 truly that the reference to the teaching of St. Paul here is introduced 
 to deprecate the idea put forward by some of the Jewish Christians of 
 a personal rivalry between the former and St. Peter. A further and 
 even' more important reason was that the libertines claimed the 
 authority of St. Paul on their side. I cannot see however why 
 Calvin should add 'Et tamen dum omnia propius expendo, mihi fit 
 
166 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 veriaimilius hanc epistolam ex Petri sensu ab alio compositam, quam ab 
 eo scriptam esse. Nunquam enim sie locutus fmsset Petrus.' I should 
 have said just the opposite. There are many difficulties in the way of 
 accepting the genuineness of this epistle ; but the manner in which St. 
 Paul is spoken of seems to me just what we should have expected from 
 his brother Apostle. 
 
 Iv ots IcttIv Zv<rv6i\T& tivo.] The reading ois is probably owing to the 
 copyist's taking tovtuiv to be the antecedent. For SvtTvorjTa (not found 
 elsewhere in biblical Greek) cf. Luc. Alexcmd. 54 jayqa-iwv^ avo-^ovi koX 
 Suo-vo^ous, Diog. L. ix. 13 (a supposititious letter of Darius to Hera^ 
 clitus) Kara^ipX-qa-ai Xoyov ypairrov irepl (^vcteus Suotoijtov re koX 
 Svcrc^TJyTjTov. 
 
 a ot ci|Uieets KaV Acrr^piKTOi. (rrpEpXoviriv.] Cf. Clem. Al. Sir. p. 529 init. 
 ot otacrTpe<^oi'T£s ras ypa<j>as irpos iSt'as r/Sovdi, koi tivwv TrpotrioSmv koi 
 o-TiypLwrmv fi,€Ta6i(r€i to. irapayyeX^evra <Tia<l>p6v(oi fiut^ofievoi wpos ^8v- 
 iradetas ras eaurfiv, ib. pp. 890, 891. I have not found any other 
 example of arpefikoia in the sense of twisting or straining a phrase 
 like the Pr. ' torturer un mot,' but in Ps. 18^^ we have /iera o-TpeySXoS 
 'Siao'TpEi/rEis (Clement's word above), where 2 Sam. 22^'' has p,eTa 
 o-Tpe)3\oi! a-Tpe^kmOrjarj. I think the figurative sense flows from the 
 notion of twisting or warping, rather than from that of torturing on 
 the rack, cf. Arist. Ma/nae 878 (of 3.v8pei ■yvw/iorvTroi) orav €is epiv 
 o^lLipifafOii eXOtain (rrpi^XoZa-i iraXa.io'fuuTiv dvTiXeyovTes, Aristot. Ehet. 
 i. 1. 5 ov hu Tov SiKao-T-J)!/ Siacrrpe^eiv (we must not warp his judgment) 
 . . . ofjMLOv yap Kav tl Tts, o) /AeWei ^(pfjcrOaL Kavovi, tovtov woi^o'ctc 
 <rTp€^\6v (with Cope's notes) ; so Plutarch (Mor. 2, p. 968 a) uses the 
 term o-Tpe/SXdrijs to express the windings of the ant's nest ; and Sir. 
 36^^ has KapSia a-rpe^h^ = k. a-Kokid. It is strange that so common a 
 word as afwJd-q^ shoiild not be found elsewhere in the N.T. or LXX., 
 its place being taken by such words as iSwunjs Acts 41^, 1 Cor. 141^' 2^, 
 or dypajujuaros Acts 4^^, or 6 dyvoGi/ Heb. 5^. Por oxtttipikto^ see above 
 on 2". 
 
 What are the Sucrvdijra Ttva referred to? Probably St. Paul's 
 doctrine of God's free grace (Bom. 3^'^), with his apparent disparage- 
 ment of the Law in Rom. 320-28, 415^ 520^ 6*, 7^"; his teaching 
 with regard to the irveuiJuxTiKot 1 Cor. l^* ; with regard to the strong, 
 whom he seems to justify in their neglect of the rule made at the 
 Apostolic Council as to tlhiaXoBvTa (Acts 15^9, Rom. 14, 1 Cor. 8, lO^s) ; 
 as regards the resurrection in baptism (Rom. &^'^\ Col. 3^, 1 Cor. 15^^) ; 
 perhaps as regards predestination (Rom. Q^^'^i), and the Parousia 
 (2 Th. 2). 
 
 OIS Kal Tois Xoiiris -ypoctids.] In the N.T. ai ypai^ai is regularly used of 
 the O.T. Scriptures, especially in the Synoptic Gospels, but also once 
 in the fourth Gospel (5^^), four times in the Acts, once in Rom. 15*, 
 twice in 1 Cor. 15'' * (kwto. tos ypa^ds). We find ypa^ai without the 
 article in Rom. P o wpoijyyet'XaTO 8ta rmv irpo^J^rfiv avrov ev ypa^tus 
 ayiai<s, ib. 16^" (pAXTrripCov) 81a. ypa<f>S>v irpo^ijnKmv . . . yvcupio-^evros- 
 The singular is used in Mk. 1 21" ouSe t'^v ypatfirjv ravrqv aviyvmre ; 
 Lk. 4^1 cnyjuepov ireTrXijpojTat ^ ypafftr) avrrj. Job. 2^ imarevcrav t^ ypa^g, 
 
Ill 16] NOTES 167 
 
 •on which Westcott's note is ' the phrase occurs elsewhere ten times in 
 St. John 738.42, 1035, i3i8_ ^712^ 1924,28,36.37, 20^ and in every case 
 except 17^^ and 20^ the reference is to a definite passage quoted in the 
 context [similarly Joh. 193'' irepa ypo<^^ Xe'yet] ... In 17^2 the refer- 
 ence appears to be to the words quoted in IS^^ . . . According to the 
 Apostle's usage, then, we must suppose that a definite passage is 
 present to his mind in 20^... which can hardly be any other than 
 Ps. 161".' The singular is similarly used of a definite reference in 
 Acts 1^^, 832 ^ gj irepioxq t^s ypac^'^s ^v aveyivaa-Kev, 836 ^ jn Rom. 43, 
 W, 1011, 112, Gal. 38, 322, 430, 1 Tim. 518, in all of which passages St. 
 Paul seems to personify ypo^jj, using it without avTij. So James 
 28' 23, 45. The article is omitted in Joh. 19^, Rom. !'■', 1626 already 
 •quoted, and in 2 Tim. 31^ Trao-a ypaijt-ij 6t6Tn/eu(TTo% koX <u(^eAi/,ios irpos 
 StSao-KoXiav, ' every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for 
 teaching ' (R. V.), 1 Pet. 2^ Trcpiex" «" 7P"^H» 'w^here Hort thinks ' the 
 translation " in Scripture " is barely possible without the article ; nor 
 a.gain, in the absence of rivt, is the sense " in a passage of Scripture " 
 probable. The most natural rendering is simply " in writing " as 
 Sir. 3932 Sievo^^iji' KoX ev ypatfirj a(l}rJKa ; 42' Sdiris Koi Xrjij/K, iravra iv 
 ypatffg, 44* SiryyoviievoL hrq iv ypa<l>fi, 2 Chron. 211 ^J^g Xtpaju, ySacriXEiis 
 tvpov iv ypatj>y, 2112 ^\0^j, avrm iv ypa(l>yj irapa 'HXtoii rov Trpo^iyrov, 
 Ps. 866, Ezek. IS^, 1 Chron. 281'! Thus Trcpiixa iv ypa^ij is equivalent 
 to " it stands written " : compare St. John's formula of quotation earnv 
 ytypafiiiivov. That the quotation was authoritative was doubtless 
 implied, in accordance with the familiar Jewish use of the words 
 *' said," "written."' If we accept this interpretation, which is sup- 
 ported by Blass p. 182, n. 3 and by Zahn Hinl. ii. p. 109,i we should 
 perhaps attach the same general meaning to ypa^-q in 2 Tim. 31^, 
 translating 'every inspired writing,' which gives a better reason for 
 the otherwise otiose epithet. But then what are we to say of 2 Pet. 12" 
 Tracra 7rpo(^7jT£i'a ypa<f>rjs iStas £iri\i;<7£(DS ov ylverai ? Is this to be 
 translated ' no prophecy of (or " in ") writing,' Zahn ' schriftlich ' 1 
 I confess I prefer the R.V. ' no prophecy of Scripture,' and so in 
 1 Pet. 2^ ' It is contained in Scripture.' A unique use naturally tends 
 to dispense with the article, as in ©eos, Kvptos, ySao-iXciJs, o-wT^p, 'S.purro'i, 
 TTViv/jia, vofjLO's, Xoyos.2 When St. Paul can speak of 17 ypa(l>r] Xeyet, it is 
 a very short step onwards to say ypa<l>r] XeyEi, shorter still to say iv 
 ypaijyrj. I think then that here we must translate ypa^as ' Scriptures ' 
 understanding by it the O.T., unless strong reason can be shown on 
 the other side. Such strong reason is thought to be found in the 
 epithet Xowras. Can it be supposed that the writer here puts the 
 Pauline epistles on the same shelf as the old sacred books of the Jews ? 
 
 ^ Sometimes ypo04 stands for ' register ' as in Nehem. 7** oStoi ^f^Trjcroi' ypaipiiv 
 aiiTuv Trjs trvvoSias, Ezek. 13' iv ypa(t>y oIkov 'IffpoJjA ov •ypa^'liirovTai ; sometimes 
 for any particular writing, as in Dan. 5' tis tiv i,vayvQ riiv ypaipiiv toiStjiv. Irenaeus 
 has 'haec soriptura' (oBttj rj ypaitjii) of his own book (iii. 17. 4) : so Clem. Al. 
 Sir. vi. 32 irep\ nev Toirav vpoioiaiis t^s ypa^Tis SiaAeJojueflo of his own treatise, 
 followed shortly after by Kara t^v yptupiiv used of scripture, and the same diversity 
 is found ib. 131. Similarly Euseb. (H.E. ii. 11. 1) uses ypaipii of Josephus. 
 [Taken from Zahn, I.e.'] ^ See my Introduction to St. James, pp. clxxxvi, cxcii. 
 
168 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Some commentators escape from this argument by reference to the 
 idiomatic use of SXAos and similar words, as in the passages cited by 
 Dr. Bigg, Hom. Od. i. 132 iKToOev SXkw iivrjar^pav, where Odysseus is 
 distinguished from the others, the suitors ; Lk. 2332 i^^^j g^'^, KaKovpyoi; 
 '. ' \ ^f^^- ^,^'' (airwXeCa anrokaarOe) KaOa koX to \oara fdvq ocra koX Kupios 
 o 0£os wTToXXviL irpo irpoa-ioTTOv v/juiiv, where the chosen people might seem, 
 according to the usual force of Xouros, to be included in the Gtentiles 
 who were destroyed before their face, see Winer, p. 664. The last 
 passage is not of much weight, because Israel is strictly included 
 among to i6vij. Besides koiirdu certainly impKes a closer connexion 
 than oAAas. If we had As tos aAAas ypa^as, it might mean 'like the 
 Scriptur^ also,' but if the writer made any broad dMtinction between 
 Paul's epistles and Scripture, I think he must have said KaOdmp awras • 
 TOS ypatftd^. We have a parallel use of Xotiros in Sir. prol. aiiTos o vo/u>s 
 Kai at TrpoffyrfTeiai. Kal to. \o»ra tS>v Pifikiutv. I incline to think that 
 ypa^ai is here used to denote any book read in the synagogue or 
 congregation, including the letters of the Apostles (Col. 4", 1 Th. S^) 
 as well as the lessons from the O.T. 
 
 Though ypa<JMi is generally used of the O.T. in the Apostolic 
 writings, it is also used of the N.T. by the middle of the second 
 century. Thus in 2 Clem. Rom. 2, after a quotation from Isa. 54i, a 
 quotation from Mk. 2^'' is introduced in the words Kal Irepa 8e ypatjiri 
 kiya oTi ovK ^kOov Kakia-ai Sikouovs aXka. afjuipraikovi ; {ib. 13) Lk. 6®' * 
 is referred to as to koyia rov ®€ov. Even before the end of the first 
 century, in 1 Clem. Rom. 23 •^ ypi"^^ Xeyei introduces a quotation 
 from a book not included in the canon of the O.T. which light- 
 foot supposes to be Eldad amd Modad. [Hennas alludes to this in 
 Vis. ii. 3. 4 <us yeypairrai ev t<o 'EXSaS Kai McdSar, Tots Trpotfyqreva-aa-iv 
 ev iprjfiio tw \au.] What is considered by some to be the still 
 earlier epistle of Barnabas introduces the words ttoAAoI icXijTot, 
 okiyoL Si ixkeKToi (Mat. 22^*) with is yeypairrai. Can we then suppose 
 that the books of the N.T. are to be understood here 1 If we give 
 koiTrdi its ordinary sense, this seems to me a more difficult explana- 
 tion than that which would interpret it of the O.T., because it 
 assumes that there was a collection of later writings known to the 
 writer as Scripture, of which St. Paul's epistles formed a part. But such 
 an assumption can hardly be conceived as possible before the middle of 
 the second century. That the word ypa^ij, Scripture, should be applied 
 to the epistle to the Colossians by one who had heard it read in public 
 worship seems to me perfectly natural ; but that this epistle should 
 have been bound up, not only with other epistles, but with a variety of 
 Christian writings by different authors claiming a similar authority 
 (and this is suggested by Xoiiras), before the end of the first century 
 seems to me incredible. Again this interpretation involves the state- 
 ment that the new Christian Scriptures were, as a known fact, perverted 
 and distorted in the interest of heretical partisans ; but this would 
 surely require a considerable interval of time after the first recognition 
 of their authority. ^ 
 
 ' Zahn I.e. notices that, while Upa ypimtara (from which ypannareis ia derivedj 
 
Ill 16-18] NOTES 169 
 
 Supposing, then, that tois Xoi'Tras ypa<t>d,i is to be understood in the 
 first instance of the O.T., -what are the kind of perversions referred to ? 
 
 1 think those which rise up first in our minds would be such as are 
 noted by our Lord Himself in Mt. S^i**, 158-6, 193-10^ Lk. Q^^^% etc. If 
 the O.T. was thus liable to perversion, no wonder that the writings of 
 the new prophets should be liable to similar misuse. 
 
 irpbs "riiv I8C0V o-uTOv aTriSXeiov.] The preposition denotes the end 
 or result of the action arpe^Xova-Lv, as in Heb. 9^^ ayid^ei irpos t^v t^s 
 o-opKos KaOaporrfra, Joh. 11* avrq 17 axrOfViua. ovk eo-Ti wpos Odvarov, 
 
 2 Cor. 4* o ®£os cXa/ti^Ev iv rais KapSiai^ rnnmv irpos <l>ii>Turi/.6v, 2 Th. 3* 
 epyaXpiLevot Trpos to /t^ hnfiaptjiTaC ra/a, 1 Joh. 5^6 ^mcra ifm}v tois 
 d/jutprdvova-iv fxri irpos OdvoTov. For the combination iSiai' airm/ cf- 
 Acts 24^* lajheva Ktokveiv tSv l8Ctov awoS imrjptTeiv avrS, Tit. 1'^ etirev tk 
 i^ avrSttf tSios avrZv irpo^rffrq'i, Dem. 1244. 24 lo-ms oi/c oi' ■^SlKTjo-e 8ia to 
 avTov tStov, Theog. 440 t6v avrov iSlov vovv, cf. above v. 3. For airatXeuiv 
 cf. above 2K 
 
 17. i|tcis oSv, aYainiToC, irpoYiviio-KovTEs.] This resumes the exhortation 
 of ver. 14 after the digression on St. Paul's teaching, replacing the phrase 
 ToBra ■n-poa-SoKmvres by the stronger Trpoyivdia-KovTe^ ' being thus fore- 
 warned.' The word is more often used in the N.T. of the divine fore- 
 knowledge. It is used, as here, in Wisdom 18^ cKctViy ij viii 'Trpoeyvwir&if 
 iraTpdxriv rifuov. 
 
 <|niXd<r<rea-6€ tva (I'fi . . . lKire<rr|T6.J ' Be on your guard, in order that you 
 may not fall away,' cf. Plut. Mor.- p. 231 C ou <l>v\dirj o-wexSs yekoid^wv, 
 on-ois ft^ •yeXoios yorg; Xen. Mem. i. 2. 37 iftuKdrTov oitcds p.ij cXaTTOusTas 
 ^oSs TTOiijoTjs, Job 36^1 <j>v\a^aj. /iri Trpd^i axoTra, Sir. 22^'^ tjtvKa^ai. oir' 
 auToS lyo iiri kojtov exO^' 
 
 Tp rav aSeiriuiv irXdv^ mivairoxfl^VTes.] For dOecrfKov see n. on 2J ; for 
 TrXdvy note on 2^^, Jude v. \\ ; for awa-irax6evTi^ Gal. 2^^ (of the weak 
 compliance of Peter and Barnabas) koX B. (ruvairrixOri avrSyv rrj v-ironpura, 
 Rom. 12^^ TOIS Taireij/ois (TtniaTrayofinvoi (in a good sense). 
 
 iKirtoTjTt ToB ISCov <rTi]piY|i.oS.] Cf. Gal. 5* t^s ^dpvro'S i$£ir€<raTe, see n. 
 on James l^^ where it has a different sense. o-n]pi7|jM5s here only in 
 N.T., found also in Isa. 3^, Symm., in the sense of ' support,' and in 
 Diod. i. 81, Plut. Mor. 76 d of the apparent 'stations ' of the planets. 
 See n. on do-TijptKToi 2", 3^^, and €rTqpi\<a V^ above. 
 
 18. aifdverc 8J Iv x^ptTi.] In early Greek a.v^dv<a is only transitive,, 
 like cmgeo, and this use is found in 1 Cor. 3^ 'An-oXXms hroriirev, dXXa o 
 0eos Tifi^avev, 2 Cor. 9^" (God) av$i^(rei to yevvrntara t^b SiKaiotri;njs vfiStv : 
 the passive is also found in 2 Cor. 10^^ aviavop-hni? t^s ■iria-Ttmi, Col. 
 1^" KapTro<f)opovvT€'S koi av^av6fJi,cvoi, Tg iKiyvuxreL tov ®£ov, 1 Pet. 2^ tva hr 
 avTio av^OriTe eis a-iarqpiAv, Mt. 13^2^ Mk. 4^. The more common use 
 in the N.T. is the intransitive, of which we have exx. in Mt. 6^*, 
 J.k. 180, 2*0, Joh. 330, Acts 6^ 1'", U^, 1920, Eph. 4i5, and here, besides 
 the form avita in Eph. 2^^, Col. 2 10. So Aristotle combines the passive 
 and the intransitive use in Anal. Post. i. 13. p. 78 6 5 ci yap to 
 
 is used of holy scripture in 2 Tim. 3", 7p<i/i/ioTo by itself is often used of writings 
 generally, as in Luke 16''', Acts 28^', and thinks that it is merely a matter of 
 accident that we have not more examples of a like use of 7po^^ in the N.T. 
 
170 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 aviavo/itvov ovT<i> (r<^aipouti%, av^dva. 8' ij <TiKr)vri k.t.A.. For the thought 
 we may compare 1 Pet. 2^ to XoyiKov aSoXov yaXa eiruiroB-^a-aTt, iva ev avrio 
 ■av(yfir)T£ tts a'larqpiav and Eph. 4^^ au^crca/iev «is avTov to. irama os cwtiv 
 rj Kt^aXri. The writer here repeats the prayer of P. It seems better 
 to take )(dpiTi absolutely, rather than to connect it with tov Kvpum, as 
 in the latter case we should have the awkwardness of giving to the 
 genitive a subjective force as regards x<»P'Tt, and an objective force as 
 regards yvuxTK. 
 
 Kal yv&a-a, tov Kvplmi ^)iuv Kal o-(i>Ti)pos 'Iijcrav XpurroS.] A repetition of 2^'' 
 ■except that yvuxra here takes the place of hnyvwrei there : cf. also 3^. 
 In the introductory verses of the Epistle we have seen reason to believe 
 that, in spite of the absence of the article, Jesus our Lord is distin- 
 guished from God : here, as in 3^, we naturally understand to3 Kvpum of 
 Jesus. For yi/Go-is see above 1^ and Appendix on imyvma-K. 
 
 a^T^ ■*! 8(5|a . . . aluvos.] See 1 Pet. 5" and notes on Jude v. 25 ; also 
 Joh. 6^1 (flcrci €ts TOV altova, 12^ 6 Xpio-Tos /ievei e« tov aUava. The 
 rare phrase -qfiipa atuvos is perhaps borrowed from Sir. 181" (where 
 man's life is compared with eternity) As <TTayu)v vSaroi Sltto OaXaxrin]^ . . . 
 ouTJus oXiya en) ev fipApa attSvos. It also agrees well with v. 8 above 
 and with the expressions ripApa Kpurems and rjiiipa KvpCov in 3''' i' ; also 
 with Heb. 1^ cr^/tcpoi' yeyoTTjica o-e, where Alf. quotes Philo i. p. 554 
 ^rrifiepov iariv 6 aTrepavroi koX dSie^in/ros auav ; see his whole note. 
 
APPENDIX 
 
 TO 
 
 SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 tTTLyVUiO'lS- 
 
 Lightfoot commenting on Col. 1* (aiTou/tcvot iva ■n-XrjpwdiJTi t^v 
 iiriyvoMriv tov 6eA.)j/iaTos avTOv iv Trttcrjj (rotjiia kol <ruvecret irvev/xaTiKy) says 
 ' the compound eTriyvmo-ts is an advance upon yv&crK, denoting a larger 
 and more thorough knowledge. So Chrysostom here, eyvoire, aXXa Set 
 Tt KOL iinyvlavai, of, Justin M. Dial. 3, p. 221 A ij ■jrape.^ovcra aiiTiov Tutv 
 dvOpiaTTiviiiv Koi tSiv Ocimv yvSuTiv, cireira riji tovtmv 6ei6T7]TOs koX SiKaio(Tvvr]s 
 fmyvuKTiv. So too St. Paul himself contrasts yivdio-Kuv, •yvGo-is, with 
 hnyivijxTKiiv, eirtyvcoo-is, as the partial with the complete in two passages, 
 Rom. P'" 2® yvcivTcs TW ®e.ov ov)( a)s ®£ov iSoiaorav . . . ovK iSoKifuurav tov 
 ®e6v ex^iv iv emyviocrei, 1 Cor. 13^2 . . . Hence also CTtyvwo-is is used 
 especially of the knowledge of God and of Christ, as being the perfec- 
 tion of knowledge.' Again, on Philem. 6 ottuk tj Koivtovia t'5s irto-Tecos 
 (TOV ivepyris yivrjTai. iv imyvuMra irai/Tos a.ya$ov, Lightfoot writes ' iiriyvuxTK, 
 involving the complete appropriation of all truth and the unreserved 
 acquiescence in God's will, is the goal and crown of the believer's 
 course.' ' In all the epistles of the Roman captivity St. Paul's prayer 
 for his correspondents culminates in this word.' [Possibly the word 
 came into use to distinguish the living knowledge of the true believer 
 from the spurious yvfio-is which had then begun to ravage the Church.] 
 
 Dr. Armitage Robinson has traced the history of the word imyvata-n 
 with great care in his edition of the Ephesians (pp. 248-254). He 
 shows that in classical writers iiriyivwj-Kav is chiefly used in the sense 
 of ' recognition ' and holds that iiri here expresses direction rather 
 than addition. ' There is no indication that it conveys the idea of a 
 fuller and more perfect knowledge.' It ' directs attention to some 
 particular point in regard to which knowledge is afiirmed.' In the 
 LXX. iiriyivaia-KU), except where it is used in the sense of recognize, 
 seems not to differ from yivuMTKui. The phrase iirLyvu>a-L<; %iov occurs in 
 Prov. 25, Hos. 41, 66, but yi/5tris 0eoS in Wisdom 2i3, 14^2. In Hos. 4« 
 ■wfiMiMdrf (A. V. ' are destroyed ') o Xaos p-av <us ovk t^mv yvuxriv oti <tv 
 iwiyvmcTLv dirwaoi Kayto ix;r(i)croju.at <re. ' In the Gospels and Acts it is 
 found in the sense of "perceiving," "discerning," "recognizing" just as in 
 classical authors ' : where we have yivwa-Kei in Lk. 10^^ (ouSeis yivwa-Ket 
 
172 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 Ti's eo-Tii/ 6 vios) we have oiSeU iiriyiviaa-Kei tov vlov in Mt. ll^''. He- 
 states the general result of his investigation in the words ' as a rule 
 yv5o-ts is used where knowledge in the abstract is spoken of, but hri- 
 yvaia-K where the special object of the knowledge is to be expressed.' 
 I am disposed to accept this as a true distinction, but I think it leads- 
 on to the distinction made by Idghtfoot, because the discernment of 
 ' the special object,' the recognition of the general in the particular, 
 implies a closer knowledge, or, if we like to call it so, a further step 
 of knowledge, than the acceptance of an abstract principle. 
 
 We will now consider Dr. Robinson's explanation of the passages 
 adduced in support of Bp. Lightfoot's view. Of Rom. 12i28.32^ 
 Dr. Robinson says ' the difference, if there be one, is that arlyvwrK is- 
 more naturally used of knowledge of a particular point.' I must say, 
 I think L.'s the more natural interpretation : yvovrcs is used of the 
 first vague knowledge of God possessed by the heathen, which is- 
 contrasted with that more developed knowledge, which might have 
 been expected, if they had made right use of the initial knowledge, cf. 
 {v. 28) ovK iSoKi/jLiwav Toi/ ®eov ex"" *" eTtyviotrei, and (v. 32) to Succuud/jlo; 
 TOV ®eou eTTi-yvovres, the latter implying a knowledge of the character 
 and will of God, not merely of his existence and his power. So in- 
 1 Cor. 13^- apTi ywaxTKia Ik fjiipovs, Tore 8e eiriyvuia-ofuii Ka0o>s koX iire- 
 yviMrOyjv : all that Dr. Robinson will allow is that cTriyvmo-o/uu is used 
 as a ' fuU-sounding word to heighten the effect.' Dr. Robinson then 
 examines the passage cited from Chrysostom and shows that the- 
 distinction alleged between yvfio-is and liciyviocrvi is scarcely borne out 
 by the context. 
 
 I do not quite understand however why he attaches so little value- 
 to Dr. Hatch's quotation from Const. Apost. vii. 39 6 /x.cWmi' KarrixaxTBai 
 TOV \6yov T^s eio-e^Seias ■n-aiSevio'dio irpb toS j8owT«r/«iTos Trjv irepl tow 
 ayewT^ov yvSxriv, t^v ircpl viov p,ovoyevovi imyvaxriv, rr/v irepi toS ayiou 
 TTveiJ/toTos TrX-qpo^opuai. Even if we accept Dr. Robinson's description of 
 the writer and of his reasons for choosing this particular form of 
 expression ('The writer is in want of synonyms : he may even fancy 
 that he is working up to a climax, and may have chosen eiriyvmo-is as 
 a word of fuller sound than yvfio-ts ') I do not see that we are thereby 
 driven to his conclusion that ' nothing is to be gained from verbiage of 
 this kind for the strict definition of words.' The writing is at any- 
 rate intended for Greek readers, and whether the author is guilty of 
 verbiage or not, he must have assumed that the words yvSo-is, eViyyuo-is, 
 and trXripoijiopia would be understood by his readers as forming a climax, 
 which is really the sole point at issue. It does not, of course, follow 
 that the climax would have been equally readily accepted in the- 
 time of the Apostles, nor is it conclusive as to the original force of 
 eVi in the compound. 
 
 I should draw a similar conclusion from the fact that the phrase 
 kut' iiriyvioariv is twice opposed to koto TrepCtftaa-iv in Clem. Alex. The 
 word vepiijiaa-K is very rare, apparently occurring only in Polyb. x. 42. 8 
 where it is used of the conmianding views to be obtained from a 
 certain mountain in Thessaly (ev^vw's Keifievov irpos Tots t&v Trpoapqixtviav 
 
APPENDIX ON i-n-Hyvtoa-Ki 173 
 
 Toircov irepK^ao-ets), and in the Clementine passages refiy;rred to. We 
 should infer that the phrase Kara. Trspii^atriv must meait ' on a broad 
 .general view,' and this seems to suit its use in Clem., though Dindorf 
 reads Kara TrepCfftpaa-iv in each case.^ The 1st passage is Str. i. p. 372, 
 where speaking of Paul's sermon at Athens Clement says 8ia tov 
 ayvwrrov ®tov TifiSxTdai Kara ir €pt<l>acriv Trpos rStv 'E W^vwi' tov 
 SrjiJi.iovpybv ®ebv yvitaro, kot' hriyvuunv Se Seiv 8i' vlov TrapaXafiiiv re Koi 
 .fjuxOeiv. A little below, Clement, commenting on Acts 261^' i^ ('to open 
 their eyes, to turn them from darkness to light '), continues ovtol ovv 
 01 avoiyofievoi tu^XSi' 6<l>0aX.fi,oi ^ 8i' vlov imyvuMrk icrri toC iraTpds, i) t^s 
 irept<^ao-efc)s (MS. irepi^pda-ea^) rijs "EWijvik^s KaraA.iji/'ts, where the 
 meaning seems to be ' the opening eyes of the blind are the growing 
 knowledge of the Father through the Son, the clear apprehension of 
 that which was dimly and vaguely seen by the Greeks.' The MS. 
 reading n-epi^pdo-cws would be here unmeaning. The second passage is 
 Str. vi. p. 759 oTt 8e ovKari-n-iyvtacriv ta-acri rbv ®e6v, aXka 
 Kara ir e p KJiacr iv EAAijvuv ol SoKifiarraroi, Zlerpos Iv tm KrjpvyfiaTi 
 Xeyei . . . tovtov rbv ®ebv o-ejSeo-^e p-rj Kara rovi "EXXrjva?, ois Si/Xovon 
 TOV avrov r//iTv a-ejSovTwv ®ebv koI t5v irap' "EkkrjcrL SoKt/uuv, dX\' ov k a t' 
 i'TT iyv<o<r iv iravreXy t^v Si' vlov TrapdSoo'iv ii.iiLa,6riKOTU>v. 
 
 In considering the force of any compound, we may begin with the 
 assumption that it must have originated in the wish to express some 
 modification in the meaning of the simple word. But the first user of 
 the compound, unless it is introduced as a definitely scientific term 
 (and even that is not always a safeguard ; it gets misused by scientific 
 smatterers, and by the large class who like to give their words a 
 scientific flavour), has very little control over its subsequent fortunes. 
 If the prefix is a preposition, such as ctti, it has itself a variety of 
 shades of meaning, and the new compound is liable to have its meaning 
 changed or coloured by the associations which the preposition carries 
 with it in the mind of each speaker or hearer. We have an example 
 of this in the word liraytitvii,ta-6ai (Jude 3) which is used to express 
 ' contend for,' ' lay stress upon,' ' contend further,' and possibly ' con- 
 tend against.' Then there is the constant tendency to wear down the 
 special force of new words with a view to novelty of expression though 
 there may be no novelty of thought. Thus, whatever may have been 
 tha original force of imyviocng, it was likely in process of time to be 
 simply regarded as a finer word for yv5o-is: and again, since the simple 
 word contains latent in itself all that is brought out into distinctness 
 in the compound, it is likely that even a careful speaker or writer will, 
 for euphony or some other purpose, employ the simple word where the 
 compound would have been more exact. Or again, the simple word 
 may from changed circumstances gain a technical force which obscures 
 or destroys the relation between it and the compoimd. This, I am 
 inclined to think, was the case with the word yvfio-is in the latter half 
 of the second century. It had gained so much in importance through 
 its gnostic use, that Clement of Alexandria thought it more necessary 
 
 ' Klostermann in his edition of the Kerygma Petri keeps itepitpacrui. 
 
174 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 to claim it as part of the Catholic heritage than to set up against it 
 the special term emyvmo-is. 
 
 And now to consider what uses of cVi may have contributed to the 
 meaning of iiriyivuxTKtiv, The earliest meaning found in classical Greek 
 is ' to recognize,' 'to discern.' Dr. Robinson says that there is her& 
 ' no indication of a fuller, more perfect, more advanced knowledge,' 
 but that eVt ' seems to fix the verb on a definite object ' ; and further 
 on he says that ' as a rule -yvuo-ts is used where knowledge in the abstract 
 is spoken of, but eViyvmo-ts where the special object of knowledge is 
 expressed ' ; and he connects these compounds with others in which 
 the preposition has the force of ' direction.' I agree that «Vt has this 
 defining force and that it frequently expresses direction, but I do not 
 think that this is enough to explain either the classical or the PauHne 
 use. To discern and to recognize imply a closeness and an intimacy of 
 knowledge. I may be acquainted with a man, but I may fail to 
 recognize him. I may know that I am approaching the harbour of 
 Dover, but it is only gradually that I discern the different features of 
 the scene. It seems to me that in many compounds eVt has this force 
 of onward movement or pressure, as in iTraKoXovdelv, iire^eXOelv, Itraro- 
 Oeiv, iirtpyaaria ' encroachment upon,' etnya/ua ' marrying into,' ciroA.- 
 XcHTo-m ' to interchange,' ' to be closely associated ' ; and that we pass 
 easily from this to the intensive force which we find in Menander's 
 iiraPeXrepuifra^ rov ttot' oW d)8e\T£pov ' to befool even more,' c7rayXaf(|a> 
 ' to grace still more,' liravopBoia, iirav^avw, iirevTeivio, iireirjiYijcrK, cjrijSe- 
 PaiauTK. This intensive force seems also to derive support fi-om 
 another use of eiri where it connotes addition, repetition, something 
 over and above, as in iTrihuirvim, emSopiriosi eVoiTeo), eira/arexio, eirave- 
 ptordo), iirairoplio, eirifixtvOavia, cVixopijyeu, iirurvyypdijxii, «5nStaTo<r<r<i> 
 (Eus. H.I!. v. 16. 3), above all perhaps in iiriStStofii, which beginning 
 with the notion of addition (giving a dowi-y in addition to a 
 daughter) comes to mean liberality, and then simply growth or 
 increase. 
 
 I think therefore that, while Dr. Robinson has rightly insisted on 
 the specializing force of imyvwcrK, Lightfoot is justified in claiming for 
 it an intensive force. ^ 
 
 ^ Dr. Abbott has supplied me with the following examples from Epictetus. 
 Diss. i. 6. 42 irphs rhv SSura airoTCTV^iKaiifVoi, /ij)^ l-riytviirKoi'Tes -rhv cisfq/ernv, 
 1. 9. 11 iTiiyv6vTis r\iv irphs Tohs Beol/s (rvyyevciav, i. 29. 59 'Bring me Caesar 
 without his trappings, and I am quite at my ease ' : Srav Se /icri roirav (KBij . . . 
 rl &\Ko ^ liriyvaKa rhv xipiov us d SpoireTijs; iv. 8. 20 tI KaK6v, iv oXs ^Wow 
 imytvii(rKe(TSai rhv (pi\6<ro(poi', iv Se Tois avn^6\ots /iit ; In all these cases the 
 meaning ' recognize ' is suitable. In Fragm. Sehw. 61 (Schenkl, p. 475) ' If you 
 wish to be a just judge,' fi.7iS4va rav SiKaCo/ievaiv kbX SiKatoKoyoimur iitiylvuaKt 
 a\\' ouTTji' riiv SiKTiv, the sense seems to be ' give heed to,' ' to note.' 
 
APPENDIX ON <j>eeipo) AND i^eopd lib 
 
 t^tipm and ijiOopd. 
 
 The characteristic mark of words belonging to the root <^^t, of which 
 these, along with <^ft'u and <f>6ivm, are the most important, as distinguished 
 from such words as Knivia, Kaivta, (T<jia.TTu>, t^oveiia, oWvjut, Oavarou), etc., 
 seems to be that the former group denote primarily not a sudden 
 destruction owing to external violence, but a dissolution brought on 
 by means of internal decay. This seems to be the only sense of 
 <l>6ivv6u> and <^^icris, but tjtOivot is used also of violent death, as in Aesch. 
 S. c. Theb. 970 irpos <j>i\ov t^Ouro, koX <j>CXov eicTavcs, Od. iv. 741 fiefiaaa-iv 
 'OSuo-CT^os ^ffurai yovav, and so <jiOiii.fvoi and ^Ovroi of the dead generally. 
 
 f^Oelpm is used of the wasting effect of a pestilence, as in Herod, viii, 
 116 and Thuc. iii. 12; but also of violent death as in Aesch. 
 Pers. 283, Soph. Aj. 25 ; then of destruction or injury of any sort, as 
 <j}d£ipeiv Trjv y^v, tov trtrov, to, ScrSpa j especially of moral injury, as in 
 Xen. Mem. i. 5. 3 KaKcvpyoTwrov icm /ii] fiovov tov oikov aWa koX to irlo/ia, 
 Kal Trjv i/f^x^v tl>Otiptiv, Plato Legg. xii. 958 C ttoXiv koX ro/iovs tjiOcipmv 
 ^iHuo-ifrOia ; then of bribery, and seduction, of debasing the quality of 
 anything, etc. 
 
