to the epistle of James.  In either case the canonical authority of the epistle holds good.  The close relation between this epistle and the second chapter of Peter’s second epistle has already been noticed.  See above, No. 13.  It was probably anterior in time to that epistle, but not separated from it by a great number of years.  If we may infer anything from the abundant use made by the writer of Jewish history and tradition, the persons addressed are Jewish Christians.

19.  Eusebius classes this epistle also among the disputed writings (Hist.  Eccl., 2. 23; 3. 25), yet the testimonies to its genuineness are ample—­the Muratorian canon, Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Jerome, etc.

It was objected to this epistle in ancient times that the writer quotes from the apocryphal book of Enoch (verses 14, 15).  To this it may be answered—­(1) that, if this be the case, Jude does not sanction the book of Enoch as a whole, but only this particular tradition embodied in it; (2) that the writer of the book of Enoch manifestly made use of a current tradition, and that, for anything that appears to the contrary, Jude may have availed himself of the same tradition, independently of the book of Enoch.  That an inspired writer should refer to a traditional history not recorded in the Old Testament ought not to give offence.  The apostle Paul does the same (2 Tim. 3:8, 9); and Jude himself in another passage (verse 9).

20.  The design of the epistle Jude himself gives in explicit terms (verses 3, 4).  It is to guard believers against the seductions of false teachers, corrupt in practice as well as doctrine; whose selfishness, sensuality, and avarice; whose vain-glorious, abusive, and schismatic spirit, he describes in vivid language, denouncing upon them at the same time the awful judgment of God.  The apostolic portraiture has not yet become antiquated in the history of Christ’s church.

CHAPTER XXXII.

THE APOCALYPSE.

1.  The word Apocalypse (Greek Apokalupsis) signifies Revelation, the title given to the book in our English version as well from its opening word as from its contents.  Of all the writings of the New Testament that are classed by Eusebius among the disputed books (Antilegomena, chap. 5. 6), the apostolic authorship of this is sustained by the greatest amount of external evidence; so much so that Eusebius acknowledges it as doubtful whether it should be classed among the acknowledged or the disputed books.