 <j)6opa, ' rottenness ' has a similar range of meaning. Its original 
 force is seen in Philo M. ii. p. 96 evaireOvrjo-Ke toi yamj tSiv lx6viav 
 airavra, are Trji ^lantcrj^ Swa/icus ets <f>0opoTroLov /i€To)8aA.o«oT7S, <as S«<7a)8ias 
 ■jrdvTa avaireirXqo'Oai. Hence it is generally defined as -q Trpos to ;(etpov 
 fiera^oX-Q, and is frequently found in philosophic writings as the counter- 
 part of -yei/eo-is, it being assumed that all that has come into being is 
 necessanly lialsle to pass out of being by dissolution. It is technically 
 used for the deluges and conflagrations from which the world has 
 suffered (Plato Tim. 22 c). It was especially used in later writers for 
 the ' crime of sense avenged by sense ' as combining both the moral and 
 physical senses of the word. So ^Oopd. of seduction, <j)6opev^ a seducer, 
 a<l>0opo9 chaste. Some of the ascetic writers, e.g. Tatian, employ 
 it generally of sexual union, see the quotation in Clem. Al. Str. iii. 
 p. 547, (TVfiLi^un'ia p-ev ovv app.6t,ii irpoo-euxiJ) KOLViavla Se <f)6op3.s Xva ttjv 
 €VTf.i)^iv, on which Clement comments ov yap, us rtves l^yiyqcravTo, Siariv 
 ywaiKOi Trpos avSpa T'^v tropKos irpos t^v <l>6opav ejrtirXoK^v p,-r]viut(r6ai, 
 inroTom/jreov, tS>v yap avTiKpv^ Sia^dXo) irpocraTTTOi'TMV ttjv tOv ydp,ov 
 tvpea-iv oiBeiov dvOpdnrmv IwCvouxv Karrjyoper Kal KivSvvivei ^\aa-tj)i^peur6ai b 
 vopjoderqq. 
 
 In the LXX. KJiOeCpu} occurs in the sense 'to kUl' in Wisd. IB^-^^ 
 ^riypxuTi. o^ceov i^OeipovTo . . . vtro n-upos tf>6iip6p.a>ov : in the sense to 
 ' destroy ' or ' devastate ' in Exod. 10^^ (the swarm of locusts) iKdXvipe 
 T7]v oij/iv TTJs yrjs Kal i(t)6dpr] '^ yrj, 2 Sam. 202" Joab denies that he seeks 
 to destroy a city, 1 Chron. 20^^ €<f)6€ipav Trjv xdipav, Isa. 24* e^ddpt) y 
 o'lKovpevrj: to 'injure,' 'mar,' 'spoil' in Lev. 19^^ <f>6. Tijv o\j/iv tov 
 ffoiyojvos ' to mar the corners of the beard,' Deut. 34'^ ' natural force 
 abated,' Jer. 13^ (j,0. t^v v/3piv 'lovSa ' mar the pride of Judah.' In 
 Gen. 6^1 i<t>6dpri ^ y^ is used in a moral sense of the corruption of 
 the inhabitants of the earth. 
 
176 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 <^$opa is used of destruction in Ps. 103* rbv kvTpov/ievov « <t,0opas 1^1/ 
 ^uiji' <rov, Micah 210 Su^tOdpriTe ^Oopa, Isa. 24^ <^^opo <l>Oap^(reTai ^ y^ ; 
 of being worn out by toil Exod. ISis ^ffop^ KaTa^OapritTxi ; of moral 
 corruption in Wisdom 14^2 eupeo-is ciSciXeav ^^opa tfirn<;. 
 
 The strengthened forms Sia<j>6eLpu> and Sia<l>6opd, which are more 
 common in the LXX. than the simple words, appear to have the same 
 variety of meaning. 
 
 In the N.T. ^Odpia has usually a moral significance, as in the quota- 
 tion from Menander in 1 Cor. 1533 ^0elpov(riv ^6^ XP^a-0' ofuKuu KaKoi, 
 bad company ia injurious to character. So 2 Cor. IP ^ofiov/juu p.^ ttms, 
 <BS o o^ts isflvdTijtrev Euav iv ry Ttavovpyla, avTOV, ffidapy to. vo^para vp.5>v 
 oMo T^s dirXonjTos t^s ets tov Xpurrov lest your thoughts should be 
 seduced from the simple faith in Christ, 2 Cor. 7^ ouSo/a ^Suc^a-ap^, 
 ovSeva i<jiOfipap,ev, ovSeva iirXeovcKTi^a-ap.ev. In the last passage Alford 
 understands it of outward injury ' we ruined no man' ; but if we compare 
 Tit. 2^ irapexop.evoi ev ry SiSaa-KoXia a<f>6oplav and 1 Thess. 23 3 where the 
 apostle protests that his teaching was not ef aKaOapa-iai or iv 86X.u>, not 
 iv \6y<o KoXaKiai ovrt Trpoi^atrei ttXcove^uis, I think we shall prefer the 
 rendering of A.V. and R.V., ' we corrupted none,' i.e. we did not seek 
 to gain popularity by lowering the standard of the Gospel. In Eph. i''^ 
 Tov iraXatov avOpotTrov, rov <f>6ap6p.tvov Kara, ras i-ndvpias rrjs da-anjs, Dr. 
 Armitage Robinson's explanation is (p. 107) 'you must strip oflf the old 
 man, a miserable decaying thing, rotted with the old life of error : you 
 must be made new in your spirit,' and again (p. 109) ' €J>6£ip6p.€i'ov may 
 simply mean is on the way to perish, as in 2 Cor. 4^^ d koI 6 e$a) ripMv 
 S.v6pmiro% SuKfiOeiperai aXX.' 6 Itruj r/pJov dvaKatvovrai. But, again, it may 
 refer to moral corruption as in 2 Cor. IP.' This ' second meaning is 
 also in the Apostle's mind, for he adds the words according to the lusts 
 of deceit and he offers a second contrast in the new man which is created 
 afier God.' ' The original purity of newly created man was corrupted 
 by means of a deceit which worked through the lusts.' Cf. 2 Pet. 1* 
 below. In Apoc. 19^ Ik/jivcv t^v iropvrjv rrjv p.iyaX7p/ ^tw €<f>6€ipev t^v yrjv 
 iv Tg iropviC^ auT^s, the phrase <f>d. r. yrjv is used of moral corruption, as 
 in Gen. 6", cf. Apoc. IV^. In 1 Cor. 310" ^^^ ojg^^^ g„ ^^j, @^o5 l^^v 
 KoL TO TTveupxi TOV @€ov iv iipltv oIkcl; tl rts tov vabv rov ®eov ^Oeipei, 
 tftOtpd TovTov o ©COS' 6 yap vabi rov ®eov ayids itrriv, oiTtves eore vpui, . 
 the R.V. has ' if any man destroyeth the temple of God, him shall 
 God destroy,' but the sense of <l>6elpa> is not the same in the two cases. 
 The A.V. translates the former ' defiles ', and so Alford ' mars.' From 
 a comparison with 1 Cor. 6^^ ^ ovk ocSotc oti to awpa vpMV voos tou ev 
 vp,iv ayCov Trvtvp-aroi icrriv ; we learn that the temple or shrine spoken 
 of is the body, which is defiled but not destroyed by sin. It 
 seems therefore to be another instance of playing upon the double 
 meaning of the Greek word. Last comes the use of <j>6eipij> in Jude 
 ■y. 10 o<7a 8« (jyvo'iKuis iiriaravrai, iv tovtok <f>6upovTat, and the imitation 
 in 2 Pet. 2^^ ovroi Se, is dXoya ^ma ytyewrip,eva ets oXcoo-iv koI <l>6opdv, 
 iv ols dyvooBo-iv p\mT^r]p,ovvTt%, iv rjj <j>6opq, avrfiv koi <j)6aprja-ovrai. 
 The former is translated in A.V. ' in those they corrupt themselves,' in 
 R.V. ' in those things are they destroj^ed ' (margin ' corrupted '). 
 
APPENDIX ON (jideipo) AND <l)dopd 177 
 
 Here too I should be inclined to join the two meanings ' these things 
 are their moral and physical ruin.' The latter is translated in A.V. 
 < made to he taken and destroyed,' ' shall utterly perish in their own 
 corruption,' in R.V. 'born to be taken and destroyed,' 'shall in their 
 destroying (mg. ' corruption ') surely be destroyed.' As I have stated 
 in the note, I think it means 'shall share the destruction of the 
 trutes,' i.e. 'shallnot attain to eternal life.' 
 
 <l}6opa. is used of the physical corruption of the dead body in 1. Cor. 
 J 5*2. 60^ o-,r€tp6Tai €v tftOopa; cf. Col. 2^2 3. ia-Tiv elg <^6opa.v 'meats are 
 destined for decomposition ' ; Gal. 6* d crinipiav eU rrjo aapKa iavrov ck 
 T^s^o-apKos OepuT^i <j>6opav, o Sk uireiptav eis to Trvevpa eK tov irj/eu/iaros 
 depitra l^mrp/ aluxviov, where Lightfoot says ' the harvest is here made to 
 ■depend on the nature of the ground into which it is cast. The field 
 ■erf the flesh yields, not full ears of com, but only putrescent grains. 
 The metaphor suggests that t^Oopa should be taken in its primary 
 ;physical sense. At the same time, in its recognized secondary mean- 
 ing as a moral term, it is directly opposed to life eternal.' Similarly 
 in 2 Pet. 2^2 discussed above, ipBopd. is primarily physical. 
 
 There are two other instances of its use in 2 Pet. viz. 1* tva 
 -ye'vTjtrfle flci'as kolviuvoI (^uo-£<os aTrofjjvyovTe^ t^s iv t(3 Kocrpio iv hndvpCq, 
 •<f>6op3.i, which may be compared with Eph. 4^^ already discussed, tov 
 -jraXaiov avdpanrov tov <j)6eLp6p€Vov Kara Tas iiriOv/Jtiai t^s airaTJjs; and 
 2 Pet. 219 SovXoL inrdpxpvTei rrj? ^Oopas, which reminds us of 
 Rom. 8^ Ktti avrr] ij ktCktis lX.ev6epuii6i^<reTai a/iro t^s SouXa'as t^s <^6opas 
 €ts T^v eKtv6epia.v t^s So^s tGv tekvoiv toC ®iov. Here we find <j>6opa 
 personified as a world-wide power to which both the material creation 
 and man himself are subject. From Rom. P" it appears that the 
 creation was brought under the yoke of vanity, i.e. of instability and 
 perishableness, not of its own choice, as man was, but owing to the 
 will of another. In man, on the contrary, this bondage to corruption 
 was brought about by his yielding himself up to the motions of his 
 bodily appetites (2 Pet. 1*, 2i8'i9' Rom. SB'^.icis), a bondage from 
 which he can only escape lay becoming partaker of the divine nature 
 (2 Pet. 1*, Rom. S^*'-). It is called a bondage, because, unless we 
 make strenuous resistance, we are carried away by a stream of tendency 
 in the direction of evil. We naturally change for the worse, unless we 
 set ourselves with aU our might to change for the better. The choice 
 before us is between regeneration and degeneration. We may com- 
 pare Heb. 2^* *■ ' that through death he might destroy him that had the 
 power of death . . . and might deliver all them who through fear of 
 death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.' This fear of death 
 is included in the notion of <ft9opd, which might be described as our 
 consciousness of the process of death already at work within us and 
 around us. ' Passing away ' is written upon all that we see. 
 
 Tears from the depth of some divine despair 
 Rise in the heart, and gather to the eyes, 
 In looking on the happy autumn-fields. 
 And thinking of the days that are no more. 
 
178 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 We are conscious of decay in ourselves. The quick sensibilitie* 
 and eager delights of youth are quickly over. 
 
 Summer ebbs : each day that follows 
 
 Is a reflux from on high, 
 Tending to the darksome hollows 
 Where the frosts of winter lie. 
 And the end is 
 
 My days are in the yellow leaf ; 
 
 The flowers and fruits of love are gone ; 
 The worm, the canker, and the grief 
 Are mine alone. 
 
 The lines of Tennyson and Wordsworth give a natural and beautiful 
 expression to the Weltschmerz, the sense of the fiaTatdnj^ of the 
 surroundings of our earthly life. Byron combines with this the 
 deeper, sadder sense of the intrusion of <jt0opd into his own inner life and 
 his recognition of the ruin wrought thereby. Yet, as we learn from 
 this very poem, it was out of this sad recognition of failure, that there 
 sprang those few months of the glorious life of sacrifice, which he 
 offered on the altar of Greek freedom. 
 
 Contrast now the utterance of one who had long escaped from ^Bopa. 
 and become partaker of the divine nature ' I have fought the good 
 fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith : henceforth 
 there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the 
 righteous judge, shall give me at that day.' 
 
 There are still some other offshoots of this family of words which 
 have to be considered. Siatjideipm and SuujyOopd have in the N.T. much 
 the same meaning as the corresponding simple words. Thus Lk. 12^ 
 oirov /cXeimys ouk eyyit" '»>^^ ""^s iia^edpei 'corrupts,' 2 Cor. 4i6 
 £1 Koi o €$<» ijfiSv avBpwTTfyi Sia<l>6eip€TaL ' decays,' ' is being wasted away ' ; 
 Apoc. 8^ TO rpiTov Tuv TrXoCmv SLffjiOdfrrjcrav ' were destroyed'; Apoc-lPS 
 8uul>6e2pai Toiis Sui^deCpovTw rifv y^v, where, I think, we must recognize a 
 play on the double meaning of the word, ' to destroy them that corrupt 
 the earth' (KV. has 'destroy,' but cf. Apoc. 19^). The only case in. 
 which the word means simply moral corruption is 1 Tim. 6* avOpunrav 
 Sie<l>6apfiev<>yv rov vovv. Ato^Sopd occurs several times in Acts 13 in 
 reference to the quotation iS«v Sui<f)6opdv, denoting physical corruption. 
 
 Another derivative, a^Bopla occurs in Tit. T iropexo/ievos ei' t^ 
 SiSatrKoXia a<f>6opiav of moral incorruptness. 
 
 More important are the words tjiOapToi and a^dapros which are often 
 used in the N.T. to distinguish the perishable from the imperishable. 
 
 a<f)dapa , , . ....... . ■ •><> j 
 
 dvayiyavijiiivoi ovk Ik a~iropa.<; tfiOapr^s, oAAa a<l>ddprov. Li Rom. P* and 
 1 Th. 1" o^^Tos is used of God, in 1 Pet. 1* of the KXijpovo/iia. In 
 1 Pet. 3* the imperishable ornament of a meek and quiet spirit is 
 opposed to the outward adorning of gold. 
 
 So a.<t>Oapa-ia is used of the life to come in 1 Cor. 15*^ iyeipejai ev d<l>6ap- 
 
APPENDIX ON <f>e6ipco AND (jidopa 179 
 
 o-ta, Rom. 2'^ a.fl>6ap(riav tyjTOva-iv, 1 Cor. 15^" oiSe rj <f>6opa. t^v at^Oapaiav 
 KXrjpovop.Ei, 2 Tim. P" Karapyijo-avros fiei' rbv Odvarov, (fxoTiaraVTOs 8« ^eoijv 
 K. a<l>6ap(riav 8ia to5 evayyeXtou. In Eph. 6^* it is questioned how ij x^P" 
 juerot ■jravTuv tSv dyoTrcovrwi' tov Kvpiov r/plov 'I.X. ev a<ft6ap(ria, should be 
 understood. See Robinson's n. He explains it to mean ' in that 
 endless and unbroken life, in which love has triumphed over death and 
 dissolution,' and shows that this is the only sense found in the Greek 
 O.T. I agree however with the R.V. rendering ' uncorruptness.' 
 
 Dr. Robinson endeavours to show that the writers of the second 
 century use these words exclusively in that which is certainly their 
 ordinary meaning in biblical Greek. He allows however that Ignatius 
 is fond of playing on the two meanings of <j>6eipio, as in Eph. 17 Sto. 
 toSto pvpov eka^ev cm t^s kc^oX^s 6 Kvpios, tva iryeg rrj iKKK-qtria. a^Gap- 
 (Tiav, where Lightfoot says the idea of incorruptibility must be 
 prominent here, as the preceding tfideLprj requires, though the idea 
 of immortality may not be absent. In § 16 we have the phrase ol 
 olKO^Oopoi fiacTiXeiav ®eov ov KXrjpovoprjfrovcrLv and cav mariv <l>6eipr], both 
 alluding to 1 Cor. 3^®' ^^ ovk otSarc on vaos ®eov lore . . .tt rts tov vaov 
 TOV ®€ov ifiBeipei, <j)6ep£i rovTov 6 ©cos, combined with vi. 9, 10, 19. 
 Dr. Robinson himself allows (p. 219) that Origen's use of the word 
 seems sometimes to combine the idea of the indissolubility of eternal 
 life with the purity which Christians associated with that life. 
 
 N 2 
 
SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS. 
 
 Address (v. 1). 
 
 Symeon Peter, a servant and apostle of JesMS Christ, to those whose 
 lot it has been to enjoy a faith not less pri/vileged than our own, 
 through the equal justice of mi/r God, and of our Saviour Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 2v/iett>v Herpos- 
 
 The name Hct/oos is a translation of the Aramaic Kephas, as Christ 
 of Messiah, Didymus of Thomas, ZijXcdt^s of Kavavaioi. The form 
 Si/udi' is hellenized from 'Sviitmv, like Paulus from Saulus ; compare 
 such forms as Disraeli, Braham, Lias, etc. in the present day. The 
 consistent Hellenic form of the double name, Simon Peter, is frequently 
 found in the N.T. : the consistent Aramaic, Svjueuv Ki/i^s, is never 
 found.^ I give below a table showing how often each name occurs.* 
 
 How are we to account for the unique use in our text ? The writer 
 of the epistle, whoever he may have been, was certainly not one who 
 wrote without thinking. We may take it for granted, then, that the 
 combination of the old Hebrew and the new Greek names was inten- 
 tional ; the intention being, as we may suppose, to remind his readers 
 
 1 It may be noted that Peter's brother bore the Greek name 'AvSpeas. 
 
 ' Kiiipas stands, with its interpretation, in Jolin I*' ; it is also found alone fonr 
 times in 1 Cor. and four times in 2 Cor. The only passage besides this in which 
 2vij.e^v is used by itself of Peter is St. James' speech in Acts 15^^. ISi/iav stands 
 alone in Matt, once; in Mk. ch. i. four times (before the name Peter had been 
 given), and once in 14'', where Jesus \4yei t^ Tlcrpif, %lfi(iit> xaSeiSeis; Luke has it 
 ten times; John twice in oh. i., thrice in oh. xxi., where the penitent Apostle is 
 thrice addressed as Slfiuv 'luivov ; in Acts we have four times ' Simon sumamed 
 Peter.' Of nirpos standing alone we have twenty examples in Matt., eighteen in 
 Mk., seventeen in Lk., sixteen in John, fifty-three in Acts, two in Gal., one in 
 1 Pet. 2(^011' Tlerpos is found three times in Matt, (twice with 6 \fy6iievos) ; 
 never in Mk., except where it is stated that Simon received the name Peter; 
 seventeen times in (R>hn ; never in Acts, except with the addition ' sumamed ' ; 
 and nowhere else in the N.T. See Hort on 1 Pet. pp. 151 foil. 
 
I 1] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 181 
 
 that, though Peter was known as ' the apostle of the circumcision,' 
 still it had been granted to him to open the kingdom of heaven to 
 Gentiles in the person of Cornelius, as well as to Jews on the day of 
 Pentecost. From this we should infer that the epistle was addressed 
 to a church made up of Jews and Gentiles, in which perhaps the Jews 
 were inclined to exaggerate their interest in St. Peter, and to claim a 
 superiority above the branches of the wild olive-tree, which were 
 recipients of grace only through being engrafted into the good olive- 
 tree. Such an assumption seems to be rebuked in the words which 
 follow. God has no favourites : He allots to each their circumstances, 
 and their opportunities of learning divine truth. This truth, however 
 brought to them, carries with it equal privileges, if it is duly received 
 in the heart. 
 
 Tois itroTi/tov fi/iLV \a)(ova'iv TricrTiv. 
 
 You have been allotted by divine election {v. 10) a faith which 
 carries with it privileges equal to our own. ' Not of yourselves, it is 
 the gift of God ' might be said of all who were born Christians, as 
 opposed to those who belonged to heathen families ; and it may 
 (1 Cor. 7") be said also of the latter, in so far as they must have been 
 brought by God's providence within the range of Christian influence. 
 From V. 9 we gather that all here addressed had been baptized. 
 Baptism had been granted to the Gentiles in the first instance, because 
 their faith had been attested by the gift of the Holy Ghost : in 
 St. Peter's words ' Can any man forbid water that these should not be 
 baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we ? ' The 
 view maintained by Spitta, that the Apostles themselves form the 
 other member of the comparison, seems to be excluded by the story 
 of Simon Magus (Acts S"*-). 
 
 Does the statement here made hold good in the present day ? Have 
 all Christians m<j-Tiv 'uroriiiov ? Was the faith of the doubting father 
 itroTt/tos with that of the Syro-phoenician woman? Is that of any 
 ordinary Christian lo-oTi/ios with the faith of an a Kempis, or a 
 Luther, or a Baxter, or a Bishop Wilson? The word is no doubt 
 intended as an encouragement ; but perhaps also as a warning. The 
 writer speaks to those of a like faith, not of a different faith. Where 
 the faith is of the same quality, however different in quantity, it 
 contains within it, Uke the grain of mustard seed, a promise of endless 
 expansion. 
 
 ev 8iKaio(Tvvri tov ®eov. 
 
 Choice does not mean favouritism. Israel was chosen to be a 
 blessing to others, and at the same time to suffer more than any other 
 people. God wills that all should be saved and come to the knowledge 
 of the truth. This impartiality marked the determinate counsel of the 
 Father no less than the redemptive work of the Son. Salvation is for 
 all, not, as the degenerate Jews supposed, a peculiar privilege for a 
 peculiar people. 
 
182 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Salutation (vv. 2-4). 
 
 Grace and peace he multiplied upon you through the knowledge of 
 [God and of Jesusy our Lord, seeing that it is by means of the Icnow- 
 ledge of Him who called us hy His own glory and goodness, that His 
 Divine power has granted us all that makes for life and godliness. 
 Through this manifestation of the divine goodness there have been 
 tmparted to you [us] promises of highest blessing, in order that through 
 them you may he made partakers of the divine nature, having escaped 
 the corruption that is in the world through lust. 
 
 On a first reading this passage might seem to be a mere tangle of 
 words. 2 It is certainly yery complicated both as regards persons and 
 instruments, cause within cause, wheel within wheel, difference of 
 names with identity of person and ideas. In the address we have 
 already had the justice of God (ei; StKaiotruVij) named as the cause of 
 the gift of faith to all the members of the Church in common, 
 regardless of distinctions of Jew and Gentile. In v. 2 we have the 
 knowledge of God and the Lord Jesus [Iv imyvioa-u) named as the 
 means whereby grace and peace may be increased : a statement which 
 is confirmed in v. 3 from the fact that it is through this knowledge 
 (Sia TTJi itnyvaioremi) that we have received all that is needed for 
 salvation. Not only are the divine names themselves, as it might seem, 
 unnecessarily repeated, in vv. 1, 2, but we have also the periphrases 
 •rijs 6eias Swajueus avTou, rov KaXeaavroi ^/^aS) Oeiai ^wetos in vv. 3, 4. 
 The general idea of salvation appears as faith in ■«. 1, as grace and 
 peace in v. 2, as life and godliness in v. 3, as participation in the divine 
 nature in v. 4. The divine calling is said in v. 3 to have been effected 
 by means of the attractive power of the glory and excellency of the 
 Caller, Jesus Christ ; and in v. 4 it is stated that this same glory and 
 excellency hold out to the readers the highest hopes for the future, in 
 order that by means of these hopes they may become participants of 
 the divine nature. 
 
 Both these characteristics, complexity and the imnecessary repetition, 
 or (as it may be more truly described) the affectionate dwelling upon 
 the divine names, may be found in the salutations of other epistles, 
 especially 1 Pet. 1'', Ephes. V-^, in both of which the name Jesus 
 Christ occurs four times in the first three verses, and in Rom. P'- '■« 
 
 ' See Introduction on the Text. 
 
 ^ It certainly is so in the Vulgate : ' Gratia vobis et pax adimpleatiir in agni- 
 tione Dei et Ohristi Jesu, Domini nostri, quomodo omnia nobis divinae virtutis 
 suae quae ad vitam et pietatem donata est per cognitionem eius qui vocavit nos 
 propria gloria et virtute,' where the gen. abs. seems to have been taken for a 
 genitive of possession, and the verb has disappeared. 
 
I 2-4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 183 
 
 p^apis v/uv Koi eipijvij irXfiOvvOfir] iv eiriyvutrci toi) OcoD.'^ 
 
 The knowledge of God is aifirmed to be (1) that which makes possible 
 their growth in grace and peace, (2) the means employed by the divine 
 Power to bestow upon us all that is needed for life and godliness {v. 3). 
 
 How is it the ground of peace ? To the primitive man there could 
 be no peace. Experience compels every human being to believe in the 
 existence of powers immensely superior to himself, which surround him 
 on every side. No one who thinks can help feeling that both body 
 and mind are liable to internal disease and to external violence of 
 nature and of man. Life itself and all that makes life worth living 
 hang on a thread. As to what may follow this life, nature speaks in 
 vague, sometimes in menacing tones ; but, that there is a survival of 
 some sort is a matter of almost universal belief. If the power or 
 powers above us are jealous, malevolent, tyrannical, like earthly rulers, 
 only to be propitiated by bribes and flatteries and abject prostrations, 
 as many nations have believed, what ground have men for hoping for 
 any improvement after death? Even if there were in the nobler 
 minds some dawning consciousness of 'a stream of tendency which 
 makes for righteousness,' still this might of itself only intensify the 
 gloom of the future. The higher our ideal, the more conscious we 
 become of failure to attain to it. The more conscious we become of 
 sin within us and around us, the more we feel that punishment awaits 
 the sinner either here or hereafter. As civilization advances, the crude 
 religious usages based upon such feelings gradually become incredible : 
 some are felt to be horrible, some disgusting, some childish. Looking 
 at the witch-doctors and inquisitors of every age, who can deny that 
 there is justification for the verdict of the philosophic poet ' tantum 
 religio potuit suadere malorum ' ? But here idealistic breaks off from 
 materialistic philosophy. The latter, while not objecting to religion as 
 an aesthetic cult, altogether repudiates the belief in God as ruler and 
 judge ; the former looks upon God as the supreme ideal, the law and 
 reason of the universe, the father of mankind, and bids men discard 
 from their thought of Him and their worship of Him all that is 
 tm worthy of so great an Object, or injurious to the welfare of man- 
 kind. It is this latter view, raised to a far higher potency, which is 
 given to us in the N.T., as the truth made manifest by Him who by 
 His Incarnation and Resurrection abolished death and brought life 
 and immortality to light. In Jesus, the perfect man, we believe that 
 ■we have revealed to us the character and the nature of God. The 
 powers of the universe are no longer a source of terror ; they are 
 ordained and controlled for our good by Him whom we have been 
 taught to invoke as our Father. In Jesus, the perfect man, we believe 
 that we behold also the pattern of what we and all men are to be 
 hereafter. We believe that we are called upon even now to follow 
 Him ourselves, and to behave to others as brothers capable of being 
 renewed in His image, and undergoing in this life a training along 
 
 ' For the distinction between yvaais and hviyvaxris see Appendix. 
 
184 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 with us for the higher life to come. Having this hope, we are never to 
 despair of the world or of ourselves, but to fight manfully the good 
 fight of faith against the evil passions which assault us all. We are 
 not, with the Stdics, to deaden our sensibilities, to stunt and crush out 
 our God-given faculties and feelings,^ but to raise and educate them for 
 a fruition infinitely surpassing our present imaginations. No sympathy 
 is wasted, no defeat is final. Knowing God's fatherly will towards us, 
 we are at peace with Him and with His creation, animate and 
 inanimate : knowing that He inhabits all time and all space, we are 
 able to cast our care upon Him, not for this life only, but for the 
 unknown possibilities of eternity. 
 
 Such were the hopes of St. Paul as made known to us in his 
 writings and especially in his description of the ultimate destiny of 
 mankind in the 1 5th chapter of the 1st epistle to the Corinthians. 
 But can we speak as confidently now, now that nearly 2000 years have 
 passed, and ' all things continue as they were ' ? Can we say that 
 peace is now established upon earth, as a consequence of the revelation 
 made in Christ ? Can we speak of peace as a result of Christianity, in 
 a century which, before it has run a twentieth part of its course, has 
 seen Christians engaged in such wars as the South African and the 
 Manchurian and in the even more terrible civil strife in Russia? a 
 century in which a larger proportion of the wealth and manhood of 
 Christendom are permanently employed for purposes of war than has 
 ever been the case before 1 And these wars and rumours of wars, this 
 threatening dissolution of mighty empires, are merely the outward 
 symptoms of the internal discord, so powerfully described by 
 St. James. Our wars and fightings arise from the lusts that war in 
 our members, from the greediness with which each grasps at pleasure 
 and riches for himself, regardless of duty and of the rights and 
 interests of others. More devastating, more destructive than ail the 
 sacrifices of war, more utterly ruinous to character and honour and 
 humanity, not to speak of religion and morality, is the mad thirst for 
 pleasure and excitement, the reckless desire to make money by 
 gambling ' trusts ' and ' corners,' and the utter indiflference to the ruin 
 thereby caused to the bodies and souls of our feUow-men. ' Without 
 natural afiection, implacable, unmerciful' — in these words St. Paul 
 sums up his terrible impeachment of the heathen world of his time : 
 would that it could be said to be no longer applicable to the Christian 
 world, especially to us, English and Americans, in this twentieth 
 century ! 
 
 There is of course another side to the picture of our time. Probably 
 
 ' Compare Hort, The Way, the Truth, and the Life (p. 96), of the heathen 
 world before the birth of Christ, ' The depression or abnegation of life became 
 the refuge of the wise and good. Life, they knew, made men vulnerable in 
 proportion to its variety and intensity. Whether their desire was to ward off 
 misery and maintain serenity, or to avoid wickedness and cherish virtue, in either 
 case it was prudent not to feel overmuch, for so opportunity would be offered to 
 the enemy. The individual soul and body together, or the individual sonj. 
 fortified against its body as the nearest camp of the enemy, could maintain 
 independence only by a lowering of life, a tempering of life with death.' 
 
I 2-4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 185^ 
 
 in no age of the world have there been so many, and such devoted 
 efforts to resist e^'il. It is enough to recall the names of Mrs. Fry, 
 Wilberforce, Shaftesbury, Maurice, Father Mathew, Dr. Barnardo, to 
 mention but a few of our own countrymen, who have led the way in 
 this noble crusade. Never before have Englishmen shown so much 
 zeal for the conversion of the heathen at home and abroad. Never 
 before in the history of the world has there been a more earnest 
 effort both in England and abroad to understand and to apply the- 
 story of the life and teaching of our Lord. Unhappily even here 
 disunion has sprung up. Community of aim in different bodies has not 
 been found a strong enough bond to overcome the separating influences 
 of diversity of order and method. The generous element of apprecia- 
 tive emulation has too often passed into a depreciative jealousy. Self- 
 will on the part of individuals has too often failed in consideration for 
 others, and hindered the common work of the Church, even where it has 
 not led to actual schism. 
 
 Are we then to be satisfied with this ? Was it this to which our 
 Master looked forward when he said ' Not peace but a sword ' 1 Far 
 different is His meaning. He spoke of the necessary effect of the new 
 wine in old bottles, the introduction of an unexampled ideal of right- 
 eousness into a world peopled by men, good, bad, and indifferent. To- 
 some of each of these classes the new teaching would appeal at once 
 as a true divine message, freed from the traditional form which had 
 disguised its meaning and deadened its force before. To others, as to- 
 Saul the Pharisee, it seemed to be a denial or reversal of the old 
 revelation, and roused their strongest opposition ; the good being often 
 for a while the enemy of the better. Others, who had contrived some 
 sort of modus vivendi with the old religion, found the new intolerably 
 exacting, and its preachers men not worthy to live. But the blood of 
 the martyrs is seed : Saul the persecutor became Paul the apostle. 
 
 Our Lord's words then are descriptive of a period of transition from 
 a lower to a higher ideal. It would be a total misconception of their 
 spirit, if we used them to make us contented with the world as we see 
 it around us. 
 
 But how are we to explain the failure? Why is it that the 
 knowledge of God has not been followed according to promise by 
 universal peace? To this it may be answered in the first place, 
 that the present is an era of transition, if ever there was one since the 
 beginning of the world. Never was change more rapid and multi- 
 farious than during the last century. In science, in industry, in 
 politics, in social life, in education, in religion, how different the end 
 of the century from its beginning ! One result has been that appeals 
 to tradition and authority have far less effect than they used to have, 
 and that classes or policies or views of life, which base their claims on 
 these appeals, tend to fall into the background. The incredible so- 
 rapidly became credible, the impossible possible, the certain either un- 
 certain or actually false, that men ceased to hold firmly to any belief,, 
 especially where it placed a restraint on their natural inclinations. 
 
 This fact however does not entirely remove the difficulty ; for man,. 
 
186 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 being an imperfect creature on the way to become perfect, must, so far 
 .as he acts up to his vocation and destiny, be always in a state of 
 transition, always rising from lower to higher. Thus in all ages the 
 'Christian is called upon to be a soldier, though the warfare is hotter at 
 -one time than another, and the struggle becomes more difficult and 
 more complicated in proportion to the rapidity of the movement, and 
 Hie consequent division in the ranks of the well-meaning and public- 
 spirited. At such a time it behoves Christians to bear in mind the 
 warning of Gamaliel ' lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.' 
 May it not be that the present revolt against authority, in admost every 
 sphere of thought and action, is a sign that we need an authority 
 of a different and more penetrating kind ; that the time is approaching 
 ■of which Isaiah prophesied, when ' thy children shall be all taught of 
 Ood ' ; a time when the external law written on tables of stone should 
 become a law written on the heart ; when, in the words of Christ, men 
 :should no longer be called ' father and rabbi, because one is your master 
 and all ye are brethren ' ? May it not be a sign that ' the good 
 message ' consists in expansion rather than repression ; that its true 
 bearing is shown not so much in insisting on the restrictions of the 
 past, as in fostering and guiding the aspirations of the future? To 
 put it somewhat differently, should it not be equally our care to 
 .stimulate independence of thought and feeling, and to foster the spirit of 
 reverence and humility ? May we not hope to do this by the endeavour, 
 on the part of each and all, to realize more our own immediate 
 responsibility to God and to our fellow-men for the use we make both 
 -of our reason and our will ? There is a danger, no doubt, in en- 
 couraging people to think and act for themselves, instead of simply 
 following the traditions of preceding generations ; but it is a danger 
 which is inevitable at a certain point in the onward progress of 
 humanity. There are many excellent men who are inclined to despair 
 when they find the world turning with impatience from that which has 
 been the breath of life to themselves. So Samuel was inclined to 
 -despair when the rule of the Judges was exchanged for that of the 
 Davidic Kingdom ; but ' God fulfils Himself in many ways.' After aU 
 it is He who is responsible for the conduct and guiding of the men He 
 has made. After all He is the Great Teacher. If He sees that it is 
 through what seems to us error and heresy, that man must rise to 
 higher purpose and clearer Kght, who shall gainsay Him ? Meanwhile 
 our duty is to be true to the light He vouchsafes to us, and to trust 
 Him absolutely for the future. 
 
 So far I have been speaking of Christianity as a theory of life, and 
 have endeavoured to show that, as such, it has a natural tendency, far 
 beyond all other theories, to bring about peace, internal and external. 
 But our text speaks not of an abstract theory, but of intimate 
 acquaintance with a Person («V fTnyvuta-u rov ®tov), an acquaintance closer 
 even than that vouchsafed to Abraham and to Moses, to whom God 
 is said to have spoken face to face, ' as a man speaketh with a friend ' ; 
 it speaks of the consciousness of a guiding and inspiring Presence 
 ever ready to reveal itself in answer to believing prayer; and it connects 
 
I 2-4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 187 
 
 peace with grace, as the immediate consequence of that close com- 
 munion with God. In his note on 1 Pet. P Hort has well explained 
 the reason why grace should come first : ' standing at the head of the 
 Christian form of blessing, it directs our thoughts to the heavenly 
 source of blessing.' Before joy or peace or any other form of well- 
 being, which formed the subject of ordinary good wishes, the Apostles 
 first wished for their converibs the smile and the merciful help of the 
 Lord of heaven and earth.' Understood in its widest sense, ' grace ' would 
 thus mean the influence of the Holy Spirit in the heart. From 
 this flows directly the peace of God which passes all understanding, 
 that of which Isaiah said ' Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace whose 
 mind is stayed on Thee,' that peace which is independent of outward 
 troubles, and which underlies and rises victorious above all inward 
 agitation.^ 
 
 TO. Trpos ^uirjv Koi €vcr£J3ci.av (v. 3). 
 
 The divine power has granted to men all things necessary for life 
 and godliness through the knowledge of Christ. If we met such 
 words in a writing of the present day, we might be inclined to 
 interpret them as follows : Human life manifests itself in feeling, 
 thought, and action. Where these are not, life is arrested, if not 
 extinguished. A full and healthy life shows itself in the health and 
 vigour of these manifestations and in their harmonious action for the 
 good of the individual and the community. We might think. What the 
 writer here asserts is, that this energy of life is not inconsistent with 
 piety, that is, with the constant reference to God as our ruler and 
 guide ; and further, that all that tends to develop life and piety is 
 supplied by the knowledge of Christ. We might compare with this 
 the words in 1 Tim. 4^ r/ eva-e^eta •n-po's iravra iKJieki/ios ia-riv, iirayyeXiav 
 €^ouo-a Atari's r^s vvv kol t^s /icXXouoTys, godliness is useful both for the 
 life of earth and for the life of heaven. If however we look at the 
 other passages in which t,a>'^ occurs in the N.T., we shall find that, in 
 the great majority of these, ^m-q has a deeper and more mystical sense, 
 particularly where it is mentioned in connexion with the sight or 
 knowledge, or the teaching or word of Christ. Often this deeper 
 sense is distinguished by the epithet alwvto's, as in Job. 6*o ' This is the 
 will of my Father, that every one that seeth the Son and believeth in 
 him should have eternal life ' ; 6^^ ' The words that I have spoken unto 
 you, they are spirit and they are life ' ; 17^ ' This is life eternal that they 
 should know thee, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast 
 sent ' ; Joh. 4i*, 7^*. Sometimes it is spoken of as ' the real life,' 
 1 Tim. 6^9 ^ 3yT(i)s ^0)17 ; sometimes as the ' life of God,' Eph. 4^8 ' being 
 alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them ' ; 
 sometimes as the life of Christ, 2 Cor. 411 ' that the life of Jesus 
 may be manifested in our mortal body,' Col. 3^ 'Our Ufe is hid with 
 Christ in God,' ib. v. 4 ' Christ our life ' ; sometimes it is connected with 
 the Spirit, Gal. 6^ ' he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap 
 
 ■* It may be noticed that grace and knowledge are again joined in 3^'. 
 
188 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 eternal life,' Rom. 8^ 'the mind of the Spirit is life and peace.' We 
 do not possess this life by nature : we are said to enter into or inherit 
 it, Mt. 188, 1917.29. and again 'to pass from death into life,' 1 Joh. 3". 
 I know of no modern writer who has thrown such light upon the 
 Christian mystery of Life, as Hort in his difficult, but profoundly 
 interesting and instructive lectures on The Wa/y, the Truth, and the 
 Life. After speaking of life as seen in the heathen world, in the 
 passage I have quoted above, he proceeds to speak of the higher life 
 known to Israel. 
 
 'There is no life, worthy to be called life, entirely separate from joy and 
 gladness. The lower life, when it exists in any strength, has in it at once a. 
 gladness of personal energy and a delight in the gladness of all living creatures, 
 as it is displayed in their youth or comeliness. The higher life for Israel could 
 never be wanting in this characteristic . . . "With Thee," says the Psalmist, 
 " is the fountain of life." The perennial spring of water that leaps and flashes- 
 as though it were a living thing, breaking ceaselessly forth from a hidden source, 
 is the best image of that higher life bestowed on him to whom God has unveiled 
 his face . . . The spontaneous uncultured joy of spring or of youth is short- 
 lived. It dies out with the mere lapse of time ... But he whose heart has 
 learned to make answer to the Lord comes to find that the power of life and joy 
 lives on with him, while outward things are taking their course of obstruction 
 or decay. He has a life exempt from being dried up, for it flows not from 
 himself or from any part of the perishable creation, but from an ever-living 
 fountain in the heavens ' (pp. 98, 99). ' Whatever life had anywhere been found 
 and lost, whatever life had never been found, was given to man in Christ. It 
 may be that this or that portion of the vast inheritance of life has never as yet 
 been claimed, or has been but doubtfully claimed, because faith in Him has been 
 too petty or wilful in its scope as well as too feeble in its energy. But in Christ 
 life was given in its fulness nevertheless, and in that due subordination which 
 alone secures that nothing be lost. This is the one character of the Gospel 
 which takes precedence of all others : its many partial messages are unfoldings 
 of its primary message of life. Salvation according to Scripture is nothing less 
 than the preservation, restoration, or exaltation of life ; while nothing that 
 partakes or can partake of life is excluded from its scope; and as is the measure, 
 grade, and perfection of life, such is the measure, grade, and perfection of salva- 
 tion' (pp. 100, 101). 'The call to the disciples to receive Christ unreservedly as 
 the Life, is a call which surely the Church of later days may well accept as 
 addressed to itself ... It is the glory of this life to include every life. We 
 do not purify it but impoverish it by detracting from its fulness. It may be that 
 all lower forms of life are rising and will rise yet more in rebellion against the 
 life of Christ, as though it were only a cunningly devised death. Yet the Church 
 will be false to herself and to the universality of the task committed to her, if 
 she seeks to protect the life of Christ by striving to fence it round into a little 
 province of peculiar emotion. There is indeed that in it which is known only to 
 those who have most communed with the living Lord Himself, and been baptized 
 by Him with a holy spirit and with fire. Yet it ceases to be His life when it 
 ceases to go forth and save. It was ordained to purify and control every lower 
 life ; and therefore it must enter freely into them all. If we fear that it may 
 lose itself in the vast and often lawless universe of life beneath, the danger is to 
 be averted not by wilfully contracting it within a narrower field, but by seeking 
 greater intensity of life in deeper and more submissive communion with the Head 
 Himself in the heavens ... If other lives will not be ruled by His life, they 
 must presently seek to cast it out as an evil thing. Wherever they for a time 
 prevail, they work perdition and destruction for a little hour, and then they 
 perish, while yet proving that life cannot be slighted or repudiated with im- 
 punity. Wherever He prevails. He conquers that He may save ... He destroyed 
 nothing that had life : He lives, that all which once lived may live again in Him. 
 
I 2-4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 189 
 
 No ancient form of life can perish for ever, though it be long before mankind are 
 fitted to receive it back at Christ's hands, renewed and transfigured by His 
 resnrreotion . . . The Saviour Himself stands always nigh to transform by His 
 presence the purifying water without into the wine of gladness within. So He 
 manifests His glory to His disciples. So His disciples believe on Him and live ' 
 •(pp. 146-149). 
 
 ToS KakicravTOi 17/ias iSia, Soirj koI apeTrj (v. 3). 
 
 All that is needed for the life of which we have spoken, that life 
 which is always united with submission to the divine will, is given to 
 us in the knowledge of Christ, who is here described as the Caller of 
 Men ; and the mode of His calling is said to be the manifestation of 
 His own character and nature. We may compare Joh. 12^^ (also 3^*, 
 S^^), where the lifting up of Jesus, that is, the crucifixion, by which, 
 more than by any other single act. He manifested His self-sacrificing 
 love for man, is declared to be the magnet which should draw all men 
 to Him — we love Him because He loved us — as well as the manifestation 
 ■of His glory: see Joh. 12^^ i^Kv&ev ^ &pa Iva Soiatrdy 6 vlbirov avBpunrov, 
 and 13'i, where the departure of Judas to complete the work of' 
 betrayal is followed by the saying vvv JSofao-fliy 6 vJos tov avOpotirov kol 
 ®eos iSo^da-Orj ev avTw. The word ' glory ' is often misunderstood. 
 The glory of God is sometimes contrasted with the good of man. ' In 
 majorem Dei gloriam ' has served as a pretext for much cruelty and 
 ■excused much superstition. Nothing can really be for the glory of 
 God on earth which is not also for the good of man. The glory of Gfod 
 is the exhibition of His character by His own acts and works, and by 
 the reflexion of His character in the life of His children. Where 
 there is not this reflexion in the heart and hfe, lip-praise or ceremonial 
 worship, whether gorgeous or slovenly, is of no avail ; it is not the 
 Bptjo-Keia KaOapa, ' the worship in spirit and in truth,' which God demands. 
 The only acceptable praise is the outpouring of a heart which is filled 
 with thankful deHght in the presence of God and in the contemplation 
 ■of His works. 
 
 81' oJv TO. TLpi,ia, Koi ficyuTTa i7rayye\.fiaTa SeSaprjrai (v. 4). 
 
 As our trust in the kindness and goodwill of a friend extends far 
 beyond any definite promise of assistance which he may have made ; 
 ■as it enables us to give the right interpretation of any reported 
 message of his, and even to discriminate between true and false 
 messages ascribed to him ; so is it with our trust in God. It is not 
 so much in consequence of this or that particular promise as it is 
 through the manifestation of the Father's love in the person of His 
 Son, that we are emboldened to hope for all future blessings. Therefore 
 it is that in our prayers we encourage ourselves with the thought of 
 what He has already done for man, no less than with the thought of 
 His actual promises for the future. Such is the appeal in the words 
 ■of the ancient hymn 'Qui Mariam absolvisti et latronem exaudisti, 
 mihi qiioque spem dedisti,' and in the suffrages of our Litany, ' By thy 
 baptism, fasting, and temptation, by thine agony and bloody sweat, by 
 
190 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 thy cross and passion, by thy glorious resurrection and ascension.' 
 Hence too it was, that St. Paul in preaching to the Corinthians 
 ' determined to know nothing among them but Jesus Christ and him 
 crucified.' Deeds are more than words, and the life of glory and good- 
 ness has a wider scope, and penetrates more deeply even than the 
 deeds regarded by themselves. 
 
 Lva Sim tovtihv yivrjcrOi Oeiai Koivwvol <j}V(rcuii (v. 4). 
 
 The purpose and end of the divine action in our behalf is that we 
 may become partakers of the divine nature by making full use of the 
 promises imparted to us. We can see how even the spoken promises of 
 Christ may lead to this result, if we reflect on such a text as Lk. 11^' 
 ' If ye then being evil know how to give good gifts to your children, 
 how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to 
 them that ask Him.' For what else is it to have the Holy Spirit 
 dwelling in us, but to be partakers in the divine nature, a participation 
 promised in answer to prayer 1 So again, and stiU more strongly, in 
 1 Joh. 412-16 ' If -we love one another, God abideth in us and His love is 
 perfected in us. Herein we know that we abide in Him and He in us, 
 because He has given us of His Spirit . . . Whosoever shall confess 
 that Jesus is the Son of God, God abideth in him and He in God . . . 
 God is love, and he that abideth in love abideth in God and God in 
 him ' ; Joh. 1 7^^ ' The glory which thou gavest me I have given them that 
 they may be one even as we are one ; I in them and thou in me, that 
 they may be made perfect in one.' It may help us to the better under- 
 standing of these mysterious intimations, if we call to mind St. Paul's 
 words in 2 Cor. 3^^ ' we all, reflecting as a mirror the glory of the Lord, 
 are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from 
 the Lord the Spirit,' and Gal. 2^0 'no longer I, but Christ liveth 
 in me.' 
 
 We must carefully distinguish this idea of the possibility of our 
 participation in the life and character of God, not only from presump- 
 tuous Stoic assertions as to man's equality with God,^ but also from 
 the unguarded statements of Athanasius and other early Fathers, as to 
 which see my note on Clem. Al. Str. vii. 53, P. 830. 
 
 a,Tro<l>vy6vTK Ttjs Iv rm Kocriiia iv eirifivfiCa. t^Bopas (y. 4). 
 
 Here we have the contrast between the state of nature and the state 
 of grace. The opposite condition to the participation in the divine 
 nature is said to be that from which the Christian has escaped, viz. the 
 corruption which is in the world through lust. The word ^opa. means 
 destruction, especially destruction proceeding from natural causes. 
 Hence it comes to be used of moral corruption and decay, and some- 
 times seems to combine both meanings, see the Appendix on the word. 
 
 ' See Cio. N. D. ii. 153, where the life of the wise man is said to be par et 
 rimilis deorum, nulla alia re nisi irmnorlaiitaU, quae nihil ad bent mvendum pertinet, 
 cedena caeleatibus, and the passages quoted in my note. 
 
I 4-7] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 191 
 
 Possibly our author may have shared the view of Theophilus, who' 
 speaks of immortality as the property of deity, in his treatise Ad 
 Autol. ii. 27 ' God made man neither mortal nor immortal aXka Bsktikov 
 d,i/,<l>OT€pu)V Iva, «i piijiri iirl ra tjjs a.&ava<TLa<; Tqprjcro.^ rrjv ivToXijv Tov ®eov^ 
 fiurOov KOjUt'tnjrat irap' avrov ttjv d^avatriav kol yevrjTai 6i6<s k.t.X., and a 
 little above ovtc ovv <j}v<7€i ^cijtos iydvero ovre dfttvaros. ct yap aOdvaTov 
 air o,p)^^ ircTTot^Ket, 6ebv avTov ireiroi^/cet. This idea may have originated 
 in the language used in 1 Tim. G^" 6 /lovo^ £x<av aOavaq-iav, where- 
 immortality is spoken of as the peculiar property of God. So Theodoret 
 Dial. iii. p. 145 (quoted by Suicer under &Bava<Tia) has Kvpm^ aOavwro's 
 6 ©eds- ov<Tia yap dfldvaros, ov fLeroviria, . . . rots 8e dyyeXois Koi rots 
 dAAots auTos Trjv aOavauTiav SeStapryrai. Compare the opposition in 1 Cor. 
 15^^ Sei yap to (fiOapTov tovto iv8v(Ta<T6ai ai^BapiTiav, ib. v. 42 (nreipeTaL 
 iv ff>6opa,, eyetperot €v o.<j)6ap(Tia, Wisdom ii. 23 f. 6 ©cos e/CTitre tov 
 avdpuyirov hr OKJiSapcria, koi eiKova ■rrj's iSias iSidnjTos ( = 6«'as Koivatvoic 
 ifivcreois) iTToirjcrev avrov <f>66v(o 8e Sia;8dA.ov Odvaro's el(rrj\6ev «is tov 
 Koa-fiov, ib. vi. 19 afftOapcria «yyi?s «Ivai irotcT ©eoCi. God Himself is called 
 a^SapTos in Rom. 1^^, 1 Th. P^ and the Christian inheritance a<j)6apT0'^ 
 KOL dfjiiavTOi in 1 Pet. 1*. 
 
 This corruption which pervades the world is the result of iwiOviiia } 
 compare Gal. 6^ ' he that soweth to his own flesh shall of the flesh reap 
 corruption,' and 1 Joh. 2'^ 'the world passeth away and the lust 
 thereof, but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.' So St. 
 Paul (Rom. 5^^) attributes ' the reign of death ' in the world to the 
 entrance of sin {i.e. as St. James says 1^^ of fully developed ciri^u/tta) 
 through one man, see Wisdom 2^3 quoted above ; and, again, declares. 
 the same truth more generally in the phrase to tjipov-rifia rrj's a-apKog 
 ^dvaTos (Rom. 8^). 
 
 Exhortation to make full use op the geace impaeted 
 (vv. 5-7). 
 
 Since the power of, God has bestowed on us all that we need, ymo 
 are especially bound to use every effort to add energy to your faith 
 ank knowledge to your energy. Energy and knowledge combined 
 will enable you to practise self-denial and endurance. If unth these 
 are joined a pious submission to the divine Will, and warm affection 
 to the brethren, it will gradually create within you that highest of all 
 Christian graces, love to God manifesting itself in love to man and 
 to the whole creation, animate and inanimMte. 
 
 Does the writer mean this for a complete list of Christian virtues or 
 graces? If so, why does he omit one of St. Paul's great trio, cXttk, 
 while he takes the remaining two, one for the foundation, and the 
 other for the crown of his series ? It is true he admits its effect iiro/jiovq 
 as one link in the chain of graces, but this is far from covering all the 
 
192 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ground of the hope which is so prominent a feature in the first epistle 
 •of St. Peter, as well as in the epistles of St. Paul. Why does he leave 
 out so many of the fruits of the Spirit named in Gal. 5'^^ '■ xapd, dprivrj, 
 jjteucpoOv/iia, )(prri(rr6Trii, ayajduxrvvrj, irpainjs, as well as SiKaio(Tvvri and 
 aXn^Oeia mentioned in Eph. 5^1 In 1 Pet. we find in addition to those 
 mentioned in 2 Pet. viz. faith, and love, and (t)iXaSe\<j>ia (1^, 2", 3*), 
 and viropLoinj (2^), a number of other graces, such as obedience {inraKtyq 
 p^ 21*' 22^, joy (xapa aveK\a\i^os kol ScSo^ac/uei/i; P), sobriety {vqi^uv V^, 
 41^, 58), holiness (cLytonjs 1^*, 2^'^), fear (0d/8os 1"), meekness (irpaiSn/s 
 S*-^^), compassion {cvcnrXa.y)(i/Ca, 3*), humility (Taireti'd^poves 3^, and especi- 
 ally 5^'^), moderation (a-at^poarvvr) 4''), hospitality {<j».\6^evoi 4*); while on 
 the other hand 1 Pet. omits four out of the list in 2 Pet., viz. aperq, 
 yvuKTis, iyKpanui, tva-e/Sfui. Again, we have seen evidence of an acquaint- 
 ance with Greek philosophy in the latter writer: why does he omit three 
 out of the four cardinal virtues, a-aKJipoa-vvrj, dfSpcta, Sixauxrvvij ? It may 
 be said perhaps that aperi^ and mrofiov-^ cover the ground of avSptCa, that 
 4yKpdT£ia represents crmtj>po<rvvri, however imperfectly, and that aydinj, 
 since it fulfils the whole law, is more than SiKaiocrvvrj. Anyhow the list is 
 peculiar, partly from its arbitrary selections and omissions, partly for 
 the marked way in which the writer introduces his seven virtues, each 
 apparently growing out of the preceding, and all rooted in faith. That 
 seven was a mystical number with the Hebrews, we all know ; and its 
 influence in the mind of the writer of the fourth Gospel has been shown 
 by Bishop Westcott in his Commentary (pp. 75 foU.) and by Dr. 
 Abbott in his Johomnme Gramvmcur, pp. 301, 463, 464. 
 
 That the number eight, the ' Ogdoad ' was also regarded as a mystical 
 number by some of the early Christians, who liked to speak of the Lord's 
 day as the eighth day, a day of holy activity, the beginning of a new 
 world, surpassing the day of rest which followed on the creation of the 
 old world, is shown by the following passages : Bam. 15. 8 ov ret vvv 
 (ripPara ip.o\ Sckto, dAAa o TmroiriKa., iv 10, Karairavtras ra iravra, apyfrpf 
 ijyucpas dySdijs jtohjcto), o i(rriv, aXkov Koa/iov a.p)cijv. 810 /cat ayofiev rip' 
 ■rjiiipav T7IV oySotjV ets £v<l>po(rvvriv, iv -g koX 6 'Ii/croBs avamj ck veKptov koX 
 (jiavipaOtU avifir) eis oupavous, Justin M. Dud. 24, cf. Clem. Al. Str. 
 V. pp. 712, 713, § 106, where he interprets of the Lord's day Plato's 
 description of the vision of Er (Sep. x. p. 616), tfi. vi. p. 794, § 108 ot 
 ToiovToi KaTa'7rav(rov(ri,v iv opci ayua 6eov ... 01 /iri Kara/iavavrei iv ejSSofuiSi 
 avairava-ita^, ayaOoepyia Se Oeia^ c^ojuouucrecas ets oySoaSuc^s riepyeo-Mis 
 Kki^povofiiav VTrepKvij/avTCi, aKopivTov Otuipia^ elKiKpivii iironreia irpocrav- 
 eXOi'Tes, ib. vi. pp. 811 f. § 140, Str. iv. p. 636, § 158 t^ e)88d/xj; ^ avd^rava-K 
 6pT](rKtv€Tai, ry Si oySoy [Xacr/xov Trpoa-tjitpa,^ ib. § 159 eire^ airXav^i X'^P" 
 17 n-Xij<riafo««ra to vor/rm Koir/xia dySoas Xeyoiro . . . c^avaSvvai yev€(rews re 
 Kot a/uipriai XW""' ^^" tw yvuxTTiKov, ib. p. 637, § 162 Bao-iXeiSijs 
 SiKaiocrvvrfv re koI ilprprrjv viroXa/ijSavct iv dySoaSi p.£V€iv. That the writer 
 of 2 Pet. regarded the ogdoad as a mystic niunber may perhaps be 
 inferred from a comparison between 2*, where he speaks of oySoov Nfie, 
 and Jude v. 14, where Enoch is described as the seventh from Adam. 
 
 ' Ezek. 44^.27. 
 
I 5-11] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 193 
 
 Further Remarks on the Value and Importance of these 
 Virtues (vv. 8-11). 
 
 If you have these virtiies, and if they continue to flourish in you,^ 
 you will be not idle or unfruitful as regards the knowledge of Christ. 
 On the other hand their absence is necessarily attended by spiritual 
 blindness or near-sightedness, and by forgetfulness of the grace 
 received in baptism. Since there is this possibility of falling away, 
 beware of losing the light ; be more earnest to ensure and make good 
 the calling and election of which your baptism was the sign. If 
 you steadily practise the virtues I have named, you will walk in the 
 light and be kept from stumbling here, and hereafter you will 
 inherit the glory prepared for you in the eternal kingdom of our 
 Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. 
 
 It is remarkable how the writer recurs to his previous list of virtues 
 with a thrice repeated ravra in vv. 8, 9, 10 and owois in •?;. 11. In 3i® 
 he exhorts his readers to grow {av^dverc) in grace (which may be 
 regarded as summing up the list) and knowledge {yvata-a equivalent to 
 hnyvwa-a here). Cf. Eph. 412'-, especially ■?;. 15 dXij^evovres ev dyaTrg 
 av^a-wfLev eis avrov to. -ir&vra, os eoriv ^ Ke^aX.'^, 1 Pet. 2^ ms apTiyewTfra 
 Ppiiftri TO \oyiKov a8oA.ov yaXa iinirodrjcraTf, iva h/ aurm avfiJoTjTe, 2 Th. 1^ 
 vwepav$dv£i ^ TrtoTis v/xSiv Koi TrXeovd^et rj ayairij. 
 
 XrjOriv Xa^tav rov Kadapur/Jiov (v. 9). 
 
 So Moses warns the Israelites (Deut. 4^2) ■irpoa-exere vfiiv, firi en-t- 
 \d6ria-6e t^v Stafii^Kijv KvpCov tov®£ov ■qpuav ^v SieOero irpos vp.ai : c£. 2 Kings 
 1788. 
 
 ySejSatov i/tSv T^i' kX^o-iv koX eKXoyijV irouia-Bai {v. 10). 
 
 So, in other epistles, the elect are urged to make their election sure : 
 as in Eph. 4^ irapaKoXut ovv vfias d^i'ois irepiirar^frai r^s KA.'^o-etos ^s 
 «ic\i7%re, ib. 6^^ avaXd^ere t^v iravoTrXtai' tov Ocov tva Suvtj^te . . . a^ravra 
 ipyaa-dfievoi <rr5vat, 1 Cor. 9^' OTowria^m fiov to crw/ia . . . /iijTrcos oAAots 
 K^pvias airos dSoKt/xos yevo/iat, Col. 3^^ ivSva-aa-de ovv <S)s CKXeKTol tov 
 ®eov (ntXdyxya olKTipp.&v, 1 Th. 51* to irveS/xa p-t] (rfiivvvTi compared with 
 1* eiSoTES T^v iKXoyrjv vp,S>v, 1 Pet. 1^^ iv <j>6p(o tov t^s irapoiKias v/j.S>v 
 ■vpovov ovaa-TpdffyqTe compared with l^' ^ eKXcKTOis . . ■ KOTot ■irpoyvoiiriv, 
 and 2 Pet. 3^^ ^vXda-a-ecrOe tva p-ri eKiri(n)Te tov iSiov c7Tt]piyfiov. The 
 Vulgate adds ' per bona opera certam . . . faciatis.' 
 
 1 See above on itKriBuyBelni in V. 2, and below on sufiivETe iy X'^P't' koI 
 
 
 
194 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 The Writer's Promise {m. 12-15). 
 
 Therefore, that you may escape the dangers and inhe/rit the blessings 
 named, it will be my care'^ continually to remind you of your duty in 
 this respect {namely thai you should make your calling sure in the 
 manner I have pointed out), though I know well that you are familiar 
 with the lesson, and are established in the truth which has been 
 delivered to you [reading irapahoOelaiJ. If we retain -rrapovay the 
 sense will probably be ' in the truth, so far as it has been revealed 
 to you,' but this seems hardly to suit such terms as elSorai} Kal 
 earripiyfievovii (v. 12) or the statement in v. 3 that 'the Divine 
 power has bestowed on you all things needed for life']. I feel 
 myself bound, so long as I am in this tent of the body, to stir you up 
 by way of rememhrance, since I know that I must shortly put it off, 
 as our Lord Jesus Christ declared to me. Andfitrther I will do my 
 best- to enable yov, to make mention of these things, as you may find 
 opportunity, after my departure. 
 
 In what respects does the promise in v. 15 differ from that in •«. 13? 
 The one refers to warnings uttered in the writer's life-time whether by 
 word or by letter : the other to something which he would leave 
 behind as a memorial for after time. We cannot, I think, suppose 
 that the reference is merely to an epistle, whether the present or some 
 other. It implies something more like a store-house of facts, on 
 which they wUl be able to draw after his death, a store-house which 
 would contain such narratives as that which follows immediately, 
 being joined to what precedes by the particle yap. I am inclined to 
 think therefore that the writer here alludes to the Gospel according to 
 St. Mark. 
 
 The Grounds op our Belief {vv. 16-21). 
 
 When we preached to you the coming of the Lord in power, we 
 relied upon no cionning fable, but on the witness of our ovm eyes, 
 which had beheld His majesty. For He received from the Father 
 honour and glory, when there came to Himfrom^ the excellent Glory 
 such a voice as this : ' Behold My Son, My beloved, in Whom I am 
 well pleased' ; and it was this voice we heard proceeding from heaven, 
 when we were with Him in the Holy Mount. We who witnessed the 
 Transfiguration have had thereby confirmed to us the testimony of 
 the prophets, to which you do well to give heed, as to a lamp shining 
 in a dark place until the day break and the day-star arise in your 
 hearts; recognizing this first of all, that no prophecy is a matter of 
 1 See Introduction on the Text. » See Introduction on the Text. 
 
I 12-21] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 195 
 
 'private interpretation, for it was not iy the.will of. man that prophecy 
 came at any time, hut men delivered the message of God under the 
 influence of the Holy Spirit, 
 
 Dr. Chase takes the word Trapova-la here of the First Coming ; but 
 it does not seem to bear this sense in any other passage of the N.T. 
 I think therefore we must understand it here of the Second Coming, 
 as in 3*'!^ below, unless there is strong reason on the other side. But 
 it is the Second Coming that forms the pivot on which the whole 
 epistle turns, the object of all its hopes and fears. It is this to which 
 believers look forward as implied in the glorious promises of 1*, and in 
 the eternal kingdom of l^^ : this is the Day of God which scoffers 
 deny (3**), but which should continually be in the minds of all true 
 disciples, urging them on to greater diligence in His service (S^^'i^). 
 The preaching of the coming of the Lord with power, referred to in 
 1^^, must surely be of the same nature as the preaching of St. Paul 
 at Athens (Acts 17^°'), 'God now commandeth all men to repent, 
 because he hath appointed a day in which he will judge the world in 
 righteousness by the man whom he hath ordained, iria-Tiv Trapatr^uv 
 TToa-iv, dvao-T^o-as airbv Ik v£KpS>v. Christ's resurrection was the ordinary 
 proof of His divine mission : it was the only one of which St. Paul 
 himself could claim to be an eye-witness. But those who had seen the 
 vision and heard the utterance on the Holy Mount could 'appeal to 
 another experience, which had been to them personally a strong con- 
 firmation of the prophetic word, that told of the Coming of the Son 
 of Man in the clouds of heaven. 
 
 Some critics have found a difficulty in this allusion to the Transfig- 
 uration. We may perhaps doubt whether St. Peter would have mentioned 
 it to the exclusion of the Resurrection, of which the Apostles were the 
 appointed witnesses, and to which reference is so often made in 1 Pet. 
 and in the speeches recorded in the Acts ; but I see no reason why he 
 should have hesitated to speak of it as making it easier to believe 
 in the coming glory of Christ. The three evangelists who mention 
 it all speak of it as affording to those who witnessed it a ' sight of 
 the kingdom of God.' It was also an earnest of the glory which was 
 to be hereafter revealed in the saints, just as the sealing of the Spirit 
 is said by St. Paul to be the earnest of our inheritance. Doubtless 
 the cross of Christ was the manifestation of an even higher spiritual 
 glory, as it was felt to be by St. Paul and St. John ; and the Resurrec- 
 tion was a fact of more universal importance ; but we instinctively feel 
 that perfection of beauty is the natural vesture of perfect goodness : 
 things are not as they should be, till the inner and the outer glory 
 are in complete accord. Of this great harmony the Transfiguration was 
 truly felt by our author to be the foretaste and image. The appear- 
 ance of the representatives of law and prophecy, to whom Jewish 
 tradition ascribed an exemption from the common lot of mortality, by 
 the side of the Central Eigure, was a token of a resurrection glory to 
 be imparted to all who believed on Him, of what the writer describes 
 as ' new heavens and a new eai:th wherein dwelleth righteousness.' 
 
 o 2 
 
196 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 As \v)(y<o KJMivovTL fv mr}(fM.rjpla rmio (■». 19). 
 
 The prophets, like John the Baptist, were lamps shining in the 
 darkness which preceded the coining of the Messiah. When the Sun 
 of Righteousness arises, then their light wanes. But the dawning of 
 the Gospel is not simultaneous over all the earth. One country, 
 one sold, may be in darkness, though the light has come to others. 
 The lamp of prophecy prepared the Jews to recognize the dawn of the 
 Gospel. Hence the frequent reference to prophecy in the Gospels and 
 the Acts. It was by means of prophecy that the Jews and proselytes 
 were first introduced to the faith. Again the Old Testament served as 
 a lamp to the early Church before the Gospels were in circulation. It 
 was the text, to which the Apostles and first missionaries supplied the 
 commentary. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria speaks of philosophy as being to the Greeks 
 what the Law was to the Jews, the iratSaymyos to bring them to Christ. 
 More generally we may say that whatever there was of ennobling 
 thought or higher aspiration in the art or poetry or religion of 
 ancient Greece ; whatever there was of reverence and stedfastness and 
 trust and purity and patriotism in the family and national life of 
 Rome ; whatever there is still that makes for true manhood and 
 womanhood in nations or individuals that have not the knowledge 
 of God — all this is to be regarded as the divinely intended preparation 
 for the full light of the Gospel, and for the appropriation of its message 
 in the heart. 
 
 irpo^yyraa iSt'as hriKicmm ov yiverai {v. 20). 
 
 Prophecy is not restricted to the particular meaning assigned to it 
 by a particular man or a particular generation. The special work of 
 the prophet is to interpret the working of God to his own generation. 
 But in doing this he is laying down the principles of God's action 
 generally. Hence there may be many fulfilments of one prophecy, or, 
 to speak more exactly, many historical illustrations of some one principle 
 of Providential Government. This is admirably illustrated in Dr. 
 Arnold's Sermons on the Interpretation of Prophecy, from which the 
 following quotations are taken : 
 
 ' Prophecy is God's voice speaking to us respecting the issue in all 
 time of that great struggle, which is the real interest of human life, the 
 struggle between good and evil. Beset as we are by evil within us and 
 without, it is the natural and earnest question of the human mind, what 
 shall be the end thereof ? And the answer is given by Prophecy, that 
 it shall be well at last ; that there shall be a time when good shall 
 perfectly triumph. But the answer declares also that the struggle shall 
 be long and hard ; that there will be much to suffer before the victory 
 is complete' (pp. 12, 13). 'As it is certain that no people on earth 
 has ever either perfectly served the cause of good, or utterly opposed it, 
 so it follows that no people can fully satisfy the mind of Prophecy ' 
 (pp. 19, 20). 'Christ alone is the true and complete fulfilment of 
 
119,20] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 197 
 
 Prophecy . . . but Christ's triumph is not for himself alone ; we all may 
 partake in it ... If looking on the world as God looks on it, we feel 
 keenly the struggle which is going on between good and evil, and 
 fain would take our part in it to the death under Christ's banner; then 
 along with all the anxieties and sufferings of the contest we have our 
 portion besides in the hopes of the final issue ' (pp. 26-28). 
 
 'History is especially iStas sTrtXvo-ecos ; that is to say, what the 
 historian relates of Babylon is to be understood of Babylon only. 
 But what Prophecy says of Babylon is koiv^s eiriXvo-ccos ; it does not 
 relate exclusively, nor even principally, to the Babylon of History; but 
 to certain spiritual evils of which Babylon was at one period the 
 representative, and Rome at another, and of which other cities . . . 
 may be the representatives now ^ . . . The Prophecies, as I believe, will 
 go on continually meeting with a typical and imperfect fulfilment till 
 the time of the end ; when they will be fulfilled fiinaUy and completely 
 in the destruction of the true prophetical Babylon, the World as 
 opposed to the Church' (pp. 31, 32). 'Most remarkable is it to see 
 in the Prophets and in the Psalms the confident anticipation of future 
 triumph, which to the human writer individually was never verified. 
 But by this very circumstance their incomplete and typical character 
 is fully manifested : it is by this especially that they in a manner point 
 to Christ ; that they stretch out their hands to Him, imploring Him to 
 fulfil what they could but faintly shadow, the whole condition of fallen 
 and redeemed man : sufferings first, but afterwards glory, the serpent 
 bruising man's heel, but man finally crushing the serpent's head ' (pp. 
 40, 41). 'Every prophecy has, according to the very definition of the 
 word, a double source : it has, if I may venture so to speak, two 
 authors, the one human, the other divine.' ' And now we see why the 
 language of the prophets, as applied to those nearer events which 
 occupy the fore-front in their vision, is and must be hyperbolical. 
 Beginning amidst all familiar objects and images, Israel, Jerusalem, the 
 Law, the Temple, Babylon, Egypt, Edom, defeat and victory, captivity 
 and deliverance, famine and plenty, desolation and prosperity, other 
 and higher hopes possess their minds almost immediately, distinct in 
 their greatness, undiscerned in their particular forms. Thus into the 
 hiunan framework there is infused a divine spirit, far too vast for that 
 which contains it.' 'When St. Peter says that "it was revealed to 
 them that not unto themselves but unto us they did minister the 
 things now reported unto us " he does not surely mean to deny that 
 they ministered to their own generation also, although not exclu- 
 sively nor in the highest degree. The prophets never cast themselves 
 as it were into the midst of the ocean of futurity ; their view reaches 
 
 ' Cf . Baxter's letter to the Lady Ann Lindsey in Silvester's Life, p. 225 : ' An 
 interpretation ia called private, either as to the subject person, or as to the inter- 
 preter. You take the text to speak of the latter, when the context plainly 
 sheweth you that it speaks of the former ; the Apostle . . . giving this caution, 
 that none of those scriptures that are spoken of Christ, the public Person, must 
 be interpreted as spoken of David or other private Persona only ... It is 
 subjectively a private interpretation to restrain that scripture to David or other 
 ordinary men, which {/he Holy Ghost intended of the Messiah.' 
 
198 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 over the ocean, their hearts it may be are set on the shore beyond it, 
 but their feet are on their own land, their eyes look upon the objects 
 of their own land ; there is the first occasion of their hopes, and there 
 lie their duties. They are prophets in both senses of the term, 
 preachers of righteousness to their own generation, as well as fore- 
 tellers of blessing for generations yet to come ' (pp. 63, 68, 69).^ 
 
 ON FALSE TEACHERS (Ch. II). 
 
 The False Teachers op the New Dispensation answer to the 
 False Prophets op the Old {w. 1-3). 
 
 Besides the true prophets spoken of above, there were also false 
 prophets under the Old Dispensation ; and their counterparts wUl he 
 found in the false teaehers of the New Bispensaiion. As the former 
 denied the Lord who had redeemed them out of Egypt, giving them- 
 selves up to the worship of strange gods, and bringing on themselves 
 swift destruction ; so will it he with the false teachers who deny their 
 Redeemer. Their vicious life will he followed hy many, who tvill 
 thus hring discredit on the Way of Truth. A further characteristic 
 of these false teachers is their covetousness, which will lead them to 
 make profit of you hy lying words. But the judgment declared hy 
 God's dealings with their forerunners of old has long ago been passed 
 upon them, and their doom is already impending. 
 
 Si ous 17 6S0S TTJg dXr/Oeias l3Xa<r<f>riit,7]6T^<reTai (v. 2). 
 
 The immoral lives of some of the heretics and especially their misuse 
 of the love-feasts cast suspicion on the practices and the worship 
 of Christians generally. So in the present day the careless lives and 
 the random talk of nominal Christians are still a great stumbling- 
 block in the way of the spread of the Gospel both at home and abroad. 
 Christianity not only sets up a higher standard than that of the world : 
 it claims to enable men to live up to that standard. When those who 
 profess Christianity fall below their profession, their failure is regarded 
 as disproving the regenerative power of Christianity itself ; just as, 
 on the contrary, each man who truly follows in the steps of Christ, 
 and does not neglect the gift that is in him, is a living witness of the 
 truth of the Gospel. 
 
 The comparison of the course and manner of life to a road is common 
 in Hebrew writers, as in Ps. P yivda-Ku Kvptos 68ov Bucaiwv, 1192'''- 686v 
 SiKauo/idTwv aov crwmo-oi' /it . . . oSbv dSiKias dirdonjo-oi' ctTr' e/ioB . . . 
 
 ' A valuable book on this subject is Riehm's Messianic Prophecy followed by a 
 complete bibliography, of which an English translation was published in 1900 
 by Messrs. Clark. 
 
II 1-16] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 199 
 
 oSoi' aXriOaa? ijpcTura/iijv, Isa. 26'^- ^ o86s cuo-e/Scuv eiOeia . . . 68os Kvptav 
 xpCa-K, 35*, Jer. Q^^, 10^^ otSa, Kvpie, on ouxt tot) avOpayTrov ^ 68os outov, 
 ovSk avijp iropevo'ETai koL KwropduxTfi iropeiav a-uToB, especially 21* iSou 
 iyu) SeSbiKa wpo ir/oo(r<oirou v/uSv t^v o8ov t^s ([(o^s Kat t^v oSor toB Oavdrov, 
 from which are derived the teaching as to the broad and narrow way 
 of Mt. 71* ", and the two ways of the Didache 1-5 : cf. Barn. 18-24, 
 Gonstit. Apost. vii. 1-18. In the Acts we read of the ' way of salva- 
 tion ' (1 61'), the ' way of God ' (1 8^6), and ' the way ' simply, meaning the 
 Christian Ufe (9^ 19^' ^8). Above all, Jesus speaks of Himself as the 
 Way in Joh. li^eymet/ti^ 680s koi ■^ dXiydeia xat^ ^mij- ov8eis epxerai irpoi 
 Tov varipa. ei /t^ 8t' Ifiov, on which see Hort's commentary in the first 
 of his lectures on The Way, the Truth, the Life, and compare Heb. 
 1019. 20_ jn liije manner the verbs Tropevo/xai (Exod. 16*, Lev. 26^, Deut. 
 533, Ps. 8611, Isa, 28, Acts 93i), ■ir^pinaTm (Rom. I312, 1. Cor. 7", 2. Cor. 
 S', 1218, Gal. 5i«, Eph. 52, 1 Joh. 2^) are used of the Christian life. 
 
 Examples op Judgment joined with Mercy 1 (w. 4-10). 
 
 God spared not angels when they sinned, tut hurled them down to 
 Tartarus, where they were delivered to chains {or ' pits ') of darkness 
 to be kept for the final judgment. Similarly Me spared not the 
 ancient world, hut ir ought on its ungodly inhabitants the Flood, from 
 which Noah only, the preacher of righteousness, and his family were 
 saved. So the Cities of the Plain were overwhelmed with ashes and 
 overthrown by earthquake, as a sign of the divine displeasure and a 
 warning of the fate reserved for the vmgodly. On the other hand 
 God saved righteous Lot, grieved and vxaried as he was loith the 
 profligate life of the rebellious. For day after day his righteous soul 
 was vexed within him at their lawless deeds, as he dwelt among them 
 keenly sensitive to the wickedness which met his ears and eyes at every 
 turn. In this we have a proof that the Lord knows how to deliver the 
 godly out of trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment 
 until the day of judgment, especially those who follow the polluting 
 lusts of the Jlesh and make light of authority. 
 
 Further Description op the Libertines {vv. 10-16). 
 
 Presumptuous that they are, they shrink not from railing against 
 the unseen powers ; yet angels, though so far superior to the libertines 
 in greatness and might, do not venture to bring against these powers 
 a railing accusation. Vengeance however wiU come wpm, them in 
 return for their insolent words in matters of which they have no 
 
 ' In the parallel passage of St. Jude the moral is rather Mercy does not exclude 
 judgment ; here it is Judgment does not exclude mercy. 
 
200 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 knowledge ; they will share the destruction of senseless animals, that 
 are horn creatures of instinct for cajptv/re and destruction. Thus 
 they will receive wrong \as they deem it] in requital of their wrong- 
 doing. Their idea of igleasure ^ is to s^&nd the, day in wanton living. 
 They are spots and blemishes in the Gh/wrch [which should be udthout 
 spot or wrinkle], revelling in their deceits when admitted to your 
 love-feasts. Their eyes betray their adulterous thoughts, insatiate of 
 sin, while they allure unstable souls, having a heart practised in covet- 
 ousness. Cursed ones ! they have left the straight way and wandered 
 from it, having followed the way of Balaam, who loved the wages of 
 wrong-doing, and was rebuked for his own contumaciousness [breach 
 of law, Trapavofiia], when his ass [by a irapavofiia of another kind] 
 spoke with human voice, resisting the infatuation of the prophet. 
 
 Sd^as oi Tpe/xovcriv ISXxwKJyrjfiovvres (v. 10). 
 See comments on Jude, pp. 74 foil. 
 
 Love-Feasts of the Ewrly Christians. 
 
 The eminent French theologian, Prof. Batiffol, in a recent study 
 on the Agape {&udes d'Histoire, vol. i. pp. 283-325), controverts what 
 has hitherto been the prevalent opinion among Roman Catholic, no 
 less than among Protestant writers on this subject. St. Jude has 
 described the libertines of his time as Iv rats dyaTrais v/tfiv oTriXaSes, 
 irweurnxovixcvoi acjio^aig iavroiv iroLixaivavres, on which a Lapide 
 comments as follows : ' Primitus Christiani in symbolum caritatis, 
 post Eucharistiam celebrabant convivia, communia tarn pauperibus 
 quam divitibus, sed frugalia et pia, ideoque eas vocabant Agapes, 
 id est caritates, uti ostendi in 1 Cor. xi. 20. Sic gentiles sua 
 habebant convivia, quae vocabant (fnXCria ' ; and Estius on 2 Pet. ii. 13 : 
 'Vox aydirq jam inde a tempore apostolorun usurpata fuit pro 
 conviviis Christianorum inter se; quod ad ea pauperes advocando 
 caritatem in eos exercerent.' This explanation is supported by the 
 Vulgate rendering of ayairq both here (in conviviis luxuriantes) and in 
 Jude (in epulis suis maculae). Prof. Batiffol, on the contrary, affirms 
 as his conclusion (p. 294), 'il n'est pas question d'agapes dans le 
 Nouveau Testament.' The arguments adduced in favour of this 
 startling conclusion are the following : St. Jude uses dyamj twice, 
 dyaTDJTot twice, and riyairrjiievoi once, in the ordinary sense. He uses 
 the plurals So^ai (v. 8) and ato-xwas (v. 13) for the singulars. We may 
 therefore translate his words in v. 12 as follows : ' lis sont des ^cueils 
 dans votre amour . . . et ici le mot amour signifierait I'ensemble des 
 fiddles, au milieu de qui ces impies sont des pierres de scandale.' In 
 answer to this I may quote Blass (p. 84) on the use of abstract plurals : 
 
 ' Or 'of love,' if we read iydrniv for i 
 
II 10-16] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 201 
 
 'They are used,' he says, 'to indicate the individual concrete mani- 
 festations of the abstract quality.' What then are the ' concrete 
 manifestations ' of love, here implied by the context, ' feasting with 
 you in your Ayairai ' ? The aydin], it is evident, gives an opportunity 
 of feasting, in a manner which causes scandal (o-iriXaScs). Who can 
 help being reminded of the similar scene described in 1 Cor. xi. 18-34, 
 where it is said that those who come together to partake of the Lord's 
 Supper destroy its character and call down judgment on themselves by 
 drunkenness and greediness 1 The first Lord's Supper united the Paschal 
 meal with the participation in the sacramental Bread and Wine ; and 
 the allusions in 1 Cor. and in Jude lead us to conclude that the xXao-is 
 apTov in private houses, of which mention is made in the description of 
 the life of the early Christians in Acts ii. 46, was a continuation of 
 this custom, thus furnishing occasion for the possible growth of the 
 abuses of which we read afterwards. Naturally the relative importance 
 attached to either element, the sacrament or the common meal, would 
 vary in different places. 
 
 Prof. Batiffol's explanation of the KXaons aprov is as follows. He 
 distinguishes the Pauline source in Acts 2*^, ^a-av Se irpoarKapTepovvTi^ 
 Tg SiSa)(g tSv aTrooToXaJV koi TJj Koivmvia koI -ry xXacrei Tov aprov Kai rais 
 irpocreuxaw, from the Judaistic source in 2*^, Ka6' r/fjiepav re irpoo'KapTepovv- 
 T£S o/iodviJuiSov ev TM U/3U, KXfivTcs TE kot' oTkov apTOV, /jLeTeXafiPavov 
 rpotfaji ev dyaXXtacret Koi d^eXdnjri KopStas. The former 'parle de la 
 fraction du pain comme d'un acte purement religieux et la place sur le 
 mSme rang que la SiSaxtj et la irpoo-evxv,' the latter ' qui voit d'abord 
 le culte du Temple, subordonne la fraction du pain, en la rMuisant a 
 une observance privde, en faisant une sorte de rappel intime du Christ, 
 un acte joumalier et domestique, qui ne se distingue plus de la fraction 
 familier du paina table que par Facte de foi qui I'accompagne.' Of 
 the latter he asserts ' I'intention judaisante de son auteur se manifesto : 
 mais I'agape s'^vanouit.' On the contrary, I should be much surprised 
 if my readers fail to recognize the agape in both. His examination 
 of the language of St. Paul in 1 Cor. xi. seems to me equally 
 inconclusive. 
 
 By the end of the second century the term agape was in regular use 
 for the love-feasts ; see quotations from TertuUian and Clemens 
 Alexandrinus in Appendix C to my edition of Clem. Al. Strom, vii. 
 For a more general account see Smith's Z>. of Bible under ' Lord's 
 Supper,' Bicf. of Christian Antiquities under ' Agape,' and the Encyclo- 
 paedias of Herzog and of Welzer and Welte. 
 
 iv avOpuyirov (fxovg cl>6ey$dp,£Vov {v. 16). 
 
 The writer takes literally the narrative in Num. 22 ^^'^^ and em- 
 phasizes its miraculous character by thus paraphrasing the words in 
 V. 28 rjvoi^ev 6 ®eos to (TT6p.a t^s ovov. Are we bound to accept his 
 paraphrase? Our reasons for giving credit to the miraculous 
 narratives of the N.T. are (1) because, speaking generally, we believe 
 that we have in the N.T. a revelation of God and of His will towards 
 
202 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 men, made through the medium of His Son, who in His perfect goodness, 
 wisdom, and power, represents to men the perfection of His Father's 
 glory. We see signs of His goodness and wisdom shining through all 
 His words and works : we see the same goodness and wisdom, along 
 with some traces of His supernatural power, manifested in what we 
 call His miracles. Though to us now the evidence from miracles may 
 seem of small importance, as compared with the living energy of Christ 
 working in his disciples from the beginning up to the present day, yet 
 we find no difficulty in a supernatural Person acting in what seems 
 to us a supernatural way. As Bishop Butler has pointed out, we can 
 see the value of such action in calling attention to the message of 
 Christ, just as the forces of civilization now strike the chord of wonder 
 in the minds of the uncivilized, and prepare them to receive religious 
 teaching from the mouth of those whose superiority in knowledge has 
 been so unmistakably attested. Moreover, without miracles could 
 Christ have fully manifested what He was to the men of that genera- 
 tion 1 Above all, could He have brought immortality to light for the 
 men of all time, unless He, the pattern Man, had risen from the dead ? 
 (2) This a priori probability of miracles in the case of Jesus Christ is 
 met by evidence of their actual occurrence proceeding from contempor- 
 ary witnesses, who also record instances of miracles wrought by them- 
 selves or in their presence ; and it is confirmed by the rapid growth 
 of the Christian religion after the death of the Founder. With the 
 miracles of the O.T. the case is very different. The reports are rarely 
 contemporary. The chronicles in which they are imbedded are some- 
 times inconsistent and erroneous. Some accounts, such as that of the 
 sun and moon standing still at Joshua's command, seem due to a 
 misunderstanding of poetical hyperbole : others have little or no 
 moral significance, as many of the miracles of Elisha, which 'are 
 rather of the nature of Jewish Haggadoth than of sober history.' ^ 
 That the story of which the text treats belongs to that class of O.T. 
 miracles which are not to be taken literally appears, I think, from the 
 narrative in the Book of Numbers itself. 
 
 Is it conceivable that, if a human voice had really proceeded from 
 the mouth of the ass, Balaam could have shown no surprise, but just 
 gone on talking with the ass, as though it had been one of his servants 1 
 The true interpretation is, I think, suggested by what we are told as to 
 the idiosyncrasy of Balaam. He describes himself (243') as ' the man 
 whose eye was closed, who hears the words of God, and sees the vision 
 of the Almighty, falling down, and having his eyes open,' i.e. as one 
 blind to outer things but capable of hearing and seeing things which 
 cannot be seen or heard by others. When, therefore, we read that 
 Balaam saw the angel of the Lord standing in the way with his sword 
 drawn, we need not suppose the writer to -mean that this was an 
 objective appearance of an angel. Balaam himself did not see it at 
 first. So it was with Saul on the way to Damascus. Those who were 
 with him were conscious of a sudden light, but he alone heard the 
 
 1 See Dr. J. H. Bernard's article on ' Miracles ' in Hastings' D. of B. 
 
II 16] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 203 
 
 voice and saw the vision. Similarly we should naturally infer that the 
 speech of the ass was only audible to the prophet's ears. It is 
 evident that we are meant to conceive of Balaam as one who was 
 wonderfully sensitive to spiritual influences. All nature was full of 
 visions and voices to him. He was setting out on his journey with a 
 conscience ill at ease, knowing that he was tempting God, but trying to 
 quiet his scruples with the resolution that, in any case, he would only 
 speak the words which God should put into his mouth. Nevertheless 
 he is afraid that God may still interfere and prevent him from 
 receiving the rewards on which his heart was set. It is this fear which 
 makes him so irritable when the quiet beast, on which he had so long 
 . ridden, suddenly starts aside and leaves the road. It is his own 
 conscience, as we should call it, i.e. it is the still small voice of God 
 within, that speaks to him in the complaints of the ass. His passion 
 answers at first in threats to kill it ; but more and more he feels that it 
 cannot be mere natural impulse which makes the animal turn away so 
 obstinately. It is something more, something deeper : it is that awful 
 power from which he is now seeking to escape, but which he was daring 
 to make use of to serve his own avarice and ambition. 
 
 There is a strange depth of meaning in the appealing eye of an 
 illtreated animal. It is an appeal, in the first place, to whatever 
 remnant of pity and generosity may still survive in the heart of the 
 man who illtreats it ; but it is an appeal, in the second place, to the 
 justice of the God who made them both, a cry of which we may be 
 sure that it has entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth. When 
 animals are put to unnecessary suffering, either in the shambles or as 
 beasts of burden, or in the interest of science or sport, or for any other 
 reason, cases are sure to arise in which we may justly apply the words 
 of our Epistle, and say of such poor tortured creatures that with their 
 dying gaze, no less clearly than if they had spoken with man's voice, 
 they forbade the madness of their torturers. 
 
 The belief in a kind of second sight in animals is widely spread, 
 originating probably in their liability to sudden, unaccountable panics : 
 compare Homer Od. xvi. 160 f., where Athene, invisible to Telemachus, 
 is visible to Odysseus and the dogs, /cat p ovk vXdovro, Kw^rjO/xm 8' 
 irepuicre Sia a-Ta6.iJ.oZo (fio^rjOev. Other examples are given in Tyler's 
 Primitive CuUv/re, vol. ii. p. 196. There are also famous stories of 
 talking animals, as that of Xanthus, the horse of Achilles, who was 
 made vocal by Hera, and predicted the coming fate of his master 
 (Homer 11. xix. 400 f.). See Wetstein's note on the text. 
 
 On the story of Balaam generally, see Dr. Lock's excellent sermon in 
 Journal of Theological Studies for Jan. 1901, where he gives Maurice's 
 view of Balaam's character in the words : ' He is the heathen seer to 
 whom God really speaks, and who yet becomes a false prophet, 
 because he has been ruined by the sense of his own strange power of 
 insight, which he has tried to strengthen by charms and divinations, 
 until the spiritual has become unreal to him, and material things have 
 grown to be of the strongest attraction. So God strives to educate him 
 by permitting him to feel the effects of his own self-will, by lifting him 
 
204 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETEE 
 
 out of himself by the sight of a, righteous nation ; yet he falls back, and 
 his language is the utterance of a melancholy spirit, conscious that he 
 is not true to himself.' ^ Dr. Lock points to Simon Magus as the New 
 Testament counterpart of Balaam ; ' He too is a soothsayer, he too one 
 to whom they all gave heed from the least to the greatest, attracted by 
 a higher religion, with a" heart not right with God ,but bent on avarice ; 
 if tradition may be trusted, falling back from the highest that he sees, 
 and becoming a source of danger and corruption to true believers.' He 
 notes that ' the venal character of the soothsayer and the rewards of 
 divination offered to him find a parallel in the Greek fiAvTK, so often 
 denounced in the Greek tragedians.' Speaking of the remonstrance of 
 the ass, Dr. Lock says, ' With the exception of the speech of the serpent 
 in Genesis, this is the only incident in the Bible in which an animal is 
 made to speak, and this incident occurs when ... we get a glimpse into 
 Gentile religions. We are in the region of folk-lore that abounds in 
 animal speech : we are in the region again of auguries and auspices, in 
 which God was supposed to reveal His will through the cries or move- 
 ments of animals, the animal being supposed to know what He tells to 
 man ... It is the prophet who is accustomed to go out to meet the bird- 
 omens, £is awdvTriaw Tois olmvols (xxiv. i.), to whom an ass speaks.' 
 
 Modem criticism distinguishes three main sources of the narrative : 
 the Elohistic, according to which Balaam is a selfish, grasping man, 
 coveting the rewards of Balak, and only restrained from taking them 
 by sordid fear of God, yet trying by every means to cajole God into 
 changing his mind ; the Jehovistic, in which Balaam acts up to his 
 light with perfect consistency and is loyal to Jehovah ; the Priestly, in 
 which he is the Midianite soothsayer, the wicked counsellor who 
 persuaded his people to seduce the Israelites by means of immoral 
 rites : ^ and some have been disposed to see in the existing narrative 
 simply an amalgamation of the doings of three dififerent persons. 
 Whatever may have been the earlier forms of the story, its inspiration, 
 that is its ethical and religious significance, is due to the writer who 
 combined them together and gave them their present shape. The 
 surpassing grandeur and interest of the story of Balaam consists 
 just in its combination of these several elements, in its faithful 
 picture of the downfall of the prophet or man of genius in its 
 three stages, the first, that in which his only care is ' not to be 
 disobedient to the heavenly vision,' but simply to deliver the 
 message entrusted to him ; the second, that in which, as recognition 
 and influence increase, he begins to think of himseli as something 
 apart from, and superior to, his message, and finally feels the message 
 to be a hindrance in the way of his obtaining the position due to him ; 
 the third, that in which enthusiasm has passed into cynicism, the lost 
 leader has come to hate the cause he once upheld, and is ready to use 
 the vilest means to undermine and destroy it. The downfall is most 
 
 '■ See Maurice, The Old Testament, Serm. XII. 
 
 '^ See Look, I.e. p. 163, and the article on ' Balaam ' in Hastings' D. of B. ; also 
 J. A. Bewer on the 'Literary Problems of the Balaam Story' in the American 
 Jmmud of Theology for 1905, pp. 238-262, 
 
II 16-III 4] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 205 
 
 conspicuous in the case of the prophet, but the danger threatens all 
 who are conscious of the dying away of youthful aspirations and enthu- 
 siasms under the pressure of the cares of this world ; above all it is a 
 warning to those — writers, speakers, politicians, philanthropists, what- 
 ever they may be — who claim to lead the way in promoting the 
 onward progress of humanity. 
 
 Thk Mischief caused by the Libertines {w. 17-22). 
 Profession without performance, preaching without doing, are 
 like wells with no water or mists dispersed hy the wind. For such 
 men the darkest future is reserved. With their emjpty boasts they 
 allure through their lusts, hy fleshly indulgences, those who were just 
 escaping from the life of heathendom. Promising freedom to others, 
 they are themselves slaves of corruption, since each man is enslaved to 
 that by which he is overcome. For if, after having escaped from the 
 polhdiovs of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and 
 Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome 
 by them, their last state has become worse than the first. It would 
 have been better for them never to have been acquainted with the way 
 of righteousness than, after having made acquaintance with it, to 
 turn back from the holy command once delivered to them. In their 
 case has been realised the truth of the proverb, ' A dog returns to its 
 vomit, and a sow, after washing, to its wallowing in the mire.' 
 
 WARNINGS OF THE SPREAD OP UNBELIEF IN THE 
 LAST DAYS, AND FINAL EXHORTATION (Ch. III). 
 
 Prophets and Apostles have warned us that the delay in the 
 
 Lord's appearance would lead men to dent His coming 
 
 altogether {w. 1-4). 
 
 This, my beloved, is my second letter to you. In this, as in the 
 former, I call upon you honestly to reflect on the predictions of the 
 holy prophets and on the command of the lord and Saviour which 
 was delivered to you by your missionaries, especially bearing in mind 
 their warning that in the last days scoffers would come with their 
 scoffing inquiries, following their own lusts, and saying ' Where is 
 the promise of His coming t The fathers have fallen asleep, and all 
 goes on as it was from the beginning of time.' 
 
 Kara ras tStas hnOv/jiCai avrSiv Tropevofi.evoL (v. 3). 
 
 As in the days before the flood and before the destruction of Sodom, 
 in spite of the warnings of Noah and Lot, Lk. IT^^'^". 
 
206 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 ■Trov icTTiv rj hrayyiXta. t^s irapceviriai avTov ; (v. 4). 
 
 The writer may have had in his mind such passages as Isa. 5^^ (Woe 
 unto them that say) Let him make speed and hasten his work, that we 
 may see it : and let the counsel of the Holy One of Israel draw nigh 
 and come, that we may know it; Jer. 17^^ Behold they say unto me 
 Where is the word of the Lord ? let it come now ; Ezek. 1 2^^, What is 
 that proverb ye have in the land of Israel, saying, the days are pro- 
 longed, and every vision faileth? ib. 12^, Behold they of the house of 
 Israel say The vision that he seeth is for many days to come, and he 
 prophesieth of times that are far off. St. Jude ascribes the warning 
 against scoffers not to prophets as here, but to the spoken words of the 
 Apostles {v. 18 iXeyov). What is the command of the Saviour here 
 referred to ? Perhaps such passages as Mt. 24*^, Watch therefore, for 
 ye know not on what day your Lord cometh, ih. 25^*, which we find 
 repeated in 1 Th. 52-i» by St. Paul, and in Apoc. S^' *. 
 
 The Scoffers answered {vv. 5-10). 
 
 It is not true that the course of the world is unchanging. There 
 ioas a time when hempen and earth were not. They were called into 
 being by the Word of God: yet that very Word^ was the cause of their 
 destruction by means of the water which had been used in forming 
 them. As the old world was destroyed by water, so our present 
 heaven and earth are by the same Word treasured up for fire, being 
 reserved for that day when the ungodly sJmll be finally judged and 
 punished. And there is one thing, my beloved, which I would 
 especially ash you to remember, that m^easiores of time have relation to 
 man and not to God : one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, 
 and a thousand years as one day. It is not from indifference that Sis 
 coming is delayed, but from long-suffering patience, because He desires 
 that all without exception should be brought to repent. Nevertheless, 
 come it will, as a thief, that day of the Lord, in which the heavens 
 shall pass away with a roaring sound and the stars shall be dissolved 
 with glounng heat ; and the earth and all the works thereof shall be 
 burnt with fire [or ' nowhere found' or ' taken away']. 
 
 It is probably to this passage that the traditional idea of the Judg- 
 ment Day is mainly due, ' that dreadful day,' as Scott describes it, 
 
 ' When shrivelling like a parched scroll 
 The flaming heavens together roll.' 
 
 The experience of partial destructions by means of flood or volcanic 
 eruption naturally led men to look to these as the destined causes of a 
 
 ' Beading 5i' 8c for Si' Sc. 
 
Ill 4-10] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 207 
 
 universal destruction ; and since the repetition of a flood was under- 
 stood to be precluded by divine decree, it followed that the world must 
 be doomed to perish by fire. 
 
 Answer to the objection that no change is possible in the material 
 
 universe. 
 
 This objection is directed against the cosmical changes which were 
 supposed to be the necessary accompaniments of the Day of the Lord. 
 The scoffers, on the contrary, maintained the necessary stability of the 
 earth, borne witness to in such scriptures as Ps. 119^", 'Thou hast 
 established the earth and it abideth ' ; Eccl. 1*, ' One generation passeth 
 away and another generation cometh, but the earth abideth for ever.' 
 To this the writer replies that history affords a parallel case of the 
 transformation of the earth in the Deluge. Pew persons would now 
 admit the fact of a universal deluge, but geology and astronomy 
 afford much stronger proof of the transitory nature of the visible 
 universe, which our Lord asserts in the words 'Heaven and earth 
 shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away,' and St. Paul in 
 the words ' The things that we see are temporal, but the things which 
 are not seen are eternal,' and again, in 1 Cor. 7^^, -irapdyei to o-^^/ia rov 
 Koa-fiov TovTov ; ^ one great aim of Christianity being to enable us to 
 resist the tyranny of the senses, and so to ' endure as seeing Him 
 who is invisible,' looking back to the past and forward to the future. 
 
 The association therefore of great cosmical changes with the Coming 
 of Christ is no reason for denying the latter. If He comes to ' 
 establish on earth a reign of righteousness, peace, and happiness, 
 as the writer seems to suggest, this involves, as St. Paul tells us, 
 ' the deliverance of the Creation itself from the bondage of corruption 
 into the glory of the liberty of the children of God.' We are not 
 bound to take literally all the poetical imaginations with which this 
 idea was embellished by prophets and seers of the Old and New 
 Testaments, though they appear to be taken literally by our author. 
 For instance, we are not bound to believe that the lion shall eat straw 
 like the ox, that there shall be no more sun and no more sea, that the 
 heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the earth and all the 
 works that are therein shall be burnt up. It is enough for us to know 
 with St. John that ' though it is not yet manifested what we shall be, 
 yet we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is,' and a fortiori 
 to know that, while we are not informed as to the nature of our future 
 environment, yet it must be such as to satisfy all the longings, and 
 give scope for all the activities, of a perfected humanity. That the 
 
 ' As the authority of Scripture might thus be appealed to on either side of the 
 question of the permanence of the present world-system, so was it with the 
 authority of contemporary science. Philo (M. 2, p. 489) classifies opinions on this 
 subject under three heads : (1) that of Aristotle who held that the universe was 
 kyivriTov Koi avii\e8pov ; (2a) that of the Epicureans who held it to be yevrjrhv kb! 
 ^BttpT6y ; (26) that of the Stoics who held it to be (jtBapThs /coret Sm/«i<r/ir|(7ii', iiSios 
 S4 as regards its essence; (3) that of Plato who held it to be ytvifrbv koI 
 ov. 
 
208 THE SECOND EPISTLE OP ST. PETER 
 
 Kingdom of God is within us does not mean that it is not also to be 
 increasingly without us : that the divine judgment is going on within 
 and around us at every period in the world's history does not mean 
 that there shall not be a greater and more penetrating judgment in 
 which the thoughts of all hearts shall be revealed ; but we may believe 
 the latter without joining to it the belief in the great white throne and 
 the literal opening of the books. 
 
 There are many things which suggest that the outlook on creation 
 will be very different, when the natural is exchanged for the spiritual 
 body. If we may argue from what we are told of our Lord after His 
 resurrection, matter will no longer be an obstruction to our freedom 
 of movement; and our intercourse with other rational beings will 
 probably be more under our own control, less dominated by proximity 
 in space than at present.^ There seems also to be no reason why we 
 should then be limited to the present channels of communication 
 with the external world ; why we may not have new senses which will 
 give us an entirely new conception of material objects. Even now 
 philosophers are telling us that what we call matter may have a con- 
 stitution utterly unlike the prevalent conception of it, and that our 
 knowledge of reality is so far illusory. ^ Thus a new outlook and new 
 knowledge may bring us into connexion with what might fairly be 
 called a new heaven and earth, looking at it merely from the material 
 point of view. 
 
 The guesses of modem science present a curious contrast to those 
 of the ancient naturalists. Pliny (N.H. ii. 107), after recounting the 
 various sources of flame which surround us on every side, exclaims 
 that ' it is the greatest of all wonders that the general conflagration 
 is deferred for a single day.' The accepted theory of yesterday 
 was, that cold, rather than heat, would be the cause of the destruc- 
 tion of life throughout the universe, since it is the tendency of 
 all other forms of energy to change into the form called Heat, which 
 itself gets lost by radiation into space. There being no known cause 
 which could make up for this constant loss of heat from the sun, the 
 radiating centre of our solar system, it was inferred that the life which 
 depends upon heat must gradually disappear from our earth.* To-day 
 
 1 So -Sir Oliver Lodge {Sibbert Journal for Jan. 1906, p. 322) says: 'Present 
 human bodies bring us into contact with . . . people in whom perchaiice we take 
 no interest. Hereafter our acquaintanceship may be limited to those with whom 
 we are linked by ties of affinity or affection, the mode of communication being 
 of a more sympathetic or telepathic character, and less physical, than now.' 
 
 ^ See Balfour's Address to the Biitish Association, contained in Essays and 
 Addresses, p. 406, ed. 3. ' The atom is now no more than the relatively vast 
 theatre of operations in which minute monads perform their orderly evolutions ; 
 while the monads themselves are not regarded as units of matter, but as units of 
 electricity, so that matter is not merely explained, but explained away.' 
 
 ' ' Follow out the theory to its obvious conclusion, and it becomes plain that 
 the stars now visibly incandescent are those in mid-joumey between the nebulae 
 from which they sprang and the frozen darkness to which they are predestined. 
 At the temperature of interstellar space their constituent elements would be 
 solid and inert ; chemical and molecular movement would be alike imnossible.'— 
 Balfour, p. 396. 
 
Ill 5-10] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 209 
 
 it seems likely that this hypothesis -will have to be considerably 
 modified in consequence of the recognition of the stores of energy in 
 the chemical elements, and of the varieties of radiant energy to which 
 attention has been prominently directed by the discovery of radium. 
 
 Moreover the history of scientific research supplies fresh evidence 
 for the possible conflagration of our planet, in the incandescence and 
 subsequent disappearance of what are known as temporary stars, such 
 as the famous star observed by Tycho Brahe in 1572, whether these 
 phenomena are caused by internal disturbance or by colhsion with 
 other bodies travelUng through space. And the possibility of such 
 collision is confirmed by the fact that many of the stars are now known 
 to be moving in difierent directions with enormous velocity, and that 
 the earth is frequently visited by meteorites, which come from the 
 unknown regions of space, and chance to cross its path.i 
 
 It is remarkable that one of the supposed consequences of the 
 Second Coming, which plays an important part in the Apocalypse 
 and which had the greatest vogue in the first three centuries, viz. the 
 Millennium, is not distinctly named by our author, though he quotes (or 
 provides) the text on which the belief is founded by Barnabas, Justin, 
 Irenaeus, and other early writers. 
 
 Answer to the objection that, as the promise of the Second Coming 
 has not yet been fufilled, there is no ground for eoopecting if in 
 
 The promise was made that ' this generation shall not pass away till 
 all be fuIfiUed,' or ' till the Son of Man cometh in His Kingdom ' ; yet 
 that first generation has passed away, and all is not fulfilled. Some 
 have answered this objection by a reference to the secondary fulfilments 
 of prophecy. Our Lord's discourse, related in Matt. 24, was elicited 
 by the double question, ' When shall these things be ' (viz. the destruc- 
 tion of the temple, of which he had just spoken), ' and what shall be 
 the sign of thy coming and of the end of the world.' A portion, no 
 doubt, of the prophecy was fulfilled in the siege and capture of Jeru- 
 salem by Titus, which was in a very true sense the crvvTeXeia tov aiSivoi. 
 
 In Bishop Westcott's words,^ 'The Apostles looked for Christ, and 
 Christ came most truly in the life-time of St. John. He founded His 
 immovable kingdom. He gathered before Him, seated upon the throne 
 of His glory, the nations of the earth, old and new, and passed 
 sentence upon them. He judged in that shaking of earth and heaven 
 most truly and most decisively the living and the dead. He established 
 fresh foundations for society and a fresh standard of individual worth 
 . . . The form of His Coming, His Coming to judgment, at that crisis, 
 is a lesson for all time . . . "We see in that Coming the type and promise 
 
 ' I have to thank Professors P. Faller and G. D. Liveing for kindly revising 
 the above paragraphs, in which I have ventured to touch on questions belonging 
 to natural science. 
 
 2 Historic Faith, pp. 90 foil. 
 
210 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST, PETER 
 
 of other Comings through the long ages, tiH the earthly life of humanity 
 is closed. We see in it the signs of a divine Presence -which is laid 
 open in the great crises of social movement. We see in it the as- 
 surance that the world is not left unvisited by Him Who died for it; 
 and we take courage at the sight . . . The wider range of our vision 
 enables us now to recognize these manifold Comings of Christ already 
 accomplished, and we may be most thankful for such teachings of ex- 
 perience, but we do not rest in them . . . We believe that Christ has 
 not yet revealed the fulness of His power or uttered the last voice of 
 His judgment . . . This aspect of Christ's Coming, the trustful and 
 reverent recognition of His manifestations in history and in society, is 
 of the highest moment to us now . . . The reality and the meaning 
 of these Comings are clear to faith, but like the Presence of Christ 
 Himself they are hidden from the world. None but behevers saw the 
 Risen Christ during the forty days: none but believers see Christ in 
 the great changes of human affairs. But beyond all these preliminary 
 Comings there is a day when every eye shall see Him, and they also 
 which pierced Him. In that Coming, that Manifestation, that Pre- 
 sence, the first Coming on earth and the later Comings in history 
 shall be shown in their full import. Then all things, our actions and 
 ourselves, shall be seen as they are, seen by ourselves and seen by 
 others. Then the whole course of life, the life of creation, of himianity, 
 of men, will be laid open, and that vision will be a Judgment beyond 
 controversy and beyond appeal.' 
 
 Our author takes a different line. Whether he wrote before, or 
 after, the fall of Jerusalem, it is certain that this event was not marked 
 by the literal fulfilment of Mt. 24^^, predicting that the sun and moon 
 should withhold their light and that the stars should fall from heaven. 
 In his view these are signs which prognosticate the Second Coming. 
 Later interpreters have explained these words to mean ' danger to the 
 fabric of human society ' ; ' the knowledge of Grod shall be obscured, 
 the truth nigh put out, worldly wisdom darkened, the Church system 
 abolished ' (AM.) ; but such allegorization was not to the taste of our 
 author. He takes each feature of prophecy in its most literal sense ; 
 and for his answer to the objection of the scoffers, he has recourse to 
 the declaration of the Psalmist that God is not bound by limitations 
 of time, one day being with Him as a thousand years. It can hardly 
 be said that this clears up the difficulty. The text was more appropriately 
 used by the Jewish rabbis to explain the non-fulfilment of the threat 
 ' In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die ' ; but even there 
 it involved a playing upon words, a sort of paying in one coin of what 
 was promised in another ; whereas the essence of good faith is that a 
 promise should be kept in the sense in which it was understood by 
 both parties. There is however a distinction to be made between a 
 threat of evil and a promise of good. To do more of good, or less of 
 evil, than is promised, is no breach of the covenant, but the prerogative 
 of a merciful and generous ruler ; and so we continually find it to be 
 in God's dealings declared to us in the O.T., as especially in the rebuke 
 to the prophet Jonah for his peevish resentment when the threat to 
 
Ill 5-10 PARAPHBASE AND COMMENTS 211 
 
 Nineveh was not carried out. This is partly the ground taken up in 
 what follows : it is for the good of man that the Day of Judgment has 
 been deferred by the long-suffering of God, in order to extend to all 
 the opportunity for repentance. It also provided a motive to stimu- 
 late the zeal of believers, whose part it was to hasten the day of God 
 by spreading the Good News to all {v. 12). But this does not make the 
 reference to the Divine timelessneas inappropriate here. It is intro- 
 duced as a corrective to the impatience and hastiness of men. When 
 we complain, as we naturally do, of the slow pace of improvement, of 
 the delay in the establishment of the reign of righteousness and peace, 
 to which we are taught to look forward as the Kingdom of God, the time 
 when His will shall be done, as in heaven, so in earth, — it may be well 
 to call to mind the deliberateness of His work in bringing the material 
 world to the state in which we now find it, and the long postponement 
 of the discoveries which have so changed the aspect of our modern 
 life. As these have been reserved for the present age in reward for 
 the untiring work of precediiig generations, so it may perhaps be with 
 regard to moral and religious discoveries, which may reward the work of 
 those who by diligent use of the talents committed to them, by patient 
 doing of the Father's will, so far as it has already been made known to 
 them, above all by attentive listening to the whispers of the Spirit of 
 Christ within them, may be enabled to hasten the coming of a new Day 
 of God. To such men the Presence within is even now sufficient evidence 
 of that Presence without, which they look forward to beholding 'face to 
 face ' when they have ' crossed the bar.' It is to the power of this 
 iPresence within that our author testifies, when he says that grace and 
 peace are multiplied by the e7rtyv<a<Tis of the Lord, land of which Christ 
 Himself affirms that ' this is life eternal, to know thee and Jesus 
 Christ whom thou hast sent.' 
 
 Another point which enters into the consideration of this question 
 of the Second Coming is the fact that, in many respects, the day of 
 deaith is, for each individual, equivalent to the day of God.^ It removes 
 him out of the sphere of illusion into the sphere of reality. Judgment 
 is passed upon the whole of the earthly life. The environment of the 
 soul is altogether new. For the sensualist, the covetous, the over- 
 bearing, the selfish, the worldling, as well as for the believer, there 
 is a new heaven and a new earth, perhaps the very opposite of what 
 he had pictured to himself before. Thus each man is made to stand 
 before the Judgment-seat of God, not because Christ has shown 
 Himself in glory upon earth, but because we are one by one called to 
 behold Him as our judge in the unseen world. 
 
 1 ' How this last Coming of Christ to judgment shall be accomplished, which 
 reveals the world to itself, we know not, and it is idle to speculate. But for each 
 one of us death is its symbol. For each one of us that solemn coming, which 
 seals our earthly work, is in a most real sense the vision of God, instantaneous 
 and age-long, the vision, in His light, of ourselves.' — Westcott, p. 97. 
 
 P 2 
 
212 THE SECOND EPISTLE OF ST. PETER 
 
 Final Exhortation (w. 11-18). 
 How Christians should be affected by the thought of the 
 
 APPROACHING JUDGMENT (w. 11-18). 
 
 Since, then, all that we see around us is thus in process of dissolu- 
 tion, what sort of persons should you show yourselves to he, as you 
 look forward to and hasten the coming of the Day of God, in all holy 
 and pious living — that great day which will bring about the dissolution 
 of the heavens by fire, and the melting of the stars with glowing heat. 
 But we, according to His promise, look forward to new heavens and a 
 new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness. Wherefore, my beloved, as 
 yaw look forward to these things, do your best that you may be found 
 by Him spotless and unblemished in peace, and count that the long- 
 suffering of our Lord is salvation, as our beloved brother Paul also 
 wrote to you, according to the wisdom given to him, as in all his 
 epistles, where he touches on these matters. [I say this to you, for] / 
 do not mean that his instructions are always suited to the unlearned and 
 unstable, seeing that there are some things in them hard to be under- 
 stood, which sueh men distort, as they do also the other scriptures, to their 
 own destruction. Having been thus forewarned, do you, my beloved, 
 stand on your guard, that you may not fall away from your own 
 steadfastness through the evil example of the rebellious ; but grow in 
 grace and in knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To 
 Him be glory both in this earthly life and in the day of eternity. 
 
 (TTrtvSovTas T^v Trapovtriav {v. 12). 
 
 In the explanatory notes special mention was made of two ways of 
 hastening the coming of the Day of God (1) by prayer, (2) by working 
 for the fulfilment of one of its conditions, viz. the preaching of the 
 Gospel through all the world. I think the last has sometimes been 
 interpreted too narrowly by missionaries, who have been dispirited by 
 apparent want of success and have endeavoured to console themselves 
 with the thought that, independently of any practical result of their 
 labours in the conversion of the heathen, the mere fact that the Grospel 
 had been preached for the first time in a new country sufficed to bring 
 nearer the fulfilment of prophecy. Ought we not however to under- 
 stand the text in a wider and more spiritual sense ? The coming of 
 the Day of God in its fullest sense means the coming of the Kingdom 
 of Heaven, first, like the leaven in the heart, and secondly, like the 
 
Ill 11-18] PARAPHRASE AND COMMENTS 213 
 
 mustard-seed in the world. Christians can hasten this coming by their 
 holiness of life, by their growth in grace and in the knowledge of our 
 Lord and Saviour, not as if these things were something apart from 
 the Coming, but because they in themselves constitute the coming of 
 the Kingdom of Heaven. 
 
 Additional Note on xark ■irepl<i>a(riv, pp. 172 f. 
 
 In his recent edition of Clement, Dr. Stahlin follows Dindorf with some 
 hesitation. He thinks vfpiippaais may mean ungertaue Bezeichnung, ungenaue 
 Kenntniss. "Doch bin ich nicht sicher ob ich richtig entschieden habe. In 
 meine Ausgabung (3. 59. 2) ist ' n-cpi^pairii' L' Druckfehler statt 'irfpupaaiv L'." 
 The word also occiu's in Str. v. p. 730 (the heathen acknowledge a divine Creator 
 and Govemour) rtk iiK6\ov9a rovrots, d /ijj kot7ixi9ei6I' vphs iifiav, oiK ^irurrtE/tEvoi, 
 aW' ouS' avT<!i', iiircos voe7<r8ai iti^vKcy, rhv 0e6v, n6voy Se, i>s ^St) )ra\\iiKis eip^Ka/iEC, 
 KOTtk irepiipatriv (Eus. Pr. Ev. xiii. 691 A itepitppaaai) 4\ij9?. Here the phrase (cori 
 ■Bsplipttaiv hXiiBri, meaning 'a correct general view,' is opposed to is yoeio-floi 
 ir6^vKey instead of to car' Myvatrtv, of which the former may be regarded as a 
 synonym. Dr. Gifford in his note on the passage of Eusebius cites for the 
 reading ireplippainv, Flut. Mor. 406 S Inreiravaf riiv nv$lav d 9ehs mpiKiavs fiiv 
 ovofi&Qovaatt rois avT^s iroXfras, o^io$6povs ' Se Tohs ^irapridras ^ . . iupeKiiv tuv 
 XpittTfi^v ^^V Koi y\tiaaffas Koi irepitppaaeis Koi iurdipetaVf and again, ib. 408 D, where 
 the obscurities of the oracles are condemned, irxdr-reiv irepi^pdrets koI y\<iaaas 
 iiri.yiiv. Here the word means simply a round-about, indirect way of speaking, 
 such as &ii) "RpaKKitfiti for Heracles. A better example is that from Origen (Sch. 
 in Psalm, iv, Lomm. xi. 431) liv Se Koreb irepippaaiv Adfiji ris rhv vthv avBpSjrav ivrl 
 ToS avSpiivov ' if one understands the phrase Son of Man simply as a circumlocu- 
 tion for man.' But surely this does not at all help us in the Clementine passages 
 adduced above, which distinguish between different kinds, not of expression, but 
 of knowledge. It is far more probable that the common phrase Karti inpl^patriv 
 took the place of the rare phrase Kori veplipaaiv. If we are to change the latter, 
 it would be better to read kot' iwlipaaiv ' on a surface view ' as in Polybius xiv. 
 2. 9 6 Sk Il6ir\tos KUTit liiv riiv Mipaaiv iiroici rh ■irapmr\ii<rtai' {sc. ^ifBiyms Sniye), 
 Kark Si t)iv ixfiBeiav iv Tois iJukXiara ircp! t&s irapairKEu&s Ifv, xxxi. S. 3 (Antiochus 
 showed great courtesy to the Roman ambassadors) Karb, riiv iirlpaaiv Kolirfp ov« 
 &v T$ irpoatpeiret rotovTOS, 
 
INDEX OF GEEEK WOEDS 
 
 a. First example of its use. 
 
 b. Post-Aristotelian. 
 
 c. No other example in the N. T. 
 
 d. Not used in the LXX. 
 
 e. Special signification. 
 
 b. ayakXiacris- J. 24 d/ica/^o'us iv aya\kid<Tei. 
 
 dyairaco: 2 P. 2. 15 (/.urOov dSiKtas ilp/airrfa-ev, J. 1 tois tv ®im iraTpX 
 
 r/yairrifievoK (pi. ■^yiacr/xei'ots), pp. 17 foil. 
 e. ayawq: 2 P. 1. r ev T^ <j>i\aSeX.tj)iq, rrfV ayairrfv iiri)(oprjyTi](raTe, 
 2. 13 aydirr/v (MSS. ■^Bovijv) ■^yovfu.evoi rqv ev ^/'■^pa Tpvfjarjv, hnpv- 
 ijiavTe'S iv Tats aTrarais avT&v {al. dyairais), J. 2 ayo/mij irXriOwOtCy), 
 ib. 21 iavTovg ev ayami ®eov njp^craTe, ib. 12 ev raw aydiraK u/tGv 
 o-iriXdSes, pp. X, cxcvi, 200. 
 dyoTTijTds: 2 P. 1. 17 o wds /^ou o dyairijTOS, 3. 16 o dyaTnjTos ■^/J.Siv 
 
 dSeX^ds, (voc.) dyaTnjTOt 2. P. 3. 1, 8, 14, 17, J. 3, 17, 20. 
 ayyeXos: 2 P. 2. 4 o ©eos dyyeXxov d/iaprijo-avToiv ovk et^Euraro, 2. ii 
 ayycXoi to-xiJt tai 8wa/x« /^ei'^oves ovtes, J. 6 dyyeAous Tovs /x^ 
 Ti]prj(raVTai TrjV iavriov dpxrjv. 
 
 ay id^m, see dyaTraca. 
 
 ay to s : 2 P. 1. 18 «v t5 opci r<3 dyiu, 1. 21 mb irvevfiaro? ayiov ^epo/ievoi 
 i\iX,r](rav dyioi {pi. airb) ®eov SvOpunroi, 2. 21 rrj^ irapaZoBe.ia-ri'i 
 avTovs dytas IvtoA'^Sj 3. 2 ma rS>v ayiiav 'TrpoxjyrjrSiv, 3. ll iroraifovi Sei 
 virdpxav VfiSs iv ayiais dvao-t-po^aJs, J. 14 tv dytais fwpidcriv avTov, 
 20 ei* TTvev/Jutn ayua Trpoirevxoiievoij ib. iiroiKoSo/wvvTei iavrov^ rjj 
 dyLayrdrri viiSiv iritrra, 3 (subst.) rg dira^ irapa^oOiia-r) Tots dytots Trio-Tct. 
 
 d y V o £ 0) : 2 P. 2. 12 «v oTs dyvooBtrti' jSXao-c^ij/ioSi/TES. 
 
 dyopafm: 2 P. 2. 1 tov dyapda-avra oiToiis Seo-iroTijv apvovfievot. 
 
 ay p 109: J. 13 KvfuiTa aypia ftiXqiffd^s. 
 
 'A 8 d /x : J. 14 l/38o/ios dsro 'ASa/t "Evolx. 
 
 d SeX^ds : 2 P. 1. 10 Sto /miWov, dScXf^oi, (firovSatTare, 3. 16 o dyomjTos 
 ■^//.(ov d8£X^os EEaSXos, J. 1 'Iou8as d8eX<^os 'laKm^ov. 
 
 d 8 I K e <o : 2 P. 2. 13 d8tKov/i£i'oi (a?. Ko/ttov/xevot) //.urObv d8tKias, p. Ixvi. 
 
 d 8 t K t a : 2 P. 2. 13 and I6 fnurOov dStKtW 
 
 d 8 t K o s : 2 P. 2. 9 dSt/covs ew ^/tepav Kpto-ems KoXa(;o/tei'ous T)/petv. 
 
 d£ t : 2 P. 1. 12 del i/iSs un-o/tt/ii^crKeu/. 
 
216 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 b.c. a 6 e a- fi o 9 : 2 P. 2. 7 t^s tS>v aOia-fimv avatTTpotj)^?, 3. n ry rSiv oBea-- 
 fuov TrXavjj. 
 
 b. e. a 6 c r i 0) : J . 8 /cv/oionyra adtTOvci. 
 
 AiyvTTTog: J. 5 \abv Ik yfji AtyiJirTou cruKras. 
 
 di8io$: J. 6 Sea/JLOLi aiSioK {nro ^oijiov Ter^pTjKev. 
 
 aipecru: 2F. 2.1 Traptura^owai alpeacK a/iraiXeias. 
 
 ai(r\vvri: J. 13 KvpuiTa &ypin 6aXd(ra~>)9 eirauppi^ovra Tas iavrlov 
 al(T\vvas. 
 
 aimv : 2 P. 2. IT oTs o ^otjjoi toB aKorovi [eh al&va] rerqpfip'ai, 3. 18 eis 
 fjfiepav auovo^, J. 13 oTs 6 ^oi^os ToC (TKOTOVi eis almva Ttrfipnfrai, 
 25 TTjOo iravTos ToC aui>vo$ koX vvv koI els irdvras Tovs almvas {(d. 
 Okdd. Tu>v aiutvuiv), 
 
 aimvLos' 2 P. 1. 11 rqi' auivLov PaariKsCav Tov KvpCov, J. 7 irvpbs 
 alaviov SiKijv, 21. els ^co^v aliaviov. 
 
 aKapvos- 2 P. 1. 8 ovSe dxapTrovs KaOi<TTij<nv els rrjv tov Kvpiov rjiuav 
 . . . imyviocriv, J. 12 SevBpa <j)6iV0TriDpaia. axapTra. 
 
 b. c. e. a K a T a TT a V (7 T o s : 2 P. 2. 14 6<l>6aX,p.ovs aKarwiravarcfos a/juipTuis 
 (al. aKaTairdaTovs), p. cxovii. 
 
 a K otj: 2 p. 2. 8 l3X,eiiiJui,Ti koI axog Sucaios. 
 
 a Kovia : 2 P. 1. 18 TavTTjv Trjv <l>tavr}V ■^[ieis r/Kovvafiev. 
 
 a Xrj 6 e la: 2 P. 1. I2ev rg irapovari aXr/Oeic/, iar^piyfLei'OVS, 2. 2 ij o8os 
 TTJs dXrjOeias pX.<w<j>i^iJ,rjdijtTeTai, 
 
 aX.1^ Orj s '• 2 P. 2. 22 TO T^s aXrjOovs irapoifitas. 
 
 d W d : 2 P. 1 , 16 ov (Tf(TO<liUTiJi,evois p/iOois iiaKoXovO'^cravTes, eyviopiauiiev, 
 aXk' eiroTrrai yevrjOevres, 21 ov Oekrifuiri avOpunrov rjvl\9ri irpo^rfTeia, 
 aXka VTTO irvevfiaros dyiov, 2. 4 ovk e^euraro, aXKJa. imp^fOKar, 5 apxaCav 
 Kd(rjuov OVK e<j>eia'aTO, aXXa Nrac e<j>v\a^ev, 3. 9 ov PpaJSvvei Kvpios, dXAA 
 liAj,Kpodvp.u, ib. firi PavX6p.ev6s rivas airo\ea-$au, dXXa iravras els /lerd- 
 voiav x'^P^o''^') J- 8 ayyekovs Toiis fi^ rqp^a-avras • ■ aXXa aTToXi- 
 TToi/Tas, 9 OVK eToX/xria-ev Kpiaar eireveyKeiv pXacr^fuas aXXa elirev, 
 pp. li, ci. 
 
 d \ o y o s : 2 P. 2. 12 ms dA.oya ^<Sa yeyewij/ieva ffnia-iKo. els SXwa-iv, J. 10 
 oo-a (fyvariKms its ra aXoya ^£a eiriaravrtu. 
 
 b. c. aXwa-is '■ 2 P. 2. 12 yeyewripJva els SXiacriv koI <ft6opav. 
 
 c. d. a/xaOi^S '• 2 P. 3. 16 01 a/iaOels Koi, aar^piKTOu 
 ap-aprdvio: 2 P. 2. 4 ayyekunr a/iapTTjtraVTav ouk e^euraro. 
 afiaprCa: 2 P. 1. 9 kT^Or/v Xafilov tov KoBapur/juiv t&v irdXai avrov 
 
 afiapTL&v {al. afmpTr]p.dTtav), 2. u o^da\/iovs oKaTairavarTOVS afULprias. 
 d/xaprcdXds: J. 15 a/uipTaiXol do-cjScts. 
 ap.e\ea>: 2 P. 1. 12 ovk ap.eki^a-a> kel vfias vwo/unvi^Kear {al. 
 
 p.eXX'qvut). 
 a p.'qv: 2 P. 3. 18 eis ■^p.epav almvos, afv^ {om, al.), J. 25 els tovs atfivos 
 
 [t5v alutvmv], afL-qv. 
 c. d. e. ap.u)fi7]Tos: 2 P. 3. 14 do^iXoi icoi &/iUa/iijToi. 
 c. e. a p. iD p, o s : J. 24 apjo/iovs cv ayaXXida-ei. 
 av ay KTq: J. s avdyKjjv etr)(0V ypdtj/ai. 
 dvaa-T pe<l>ia: 2 P. 2. 18 tovs h> TrXdvg dvaorpE^o/j.ei'ovs. 
 d V a o- T p o ^ ^ : 2 P. 2. 7 T^s Tmv d^tV/trnv ev a<rekyeiq. dvaorpo^s, 3. U 
 
 TTorairovs Set vn-dpxeiv v/xSs cv dytous dvaorrpo^ais. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 217 
 
 avaTckXto: 2P, 1. ig ems ov <f>uur^6po^ avanikri iv rais KapSiats v/mov. 
 
 av e[i OS' J. 12 Vi<l>i\.ai, virb avt/JiOiv Trapa^epo/tEvai. 
 
 av6p<Diros: 2P.1. 21oi yap Ofk'qfiaTi avdpunrov r)vi)^y) irpo^ifraa, ib. 
 
 a y I o I (a?. aTTo) ®iov SvOpioiroi, 2. 16 inro^vyiov a^wvov ev avOpwirov 
 
 <})iavg ^Oey^ajkevov, 3. 7 ets ^/lepav aTruXcias tSv dtrejSfiv ayOpumutv, J. 4 
 
 irapcio-ESvi/a'ai' rives S.v6pmiroi. 
 avojuo$:2P. 2. 8 tfiv)(i)v SiKaiav avo/iois epyois efiacrdvi^ev. 
 avT iXoy la : J. llTig avriXoytoi tou Kope dircoXovTO. 
 d V V S p o s : 2 P. 2. 17 oSrot eicriv Tn^yai oiwSpot, J. 12 vec^eXai avuSpoi. 
 arra^: J. 3 t^ airaf irapaSoOeiay rots dytots irtcTTei, 5 Kvpios OTra^ \aov 
 
 o-cio-os (readings differ, see pp. clxxxiii f.). 
 airaTT] : 2 P. 2. IS ivrpvtfiiovTK ev Tois d w a T a I s ouTfiv (aZ. dyairais, see 
 
 pp. cxcvi f.). 
 d7rep;i(o/iai: J. 7 aire\6ov(T<u ojrwro) (rapKos erepas. 
 d TT d : 2 P. 1 17 d'TTO T^s Sd^ijs (fls?. mo), 1 21 eXoXi^o-av dTro (al. ayiot) ©eoB 
 
 avOpwiroi, 3. 4 d<^' ijs yap oi irarepes cicoi/i^ftjerav, i6. dir' dp^s KTwreius, 
 
 p. Ixv, J. 14 ej8So/;lOS dTTO 'ASdp., 2S TOV djTO T^s o-opKos eOTriA.(l)p,£VOV 
 
 ;(iT5va. 
 c. d. aTToBiopi^ui: J. 19 ovToi eitrtv oi airoSiopi^ovres, p. clxxxvi. 
 c. d. e. airoBecr IS '• 2 P. 1. u raxivij iariv ^ dTrd^eo-is toO <rKqvis>fuxr6s 
 
 iwv (only found elsewhere in N.T. in 1 P. 3. 21). 
 aTToflv^o-Kw: J. 12 SevSpa Sis dTroOaf wra. 
 d'7roica\i;i/ris, pp. Ixxiv f . 
 
 diroXetTTw: J. 6 airoXvitovTas to iSiov o'lKifrripwiv. 
 aTT oXXv iLi: 2 P. 3. 6 6 KocTfuos vSari KaraKX-ucrflels airmXero, 3. 9 /X'q 
 
 ^ovXoji.evo'i Tivas diroketrOai, J. 6 tous /x^ irioreijcraVTas aTrtoXeo-ev, 11 Tfl 
 
 avTtkoyiq, rov Kope airolXoi'TO. 
 ti'jrdo-ToXos: 2 P. 1. 1 SoBXos koi oirdo-roXos 'I.X., 3. 2 /tvijcr^vai t^s 
 
 tSv ojrocTTdXtoi' vjuuv evToX'^s, J. 17 larqcrOr^e T(Sv prjfiATbiv tSsv 
 
 irpoeiprjuei/iov vtto tZv dirofTToXtav rov Kvpiov. 
 c. diro ff) €v y (a : c. gen. 2 P. 1.4 airo<j>vy6vres t^s ev hriOvixiq. (fiOopas, c. acc. 
 
 2. 18 SeXed^ouciv rovs dXiyus airo^evyovras rov% ev TrXdvy avacrrpii^o- 
 
 [levous, 2, 20 diro<^evydvres ra. [uaafJiaTa rov Kocrp-ov. 
 c. airrato-ros: J. 24 ^vXa^ai vpiSs airraioTovs. 
 a-TT m\c la: 2 P. 2. 1 aipeo-ets dircoXeias, ib. Ta\ivriv airutkeiav, 2. 3 ^ 
 
 dirwXeia avruv ov ward^ei, 3. 7 «is y)p.epav airmXtias rfiv axn^Siv 
 
 dvdpdnnav, 3. 16 irpos r^y (8iav airfiv aTTcaXeiav. 
 c. d p y e <ij : 2 P. 2. 3 oTs TO Kpipa tKiraXai ovk apiya, 
 dpyds: 2 P. 1.8 OVK dpyovs ovSe dxapTrovs KaOifTTqtnv. 
 dperi^ : 2 P. I.3 rov KoXecravros ■^(Jms iSiiji Sd^ Kai aperg (al. Sia Sd^s 
 
 K. dper^s), 1. 5 em^fopriyqiraTe iv r^ iriirrei v/iuv rqv aptrrjv, iv Sk vg 
 
 apery ri/v yvSxnv. 
 d,pveop,ai: 2 P. 2. 1 rov ayopdcravra avrovs SeoTrdnjv apvov/icvoi, J. 4 
 
 roi/ fwvov SeoTTonjv dpvov/iEvoi, p. 72. 
 a p IT a (; a) : J. 23 ovs Se fftoZ^ere ex irvpos dpTro^ovrcs. 
 •^PX^yys^os: J. 9 Mi;(a'^X 6 dp^dyyeXos. 
 a p X a r OS : 2 P. 2. 5 dp^atov Koafwv ovk e<^et(raT0. 
 d p X ^ : 2 P. 3. 4 air' <ipx?s KTtcreusj J. 6 ayyeXovs rovs /x'q rrfprjaravras rrp/ 
 
 iavriov dp)(^v. 
 
218 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 derive la: J. 16 iXiyicu Trepl iravTW rSiv lpy<ov' d(re^ela<i avrmv, 18 Kara. 
 
 c. cto-e/Seu: 2 P. 2. 6 £7ro'8ety/;ia fieXXovrav dae/Selv (<U. aorc^eo-iv) 
 TEdeiKbJS, J. 16 Twv epyuv dcre^eCas &v ricre^ijarav. 
 
 Tap€urcSvi]a 
 
 aiiapTiokol ao-e^Sas- , , 
 
 da-ikyeia: 2 P. 2. 2 iroWoi e^o/coXov^^wouo-tv awSv rais atrcAyctots, 
 
 2. 7 T^s tS>v dOeafioiV iv dtreXyua. dvacrrpo^'S, 2. 18 SeXeafoutriv 
 
 ao-eXyeiais, J. 4 t'^i/ toi) ®eoi) xaptTO fierarida/Te<s cis ao-eXyciav. 
 a (T TT t X o s : 2 P. 3. 14 ao'TTtA.oi Kat a/A<i)/«.ip"Oi. 
 d (T T r)p'- J. 13 d(Trep€'s -irXavrJTai. 
 a. c. a o-Tijpt K Tos; 2 P. 2. .14 SeXea^ovres i/fux^s ao-njptKTous, 3. 16 ot 
 
 a/JtaOiiS KOL &<TTT^ptKTOL. ^ 
 
 avOdSri^: 2 P. 2. 10 ToX/*ijTal avOdSen. 
 
 av^dvio: mtra/ns. 2 P. 3. is ait^dverc iv ^dpiri. 
 
 avTO's: ( = is) 2 P. 1. 17, 18, 2. 3, 8, 11, 12, is, 19 ikevOeplav awois eirayyeX- 
 Ao/ievot, 21 bis, 22, 3. 3, 6, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16 Ms ; (emphatic) is aurw ^ Sofa ; 
 (unusual order) 2. 2 l^aKoXouSijo-ovo-tv avToiv rais dercXyettus ; J. 7, 11, 
 14, 16 his, 16 6is, 24. ( = ipse) 2 P. 1. 5 Kat auTO toSto 8e, 2. 19 auroi 
 SovXot VTrdpxovTK. 6 a fi t d s, 2. P. 3. 7, see p. cxcix, ra avra Tav 
 TraOi^imTiDV, 1 P. 5. 9, p. xciv. 
 
 c. d. avxt^V P°^' 2 P. 1. 19 X.v)(yio <j>aivovTL iv avxf-ripii tottio, pp. cxciii f. 
 
 e. a ^ d ;8 o> s : J. 12 erui'ctiuxou/'iei'oi a(^d;8o)s (others connect it with what 
 follows b.^. eauTovis TTOifuaivovTci), 
 
 d^tav o<i: 2 P. 2. 16 vTTotyiyiov d<f>ayvov. 
 
 B a X a a jti : 2 P. 2. 15 e^aKoXoi/fl^o-avres rfj 68c3 Tou BaXaaju Tov 'Boa-op, J. 11 
 
 Tg Trkdvy tov BaXaa/x //.urOov i^e-xyBticrav. 
 jSatravi^o): 2 P. 2. s \j/vx^ Socaiav avdjuois epyois e/Sacravif sv. 
 /3 a <r I X e I a : 2 P. 1. U eis t^v aiuvtov ySacrtXetav roB leupiov. 
 jSc/Saios: 2 P. 1. 10 ^e^aiav vjjmv T'^v kX^ctiv Troieio-^at, 1. 19 ixPf'^ 
 
 /SejSaidrcpov tov ■7rpo<^y)TiK.ov Xdyov. 
 B £ <ip : 2 P. 2. 16 (aZ. Botfdp). 
 /8Xao-^ijjU.£0): 2 P. 2. 2 17 080s T-5s dXiydEtas pXaxr<jyriii,TQ6i^crerai, 2. 10 
 
 Sd^as oi Tplfi.ov(TLV jSXao-^iy/xoBvTes, 2. 12 ev oTs dyyooBtriv pXiaxr^ri- 
 
 fiovvTti, J. 8 Sd^as 8e j3Xa(r<l>r]iJ,ovariv, 10 d(ra /iicv ouk oKatriv j3Xoo"^ij- 
 
 /xoScriv. 
 /8Xao-^i;/xia: J. 9 ouk iroXfirjo-ev Kpc&iv iTrtvtyKetv pXa/r^fua?, p. 75. 
 j8 X d or 17 ju o f : 2 P. 2. 11 oi ^epoixTiv Kar air&v ^Xdir^i^juov Kptaiv. 
 c. d. j3X £ju,ju,a : 2 P. 2. s jSXc//./tari xai axo^ SiKaios, p. Ix. 
 c. j8 d p j8 o p o s : 2 P. 2. 22 vs Xotiora/j.Ei'iy eis rvXict/aov Pop^opani. 
 Bo (Top: 2 P. 2. 15 (a?. BEoip, see p. cxcviii). 
 ^ovXoiiai: 2 P. 3. 9 /x^ jSovXdjuEi'ds Ttvas AiroXEirfioi, J. 6 wo/iy^(rai 
 
 v/;ids ^ovXoiiai. 
 P paSvvm: 2P. 3.9o« jSpaSvvEi Kvpios t^s tirayyEXias. 
 c. a. PpaSvTTQi' 2 P. 3. 9 5s tives ^paSvnjra ^yoviToi. 
 
 y dp : 2 P. 1. 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 21 ; 2. 4, s, 18, 19, 20, 21 ; 3. 4. 6 ; J. 4. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 219 
 
 y €VV dm '. 2 P. 2. 12 us dXoya ^iSa ycytwyfixiva <j>V(TiKa eis aXwerti'. 
 
 y^ : 2 P. 3. 6 y^ £^ vSaTOS Koi Bi v8aT0i <ruve(rTUKra, 3. 7 ot 8k vvu ovpavol 
 
 Kat ^ y^, 3. 10 Koi yij koX to. ev avT^ epyoi 3. 13 yrjv Kawrjv 7rpoo-8oK5j«.ev, 
 
 J. 6 Xaov CK y^s AiyuTrrov o-ulo-as. 
 yivo/nai: 2P. 1.4 tva yevrjcrBe Oeias koivujvoi <j>vcrem's, 1. 16 eirdnrai 
 
 y£VJjd«VT«s T^s eKeivov /xeyaXeidnjTOs, 1. 20 irpo^i/rcia ypa^^s iSias 
 
 cirtXvcreus oil ylverai, 2. 1 iyevovro 8e xai xl/euBoirpofjiTJTai, 2. 20 yeyorei' 
 
 ouTois Tot OT^aTa ^(eijoova T&v irp(i)TO)i'. 
 yivo)o'Ka):2P. 1. 20 and 3. 3 toCto TrpuToi' yivtoiTKOVTes. 
 yvupi^d): 2 P. 1. 16 eyi/upitra/jiei' v/x.ti' t^v Swajuiv. 
 yvfio-ts: 2 P. 1. 5, 6 eTrt^opj/yijo-aTe ev Tjj aperjj T'^v yi/ffio-ii/, cv Se t^ 
 
 yvutrei t^v eyKpareua/, 3. 18 aifaveTC ei' yvoitrci ToC Kvpiov rijt,S>v. 
 
 b. c. yoyyvcTT^s: J. 16 yoyyutrrai jUE/x^ijuoipoi. 
 
 rdjuoppa: 2 P. 2. 6 ttoXek 2oSd//.(>>v xai Fojuoppas, J. 7 ais SoSo/Aa Kal 
 
 Top-oppa KoX ai irepi avras ttoXcis. 
 y patft-q: 2 P. 1. 20 iraira 7rpo^i}TE(a ypa<l>^i, 3. 16 oTpe/SXoCoriv As koi ras 
 
 Xotiras ypatfidi. 
 y p d<f>m : 2 P. 3. 1 SevTEpav fi/xiv ypdtjxa orwrToX^, 3. 15 IlavXos epyaij/iv 
 
 vfuv, J. 3 irScrav aTrouSijv iroio-u/iEvos ypd<JKiv viuv, ib. avdyicrjv ia-xpv 
 
 ypdxj/ai, vfiiv. 
 yvfuvd^ut: 2 P. 2. 14 KapSiav yEyu/Avao-fiEvrjv TrXEOVE^tas. 
 
 8 e' : 2 P. 1. 5 Kal auTo TovTo Si, ib. ev 8k rj apErg Tqv yvSunv {iinxopriy^ 
 o-are), 1. 6 <er, 1. 7 iis ; Se xai 1. 16, 2. i ; Se 1. 13, 2. 9, lo, 16, zo, 3. 7, 8, 
 10 bis, 13, 18 ; ovToi M 2. is ; J. ovroi Se' lo, 12, 16, 19 ; vfius Si 17, 20, 21 ; 
 8£ Ktti 14 ; p.EV — Se : a <rdpKa /lev . . . Kupumfra Se . . . Sofas 8e, 10 oo'a 
 juEV . . . ova Si, 22 f. ovs piv . . . ovs 8^ . . . ovs 8i ; Se 1, 5, 10, 24. 
 
 8 £ 1 : 2 p. 3. 11 iroTOTrois Sei wrap^ew VfjiS.^. 
 
 c. d. SeZy/na: J. 7 irpoKuvrai Sfiyp/x irupds. 
 
 8 E X £ a (I (d : 2 P. 2. 14 SEXEa^OVTES xfrVXW doTlJpiKTOVS, 2. 18 SEXEa^^OUCTlV iv 
 
 Eindv/uuus (rapieos- 
 BivBp ov: J. 12 8iv8pa tjiOivoTrapivd. 
 Sea- pioi: J. 6 Seo'/xois diSiois vtto ^d^ov rerqprrfKev. 
 Santo^Twoi, p. 26. 
 Seo-ttotjjs: 2 P. 2. 1 rav ayopdxravra auTous SEo-iroTijv apvovp-cvoi, J. 4 
 
 Tov jMvav BefriroTTjv koX Kvptov ■^p.Ssv 'I.X. apvovp-evoi. 
 8£VTEpos:2F. 3. 1 ravnyv ijSij SEVTfpav u/aii' ypd<f)<o ettio-toX^v, J. 5 to 
 
 SEVTEpov Tovs p.^ TTurrevaavTas &irt!>\tafv. 
 8i}Xd(i>: 2F. 1. 14 Kvpios eSj^Xciktev /;io(. 
 S I a : c, ^en. 2 P. 1. 3 81a r^s CTriyvcao-Etus roi) KaXEO'avros ^/<ias Sia Sd^s {(d- 
 
 li8df So^y, 1. 4 81' 0)1/ rarijuia lirayyEXjuara SfSupiyrat, i&. 4 Tva 8t& 
 
 TOVTUV yivr/crOe Oeia^ kowidvoI KJavaewi, 3. 5 y5 Jf SSaTOS tat 81' uSaTos 
 
 avvftfrmfa, 3. 6 81' wv (ov 1) 6 rdrE Koap-os dn-cuXETo, pp. Ixv, Ixxxii, 
 
 J. 25 81a 'LX. roS Kvpiov ripJSiv. 
 
 c. ace. 2 P. 2. 2 81' oSs 17 oSos t^s dXrjOeia^ /SXao-c^iy/wj^ijo-Erat, 3. 9 
 
 puutpo6vp.tt 81' vpMs {(d. E(s vjuas), 3. 12 St' ^v ovpavol XvOi^xTovTai. 
 e. SiaySoXos: J. oru Sia^dXm Biaxpivoixevo^. 
 SiaKpii/w: J. »Tw8ia^dX(j> StaKpivd/Mvos, 22 ovs /uev EXcyxcTE Siaicpivo- 
 
 jtiEi'ovs (a^. Suueptvofjxvot). 
 
220 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 SiaXiyofiai'. J. 9 SieXeyeTO Trepl rov Muutreois (ToifuxTOS, 
 
 S I a ju. c V 0) : 2 P. 3. 4 TravTa o^tws Siaficvei air' dp;^s KTt(r4<i)S. 
 
 Sidvo la : 2P. 3. l rr/v elXiKpivrj Sidvoiav, 145. 
 
 b. c. d. S 1 a V y a ([ (0 : 2 P. 1. 19 lus ov rjfiipa, Siavydtrig. 
 
 S iSot fii : 2 P. 3. 16 Kara ttiv SoOeicrav avTio iTO<j>Lav. 
 
 Sieyeipat: 2 P. 1. 13 SuyeipEiv vfJi.S.9 iv wo/tv^oret, 3. 1 Sieyet/io) vfuav iv 
 vrcoiarqiTti rrpr elkiKpivij SidvoMV. 
 
 SiKaios: 2 P. 1. 18 Sixaiov fiyovpai Sieyeipeiv v/icii, 2. 7 StKaiov Ao)T 
 ipva-aro, 2. 8 p\.ip.iw,Ti koX axog [o] Sikacos lyKaToiKW ev avrois 
 il/v)(Tjy SiKaiav i^acrdvi^tv. 
 
 SLKaioavvrj: 2P. Llei/ ScKcuocrvvy t. ®eov ■^p.lov Kol crtsT^pos 'I.X. 
 p. i, 2. 6 Nfie 8iKaiocn;|/i7S Kr/pvKa, 2. 21 T'^v oSoi' t^s Sixawcrvirqi, 
 3, 13 Kaivovs ovpacoiis , . . ev ols SucaioavvTj KaroiKci, 181. 
 
 SiKT] : J. 7 irvpos aiiovtou SticT^i' we^^outrat. 
 
 S ( o : 2 P. 1. 10 Sib iJ,3X\ov, aBek<j)Oi, crn-oi;Sa<raT£, 1. 12 Sio yucWijiro} dei v/iSis 
 virofJUiairitrKeai, 3. 14 8td, dyattryroC, fnrovSdaaTe. 
 
 8 1 s : J. 12 SivSpa 8is diro^avovro. 
 
 Sofa: 2 P. 1. 3 Tol KoXeoravTos iJ/iSs iSia 8o^ Kai dpci-g, 1. 17 XaPirv 
 irapa ®eov irarpoi So^av, ib. tjtmv^i h'e)(6ti(Tr}^ roiairSe inro Trjs 
 /*cyaA.o7rpe7roSs 86$rji, 2. lo 8ofas ou Tpip-ovtriv jSAao-t^iy/tovvrcs, 3. 18 
 auT<p ^ 8ofa, J. 8 8ofas 8e pXaa-^Tiiunicnv, 24 KaT£V<inr(Ov T^s So^s 
 avTov, 26 0c^ 8ofa //.eyaXaicrvvq Kpdroi koI i^ovo'ia. 
 
 8oi)\os: 2 P. 1. 1 8ovA.os koI dirocTToXos 'Ii/o-oS XpurroS, p. 17, 2. 19 SovAoi 
 wdp^oi/TEs TTJv ffiOopcii ; J. 1 'lovSai 'li](rov TLpUTTOv 8oSA,os. 
 
 Sov\6<a : 2 P. 2. 19 ^ ydp Tts ^TTJ/Tat rovTia [koi] 8£8ovA.(i)ra(. 
 
 S V V a /;i a I : J. 24 ™ Sui'aju.ei'a) (fivXdiai ipmis. 
 
 Svca/^is: 2 P. 1.3 TToVra ij/iiv t^s Oetas Swdfuems airov SeSmprjfievtjg, 
 
 1. 16 eyvmpiara/jLev v/uv rrjv rov Kvpiov ■^p.Zv Svvafiiv Koi irapmnriav, 
 
 2. 11 ayyeXot icrxvi koi Swdfjuei /leC^oves ovres. 
 
 b. c. a. ovavoTjTos. 2 P. 3. I6 ev ats etrTtv Svavrnird tivo. 
 Sii>piop,ai: 2 P. 1. 3 irdvTtt ^/tti' t^s Oeiai Swdfixats ScSca/nj/tci^s, 
 
 1. 4 TO Ti'/;ua eirayyiXfiara SeSmfytjrai. 
 
 iavrov: 2 P. 2. 1 eTrdyovres eaurois Ta;(iv^v dn-mXcuiv, "J. 6 ^•^ trip'q<ravTas 
 T7IV iavrlov dpx^v, 12 d^ojScas eodtous iroi/;ian'ovTe$, IS iira<f>pl^0VTa ras 
 eaifrfiv aio-p^i/os, 18 Kara ras eavT&v hrtdvfiia^, 19 01 aToSiopi^ovTES 
 iavTovi (al. om. iavTovti), 20 EiroiKoSo/xoiWcs cavrovs, 21 lavTOvs ev 
 dydirrj ®eov T7]pr}a-are. 
 
 €/38ojUos: J. 14 e^8o/;ios diro 'A8a/A 'Ecd>Xj P- vii. 
 
 c. d. £ y K a T o t K £ <i) : (aZ. £i/KaroiK£a>) 2 P.. 2. 8 cyKaroiKuv £v avrois. 
 
 iy Kpareia: 2 P. 1. 6 (£irtxo/3i7y^<roT£) £V Tg yvoio-ei T^v cyKpdr£(av, ev 
 
 Se T^ eyKpareCq, ttjv viro/iov^v. 
 Eyu: 2 P. 1. 17 £?s 8v eyu euSoki/to, (/*ov) 2 P. 1. u 17 dird^EO-ts tou 
 
 o-(o;v<o/iaTds /tou, 1. 17 o vids /*ov o dyaTnjrds, (/-toi) 2 P. 1. u X/dkttos 
 
 eSijXuo'ev /iOt. 
 (^/^Eis) : 2 P. 1. 18 ravrrjv t^v <^(ov^v ij/teis ^Kowraiitv, (^juSs) 2 P. 1. s 
 
 To5 Ko\eo-avTos ^/iSs, 3. 9 fmKpoevp.fl eis ^/*os (oZ. v/iSs), (wSv) 
 
 2 P- !• 1 ToC ®eov ^/tuv, 1. 2, 8, 11, 14, 16, 3. is, 18 ToC KvpCov ■qpSiv, 
 
 2. 20 (al. om. ■^p.mv), 3. I6 S dyamp-os ■qpMv d8eX</>o's, J. 8 t?s koiv^s 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 221 
 
 ■q[i.wv (Tiav^plas, i Tov ®€ov i^fiSiv, ib. Kvpiov ^fmv, 17, 21, 25 tov kvpiov 
 ^fimv, ib. friatijpl ijfmv, (rnuv) 2 P. 1 . l Tots ttroTifiov ■^/uv Xa)(ova-t,v 
 irurriv, 1. 8 iraVTa ^/uv (al. vfiiv, see p. oxciii) t^s Otiai Wa/icus 
 SeSapT^fievrii, 1. 4 /liyurra -qiuv ScSujDijrat. 
 
 ei: 2 F. 2. 4 ei yap o ©eos dyyeA.o)v ovk e^Euraro, 2. 20 £t yap aTro^vyovrei 
 TO. fLmATiMTO. TOV Koorfiov, TOVTOis 8e TToXiv E/iTrXa/CEiTES ■qTTmvTal. 
 
 c ( 8 £ V a e, see o 7 S a. 
 
 EtXtKptv^s: 2 p. 3. 1 Trju eiXucpiv^ Stavouxv, 145. 
 
 cl/xt: 2 P. 1, 13 £1^' offov ilfil iv rovTif rm crKrp'u>[juiTi, 2 P. 1. 9 tv<^\os 
 £OTi p.T«i)jra£<ov, 1. 14 raxLVT^ iariv ■q aTroOea-K, 1. 17 oCtos £<rTtv 6 vios 
 /jtov, 3. 4 iroS EO-Ttv -^ eTrayyeXia; 3. 16 ev oTs ivTiv ^vcrvor/rd Tiva, 
 2 P. 2. 17 ouTOi Eitriv mjyai awSpoi, 3. 7 reOr/a'avpuriievoi elirCv, J. 12 
 ouToi £i«riv 01 (nn'Et)(o;(o«/t£Voi, 16 ovroi Eitrtv yoyyvo'Tai, 19 oBtoi Ettrti' oi 
 d7ro8(opi{|ovr£S — 2 P. 1. 18 ooiv a'uru ovtes ev t^ opEi, 2. U dyyEXoi 
 
 8tJvdp.£( /lEl^OCES OVTES 2 P. 2. 21 KpElTTOV ^V aUTOlS /Al? EITEyi'OJICEl'at 
 
 K.r.X., 3. 5 ovpavol ^<rav eKiraXai — 2 P. 2. l iv ifuv scrovrai i/teuSoSi- 
 
 SdcTKaXoi, J. 18 £<rovTai ip/iraiKTai. 
 tiirov: J. 9 dXAa ErirEv BTTiTt/i^crot <roi Kvpios. 
 Eip^vr;: 2 P. 1. 2 X'^P^^ u/tiv xai tlprprq TrkyjOvvOcir/, 3. 14 (TTroiiSdtraTE 
 
 dcririXoi EvpE^^vai ev Eip^vg, J. 2 IA.EOS £/iti/ Kal eipT^vrj koI ayairq 
 
 C(s: 2 P. 1. 8 dxapTrovs Kaflt'orijo-iv' eis t^v toB Kvpimi imyvuxnv, 1. 11 
 ^ £i(ro8os Eis r^v amviov /SaaiXaav, 1. 17 ek ov iyut EvSoKijcra, 2. 4 eis 
 KpuTiv ■nypoup.ECOus, 2. 9 ew ■^[lipav Kpicretas Tqpitv, 2. 12 ytyewr]fi.iva 
 Eis aXojtrtJ', 2. 22 £ts KvXicrjuov ^op^opov, 3. 7 irupt Ti/jpovfievoi eZs 
 riiiipav KpuT€(a<s, 3. 9 /juiKpoOviiei eis vjua;, i&. £15 /XErdvouiv ^'op^''''^^) 
 3. 18 aur^ ij Sdfo eis rjiiepav aitavos, J. 4 irpoyEypap./tei'oi £ts toBto, i6. 
 T^v TOV ®£oi) xdpiTa fttTaTidevTfi Ets dtTEXyEtai/, 6 eis Kpimv TtrripnfKev, IS 
 EIS ai<3va Tcn/jpriTai, 21 '7rpocrSe)(6iJt,(voi to eXeos tou Kvpuyv Ets ^<>>7]v, 
 25 Sofa . . eis Trdiras toiis aiSvas. 
 
 els: 2 P. 3. 8 EI' Se toBto /t^ Xov^avero) v/iSs, on p.ia ■^p.ipa irapa Kij|((d 
 dis x^'^"^ ^''^ '^'^^ X'^'" ^^ "^^ ■^p.epa fiia. 
 
 iiar oSo^i 2 P. 1. 11 ij eio-oSos eis r^i' aicoviov ^a<riXeiav. 
 
 £ K : 2 P. 1. 18 tjxav^v E^ ovpavov Ei/ex^eio-av, 2. 8 ■qp.ipav ef ■qp.ipai ^vxrjv 
 iPa(Ta.vi,i,€v, 2. 9 ek ■ireipacr[ii.ov pvea-6ai, 2. 21 vTrotrrpe^ai CK t^s dyi'as 
 EVToX^B, 3. 5 y^ E^ irSaTOB /tai 8i' uSaros (TWEo-rfio-a, J. 6 Xaov ek y^s 
 Alyvirfov crua-as, 23 ek irvpos dpTrd^oi'TES. 
 
 c. d. EKd( tote: 2 P. 1. 15 OTTO'uSdo'ii) 8e Kai fKouTTore exEiv v/xcii tt/v 
 TOVTW larqiiyfV iroiciirOai. 
 
 EKEIVOS:, 2P. 1. 16 T^S EKEtVOU /tEyoXfilOTIJTOS. 
 
 exXoy^: 2P. 1.10 Pepaiav vpMV t^v KXriinv koX eK^oyqi/ iroiEio-fci, pp. 1 9 f . 
 b. C. cKiraXai : 2 P. 2. 3 to Kpi/ia EKTroXai ovk dpyei, 3. 5 ovpavol ^irav 
 
 CKTraXJi, p. Hi. 
 e K IT t 71" T 0) s 2 P. 3. 17 iva fiij EKTrem/TE tov ISiov a-Tr]pLyfiov. 
 b. c. i KTT dbjv tv a: J. 7 iroXeis EKJropvEuo-acrai xai diTEA.doSo'at oTruTia 
 
 o-apKoJeTEpas. 
 6. £ K p I ([ o u> : J. 12 SeVSpa Sis dTro^avdvra eKpiZfoOevra. 
 f K\eia : JJ 11 Tig TrXdvij tou BaA,aa/;i jutrdov e|£xu^o-av. 
 E \ a u V (0 : S P. 2. 17 bfdj^jai vm \aiXa7roS e\avi'0/*£l'ai. 
 
222 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 h. c. eX e y ^ I s : 2 P. 2. 16 IXeyfiv laxev iStos irapavofiLai. 
 
 i\iy)(a) : J. 16 iXeyiai TravTas roll's dcrejSeis irtpi irdvTioVf 22 o«s /acv 
 
 e\£y;(£T£ {al. cXcSte or cXeciTt) SiaKpivo/ievovs. 
 e A. € o s : J . 2 eXeos v/uv koX eiprjvr] irkrj6w6eirj, 21 irpotrSt^ofitvoi, to cXeos tov 
 
 Kvpiov. • 
 £ X £ i; E p ( a : 2 P. 2. 19 eX.cv6ipiav awoTs EirayyeXXo/^Ei'oi. 
 £ /I d ; : 2 P. 1 . 15 /x,ETa T^i/ £/i^v E^oSov. 
 
 a. c. d. Ip-TT aiy p^ovq: 2 P. 3. s EXEwovrai ev ifiiraiy/iovg ifjnraiKTai. 
 
 b, c. ifnraiKTrjs- 2 P. 3. 3 eXevirovTat eir' t<T\drwv rmv ■^f/.epZv ifival' 
 
 KTai, J. 18 iir' i(rxdTOv )(p6vov iaovrai kp/iraiKTau 
 e p-Trk eKia: 2 P. 2. 20 toutois Se ttoXiv ipjTrXaKevTes- 
 ( fj, IT o p € V o fx, a i : 2 P. 2. 3 ev itXeove^ioi TrXao-TOis Xdyois v/aSs ifivopev- 
 
 trovrai. 
 i V : (place) 2 P. 1.4 t^s ev to Koapjia <l>dopS.s, 1. 13 ev rovria t^ (TKrfv6iw.Ti, 
 
 1. 18 EV r(p o/DEi, 1. 19 £V av)(fi,rip& roirio, ib. ev rais KapSiaiSt 2. 1 ev tw 
 Xau, i6. £v v/nTv, 2. s iyKaTOiK&v ev awoTs, 3. lo rot ev yp Ipya, 3. 13 ev 
 oTs SiKaioavvr] KaroiKel, 3. i, 3^ 16 ev ETnoToAois XaXfiv bis ; (time) 
 
 2. 13 T7/V £v v/itEpa rpvfjii^v, 3. lo ; (cause or instrument) 1. 1 uraniwv 
 Xaxu>v TTto'Tiv £v SiKaiocrivYj ®cov, 1. 13 and 3, i SiEyE^iEtv v/ias ev 
 VTro/Juvi^crei, 2. 3 ev itXeove^i^ vjuas k/jLiropevcravTai, 2. 16 ev dvOpioTrov 
 <l)o}vy (j>6fyidit.cvov, 2. 18 SEXEa^oviriv ev iiriOviiiaK, 2. 20 drro^wydvrfs 
 ra p,id(7ftaTa ev liriyvwcrei ', (manner) 2. 7 t^s ev aaeXyei^ dvaarpotj/iijs, 
 
 2. 10 EV eindvfi,iq. Toptvop.evoi, 2. 18 tous ev wXavj; dvaurrptflMiievovs, 
 
 3. 3 £V ep/iraiy fiiOV^ ifJi,waiKTai, 3. 11 ev dytbus avaoTpo^K, 3. 14 
 a/jLutfiAfiTOi EV elp-qvig ; (sphere) 1. 12 ka-THjpiyfievovs ev aXijOeiq,, 3. 18 
 oifavETE £v xdpiTi ; (subject-matter) 2. 12 ev oTs dyvoowrw ^Xocr^ij- 
 jU,oi!vT£Sj 2. 13 EVTpu<^5vTES EV Tais diTaTais J (addition) 1. 5 iiTLXopr)- 
 y^o-ftTE EV iriaTei dpen^v bis, 1. fer, 1. 7 6is. J. (place) 12 ev rais 
 dyairais a-iriXdSe? ; (accompaniment) 14 ev dyiais fiAjpidviv ^k6ev ; 
 (cause or instrument) 10 ev tovtoii tftOeipovrai ; (manner) as ev <^6p<o, 
 
 ^ 24 £V AyaXXtdo-Ei ; (used of God) 1 ev ®e& ^yairrnxivoK (?), p. clxxxii, 
 
 20 £V irveu/xan vpotrevxop-evoi, 21 lauroiis ev dyoiTrj; ©eoC Trjp^aare, 
 
 p. Ixv. 
 E V T o X ^ : 2 P. 2. 21 T^s TrapaSoGeio'ris avroii dytas evtoX'QS, 3. 2 t^s 
 
 Ttov dn-otrroXoiv vp,Sv evtoX'^s tov KvpCov, p. 64. 
 b, C. ivT pv<l>du> : 2 P. 2. 13 EvrptM^fivTES ev Tats dTraTois airav (al. 
 
 dydirats). 
 £VUTrvid^o//.ai: J. 8 ovrot £VDTviafdp.Evoi, p. 74. 
 'E V u) ;( ; J. 14 £7rpoi^^TEU(7£v £;88o/xos diro 'A8a/i 'Evo);(. 
 6. C. l^aKokovOem: 2 P. 1. 16 p.vOoi'S i$aKo\.ov6rja'avres, 2. 2 E^axoXov- 
 
 Brjo^ovcriv airStv rais dcEXyEi'ats, 2. 16 E^aKoXov^ij(ravrES tjj o8(y toC 
 
 BaXad/^. 
 a. b. G. d. £ ^ £ p a p, a : 2 P. 2. 22 kvuv ETrto-rpE^as eitI to i8iov E^Epajua, 
 
 p. xii, Ixii. 
 e. J^^oSos: 2 P. I.I6 p,£ra tijv e/a^v ?^o8ov. 
 £ ^ o u or t a : J. 26 ;udv(^ 0£u Kpdroi Kal eiovaia. 
 iirayytXia: 2 P. 3. 4 iroB ecttIv ij EirayyEXta r^s vapov<ria^ avTOv ; 
 
 3. 9 ou /SpaSwEi Kvpios t^s EirayyEXias. 
 EirayyfXXojuat: 2 P. 2. 19 EXEv^Epiav auTois ETToyyEXXd/iiEvot. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 223 
 
 C. d. kirdyyeXiia: 2 P. 1.4 to, fidyuTTa Koi Tt/xta kirayyiX/xaTa, 3. 13 
 
 Kara to kirdyyek/xa avTov, pp. Xxxiv, cxcii. 
 eTrayio: 2 P. 2. 1 iirdyovTii eauTois Ta)(a'rjv a.Tru>Xuav, 2. 5 KaTaK\v(rfi,6v 
 
 Kocr/iw dtre/Sffli/ lirafas, p. xxvi. 
 
 b. c. d. iTraymvi^o/j-ai: J. 3 kirayiin'Ct,i(T6ai ry aira^ irajoaSoflewnj tois 
 
 dyi'ois iri(rr«, pp. 22, 23, 70 f. 
 
 h. c. d. krt a^pi i,tii : J. 13 KV/xara kiTatj>pitpvTa Tas eairrSv ot<r;^was. 
 
 «Tt: c. g'ew. 146 f., 2 P. 3. 3 kir strp^aToiv rSv rip,epu)v, J. 18 ctt «or;(aTou 
 j(pdvou. 
 
 c. ace. 2 P. 1. 13 e<^' ocrov elfii kv rovria t<3 a-Krjvia/JLaTi, 2. 22 kirUTTphpas 
 km TO tSiov kiepap-a. In compounds, pp. 22, 174. 
 
 ETriytvmo'KO): 2P. 2. 21 KpeiTTOv ^v /iij cTreyi/u/cct'at T^v oSov t^s 
 SiKOiooTJViys ^ eTTiyvoSo-ti' vTro(TTpi\jia.L. 
 
 h. kiriyvaxTn: 2 P. 1. 2 ■^(a.pii koX etp'qvr] ■7rX.r]6vv6arj kv eTTiyraJo'ei ToB 
 0eoD, 1. 3 Slot T^s kTnyvdxreios rov KoXetravro's '^p-oig, 1. 8 ets T^y toB 
 KvpCov kiriyvmaiv, 2. 20 diroc^tiydi'Tes tci p,id(j-paTa rov KotTjUou cv kwi- 
 yvuxrei rov Kvpiov. 
 
 kiriOv pta: 2 P. 1. 4 diro^ifyoVTES r^s cv tu Kotrpm kv emOvp,iq, 
 ff>$opa.i, 2. 10 tous OTTiiTia a-apKOs iv einOvp,icf, puKr/tov Topevopevovi, 
 2. 18 SeX€d^ov<nv iv iiriOvpiaK crapKOi do'eXyetais, 3. 3 Kara ras 
 iSias CTTiOvpia.'i avruiv iropevopevoi, J. 16 KaTo. Tas dinGvpias avrmv 
 Tcopevopxvoi, IS KOTOt Tas lavruiv evLOvpiai ■noptvopevou 
 
 G. d. ciriXucis : 2 P. 1. 20 iracra irpotjyriTda, ypa^^s iSias eTTiXuoreaJs ou 
 yivtrai, pp. iv. 196 f. 
 
 eir ivrapai: J. 10 oo'a Se <^uo-ikSs eirto'TayTat. 
 
 cjTto-ToA.'^: 2 P. 3. 1 ScuTepav v/iiv ypd<jim iiruTToXriv, 3. 16 is eV Trdo-ats 
 Tats eirioToXats. 
 
 CTTio-Tpei^u): 2 P. 2. 22 Kuwv ETTto-Tpei/ras eTTi TO iStov i^epapa. 
 
 eiriTipda: J. 9 tVtTi/iiJerai o-ot Kijpios- 
 
 €iTiif>epm: J. 9 KpCa-iv eireveyKCiv pX.a<T<j>r]puii. 
 
 h. tTT ixopriy e<a; 2'P. 1.5 cirtxopiyy^craTe eV T'g iricrTei iipaiv rrjv dpeTiJv, 
 1. 11 irXouo-icos iirixopriyrjOi^creTai vpiv r) eto-oSos. 
 
 «. eirotKo8o/ic<i):J. 20 £7roiKo8op.o5i/T£S eauTovis TJj dytoTaTij v/iSv ma-rti. 
 
 c. iiroirrr]^: 2 P. 1. 16 eTroTTTat yev^fievTcs T^s eKeivov /teya- 
 
 XeiOTip-os. 
 ep y V : 2 P. 1. 10 8ta to>v KaXSv ^/iSv epyuv (oJW. a?.) 2. 8 i/'^xV SiKaiav 
 
 avopoK epyoK i^aa-dvi^ev, 3. 10 yrj koi Ta eV a^T^ epya, J. 15 irtpl 
 
 iravTcoy tZv Ipytav dcrejSeias auTwv. 
 i pxopai: 2 P. 3. 3 eXewovTct ipTraiKTai, J. 14 rjkOev Kvpios iv dytais 
 
 pvpiA(nv avTov, c. i/nfin. p. xlv. 
 £ o- X a T o s : 2 P. 2. 20 ye'yovev o^ToTs Ta ccrxaTa x«VO»"* ™i' -irpdmav, 
 
 3. 3 Itt' EtrxciTcuv TMy ■^pep&v, pp. 146 f., J. 18 stt' icrxdrov xpovo"") 
 
 pp. 77 f. , ' ^ , 
 
 STepos: J. 7 dircX^ovirai 6m<Tta capKos ^Tepas. 
 It s : 2 P. 3. 8 /tia ^/^icpa irapa KvpiM is X'^"» ^'^ «"' X'^"» «"7 <"« iJ/^ep" 
 
 jLua. 
 euayyeXtov, p. 65. 
 
 b. £vSoK£0>: 2 P. 1. IT eis ov eytb tvBoKriara. 
 iv6vs: 2 P. 2. 16 KaTaXewrovTes evOeiav bSov. 
 
224 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 cvjo icTK (1) : 2 P. 3. 10 yrt koX to. iv avT^ epya cvpeB-qtrerai (? see p. cc), 
 
 3. 14 ajxtofjui^oi avT^ evpe^voi iv tlprprfi. 
 £U(re')8eia:2P. Lara irpo% ([(o^ Kcu eva-e^eiav, 1. 6 cV 8e T^ imofiov^ 
 
 Tr/v eva-iPuav, ev Si r^ tv(Tt^fi(f rrjv ^iXaSeX^iav, 3. 11 eV dyiois 
 
 ava<TTpoff>a.K Koi EV(rE)3c(ais. 
 tvo-e/8'^s: 2 P. 2. 9 olSev Ku/oios eio-cjSeis ck ireipacr/iol pvetrOai. 
 ?X " (1) : 2 P. 1. 19 expn€V fitfiaioTtpov Tov irpoKJurjTiKbv Aoyor, 2. U 6(t>9aX.- 
 
 fimii eXOVTts /tcoTois fioixoXiSos, *6. KapSidv yeyvfivaxr/ievi^v ttXeovc^ios 
 
 IxovTCS, 2. 16 lA-ey^iv co-xev irapavop.ia.'i, J. 3 avay Kr/v Icrxov ypa.\j/ai, 
 
 19 TTveS/ia /x^ exovTES. (2) =_poss?M». 2 P. 1. 15 cnrouSao-o) exav v/iSs 
 
 fi.vrjp.rp' TTOieurBai. 
 £0) s : 2 P. 1. 19 u KaXias ttoieite 7rpo(Te\oVT£i £(i)S ov ■^/icpa Stavyatn;. 
 
 <?. ^ o ^ o s : 2 P. 2. 4 (dyyEXous) (reipoT,^ lofjsov {al. (reipais and ^o0ois) 
 raprapuxTa^ irapiSiaKev eis Kpitnv, 2, 17 ois 6 ^o<^os toS (Tkotod? Tfrtjpftfrai, 
 J. 6 (dyy£\ous) £« KpL<riv fiEyd\ijs ^/AEpos SEtr/tois d'iStots utto ^6<f>ov 
 rtrqpqKOi, 13 oIs 6 ^oi^os tov (tkotovs eZs oiwva T€TTfiprjTaL. 
 
 ^ <D ^ : 2 P. 1. 3 TO, n-pos ^ca^v koi ev<ril3aav, J. 21 eis ^o)^!/ aiwvtoi'. 
 
 ^ <3 o V : 2 P. 2. 12 dis d\oya ^ua yeytwij/ieva <j>V(nKa eh aXaxriv, J. 10 ocra 
 Se (^uctikSs a)s TO, dXoyo ^ua EirMrravTot ev tovtois ^dEijpovrai. 
 
 ^ : 2 P. 2. 21 KpettTOV r)V auTois /A'^ ETTEyvcoKEi'ai^ EiriyvoCcru/ mooTp&liai. 
 
 jjyEOjuai: 2 P. 1. 13 Sixaibv Se ^yoS/^oi SiEyEipEiv i/tSs, 2. 13 ^Sov^v 
 ■^ovp.evoi TTjV EV '^P'Cpa rpvi^^v, 3. 9 us TtVES fipaSvT^Ta ^ovvrai., 3. 15 
 T^v fuiKpo6vfji,iav erwTijpiav ^yEur^E. 
 
 ^ 8 ij : 2 P. 3. 1 TarTTjv ^Sj; SEvrE/oav ypatjioi hruTToMiv. 
 
 ij 8 o V ^ : 2 P. 2. 13 ijSovrp/ (aydtrrjv ?) ijyou/nEvot t^v ev fifiipa. Tpv<j>r}V, p. x. 
 
 ■^ fie pa: 2 P. 1. 19 Iws ov ■^fiipa Suivydcrg, 2. 8 ^/lipav ii ^fiEpas i/'v^^v 
 iPtwdvi^ev, 2. 9 and 3. 7 eis fipLtpav Kpitrtmi, 2. 13 t'^v ev ■^p.ipa rpv^rpr, 
 3. 3 Ew' Ea^aTUV t5v ■^p.eplav, 3. 8 /xta ■^/lipa irapa Kvpiio ms x'^'i cttJ 
 Kai ^iXta In; &>s ■^p.ipa p,ia, 3. lo ^^ei rfpiipa, TLvpiaxi ms KXEirrijs, 3, 12 
 T^s TOV ©Eov fifikpas, 3. 18 £ts ■qfiipav allovoi, J. 6 eis Kpitrw /i.£ydXijs 
 ^/UEpas. 
 
 ^TTao/tai: 2 P. 2. 19 a> ydj9 tis ^TTijTai tovto) koi SESovXmTat, 2. 20 
 TovTois Se TrdXtv Ifi/jrXaKevm 'qTrlovTai. 
 
 6 dXaafra: J. 13 KV/xaTa aypia 6aXd(r<n]i. 
 
 6 av p.d^u> : J. 16 6avp.d£pVTe^ wpocrtoTra wi^eXuis X'^P"'- 
 
 6£Tos:2P. 1.3 T^s ^Eias 8vvd/iE(os avTov, 1. 4 dEtas'KOivmi'oi 0va-£b)s (else- 
 where in N.T. only in Acts 17. 29 to ^eiov). 
 
 b. 6 ikfj fi,a: 2 P. 1. 21 ov yap Oe\iqp.aTi avOpanrov ^epfOr) irpotjnjTeia ttote. 
 
 i\(a: 2 P. 3. 5 Xdr^avEi yotp avTOVs tovto 0EXovras oti k.t.X. 
 
 ® £ o s : 2. P. 1. 1 £1/ SiKaioo-vv}} tov ®eov ■qfi&v koX a-uynjpo^ 'Ijjcrov XptoTOv, 
 1. 2 £V ETnyvmo-Ei tov ®eov koi 'Irjcrov tov Kvpiov ■^p.&v, 1. 17 XajSwv irapa 
 ®tov TTttTpoB Tip.^v KOI Soiav, 1 . 21 vTTo TTVEV/iaTos dyi'ov tftepop.ei'oi £XaXi/(7av 
 dTTo (cd. dyioi) 0EOV 3,v6p<i>-iroi, 2. 4 6 ®£os dyyEXmv ap-aprrja-avTOiv ovk 
 Et^Eio-aTO, 3. 5 yij £^ vSaTos a-vveoToxra T<f tov ®eov Xdytp, 3. 12 Trjv 
 irapovtriav t^s tov ®£ov fjp.ipa'i, J. 1 toTs Iv ®£^ TraTpi ^airrjiievoK, i 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 225 
 
 rijv Tov ®tov p^o/iiTa iieraTiOevm cis doreA.yetoi', 21 kavTovi iv aywirn 
 ®tov Tqprjo-aTt, 25 ftAna ®ew o-cor^pt i^jucui'. 
 drj (Tavp i^(o : 2 P. 3. 7 ot Se vvv ovpavol Koi ij y^ t<3 auTm \oy(j re^ij- 
 aavpurii,evoi tla-iv. 
 
 'IaKo>j8os: J. 1 'louSas Iijaou Xpurrov SovXos, dSeXi^os Se 'laKw^ov. 
 
 I 8 1 o s : 2 F. 1. 3 rov KaXco-avros ^(/.a? iSi'a So^ (a^. 8ta 8d^s, p. cxcii) 
 Kal apiry, !• 20 'Tracra irpotjirjTcia ypa<j>^s ISias CTriXvcreus ov yiverai, 2. 16 
 eXEy^tv l(r;^ci' tSi'as irapavo/itas, 2. 22 ki;<i>v hrKTrppliai hr\ to tSiov 
 i^epapa, 3. 3 Kara ras iSta? iwiOvp.ias avr&v ■Tropevop.evoi, 3. 16 Trpos 
 Tqv tStav avrSiv a.wu>\eiav, 3. 17 Iva p,ri eKvitrifTe rov ISiov <Trqpi.yp.ov, 
 J. 6 (dyyeXoDs) diroXiTroi'Tos to tSiov oiK^rqpiov, pp. xxxii f., xlii. 
 
 t 8 o v : J. u iSou ^X$€V Kupios ev dyt'ais p-vpida-iv ovroB. 
 
 1. 11 TOV Kvpiov fipJav KOt o-a)T^pos 'Iijo-ou XjOlO-ToC, 1. 14 O KVpiOi 
 ^p.S>v 'Iijo-ovs XptoTos cS'qXuo-ei' p.01, 1. 16 T^v Tou Kvpiovqp&v 'Ir/a-ov 
 XpurroC 8wa/x.iv, 2. 20 kv eiriyvao'ti rov Kvpiov Kal o-corqpos Iijaov 
 XpnTToC, 3. 18 ev yvcocrei T. Kvpiov ■qpStv Koi aioT^pos Iijo-ov Xpio-Tov, 
 J. 1 'louSas 'Iijo-oB Xpto-ToC 8oi)Xos, ib. toic; ev ©em irarpi riyainjp,€voK 
 Kal 'Iij(ro5 XpujTtS Tenijpr]p.ivois kXi^tois, 4 tov /aovov Seo-TTonjv Kai 
 Kvputv ■qpMV 'Ii/o'DW XpioTOV a.pvovp,ivoi, 5 'Ii;eroSs (ffl^. KuptoSi see 
 pp. clxxxiv f.) Xadv eK y^s AiyvTrrou o'cocras, 17 tSsv airofTToXiav tov 
 Kvpiov rip.mv 'Ii/o'oS Xpiorov, 21 to eXeos Toi) Kvpiov ^/uoip IijcroS 
 XptCTOV, 25 Sia 'Iijo-oS XplOToS ToS KvpCov ■qp.&v. 
 
 t V a : 2 p. 1. 4 e7rayyeX/*aTa SeSmp-qrai Iva Sta tovtmv yiv7](Tdt Beiai KOivtovoi 
 (jtva-eoK, 3. 17 tfjmXdtra-iorOe Iva pJi) jKvioTifTe. 
 
 Iou8as: J- 1. 1. 
 
 c. d. ia-oTip-os : 2P. 1.1 Tots IxroTipMV ripZv \axov<riv m(rTiv, pp. ii, 181. 
 
 la Tf] p.1'. J. 24 TO) Swa/ievio (rT^trai KaTfvuyTriov T^s So^s airoB apM/iov^. 
 
 I iTvv i : 2 P. 2. 11 dyyeXoi l<T)(vi koi Svvdjuei /let^oves ovTes. 
 
 6. Kadapio'p.os: 2 P. 1. 9 Xrjdrjv Xaj3<i>v ToB Ka6apurp,ov Tuiv TrdXai 
 avTov apjipTUov. 
 
 Ka6i(rTrjp,i:2F. 1.8 dKotpTTovs KaOurrqtriv eis T^v Tou Kvpiov ■qp.iov 
 'Iijaou XpioToB kiriyvioiTvv. 
 
 Ka0<as:2P. 1. 14 Ka^us Kai o Kvpioi kS'qKoxriv p.01., 3. 15 Ka6m Kal 6 
 dyain^Tos ijjmSv dSeXi^os IlaiiXos ipyaijicv v/uv. 
 
 Kai: ' both ' 2 P. 3. is koi vvv koi ets fjp.ipav atuvos, J. 25 Kai vvv koX eis 
 irovras Tous aiojvas. 
 
 ' also ' 2 P. 1. 14 Ka6a)'s Kal 6 Kvpios eS^Xuo'ei' p.01, 2. 1 kyivovro Se 
 Kai ij/ivSoTrpo(l>rjrai iv tm Xa^ As koi ev ij/iiv ecroVTai, 2. 12 «v t^ ^dopa, 
 avT&v Kal iftOaprjfTOVTai {(d. KaTa<f)6ap'q<T0VTai), 2. 19 ^ tis ^tti/toi 
 ToijT({) Kai (oj». aZ.) SeSovXurat, 3. 15 Kadus Kat o dyainyTos ^/ifiv dSeX^os, 
 3. 16 As Kal iv TTao-ais ejrio-ToXats, 'ii. <us Kai Tcts Xowras ypa^as, J. 8 
 6/itoiois p-evToi KOI ouToi, 14 eirpo<f>T^T£ucre Se koi toutois J ' even ' 
 2 F. 2. 1 KOI TOV ayopairavTa ourovis apvovp,€Voi, J. 23 juio'Ovi'Tes koi tov 
 diro T^s o'apKOi ifnriXiapJvov ^iroJva. 
 
 K a I V : J. 11 rg 68(3 toC Koic hropfvOyjirav. 
 
 9 
 
226 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 Katvds: 2F. 3. 13 xaivovs abpavov^ koi yrjv Kaa/rpr TrpoiTSoKZ/JLtv. 
 
 KaiTre p; 2 P. 1. 12 Kaiirep ciSdras. • 
 
 KaA,e(i):2P. 1.8 toC KoXeaavro's 19/xas ISCq, Soiy koI apery. 
 
 Ka\ds: 2 P. 1. 10 8ta Tuiv Ka\S>v vfmv Hpyiov (pm. al.). 
 
 Ka,\Si % : 2 P. 1. 19(0 KaXois Troieire Trpocre^ovTes. 
 
 KapSia:2 P. 1. 19 eais ov t^uxr^opoi avaTtikri iv rais (capSi'ats v/xfii', 2. 14 
 
 KapSiav yeyv/M/aiTnevrpf t^ovres. 
 Kara: c. g'ew. 2 P. 2. 11 oi ijiepovcriv Kar' avrlov pX.axrtj>7ifji,ov Kpitriv, J. 15 
 
 TTOi^crai Kpitfiv Kara TrdvTwv, 15 iXd.X.rj(rav Kar* avrov. 
 
 c. ace. 2 P. 3. 3 Kara ras 181'as i'Tndv/ji.ias avrSiv Tropivo/ievoi., 3. 13 
 
 yijv Kawqv Kara to eTrayycX/ia aurou irpoo'SoKmfjLev, 3. 15 Kara t^v 
 
 So6et(rav owo) (Totjylav eypaij/ev, J. 16 Kara ras eTri^v/ttos aurSv Tropevd- 
 
 fievoi, 18 Kara Tas eauToiv iiriOv/Jiiai iropivop.evoi. 
 K a r a K a I o) : 2 P. 3. 10 y^ koi to. ei/ auT^ epya KaraKwq(riTaL (al. evpedi^- 
 
 (rerai). 
 0. KaraKXy^w, 2 P. 3. 60 Tore Kocrp-o^ wSart Kara/cXua'^els aTreuXtTo. 
 0. KaTaK\v(Tp,6%: 2 P. 2. 5 KOTaK\i;(r/x6v Kocrfiio da'£)8(uv eira^as. 
 KaraKpiVtt): 2 P. 2. 6 TrdXeis . . KaraiTTpo^ KareKpivev, p. CXCV. 
 KaTaXetTTio: 2 P. 2. 16 KaTaXeiVoi/Tes (flsZ. KaTaXtTrovres) ci^eiav oSdv. 
 KaTairovew: 2 P. 2. r Aojt KaTaTrovovp,£vov inrb t^s tuv aOitrfiMV ev 
 
 atrcXyeta dvaorpoi^^s. 
 K ardpa: 2 P. 2. 14 Kardpas TCKVa. 
 Kar a(7T pofjirj: 2 P. 2. 6 [xaTao-Tpo^jj] KareKpivev (om. WH.) : see 
 
 p. CXCV. 
 
 o. K a T a ^ ^ e t p (0 : 2 P. 2 12 ev T^ ^OopS, avrlav Karacjidap'i^arovTai (al. koi 
 
 ^6ap-). 
 Kara^povcto: 2 P. 2. 10 Kvpior^TOs KaTa<j>povovvrai. 
 0. KaTevwTTiov: J. 24 o-T^o-at KaT«j'U)7rtoi' t^s Sdf)js aurou. 
 K a T o ( K £ o) : 2 P. 3. 13 ei/ oTs StKaioo-wij /caTotKet. 
 0. c. a. e. K a u o- d (0 : 2 P. 3. 10 o-Toi;(era Kaucrov/teva Xu^rjo-erai, 3. 2 oToip^cia 
 
 KaviTOv/ieva TijKeroi, p. Ix. 
 Ki) pv $'. 2 P. 2. 5 Nfie 8iKato(rvi/7;s KrjpvKa. 
 K X e IT T 17 s : 2 P. 3. 10 ^f et ■^p.epa K.vpCov ois KXen-Tj/s. 
 kX^o-is: 2 P. 1. 10 ^ejSaiav v/xui/ t^v /cX'^o-ti' ■jroieia-Oai. 
 kXt/jto^: J. 1 TiTrjprr)p,evoi^ kXt/tois. 
 KO(p,a<i): 2 P. 3. 4 d^' ^s ot TraTcpeg sKoip.'qOrja'av. 
 KotvoslJ. 3 Trepi t^s koiv^s crcoTijpt'as. 
 Kotvtdvos: 2 P. 1. 4 ^etas koivmvoi <^i;(7£(os. 
 KoXa^u: 2 P. 2. 4, 9 K oXa^o/i £ vo vs Ttjpeiv (in 4 some read 
 
 ■n/povixevovi). 
 Ko/ii^o): 2 P. 2. l3Ko/itod/x£voi {al. d 8 1 k o d p. £ v o t) /iio-^ov dSiKtos. 
 K o p £ : J. II T^ dvTtXoyia rov Kope diroiXovTO. 
 K o <r p, o s : 2 P. 1. 4 t^s iv t(3 Kd(r/*(p £V iTriOvfiia ^SopSs, 2. 6 apxt^^ov 
 
 Koa-fwv ovK i<f>ei(raTO KaTaKkvtTp,6v Kdcrjuo) aa-e^iov ETrdfas, 2. 20 
 
 diro(^uydvT£S ra (iid<Tp.aTa rov Koarfiov, 3. 6 o tots Kdtr/tos Kara/cXu- 
 
 tr0£is d7r(i)X£T0. 
 Kparos: J. 26 ®£^ Kpdros Kai iiova-ia. 
 KpeCrrmv: 2 P. 2. 21 Kpeirrov ^v airots m« ^7r£yv(aK£Vot rrtv bhhv ^ 
 
 fiiriyvovo-tv k.t.X. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 227 
 
 K p 1/1 a : 2 p. 2. 3 ots TO Kpijxa eKiraXai ovk dpyel, J. i irpoyeypafifievoi eis 
 
 TOVTO TO KpCfla. 
 
 K p I cr I s : 2 P. 2. 4 £ts Kpta-iv njpou/ie'i/ovs, 2. 9 ets rjp.ipav Kptcreus xoXafo- 
 /leVovs rqpiiv, 2. 11 oi (jtipovmv kot' avrmv irapa Kvpia pXaa-^erniov 
 Kpi(TW, 3. 7 Tr}pov[Ji,tvoi eis ruiApav Kplcrea^, J. e eis KpCtriv /leyaXijs 
 fip-ipwi Terfiprixev, 9 Kpterii' cn-eveyKeo/ /Skaa-fjtrjfjiiai, 15 iroi^erot /cpitriv 
 Kara iravTwv. 
 
 KTi'trts: 2P. 3.4 Att' ap^^s KTitreios. 
 
 a. c. tZ. K V \ ( a- //, o s : 2 P. 2. 22 eis Kv\tcrjU,6v (al. Kv\ia-[ia) ^opISopov, 
 
 p. Ixii. 
 Kv /J, a : J, 13 Kv/xara ay put, OaXao'tri]^. 
 h. d. K V p I o T 1; s : 2 P. 2. 10 KupioTijTos KaTa<^povoIi'T()is, J. s KvpioTiyra 
 
 aOerovcriv, p. viii, 
 
 Xayj(avM: 2P. l.i rots Icronfxov ■^fuv Xaxovcriv ttio-tlv. 
 
 \ a I \ a i/f : 2 P. 2. 17 bfii^fXai virb XotXairos £Xawd/;ievat. 
 
 XuXcu: 2 P. 1. 21 iXaXyiarav ayiot toC (aZ. ajro) ®eov avOpaiiroi, 3. 16 
 
 XaXlov iv avTOLs irepi tovtiov, J. 15 jrcpt Travrmv rmv crKXrjpSsv S>v 
 
 i\a\r}<Tav, 16 to (TTop-a airSiV XoXei inripoyKa. 
 Xa/ijSavca: 2 P. 1. 9 X-fjdiqv Xa^uiv rov KaBapuTfiov tu>v TrdXat avTov 
 
 apjapfTimv, 1. 17 Xa^lbv irapa ®eov jrarpos Tip-rp/ koX So^av. 
 Xav$ avio: 2 P. 3.5 XavdavEi 'yap auToiis ori, 3. s tovto [irj XavOavsTot 
 
 i/JLoii OTl. 
 
 X a ; : 2 P. 2. 1 iyevoVTO Sk koX \l/tv8oirpo<j)^Tai iv tw XcuS, J. 5 Xaoi' Ik 
 
 y^s AiyvTTTOU awcras- 
 X e y (0 : 2 P. 3. 4 XeyovTes IIoS ecTTtv ■^ eTrayycXta ,• J. 14 irpoi^'qTivtTtv 
 
 '^vm\ Xiywv, 17 p.vi^cr6rjT€ tSiv pripATUiv tS>v Trpoeiprip.eywv viro tS>v 
 
 aTrotTToXiav on eXeyov. 
 0. Xt^Otj: 2 p. 1.9 XT^dfjv XajSuv to5 KaBapur/xov. 
 X o y o s : 2 P. 1, 19 Tov Trpo^ryriKov Xoyov, 2. 3 TrXoo-ToTs Xoyots, 3. 5 tu tov 
 
 0£oS Xdycii, 3. 7 TM auTM Xdyu rtdrjo'avpia'ixivoi elaiv. 
 X o t IT d s : 2. Pi 3. 16 MS Kal tos XotTrots ypatjids- 
 X o v <i> : 2 P. 2. 22 vs Xov(Tap,fvq. 
 Xv ■)^v o %: 2 P. 1 . 19 o)S Xvyyia (^oivovri. 
 X i5 <ij : 2 P. 3. ID (TTOi-)(iia Kav&ovp.eva XvOrjirerai, 3. 11 tovtui' iraVTiov 
 
 Xvop,evo>v, 3. 12 ovpavol Trvpovp-cvoi Xvdi^crovrai. 
 w T ; 2 P. 2. 7 SiKaiov Ao)T Karairovovptvov. 
 
 b. iii.aKpo6vp,iu>:2P, 3. 9 p.aKpo6v/iei cis v/itas. 
 
 6. iA,aKp o6v jxla: 2 P. 3. 15 T^v ToB Kvpiov fiaKpo6vp.iav (rmrripiav ■^ei<r6e. 
 
 fidXiCTT a : 2 P. 2. 10 pAXurra Se Tois oirio'ia crapKos Tropevop-evovi. 
 
 p. aXXov : 2 P. 1. 10 Sio p,a.XXov o'lrovSaaare. 
 
 b. p.ar aioTfi i : 2 P. 2. is virepoyKa /xoTaioTjjTos ^Ofyyopxvoi. 
 
 b. p. eyaX e lOTTj s '• 2 P. 1. 16 itroirrai rrji eKtivov p-eyaXewn/jTO^. 
 
 c. n«yaXo7rpe7rijs: 2 P. 1.17 wrb rrji p,eyaXoirpeirovi Sdfijs. 
 
 b. p,eyaXio(rvV7i: J. 25 ®e(o . . . Sofa p,eyaXto<Tvvri Kpdroi koI i^oviria. 
 /x e y a s : J. 6 ets Kpiaiv /teyaXijs ^/lepas. 
 
 c. /Ac'yio-Tos: 2 P. 1. 4 8t' «5v to p.iyuTra koI ripua fipHv lirayyiXpaTa 
 
 SeS<!>p7]Tai (reading uncertain), p.' xlii. 
 uei ^<ov: 2 P. 2. ll ayyeXot t(r)(ui Kal Swdp,€i juei^ovcs ovtes. 
 
 Q 2 
 
228 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 /xcXXm: 2 P. 1. 12 8i6 ixtWrjirm (?) vftAi del {nrofUlivrjiTKdv Trepl rovrmv, 
 
 p. Ix, 2. 6 viroSeiyiia ixeXkovratv aa-e^ea-iv reOeiKm^, p. cxcv. 
 /i e'Xco, see 2 P. 1 12 and p. cxciii. 
 
 b. G. d. fi € fixli i fioip o<i: J. 16 yoyyva-ToX /itful/ifioipoi. 
 
 fiiv.J. 8 aapxa /i£V /iLaivova-LV, KvpiorrjTa 8k adeT0v<nvS6ia% 8e ^\a<T<t>i]iJ.ov(nv, 
 10 Sera /«,€!' oix o'Sa<7ti' pXa<r(l>rjiJi.ov(Tiv, Sera Se tpvaiKUK iiria-TaVTOi . . . iv 
 TOVTOi's (jiBiipovTai., 22, 23 oSs p.h ikeyx^Te SiaKptvofieyovs, oSs 8c (Tw^iTt . . . 
 oSs 8e eXeare (readings differ). 
 
 p,ivTO l: J. 8 bfWLOii fiivTOi (cat oBrot (rdpKa /ucufovcnv. 
 
 /A £ o- T d s : 2 P. 2. 14 6<l}6a\fi,ovi ex"''''''* /teorovs /M.otxaA,iSos. 
 
 /JLCT d: c. ace. 2 P. 1. 15 /xera t'^v c/t^i' e^oSov. 
 
 j«.£Tavoto:2P. 3. 9 PovKofiiVO's iravras eiS ixerdvoiav x<aprjtTai. 
 
 /xiTar i6r)[ii: J. 4 t^v tov ®£o5 ^dpira p.tTaTi6evTe% £ts d(r£A,y£iav. 
 
 /n ^ : pp. 1, c wi^A. iTTiperat. 2 P. 3. 8 tovto p.ri Xav6av€ra> v/xas on ; with 
 pa/rt. 2 P. 3. 9 paKpoOviiii fir] j8owXd/t£vds rii/as diroKiadai, J. 19 
 oSrot Eto-iv 01 diroSiojot^ovT£s, irvevfjui fir] e)(ovTK ; tvithpart. and article, 
 J. 5 Toiis ixij wuTTeva-avTag airdikecrtv, 6 Tovs p-^ Tqpricravras Trjv iavrSiv 
 dpXV" """^ io<t>ov rerqprqKfV. 
 
 c. infin. 2 P. 2. 21 KpeiTTOv rjv p.y] iireyvWKivai rrjv oSov . . . ^. 
 c. reZ. 2 P. 1.9 ia fiij irdpvTTiv ravra TV<f>\oi iariv. 
 ov p.rj : 2 P. 1. 10 oil jirj iTTatoTjTE troTe. 
 
 p. laivm: J. 8 vdpxa p.h> p,iaivovcnv. 
 
 c. p i a a- p, a : 2 P. 2. 20 d7ro<^vydvT£S to. pida-para tov Kocrp-ov. 
 
 b. c. p, I a (T p. 6 i : 2 V, 2. 10 tovs OTricrut aapKos iv im6vp,ia p.ux(Tp,ov rropevo- 
 
 pJvov^. 
 p ip,v^ a- KO pai : 2 P. 3. 2 pvria-drjvai tZv irpoeiprip.ivutv prjpdrmv, J. 17 
 
 p,vrjcr6r}Ti tZv prjpaTtov tZv TrpoeLpypeviov. 
 p. icr i a> : J. 23 puj-ovvTC'S koI tov dirb t'^s o-ojokos l<TiriXwp,evov \LTSiva. 
 p i<T 6 6 <s: 2 P. 2. 13 Kop.ioviJ,evoi (cd. dSiKOvp,£voi) purdov dSiKias 2. 15 
 
 pxirOov dSiKias ■^ydTrtjcrev, J. 11 ttj irXdvy to3* BoXaaju pLurOov 
 
 i^cxydrjcTav. 
 
 c. pvT] p,rj : 2 P. 1. 15 TovTiov p,vi]p,riv irouia-OaL, pp. xxxiv, Ix." 
 6. /A o I X a A. t s : 2 P. 2. 14 64)0aXp.ovi €x°^'''^^ pecTTovi p,oixaXiSo?. 
 
 //. d V o s : J. 4 TOV p,6vov Sto'iroTrjV Koi Kvpiov 'I. X. dpvovp,evoi, 25 /xdvo) ®£(3 
 
 ffUT^pi yjpStv. 
 p,v 6 0%: 2 P. 1. 16 <r£a-o<l)i<Tp.ivoK p,vdoK iiaKoX.ov$ij(ravT€i. 
 pv pidi : J. 14 ^kOev Kv/atos iv dyiaK p,vpid<riv airrov, p. xxxi. 
 c. d. p, V 10 IT d ^ 10 : 2 P. 1.9 Tu^Xds eo-tiv p/vioird^mv, p. Ixi. 
 c, p, m p, o i : 2 P. 2. 13 cnriXoi Kai pS>p.oi. 
 Mwvo-^s: J. 9 Tm 8ia)8d\<B Sia/cpivd/icvos SuXcyETO 7r£pi tou McoucTEajs 
 
 a-(i)/;iaTOS. 
 
 ve^cXjj: 2 p. 2. 17 6/xtxA.at (aZ. i/Ei^Aai) vto XaiXaTros EXavvdjuci/at, J. 12 
 ovrot Eto-iv . . . ve(j>e\ai 3.vvSpoi virb dvep.mv 7rapa<f>ep6p,tvaL. 
 
 vvv: 2 P. 3. 7 01 Se vvv ovpavol kol tj y^ Tf6r]cravpurp,4voi, cla\v irvpi, 3. 18 
 air<3 ■q Sdfo Kal i/ij/ Kot £?s 7]pipa.v aiwvos, J. 26 judvu ©cm 8d|a KOi vw 
 Kai CIS irdvTas tous alStvai. 
 
 vva-Td^ia: 2 P. 2.3^ diruXcta avrcov ov vuoTctfci. 
 
 N (1 £ : 2 P. 2. 6 c!y8oov NSc 8iKaioo-iJvi;s Ki^pvKa itftvKaitv. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 229 
 
 oySoos: 2 P. 2. 6 oySooi/ NGe SiKOiotrwj/s Krjpvna i<f>vXa^ev, pp. vii, 
 192 
 
 e. 8 s : 2 P. 2. 2 ^ oSos t^s dXijfittas fiX.atTfjfrjf/.iriO'qcreTai, 2. 15 KaraXiirovTes 
 {al, KaToXiiirovTis) tiOtiav oSov, ib. iiaKoXovOT^aravm Tg oScj) tov 
 BaXadfi, 2. 21 eireyvojKcVai T^v 6801/ T^s SiKotoorwijs, J. 11 TJ} oSai tov 
 K.a.lv ejropt.v6r](Tav. 
 
 oTSa: 2 P. 1. 12 KaOirep eiSoTos koi eanjpiyfiivovi iv rrj vapovay dXijfleta, 
 1. 14 EiSus oTi Ta;(ii'^ etTTtv ^ dirofletris tou (TKtfvmpjXTOi fJbov, 2. 9 oiSev 
 Kvpios evtre^cK f.K irtipav/xov pveaOai, J. 5 wo/LiK^crai vfiaii j8ovA.o/ia( 
 eiSdras i/iSs iravra, 10 oo-a /Jiiv ovk otSacriv pXaa-<jiy]p,ov(nv. 
 
 otKjjTijpiov: J. 6 diroXtjroi'Tas ro iStoj' oiKijTqpiov. 
 
 c. d. oXCy la s- 2 P. 2. 18 StXia^oviTLV TOiis oXiyms Affo^euyovTas, p. cxcviii. 
 
 c. o p, i \\ 7] : 2 P. 2. 17 o/At^Xai iTro A.atA,ajros iXawo/nvai. 
 
 ojuoios: J. 7 TOV op.oiov Tp&TTOv TOVTOis iKiropvev(Taarai. 
 
 6 ju, o ( (1) s : J. 8 d/xO((i)s jueVTOi Kai oBroi {rdpKa /iiaivovcriv. 
 
 e. OTT L(To>: 2 P. 2. 10 roirs airicrm trapKos 7ropcvop,4vovi, 2. 21 eis to, oiricro) 
 vwoarpi^ai {al. om. tis ra otritro)), J. 7 dTrEA.^ovo'ai 6tr[<Tm trapKos 
 ETcpas. 
 
 o IT o u : 2 P. 2. 11 oirou dyycXoi oi <^epoucrtv Kar' aiToli' p\d<Ttfri]p.ov 
 Kpiaiv, 
 
 OTT (dp a, pp. 55 f. 
 
 o p o s : 2 P. 1. 18 Ev ™ opsi TM dytiji (al. to ayiu opEi), iv, cxiiv. 
 
 9, ^, o : 2 P. 1. 4 81' £v Ta p-iyurra iTrayyikp,aTa SeSdpyjTai, 1.9 a) yap /tij 
 irapeoTiv ravra ruc^Xos eotiv, 1. 17 o vios £is ov eyoi evSoKrjo-a, 1. 19 
 TOV Xoyov <§ KaXws ttoieTte irpocTE^^ovTES, EOJS o5 ■qp.ipa Siavydcrri, 2. 2 81' 
 08s ^ 680S Pkacr<j>rip,ri6i^(j-erai, 2. 3 ots to xptjiia ovk dpyEi, 2. 12 ev 
 ots dyvoovo-iv ySXacr^Tj/ioiWes, 2. 16 os p.ur6bv dSiKias ^yaTnyorEV, 2. 17 
 ois 6 ^6<t>os TerqpTfrai, 2. 19 w Tts ^TTijTat rovT(a xai S£8oT;X(j)Tat, 3. 1 
 Seiwepov vp.LV ypd^o) ettio-toXijv, ev ais SiEyeipo), 3. 4 d0 ^s 01 waTEpES 
 €K0ip.ri6ri<rav, 3. 6 8t' 5v (? ov, see p. cxcix) 6 tote K6(rp,oi airuikiTO, 
 3. 10 ev y 01 oipavot irapEXewovTai, 3. 12 St' ^v ovpavol Xu^'^o-oVTat, 3. 13 
 £V ots SiKotoo-uvj; KaToiKEi, 3. 16 EV aTs eoTiv Suo-voijra Tiva, a ol a.p,a6eU 
 
 O-TpEjSXoilo-lV, J. IS ots 6 ^0005 T£T1^prp-al, 15 ITEpi TTOLVTOiV tSv EpydlV 
 
 aart0aai S>v ■^frefirja-av, Kai irepi iravrtav tTKh/jpuiv S>v EXdXijo-av, 22, 23 ois 
 
 p.\v eXeyxETE, ovs Se a-m^ere, o6s Se eXeSte (readings differ), 
 o o- o s : 2 P. 1. 13 E^' ocrov dp.i iv tovtw t5 o-Kiyvii/iaTi, J. 10 oo-a p-iv ovk 
 
 oiBaa-iv pXiuT<f>rfp.ov(iiv, oo-a Se c^vo-tKcos £7r«rTavTai ev TouTOts ^ftet- 
 
 povrai. 
 o o- T I s : 2 P. 2. 1 i/rev8o8iSdo-KaXo[ omvES wapEio-a^ovo-iv aip£0-£is dirw- 
 
 Xeuis. 
 o T £ : J. 9 o Se (al. ote) Mixa'^X 6 dp^dyyEXos, ore (al. tote) tco Sia^dXoi 
 
 Siatcptvo/xEvos SieXeyeto. 
 oTi: ('that') 2 P. 1. U £i8ais on, 1. 20, 3. 3 ytvucrKovTES oti, 3. 5 
 
 Xav^avEi OTI, 3. 8 Xav^ovETOi oTi, J. 5 eiSoTas on, 18 /iv^a^JjTe t5v 
 
 prjpMTiov . . . OTt eXeyov u/;iTv [oTtJ . . . ecovTai. 
 (' because ') J. 11 oval avTots oTt rg 68<^ tov Kaiv eiropev&ritTav. 
 o V, see p,ri, pp. 1 f. 
 o V a 1 : J. 11 oval avToTs oti. 
 ovSe: 2 P. 1.8 OVK dpyovs ovSe dKapirovs. 
 
230 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 o S V : 2 P, 3. 11 rovTOJV (niv (al. ovtms) irdvroiv kvofxcvutv, 3. 17 i/ieis ovv, 
 ayairrjTol, (jyv\d.(r(Te(T6t. 
 
 ovpavoi: 2 P. 1. 18 tjiwvriv i^ ovpavov IvtyOiurav, 3. 5 ovpavoi Tjaav 
 ' EKTraXai, 3. 7 oi Se vBv ovpavoi koI t] yrj, 3. 10 oi ovpavoi poi^r/oov 
 ■jrapekevaovTai (al. am. oV), 3, 12 ovpavoi Trupou/tcvot XvOT^aovrai, 3. 13 
 Katj/ovis Se ovpavoirs xai y-^v Kaiv^v irpocrSoK&iJ.ev, p. xxxiii. 
 
 oStos: 2' P. 1. 17 oStos icTTiv 6 utos fiov 6 ayairqro'i, 1. 18 ravTqv rrp/ 
 (jiUivrjv ijjUcTs rjKovaa/Jiev, 3. 1 rauTiji'^Sij Sevrepav vfuv ypa^o) eirtO'ToXi;!', 
 1 . 5 Kol avTO TovTO Se (al. Koi avTol Sc) (rirovSrjV Tratrav TrapeureveyKavTiS 
 ejTi^opijy^iTaTC, 1. 20, 3. 3 tovto irpSyrov yivuxxKOVTK, 3. 6 \av6dva yap 
 avTovi TOVTO 6eXovTa^, 3. 8 ei/ Se toSto fii] kavOaveria vim's, 1. 13 ev 
 TovTto T<3 fTKtjvii>ixaTi, 2. 19 w yap Tts ^TTijTai TOVTio SeSouAcaTOt, 2. 12 
 oStoi Se (US oXoya ([<3a, 2. 37 oBtoi luriv TrqyaX awSpoi, 1. 8 ravra viuv 
 vTrdp)(0VTa, 1. 9 <p yap fir] irdpeo'TL rauTa, 1. 10 raSra Trotowres, 3. 14 
 TaBra wp"oo'SoK<li'T£S, 1. 4 tva Sta tovtiov yivrjade Otia^ Koivwvol iftvceoi's, 
 1. 12 vTrop.ifi,vr)(TKiLV irepl tovtwv, 1. 16 t^v tovtuiv furqit/qv TrouiaOai, 
 3. 11 TovTiav ovv irdvTiov Xvo/tevav, 3. 16 \a\(oi/ irept Tourmr, 2. 20 tovtoi<; 
 8e iraXiv e/tTrXaxevTes, J. 4 ol iraXai irpoyeypa/jip.ivoi. £is toBto to Kpi/j-a, 5 
 ctooras v/tas toDto (flsZ. iravra), 8 o^oiuis jxevToi koX oBtoi Iwwvia^ofievoi, 
 10 oBtoi Se oo-a /ikv ovk otSacriv jSXao'^p.ovo'iv, 12, 16, 19 ofiroi Euriv, 7 
 
 TOV OjJtOlOV TpOTTOV TOVTOK, 10 tV TOVTOK (j>6€lpOVTai, 14 i'TTpOtjiTfTiVlTeV Se 
 
 /cai TouTois. Prospective use p. xciii f, 25. 
 ootids: 2 p. 1. 11 ouTus yap irX.ov(riu>s im)(opriyri6rj(rerai, 3. 4 jravra 
 
 ouT(os Sia/tei/et ott' ap^s KTiVeus, 3. 11 tou'to)!' oifrojs (al. ovv) irdvTiov 
 
 Xvo/xivotv. 
 6<j>$aXp,oi: 2 P. 2. 14 6(j>6aX[iovs txpvres /xco'Tois /xot^aXtSos. 
 
 ■7raAai:2P, 1.9 rlov TraXoi airoS d/uaprtuv, J. 4 ol n-aXai irpoyeypa/i/iefoi 
 
 ets ToSro TO KpL/ia. 
 TT a X I V : 2 P. 2. 20 TOUTOts iraXiv c/iTrXaKei/Tes. 
 IT ap a : (c. g'em.) 2 P. 1. 17 \aj3lov wapa ®eov irarpos Tifir/v. 
 
 (c. oa<.) 2 P. 2. 11 OV fjiipovcTW KaT avTutv irapa K.vpua (al. om. ir. K., 
 
 see p. cxcvi) ^Xao-^i/p,ov Kpinv, 3. s /i,ta ^fiepa Trapa Kvpim o>s ^tXia 
 
 eTij. 
 ■jrapayy eX ta : p. 64. 
 irapaS(Su>/n: 2 P. 2. 4 TrapeScdKef eis Kpi<riv Tijpou/tei/ous, 2. 21 £k t^s 
 
 -irapaMeloT/jS avTois ayi'as evToX'^s, J. 3 tjJ awaf irapaSodeun; tois ctytois 
 
 •JTio-Tei, pp. 61 f. 1 P. 2 23 TrapeSiSov T<5 KpivovTi, pp. xcviii f. 
 irapaSoo-is: pp. 61 f, 
 irapaO-qKri: p. 62. 
 
 irapaKuXeu; J. 8 ^rapuKoXuv eTraywvi^taOai. 
 c. Trapavofiia: 2 P. 2. 16 IXey^tv Se lo^^ev iSt'as Trapaco/itas. 
 TTapat^epw: J. 12 vei^eXat avvSpoi in-6 dv^jucai/ 7rapa<^epo/t,evai. 
 a. Trapa^povia: 2 P. 2. lo t^v toC n-poi^^ou irapatftpoviav. 
 TT ap ei p. i: 2P. 1.8 TaBra i/itv irdpovTa (al. VTrdpxovra), 1. 9 u yap fir] 
 
 irapeo-Tiv TaBro, 1. 12 eoTijpty/iei/ovs eV Tg rrapovaig SXrjOela. (wapaSo- 
 
 6eia~ri 8p.). 
 c. c?. IT a p c I or d y u ; 2 P. 2. 1 Trapeia-d^ovcnv aipeWts aTTcoXetW 
 c. a. irapeio-Suu: J. 4 Trapeio-eSu'ijo-dv Tivts avOpiairoi. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 231 
 
 c. d. Trap€icr<ji£p<o: 2 P. 1. 15 cnrovSrjv iraxrav srapeio-evey/cavTes, pp. Ix, 
 
 Ixi. 
 irape p\o [t,a 1 : 2 P. 3. 10 ot ovpavol poi^r/Sbv irapeXevfrovTai. 
 
 Trap o i/t t a : 2 P. 2. 22 to t^s dXij^oBs irapot/xias. 
 
 irapovata: 2 P. 1. 16 I.X. ovva/uv koX trapoviTLav, 3. 4 ij eirayycXia t^s 
 iropouo-tas avrov, 3. 12 t^v irapovcriav rrji tov ®eov rj/JLepai, pp. Ixxiv f., 
 195. 
 
 iras : 2 P. 1. 3 irauTO, ra irpos ^o>rjv, 1. 6 (TTrouS^i/ Tracrai' irapeureviyKavTti, 
 1. 20 irSo-a irpotjinyriCa ypa^^s, 3. 4 ■iravTa o^tojs Siafievei, 3. 9 Travras ets 
 Herdvoiav ■)(mpn)<rai, 3. 11 toutoji/ oSv iravrcov Xuo/tei/(oi', 3. 16 ev Tratrais 
 eirMTToXais (a?, rats eir.), J. 3 Traarav ottouS^i' iro(Ov/.icvos, 5 eiSoras 
 £/tas iravTtt (readings differ), 15 irot^o-ai KpCuiv Kara iravTcov, Kat eXey^at 
 iravTas TOiis atre^ii/i ircpl ttovtw rS>v epyoDV . . . Kal -irepl ■jravnav Twv 
 o-kXijpSv, 25 fwvia ®eu So^a irpo Travros toS aicuvos Kat vvv Koi cts 
 iravTas Tois atSvas. 
 
 TaT^p:2P. 1. 17 Trapa ®eov Trarpos, 3. 4 01 Traripes iKOifJi-qOriaav, J. 1 rots 
 [cv] ®£w irarpi rp/aiTriii.ivoK. 
 
 n a C X o s : 2 P. 3. 16 o dya7n;Tos ^/xSv dSeX^os IlaBXos. 
 
 iTEipao'juds: 2 P. 2. 9 EvircjSeis £k Tr€ipa<riJ,ov pv&rOai. 
 
 ire pi: (c. gen.) 2 P. 1. 12 v7ro/;itjuv^(7KEiv irept toutoiv, 3., I6 XaXfii/ Trepi 
 toi5t«)v, J. 3 7r«pi TTji KOLvrj's -qnSiv awTTjpias ypdij/ai, 9 SieXeyero irepl 
 TOV McDvcreus (rci/toTOSj 16 eXeyfat Trepl TrdvTtov tSv tpyiov Koi irepl 
 irdvTiav T&v (TkKi)pS>v. 
 
 (c. acc.y J. r SoSo/xa xai To/Jioppa koI aX irepl avTcts irdXcis. 
 
 irepiep^et ei' ypa<j)y: 1 P. 2. 6, p. xcviii. 
 
 ir«pi<rcr£i;<o: pp. 93 f . 
 
 irepiKJiaa- 1? )( iiriyviacns: pp. 172 f, 213. 
 
 IleTpos: 2 P. 1. 1 '^vp.etbv IleTpos SovXos Kal dirdo-ToXos 'I.X. 
 
 w ij y ^ : 2 P. 2. 17 ovTOi eicriv irijyai avvSpoi. 
 
 IT icTT ev 10 : J. 6 TOiis /t^ iritTTeuo-ai'Tas aTnoXso-o/. 
 
 irt'o-Tis: 2 P. 1. 1 TOts icroTi/iov iJ/xTv Xa^^oScrii' irCoTiv, 1. 6 eTn^opijy^aaTe 
 ev rfj irCcTTei vfiiav rrp> aperijv, J. 3 eiraytovi^eo'dai rg diraf irapa8odei<rri 
 Tois dytots iriarei, 20 £iro(KoSo/x.oSvr£S eauToiis rij dytcoTaTg vp.uv iriarei. 
 
 TT X a V d 0) : 2 P. 2. 15 £irXai^0»jcrav £^aKoXo«6^(ravTes r^ oScU toC 
 BaXad/x,. 
 
 TT X d V j; : 2 P. 2. 18 Iv irXdvj; dvacrrp£^o/X£voti«, 3. 17 t^ tSv o^ect/acov irXdvij 
 • awaiTa}(6evTei, J. 11 t^ TrXdvg toB BaXaciju. e^e)(ydri<Tav. 
 
 c. e. IT X a V 17 T 9; s : J. is aa-repes TrXar^rai {al. irXdvjjT£s). 
 
 c. d. TT X a (7 T d s : 2 P. 2. 3 TrXaoTois Xdyois u/aSs ejjaropeviroVTai. 
 irkeovd^oi: 2 P. 1.8 raBra TrXEOvd^ovTa o^k dpyois Ka6/<7Tijoriv. 
 irXEOVE^ta: 2 P. 2. 3 ev irXeove^ia vfias efi,iroptv(TOVTai, 2. 14 KapSiav 
 
 yeyvfji,v(i<T[Ji.evriv irkeoveiias exovres- 
 ir\Tjdvv<o: 2 P. 1. 2 x<ip'S "M'" «"' eipr/vrj ir\rj9vv6eirj, J. 2 eXcos r/tiv Kai 
 elprprq Koi dydirq irkfjOvvdeii^. 
 
 d. TrXoucrtcos: 2 P. 1. 11 ir\ov<rio>i ein)(opr]y7]9rj(reTai vfuv ij eio-oSos eis 
 
 T7]V alutviov PofTiXeiav. 
 irvev/xa: 2 P. 1. 21 virb irv£vfji,aTOi ay Cov tjapoiievoi fKdX-qcrav, J. 19 
 ijrvxtKol, irvevfia fi,^ exovtes, 20 ev mievimri ayiia irpofrevxoiievoi, 
 p. xxiv. 
 
232 INDEX OP GREEK WORDS 
 
 TToi'to): 2 P. 1. 10 )8«)8aiav vfimv rrjv kX^o-iv koX eKkoyrjv iroieurBai, lb, 
 ravra yap iroiowrti, 1. 16 tovt(ov fivi^firjv iroiturOai, 1. 19 <j> KaXS>9 
 iroitiTi ■itpoire)(OVT€i, J. 8 Traa-av (rirovBijU Troiovfuvoi, 15 Troirj(Tai Kpicriv 
 Kara irdTToyv, p. xlix. 
 Woifiaivta: J. 12 eavrovf iroi/juiivovTei. 
 
 iro\(9: 2 P. 2. 6 iroXeis SoSd/xoiv koI Tofioppa^, J. 7 at irtpi avras TroXew. 
 iroXus: 2 P. 2. 2 iroXXoi efaKoXotifiijo-ovaiv avroii' rats dtreXyeiais. 
 e. vopfvofiai: 2 P. 2. 10 tows ottCcto) <rapicoi iv eiriBvpL}. pMuriuyu Tropevo- 
 fiivovs, 3. 3 Kara ras tStas ljriBvp,lai avTiov iropevo/jLcvot,, J. 11 r^ ooS 
 rov Kalv iiropevOrjaav, 16 Kara tos eirt&vp.iai avTwv Tropeuoixtvoi, 18 KaTa 
 ras iavTwv iiri£vfji.iai ■Tropevofievoi tS>v &iTe^€i&i'. 
 h. d. ■TTOTaTTO^: 2 P. 3 11 Trorairoiis Set virdp\av vp.a.i. 
 IT ore: 2 P. 1. 10 ov p.r] irraia-qre irore, 1. 21 ou yap OekijiuiTi avOpunrov 
 
 ifviyOT) ■TrpotjyrjTiLa irori. 
 TTOv : 2 P. 3. 4 irov ia-Tlv r/ eirayyekia T^s napovcria? avTov ; p. lii. 
 ir p 6 : J. 25 fnovm 0£M t^cnxria irpo waiTOS rov alStvoi. 
 irpoyivuxTKia: 2 P. 3. 17 irpoywuxTKOvm ^v\iiar(T€<r0t. 
 irpoypdijxa: J. 4 01 irdXai ■Trpoyiypap.p.h'oi els tovto to Kpi/ui. 
 TrpoeiprjKa: 2 P. 3. 2 fji,vr]a-6rjvai, rSiv irpoeipfripxvun' p-^fjuiTOiv inro rSiv 
 ayimv wpotjirfrSiv, J. 17 furf^crOyfTe run/ prj/xdrmv rStv Trpotipijijuvon' vrro 
 tZiv diroo'Tokiav. 
 TrpoKct/tai: J. 7 at n-dXcis irpoKetVTai Seiyjua. 
 Trp d s: c. occ. 2 P. 1. 3 Travra ra irpos tfti^t 3. 16 (TTpefiXovaiv irpos ripf 
 
 IBiav avTu>v aTTwXeuiv. 
 Trpo<T84\oiJ,aL: J. 21 ■7rpo<7h£)pfi,€VOi TO IXeos tov KvpCov fip.Siv. 
 ■7rpo<r8oKdta: 2 P. 3. 12 Trpo(r8oK&VTa9 rrfv irapovaiav, 3. 13 koivovs St 
 
 ovpavovs irpoo'SoKSip.fj', 3. 14 TaSra 7rpocr8oKa>|/Tes. 
 irpoo'eijxo/xai: J. 20ej' irvev/juiTi dyttj) Trpoaev)(6fievoi. 
 TT po a e\to : 2P. 1. 19(ji KaXus Trotetre irpoo'cvovTes. 
 irpdo'mTroi': J. 16 OavpA^ovres irpoautira. 
 irpo^rjTtia: 2 P. 1. 20 irSca Trpo^fnjreia ypatjnjs tStias tTrtXvo-tcus ou 
 
 ytVcTat, 1. 21 ov yap ^eXij/wiTt avdpumov ■^i^Oij ■7rpo<ln]Teui wort. 
 irpo^riTtvia: J. 14 lirpo<f>r[Teu(Tev (al, TrpoettnJTtvtrtv) 8e /cot toutois 
 
 irpo<^ijTi;s: 2 P. 2. 16 t^v tou irpo<j>TJTov vapa<j>povCav, 3. 2 pLvqirO^ai 
 
 r&v irpoapiqp.kvtm' pr/pATdiV viro Tfiv dyiW irpoffyriT&v. 
 b. a, TTpOfjiriTiKos: 2 P. 1. 19 /cat f-xofLev ^e/Saiorepov tov irpotfn/TiKOV 
 
 Xoyov. 
 TT p « T o s : 2 P. 2. 20 yeyovev auroTs Ta hrxara xupova Tu>v Ttpwrmf, 1. 20, 
 
 3. s TOVTO irploTov yivaxTKovrti. 
 TT r a im: 2 P. 1. loov /i'^ irTaiatjTe Trore. 
 TT S p : 2 P. 3. 7 Te&rjo-avpurpivoL eurlv irvpi, J. 7 Trupos aiuvtov StXTC 
 
 VTrt^ouo-ai, 28 iTu>t,eTe Ik irvpos dp7ra2[oiTfs. 
 IT u p d 0) : 2 P. 3. 12 oipavot irupou/ttvot Xu^iJo-ovTai, 3. 10 yq TrvpwO'qa-tToi, 
 
 see p. cc, 
 
 p V p. a : 2 P.^ 3. 2 p.vri(r6rjvaA t5v irpouprr)p.ivtov pripAriav viro rwv ayitov 
 irpoijinffTusv, J. 17 p,vi^(T6r]T€ twv pripdrmv t5v npofip^p.evow wro Tav 
 anoo'rdX<i)v. 
 
.INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 233 
 
 h. e. d. p o t ^ 17 8 o v : 2 P. 3. 10 01 ovpavoX poit,riSbv TrapeXev(TOVTai. 
 pvo fJLai: 2 P. 2. 7 StKatov Amr ipviraTO (al. ippva-aro), 2. 9 olSev Kvpios 
 citrejSeTs e/c ireipatr/i.oD pvitrOai. 
 
 e. <T a. p ^: 2 P. 2 10 rois 6m<r<a crapicos ev iinOviii,iq, fiiaafiov irope.vofi.ivov%, 
 2. 18 OE\ca^ov(nv ev liri6v[i,iaK o"ap/cos do'eA.'yeiats Tois oXiycos airotjiev- 
 yovTas, J. 7 dTreXdoScrat OTTMro) trapKOS Irepas, 8 evuirvta^o/xevot orapxa 
 /liei' /uaivovtriv, KvpiorijTa Sc d^croSo-iv, 23 /iio-oSi'TES (cai Tov djro t^s 
 (rapKos itnTiXm/iivov \iT&va. 
 
 aeipd, see <rcipds and p. cxciv. 
 
 c. d. <r £ I p o s (aZ. (Ttpos) : 2 P. 2. 4 o'Cipois (a?. o"etpats) ^ocftov Taprapaxras 
 TrapiSutKev eis Kpi(riv nqpauixivovi. 
 
 e. (rKrjviap.a: 2 P. 1. 13 £0' otroi/ ei/xl Iv toutm t£ (rKrjvtiiJuiTi, u ra^^iv^ 
 eoTtv ij aTTo^eo-is toB o-(ojv<o/iaTos /iov, pp. cxx, cxzl. 
 
 (TkXijpos: J. IB Trept -iravriav twv (TKXrip&v {al. add. koymv) &v £A.d\ijtrov. 
 
 (T K d T o s : 2 P. 2. 17 and J. 13 oTs o ^dijbos toS ctkotous ets atGva TCT^pjjTat. 
 
 2dSojua:2P. 2. 6 TrdXeis 5o8d/«.(ov Kat Tofioppa? re^ptacrwi KareKpivev, 
 J. 7 'SioSop.a KOI Tofioppa. koL at irept aitots irdXeis irpoKeivrai Seiy/aa. 
 
 (To^ia: 2 P. 3. 15 KOTO. T'^v 8o^ei(7av auru aotjiiav. 
 
 <r o <j> i t, m '• 2 P. 1. 16 <Ti<TO^UTiJi,evoi'i fivOovs i^aKoXovOi^craVTCs. 
 
 aotpoi : J . 25 judvo) (Toi^u ®eu (aJ. om. (700(3). 
 
 (T IT e u 8 (0 : 2 P. 3. 12 cnreuSovTas T^v irapovcrlav T^s To5 ©col ^/tepas. 
 
 c. (i. (TIT I X ct s : J- 12 oStoi £i(ru' [oJ] £1/ rais dyoiirais u/i£v (tttiXoiScs (TWEvai- 
 ^ovjuEvot, p. xi. 
 
 6. C?. (tV t a. o $ : 2 P. 2. 13 crmkoL koI ixS>iji,oi h/TpvtjiSn'Teg iv TaTs dirarats 
 (cd. dycijrais) auToiv (rweviajfov/ievot v/uv. 
 
 b. (T IT I X. 6 10 : J. 23 TOV dTTO T^S CTOpKOS £(r7rtA.(0/A£I'0I' XlTMl/a. 
 
 (rirot;8(i^a): 2P. l.io <nrovSd(raT€ /SEjSaiW u/tGv T'^v KKrjdLV kol EKXoyrjv 
 iroiAixrOaL, 1 . 15 oTrou8(£(r(o Se Kat ek(I(7tote ex^iv £/xSs T'^v toutoji/ iJ,vr}p,riv 
 "iroiiurBax, 3. 14 (rirov8(i(raT£ ainriKoi koX d/uo/iijrot airu evptOTJvai. 
 
 (TTTOvS^: 2 P. 1.5 (7n'0'u8ijv 7ra(rav TrapciortviyKaVTei, J. 3 7ra(raj' (TTrouSiji' 
 iroioi5/t£vos ypd<j>eiv vfuv.. 
 
 b. c. d. (T T 17 p I y /i d s : 2 P. 3. 17 (^uX{i(7(r£(r^£ iva /x^ ekiteotjte toC i8tov 
 
 tmypiy/iov. 
 <r T7] p i^m : 2 P. 1. 12 Etrnjpiyp.Ei'ous ev T'g ■irapovcry aX-qOua. 
 (J- T oi^tZov: 2 P. 3. 10 (TTOi^Eia Kavaov/xeva \v6Tq(T£Tai, 3. 12 (ttoix"" 
 
 Kavaov/ieva r'^KErat. 
 <TT 6 fLa: J. 18 TO (rrd/io airoii' XoXei vTrepoyKa. 
 
 c. e. (TTpcfikou)', 2 P. 3. 16 8i;crvdijrci riva a 01 ap,a6ets <rrpi^\ovtTiV. 
 
 a V : J. 9 iiriTinTjaai croi Kvptos ; (u /x e T s) 2 P. 3. 17 v/xeis GUI', dyamjTOt, 
 <j>vX.d<T(rt(r6€, J. 17 iJ/XEts 8e, dyoirjjTot, ian)<T6y)T€ rtov ptukdrtav, 20 v/aeTs 
 8e, dyairffroC, EauTois ev dyoiirj; ©£oi3 r-qprjcrare, 2 P. 1.5 e'iri)(op7iy'iQ<raT€ 
 ev ijj iri<TTa v/juav Trjv dperqv, 1, 10 (nrovSd<TaTe ^e^alav vfiiov ttjv Kkrjtriv 
 irouio'Oai, 1. 19 £(os ov ■^fj.ipa Siavydo'Tj iv rais KapStais vp.Zv, 3. 1 8iEyEi- 
 pci) V/X.UI/ EV vwop.vrj(Tei ryjv e'lXiKpivrj Sidvoiav, 3. 2 rijs toIv d'jro(rTdX(uv 
 vjuu;' £iToX^s> J. 12 oStoi £i(rtv ot £V Tais dyiiTrais vp,u>v (nriX(i8£s, 20 tij 
 ayimrdTQ vp-Siv irtb-TEt, 2 P. 1. 2 X'^^P^s ^/^i'' "ai iipfr(vr), 1. 8 TavTa v/aTv 
 irapovra, 1.11 im)(op'qy7i6i^(TeTai. v/uv ^ Ei(ro8os, 1. 16 iyvutpC(Tap,ev vplv, 2. 1 
 EC vjuu/ i<rovT(U ij/fvSoSiSdaKaXoi, 2, 13 (rwEV((>xov/xEVO( v/xiv, 3, 1 8£VTEpav 
 
234 INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 
 
 v/uv ypd<l>(0 emcTTokriv, J. 2 eXeos vfuv TrXriOvvOtir], 3 ypa^etv vfuv, ib. 
 
 ypdil/ai v/juv ; 2 P. 1. 12 i/^as vTroiufiv^crKeiv, 1. 13, 15, 2. 3, 3. 8, 9, 11, J. 24. 
 crvfi^aivia: 2 P. 2. 22 a-VfJi,l3c^r]Kev airrolq to t^s d.A.7;^oSs Trapoi/ttos. 
 Su/te(uv:2P. 1.1 STJ/te<i)i/ (aZ. Si><uv) IleVpos, pp. 180 f, ii. 
 
 rr vv: 2 P. 1. 18 (TVV aVTli OVTK iV TW Opii T^ dytOI. 
 
 a-vvaTrdyia: 2 P. 3. 17 T-g rfiv a.Oi(rfi,(ov TrXdvrj crwatraxOevTes. 
 
 c. C?. trvi/euioj^eo/tai: 2 P. 2, 13 tvTpu^SvTes ev rais airarats avrZv 
 
 (TVV€VIOXpVIJI,€VOl VfUV, J. 12 OVToC flcTlV \pi\ iv TttlS dyOTTaLi VfllOV 
 
 (rirtXaScs (7W£i;<o;(Oi;/i£voi. 
 trvviaTrjiJ.L: 2 P. 3. 5 y^ ef uSaros Kai 8t' vSaroi (ravta-rSxra rif toS 
 
 0£oi) koyia. 
 a- <i^ti): J. 6 Xaov ex yrji AlyvwTov trwo-as, 23 o6s /*£!' e\eaT€ SiaKpivoiievovi 
 
 A ^\ ft, 
 
 ous oe o"(i)4eT£. 
 
 (T St p-a : J. 9 wept toB Mojucrecos o-ca/xaTos. 
 
 a-inT-qp: 2 P. 1. 1 Tol ©eoB ^/ifiv Kol (raJT^pos 'I.X., 1. 11 rrp/ auovCov 
 /Soo-tXetav ToS Kvplov kol (royrTJpos 'I.X. 2. 20 ev eiriyvuKTei tov ®eou xai 
 o-toTnpos 'I.X., 3. 2 ToB Kvpiov koX cwrnpos, 3. 18 avidvtre iv yvoxrei 
 TOW Kuptov Kat cru>rqpo%, J. 25 p.ov(j) <a)e<j) trioTqpi ripjav ota J.. -A.. Tou 
 
 KVplOV flflUiV. 
 
 (T (OTTj p Ca : 2 P. 3. 15 T^v To5 KvpLov Tjp.uiv pjXKpodvpi.iav aoirripiav 
 yfyaxrOt, 3. 3 irdcrav <nrovty)v iToiovp,tvo% ypd^tiv vpAV rrepi n/s KOtn;s 
 
 ^p.fil' <T(OT7]pCaS, 
 
 a. T apr a p6(jy : 2 P. 2. 4 o-eipoig ^0(^ou rapTapcocras irapeScoKCV, pp. vi, Ixii. 
 
 fi. c Ta;(ivds: 2P. 1. u raxiv^ eorti' ^ a7ro'^«(rts toS ctktjvm/witos /tou, 
 2. 1 «7rayovT£s lauroTs Ta;(ij'^i' dirolXeiov. 
 
 T £ : J. 6 dyy£\oi;s re tous /t^ nyp^iravTas t^v fiaurSv dp)(riv . . . TeTijpi^Kev. 
 
 T £ K V o V : 2 P. 2. 14 Kardpas reicva. 
 
 h. c. d. T €<j>p6u>: 2 P. 2. 6 itoXeis SoSo/iuv Kai Vop.oppa's Te<l>piocrai 
 KwreKpivtv, p. vii. 
 
 c. T Tj K la : 2 P. 3. 12 <rTOi;^£to Kav<roi;/i£va rirJKfTai. 
 
 T i; p £ ft) : 2 P. 2. 4 £is KpCcriv Tr)povp.£vovi {al. KoXatpp^evov^ TTjptiv), 2. 9 
 dSiKOvs £is -^fiepav Kpicreoti KoXa^o/xevovi Trjpelv, 2. 17 ois 6 ([o<^os tov 
 (TKOTODS TfTT^pTjTai, 3. 7 ot Se vSv ovpavol . . . T£6r](7avpurp,€i/oi £«riv 
 TTvpl Tripovp,evoi £is fip-epav Kpiaewi, J. 1 T£T7;pi;p.£vois /cXi^rois, 
 6 dyyfiXovs Tois fi^ rripi^cravTas rrjv lairroii' dp;^v £is Kpuriv /lEyaXijs 
 7]/iepai TCTT^priKtv, 13 oTs 6 ^6<j)0i tov (Tkotous £is aifiva reTrjprjrai, 
 21 lavrovs £V dyaTnj 0£oS n/p^traTe. 
 
 T I 6 t; ju. t : 2 P. 2. 6 V7rd8£iy/xa /i£XXdvT<i)v da-i^icriv (al. avePiiv) TtOeiKtas- 
 
 r I p-Tj: 2 P. 1. 17 XafSwv Trapa ®£oS TroTpos Tip,r]V Kal Sdfov. 
 
 T t'/i 10 s : 2 P. 1. 4 Ta rijuia Kal p-iyuTTo. vp.iv £7rayy£X/«iTa (a?, ra p-fyuna 
 Kai Ti/ua ij/j,iv ETrayy.). 
 
 T I s : 2 P. 2. 19 S ydp t« ^mjTat towto) Kai SfSovXiorai (*?. ojm. icat), 3. 9 
 IDS TtvES PpaSvTTjTa T/yoOi'Tai . . . pi) )8ovXdp.£vds rwas diroX£O-0at, 
 3. 16 £1/ ats EOTtv Svavorjrd riva, J. 4 TrapeureSvTiirav ydp tives dvOpuiiroi. 
 The interrogative tis does not occur. 
 
 c. a. T o I d Of 8 £ : 2 P. 1 . 17 <f)iovrj% huxOitirri^ aurw TOtacrSf. 
 
 ToXjudd): J. 9 ovK iToKprjvev KpCcnv eireveyKeiv /3Xacr(/n;/t(as. 
 
 c. d T o X /i 1; T ij s : 2 P. 2. 10 roX/xijTai avj^dSEw. 
 
INDEX OF GREEK WORDS 235 
 
 T d IT s • 2 p. 1 . 19 o)s X.v)(y<a tjiaivovTi iv avxfirjpif totto). 
 
 TOTc: 2 P. 3. 60 TOTe Koo'iJ.o's airmXero, J. 9 on Mi^i'^^ . . . tot^ SiaKpivo- 
 
 fifvoi SieXrycTO (al. 6 8c M...,OT£). 
 T p € /xw : 2 P. 2. ID Sd^as ov rpi/jLovcnv. 
 TpoTTOs: J. 7 Tov 01.1,010V Tpotrov toijtois iKTTopvevcrairaL, 
 T pv <j>i^ : 2 P. 2. IS rjSovijV rj-yov/jLivoi TrjV iv ijli-epa. rpvifiriv. 
 rv<f>X 6 i : 2 P. 1.9 TV(j>X,6's ottiv fiviawd^iav. 
 
 vBia p: 2 P. 3. 6 y^ e^ ^SttTos <cat Si' vSaTOi (rweo'THia'a, 3, 6 o Tore koct/aos 
 
 vSaTi KaraKkvcrOiii diralXeTO. 
 i; I d s : 2 P. 1 . 17 oStos ottiv o vtds /iou 6 aya'Tn/jTos (al. b uids /*ou, 6 
 
 dyamjTos /xou, oStos iaTiv). 
 V IT d p )( (D : 2 P. 1.8 TaSra £/xtv vird.p)(0VTa {al. irapovTo), 2. 19 auTol SoCXoi 
 
 ijrdjo;^ovT€Si 3. 11 iroTaTroiis Set vTrdp^nv v/jia.^. 
 c. e. V T e p o y K o s : 2 P. 2. . is virepoyKo, [laraioTrjTOi t^tOeyyofi^EVOi, p. 
 
 xxxvii, J. 16 TO (TTOixa avT&v XaXtl virepoyKa. 
 c. vTr i\ij): J. 7 mjpos aimw'ou Siktjv rTrej^ouerat. 
 ■u ir d : (c. g'ew.) 2 P. 1. 17 c^aiv^s ivex^eifrrj^ avriS mo (aTro ?, see p. cxciii) t^s 
 
 /;i£yaXo7rp£7roi)s S6$r]?, 1. 21 wo irvevfiaro's ayiov (jtepo/JievoL, 2. 7 oiKaiov 
 
 A(i)T KWTairovoviJi.iVOV virb tijs tSv a6i(rii,(ov iv acreXyeiq. avacrrpotfi^i 
 
 ipvcraro, 2. 17 o/j-L^Xai virb XatXaTTOs eXauvd/iEvai, 3. 2 fji,vi](r6rjv(u tSv 
 
 irpoeipriiJi.ivmv pij/idrcov vtto rfiv ayiiav irpo^TjTmv, J. 12 vecfyeXau avvopoL 
 
 VTrb avifiMV Trapai^Epd/iicvai, 17 fivrja-OrjTe rlov ptj/iaTutv tu>v Trpoeiprrnj.evotv 
 
 vTrb tZv airoaToXiav. 
 
 (c. ace.) J. 6 dyyeXous . . . vtto (|d<^ov TeT^prjKev. 
 uirdSeiy/ta: 2 P. 2. 6 viroSetyfia fieXXovrmv acrejiitv reOeiKm^, p. oxcv. 
 inro^vyLov: 2 P. 2. 16 mo^vyiov d<j)(i>vov iv a.v6pu>7rov i^uvi} <j>6eyia- 
 
 /levov. 
 VTTO ihifi-vrj a Km: 2 P. 1. 12 aii vfnai inrofiifivqcTKav Trepl towcov, J. 5 
 
 wo/iv^o-ot 8e u/tas jSovXojuai. 
 vird/ivrjo-is: 2P. 1. 13 Sieyeipctv £/Aas ev virofi-vqiTa, 3. 1 Sieyeipm v[iS)V 
 
 iv viroiairjtrii T-qv eiKiKpivrj hvavouiv. 
 VTro/J.ovrj: 2 P. 1.5 (eTrij^opryy^o-are) ev Tg iyKpareCa t^v wo/tov^i', ev 8e 
 
 Tg viro/iOKg t-^v eio-ejSetav. 
 vTro(TTpi<j)u>: 2 P. 2. 21 mo(TTpeij/ai ex T^s TrapaSofleioTjs auToTs dyias 
 
 6vro\'5s. 
 c, 5s : 2 P. 2. 22 Ss Xovcrafievrj ets KuXwr/xov j8opj8dpov. 
 
 fj) a IV <o : 2 P. 1 . 19 irpoo'e^ovTcs ais \ij;)^a> (^aivoi/ri ev aup^j^pu roiria. 
 <j)€iSofii,ai: 2 P. 2. 4 dyyeXuv d/xapnjo-dvTwv oix e0£«raTO, 2. 5 dp}(acoi; 
 
 KotT/iov ovK i<j>u<raTO. 
 <f>ip<a: 2 P. 1. 17 (jxavrji ivexOeCarrj'S avT(o ToiaxrSe, 1. 18 Tavrypf T^v ^iovr\v 
 
 ^/ieis ■^Kova'a/Miv i^ oiipavov ive)(6ela-av, 1. 21 ov yap Oeki^/iari 
 
 dvdpdirov rjviyfdrj irpotjyqTua irorijib. vrrb m/euixaros dyiov ^epoixevoi, 2. 11 
 
 oi €f>ipoii<Tiv Kar airuiv pXd.(7if>7]it.ov Kpiiriv. 
 iftdiyyo/jLai: 2 P. 2. 16 virot,vyiov S.<j>u>vov iv dvdpdtrrov <l><x>vrj 
 
 ^^cyfo/ievov, 2. 18 virepoyKa /iaTaidnjTos <^6eyyd/iEVoi. 
 ijiOeipm: 2 P. 2. 12 ev rg ^6op^ avrwv Koi ^^apijcrovrat (a?. Kara^O.), 
 
 J. 10 ev TouTois tj>OdpovTai. 
 
236 INDEX OP GREEK WORDS 
 
 c. d. f^Ba/oTTOjpa'Oi : J. 12 oiiTot iurtv BevSpa <l>6ivoiT<apiva Sucapira, pp. 55-59. 
 <j} 6 opd: 2 P. 1.4 &irotl>vy6vT€i rrji ev tS koctijm iv hriOvfiiq, <j)6opas, 2. 12 
 
 yiyewrjfieua <^v(nKa tU SXioaiv koX ij)Oopdv, . . . h> r-g <l)6opa, avrtov Kai 
 fj)6ap7JcT0VTai, 2. 19 Sov\oi VTra.p\oVTii -nji <^6opai, pp. 190, 176-9. 
 
 d. e. <l>L\a8eX.<j)ia: 2 P. 1. 7 {(wixofyrfyria-art) iv ry tvae^tiq. rrjv 
 
 tf>i\aZe\(j>iav, cv Sc rij if>iXaZiK^ia, rrjv aydirrfv. 
 ^ o yS o $ : J. 23 ovs 8c cXcarc ev <l>60<f. 
 <j>v\d<r<r u) : 2 P. 2. 5 oySoov Nfic SiKawcrvyris K-^pvKa l^vXaiev, 3. 17 
 
 <j)v\a(r(rea'6e iva firj . . . iKireoTjre tov ISCov o-tT^piyfJUw, J. 24 t<3 
 
 8vvap,ev(o <f>v\.d^ai, v/xai aTrraCo'Tovi. 
 d. <^v(r ik6%: 2 p. 2. 12 ^<j!a yeyewijiieva i^vaiKo. eis aXfticrtv, p. viii. 
 c. d. <l)vcriKwi: J. 10 oo-a 8e (jyvaiKSis As to a\oyo Z[^ iTnaravrai. 
 <f>vcri9: 2 P. 1.4 iva yivrjtrOt Oelai koiviovoI (fyvaeias. 
 (jxov^ : 2 P. 1. 17 <I>(ovt}s ive.xBiUrq'i aur^ Totoo-Se vtto (diro?) t^s /teyoXo- 
 
 irpeTTOVi So^s, 1. 18 Tavrrp/ rrjV <l>iavTp' ^/i£ts rjKOvirafLev, 2. 16 wo^uyuji' 
 
 aifiwvov hf avOpWTTOv fjxavfj <j>6ey^d.iX(.vov, p. Ixi. 
 
 c. c^. <j>w<rtj>6po%: 2 P. 1. 19 ea)s ov <l)ui<r<j>6pos avareCXri iv rais xapSCaK 
 
 vjiiSn/, 
 
 \dpi?'. 2 P. 1. 2 X'''P" ^M'*' ""' flpi^vr) ir\r]$w0eLTij, Si. 18 av^dvere iv 
 
 ■j(dpiTi KoX yvuMxa tov Kvpiov ■^/iwv, J. 4 t^ to5 ©eoS ^dpira fteraTir 
 
 OivTa CIS dcreAyeuiv, p. 26. 
 ■^d piv : J. 16 OavfUxt/m/TK ir/ootrawra uxfttkiai X'^P"'* 
 XtAiot: 2 P. 3. 8 /ii'a rifiipa irapa KvpCio ois x''^ '"7 *"*' X''^ *"7 ^ 
 
 f/p^pa fjua. 
 X I T o> V : J. 28 /turowTes koi tw diro t^s crapKos ia-iriXuifievav xiT&va. 
 X. pia-Tos- never alone, nor before 'Ij;<roSs, follows 'IijeroSs in 2. P. 1. 1 
 
 bis, 1. 8, 1. 11, 1. 14, 1. 16, 2. 20, 3. 18, and in J. 1, 4, 17, 21, 25. 
 XP 6v o 9 '■ J. 18 £7r' i(r)(dTov )(p6v(yv, 
 p((i)p£a>: 2 P. 3. 9 Travras «« fierdvouw xfapridai. 
 
 a. c. i^ev8o8i8aa'KaXos: 2 F. 2. 1 us xai ev v^iv ^trovrtu ^ev8o8(- 
 
 SocKoXoi. 
 J. ij/ev8orrpo<f>iJTT]s: 2 P. 2. 1 eyevovro 84 xai i/reu8(ray}o^^(U ev tu 
 
 Xau. 
 1^ u T^ ij : 2 P. 2. 8 <I/V)(rfv SiKaCav dvo/iois e/jyois iPaxrdviZfV, 2. 14 8e\ea^ovre$ 
 
 \liv)(as dirn)piKTOVi. 
 
 d. e, fpv\LK6^: 3. 19 oJrot' eto-iv \j/v)(i.ko\ wvajpui p.^ exovres, pp. xxiv, 
 
 clxxxvii f . 
 
 a> s : followed by substantive (a) 2 P. 1. 19, 2. 12, 3. 8, 3. 10, 3. le, J. 7, 10 ; 
 
 followed by verb (j8) 2 P. 2. 1, 3. 9 ; followed by participle 
 
 2 P. 1. 8, cf. pp. Hi, cii. 
 & <f> tX. (a : J. le co^eXtas xdpiv. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 Abbott, E. A., vi, xxvi, xxx, xliii, 
 oxxvii, cxxix, oc, 97, 110, 132, 157, 
 160, 174 
 
 Abraham, Assumption of, 36 
 
 Adjectives in J. and 2 P. xlii ; in 1 P., 
 xcv 
 
 Advent, Second, 209 f . 
 
 Adverbs, li, ci 
 
 Agapd, 40, 133 f., 200 
 
 Alford, 27, 108, 112, 126, 161 
 
 Alliteration, lix, civ 
 
 Anacoluthon in Jude and 2 P. , liv ; in 
 
 1 P. cUi 
 Anathemas, 70 
 
 Angels, fallen, clviii-clxvi, 73 
 
 Antecedent of relative, ambigaous, xli, 
 xoiv 
 
 Aorist Ind. answering to English Per- 
 fect in J. and 2 P. xliii; in 1 P. , xcv f . ; 
 Aor. Imper. of urgency, xliii f . , xcvi ; 
 Aor. Inf. of a momentary act, xliii f. ; 
 Aor. Part, expresses antecedence 
 either temporal or logical, xlv-xlvii, 
 used for Perf. Part., xlviif., xcvii f.; 
 Pres. and Aor. combined ypiifieiv, 
 ypi^at, 22 ; Ti/tore and Ti/iiiiraTf, 
 xcvi ; Aor. and Perf. Part, combined 
 xcvii 
 
 Apocalypse of Peter, resemblance to 
 
 2 P. , cxxx-cxxxiv 
 
 Apocryphal books used by early Christ- 
 ian writers, especially Jude, cliii 
 foil. See under Enoch, Moses, 
 Apocalypse of Peter, Testaments of 
 the Patriarchs 
 
 Ark a symbol of the Churchy vii, 
 ixxxi-lxxxiii 
 
 Arnold, T., on the interpretation of 
 prophecy, 196-198 
 
 Article, use of, in J. and 2 P., xxvi- 
 XXXV ; in 1 P., Ixxxix, xc; omission 
 of the article in poetry and prophecy, 
 xxxiv, XXXV ; art. with two nouns, 
 XXXV, 27 ; wrongly inserted in text 
 J. V. 5 (clxxxiv) ; in J. o. 12(oIxxxv); 
 2 P. 28 (cxcv) 
 
 Authenticity, see Evidence 
 
 Babylon a name for Rome with the 
 early Christians, cxxxix 
 
 Balaam, 39, 136-8, 201-205; Balaam- 
 ites, clxxvi 
 
 B.'s ass speaking with man's voice, 
 X, 203 f. 
 
 Balfour, A. , on cosmical changes, 208 
 
 Baptism illustrated by Noah's deliver- 
 ance, Ixxxi-lxxxiii ; sin after, vi, xii, 
 XX, 30, 96, 97 
 
 Batiffol on the Agape, 200 f , 
 
 Bede, 28 
 
 Bengel, 33, 131 
 
 Bigg, ix, xvii, xxii, xxiv, xxviii, xlvi f. , 
 xoiv, oii, ovii, oxxvi, cxxxiv, 25, 28, 
 35, 40, 95, 103 f., 119, 126, 129 f, 
 133, 144, 154, 159, 160, 168 
 
 Cain and Korah highly esteemed by 
 
 the Ophites, 38 
 CaUing of God, 20 f. ; through the life 
 
 of Christ, 189 
 Calvin, 165 f. 
 Cases in J. and 2 P. , xxxv-xxxix ; in 
 
 1 P., xoi-xeiii 
 Charles, 25, 26, 36, 45, 99, 121, 162 
 Chase, iii, xxi, xxv, Ix, cxvii, cxxx, 
 
 cxl f., 19, 25, 31, 33, 41, 54, 195 
 Chiasmus, 162 
 Christianity, continual growth essential 
 
 to its life, 65-69 
 Climax, 90 
 Compounds with if/euSo-, 115 ; with iiri, 
 
 see ^-jrayavl^ofiai, ivlyvanrts ; with 
 
 Ttapd, Ix ; compound adverbs, 119 
 Conflagration, final, 154, 155, 158 foil., 
 
 207-209 
 Confusion between ^yaeis and iiieU, 
 
 cxcii f. oxcix, 87 ; between . and ei, 
 
 oxcviii 
 Creed, its growth, 23 
 
 Deissman, 69 ; resemblances of his 
 
 Carian decree to 2 P. cxxx 
 Deluge, why substituted by 2 P. for 
 
 J.'s punishment of Israel, vi f. 
 Denial of a person, 72 
 Derivations in -ovia from nouns in -av 
 
 137 ; in -ovri from -os, 147 
 Divine nature, 87 ; man's participation 
 
 in, 190 
 Dollinger, xxi f. 
 
238 
 
 INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 Doxology, 52-54 
 Driver, Prof, clix, olxvi 
 
 Eight, a mystic number, 192, see 
 
 'Ogdoad' 
 Elijah's spirit opposed to the Christian 
 
 spirit, clxv 
 Ellipsis in J. and 2 P., lii ; in 1 P., 
 
 ciii 
 Enoch, contrasted with Noah vii ; 
 
 book of, oliii f., clvi, clx, 24, 26, 
 
 28, 30 f., 40, 42, 43, 44, 45, 76; 
 
 Secrets of Enoch, olxi, 28, 40 
 Estius, 28 
 Evidence external for Jude, oxiv, cxv ; 
 
 for 2 P. , oxvi-cxxiii ; internal for 
 
 Jude, cxlvi foil.; for 2 P. cxxiv-oxxvii 
 Ewald, 29, 35 
 Excommunication, 70 f. 
 
 Faith, right and wrong ways of defend- 
 ing it, 70, 71 
 Feltoe, 118 
 Field, cxoiii, 36, 64, 99, 107 
 
 Gender in J. and P. xl. , in 1 P. xciii 
 Gospel of St. Mark alluded to, 194 
 Gow, 55 
 Grammar of Jude and 2 P. Introd. ch. 
 
 ii, xxvi-lv 
 Gwynn, clxxx foil. 1 
 
 Hamack, cxiv, 67 
 
 Hare, Julius, 50 
 
 Hatch, 172 
 
 Hell, harrowing of, Ixxxiii f. 
 
 Hellenism in 2 P., iii 
 
 Hendiadys, liv 
 
 Heresies of the later part of the First 
 
 Cent., olxvii-clxxx 
 Hofmann, 25, 129, 132, 134 
 Homer, G., 1, clxxx, foil. 
 Hort, xxii, xxv, Ixxiv, Ixxxv, xcvii, 
 
 cv, olxxxiv, cxcvii; 20, 21, 25, 52, 
 
 139, 162, 167, 184, 187, 188 
 Hundhausen 88, 90, 94, 136, 140, 141, 
 
 159 
 
 Imperative, xliii f., xcvi 
 
 Infinitive with art, xcvii, rare in N.T., 
 
 xlv ; other uses, xliv f. , xcvi f. 
 Inflexions, unusual in J. and 2 P., 
 
 xxvi ; in 1 P., Ixxxix 
 
 James, M. , cxxxi foil. , civ 
 Jerome on Epp. of Peter, Ixviii 
 Josephus, resemblances to 2 P. , cxxvii 
 
 foil. 
 Joshua, 29 
 Jude : Relation of his Epistle to 2 P. , 
 
 Introd., i-xxv ; detailed comparison 
 
 of contents -i-xv ; doctrinal difier- 
 ences and resemblances, xv-xxi ; 
 priority of Jude discussed, xxi-xxv ; 
 Grammar and style, xxvi-lxvii ; life 
 and character, cxlvi-clii ; use of 
 apocryphal books, cliii-clvii ; his 
 account of the Libertines, clxvii foil. ; 
 fondness for triplets, Ivi f. ; written 
 to Jews, 20, fragment contained in 
 Fayoum papyrus, clxxxvi ; authen- 
 ticity, cxv f. ; date oxlv 
 
 Kenyon, F. G., cxcvii, coi 
 Knowledge of God, its effects, 183-7 
 
 Life, meaning of, 187-9 
 
 Lightfoot, Bp. 18, 24, 26, 34, 41, 52 n., 
 57 f., 85, 87, 117, 171 foU., 177, 
 cxxvii, cxxxvii foil., clxxxii 
 
 Luther, 51 
 
 Mark, his connexion with Peter, Ixviii ; 
 
 his Gospel alluded to in 2 P. 1'', 
 
 cxiii folL 
 MSS., 1 ; errors caused by love of 
 
 uniformity, 82, TifieTs and w/ieis con- 
 founded, 87 
 Michael contending for the body of 
 
 Moses, 74 ; story generalized in 2 P., 
 
 ix 
 Miracles, 202 
 Moods, xliii f., xcvif. 
 Moral difficulties of the O.T., clxv 
 Moses, Assumption of, cUil foil., 36 
 Moulton, J. H., 6r. of N.T., xxvi, 
 
 XXXV f., xlii f., xliv, xlvii f., Ij, 
 
 Ixxxix 
 Munro on damno c. dbl.=KaTa<TTpo^TJ 
 
 KaraKplva, 124 
 
 Negative in J. and 2 P., 1 f. ; in IP., 
 
 c, oi 
 Nestle, 83. 127, 128, 152, cxcix 
 Number in J. and 2 P., xxxix, xl; in 
 
 1 P. xciii 
 
 Nicolaitan heresy, 38, 39, clxxvi f., 
 clxxx 
 
 Ogdoad, vii, Ivii, cxxvi, 192 
 
 Old Testament, allusions in 1 P. and 
 
 2 P. Ixxxv-lxxxix 
 Optative rare in N.T., xliv, xcvi 
 
 Participle sometimes used instead of 
 finite verb, xlviii, xcvii, see aorist 
 
 Paul, his letter cited in 2 P. 3'°, sup- 
 posed by Zahn to be lost cxxxvii, 
 but probably our Ep. to the Romans, 
 164 ; his collected Epistles, cxxvii ; 
 Lightfoot's account of his stay in 
 Rome, cxxxvii foil. 
 
INDEX OF SUBJECTS 
 
 •j;ii) 
 
 Peace caused by the knowledge of God, 
 183-187 
 
 Periphrasis, liii ; ' reverential,' xvii f . 
 
 St. Peter, names by which he is known, 
 180; Life and character as seen in 
 the N.T. ovi-oxiv ; agree with 1 P. 
 not with 2 P. cxi, oxivf. ; Chase and 
 Zahn on his later life cxl foil. ; his 
 crucifixion, clxi 
 
 2 Peter, vagueness of, ix ; love of itera- 
 tion, Ivii f. ; criticisms on his style, 
 lix-lxvii ; reference to a former epis- 
 tle, xiii ; allusions to Gospels Ixxviii; 
 to O.T. Ixxxviii ; doctrine of, xvi-xxi ; 
 later than Jude, xxi-xxv; its rela- 
 tion to 1 P., Ixix-cxv ; probable date, 
 cxxvii ; not addressed to the readers 
 of 1 P. , oxxxv ; addressed to a 
 Graeco-Jewish church, cxxxvi 
 
 1 Peter, influenced by the writings 
 of St. Paul, xxiv, XXV ; sense of 
 rhythm, civ; full of reminiscences 
 of Christ's life and teachings, 
 Ixxvi-lxxx ; Grammar and Style, 
 Ixxxix-ov ; allusions to O.T. Ixxxv ; 
 ambiguity in, cv 
 
 Peter, Gospel of, Ixxxiv 
 
 Philo, resemblances to 2 P. cxxix f. 
 
 Pleonasm, Hi, ciii 
 
 Plummer, xxii, 161 f. 
 
 Plumptre, 48 
 
 Plural of abstract nouns, 161 
 
 Prayer in the Holy Spirit, 78 
 
 Prepositions, excess of, in N.T., Ixv, 
 xciii 
 
 Pronouns in J. and 2 P., xl-xlii; in 
 1 P. xciii-xov 
 
 Prophecy, 111-115 ; spoken of both in 
 1 P. and 2 P. , Ixxxvii f . , cxlii ; Arnold 
 on, 196-198 ; Baxter on, 197 
 
 Pseudepigrapha not the same as for- 
 geries, cxxv ; condemned by the early 
 Christians, not as fictions, but as 
 hei:etical, cxxiv f. 
 
 Bampf, 40 
 
 Ramsay, 39 
 
 Readings of cod. B tested, cci f. 
 
 Reiteration in 2 P., Iviii ; in 1 P., civ 
 
 Repentance not limited to this life, 
 
 vii ; possible after falling away, xx 
 Rhythm of J. and 2 P., Iviii f., Ixii f. ; 
 
 in 1 P., civ 
 Richards, H., xxxvii, 86 
 Robinson, A., 19, 26, 63, 74, 171 foil. 
 
 176, 179 
 Rome, church in, oxxxvii foil. ; Peter's 
 
 connexion with, cxl f. 
 Ryle, clix, olxvi. 
 
 Salutation, form of, 21 ; In 2 I'. 1H2 
 
 Sanday, oxxxii 
 
 Satan, clxi foil., 74-76 
 
 Seven, a mystic number, iii, 44, 192 
 
 Silvanus, oxxxiv; in Rome, oxxxvii, 
 
 cxli 
 Simon Magus, clxxviii f. 
 V. Soden, 94 
 ' Sons of God,' how explained, olviii 
 
 foil. 
 Sorites or climax, 90 f . 
 Spirits in prison, Ixxxiii f. 
 Spitta, xxii f., clxxxiv, cxoiii, cxciv, 25, 
 
 42, 51, 64, 82, 83, 87, 95 f., 97, 
 
 100, 108, 113, 118, 123, 129 f., 131, 
 
 133 f., 168, 159 
 Style of 2 P., objections to, lix foil. 
 Subjunctive, xliv, xcvi 
 Superlative joined with positive, 86, 
 
 cxcii 
 
 Taylor, C, 39 
 
 Tennant, clxif. 
 
 Tenses, xliiif., xov f. 
 
 Testaments of the Patriarchs, civ, clxiii 
 
 Text, 4^15, Introduction on, olxxxi- 
 
 ccii 
 Tischendorf, olxxxiii 
 Tradition as a fact, 61 ; contents of, 
 
 62 ; its use, 65 ; danger of its misuse, 
 
 67 
 Transfiguration, accounts compared, 
 
 106 f., 195 
 Tregelles, clxxxiii 
 Trench, 57 
 Triplet a feature of J. 's style, Ivi ; 
 
 found also in James, Ivii 
 
 Vansittart, exvii n. 
 
 Verb, inflexions, xxvi; moods and 
 
 tenses, xliii foil., xcvf. 
 Version revised, faults in, 93 ; versions, 
 
 Syriac and Egyptian, clxxxi 
 Virtues, Christian, list of, Ivii, 90f., 
 
 191 ; divine' and human, 86 
 Vocabulary of 1 P. and 2 P. compared, 
 
 Ixix-lxxxvi; of 2 P. criticized, Ix, 
 
 foil. 
 Voices, rare uses of, xlviiif., xcviiif. 
 
 Way of truth, 198 f. 
 
 Weiss B., 18 
 
 Wernle, 67 
 
 Westoott, 38, 88, 167, 209, cxv-cxvii 
 
 Weymouth, 23 
 
 Wordsworth, Bp. Chr. Ixii, 41 
 
 Zahn, xxiif., clxxxvii, cxlif. clxxv, 20, 
 24,25,30, 39, 167, 168 f. 
 
Richard Clay and Sons, Limited, 
 
 bread street hill, e.c., and 
 
 bungay, suffolk.