THE EPISTLE OF JUDE
                       ABOUT A.D. 65 TO 67

                      BY WAY OF INTRODUCTION

                            THE AUTHOR

        He calls himself Judas, but this was a very common name.
In the N.T. itself we have Judas Iscariot and Judas not Iscariot
( Joh 14:22 ; also called Judas of James, son or brother,  Lu
6:6 ), Judas a brother of our Lord ( Mt 13:55 ), Judas of Galilee
( Ac 5:37 ), Judas of Damascus ( Ac 9:11 ), Judas Barsabbas ( Ac
15:22 ). The author explains that he is a "slave" of Jesus Christ
as James did ( Jude 1:1 ), and adds that he is also a brother of
James. Clement of Alexandria thinks that, like James, he
deprecated being called the brother of the Lord Jesus (as by
Hegesippus later) as claiming too much authority. Keil identifies
him with Jude the Apostle (not Iscariot), but that is most
unlikely. The Epistle is one of the disputed books of Eusebius.
It was recognized in the canon in the Third Council of Carthage
(A.D. 397). It appears in the Muratorian Canon (A.D. 170).

                     THE RELATION TO II PETER

        Beyond a doubt one of these Epistles was used by the
other, as one can see by comparing particularly  Jude 1:3-18  and
 2Pe 2:1-18 . As already said concerning II Peter, scholars are
greatly divided on this point, and in our present state of
knowledge it does not seem possible to reach a solid conclusion.
The probability is that not much time elapsed between them. Mayor
devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of the relation between
II Peter and Jude and reaches the conclusion "that in Jude we
have the first thought, in Peter the second thought." That is my
own feeling, but it is all so subjective that I have no desire to
urge the point unduly. Bigg is equally positive that II Peter
comes before Jude.

                   THE USE OF APOCRYPHAL BOOKS

        Jude (verse  Jude 1:14 ) quotes from "Enoch" by name and
says that he "prophesied." What he quotes is a combination of
various passages in the Book of Enoch as we have it now. It used
to be held that part of Enoch was later than Jude, but Charles
seems to have disproved that, though the book as we have it has
many interpolations. Tertullian wanted to canonise Enoch because
of what Jude says, whereas Chrysostom says that the authenticity
of Jude was doubted because of the use of Enoch. In verse  Jude
1:9  there seems to be an allusion to the _Assumption of Moses_,
another apocryphal book, but it is the use of "prophesied" in
verse  Jude 1:14  about Enoch that gave most offence. It is
possible, of course, that Jude did not attach the full sense to
that term.

                            THE STYLE

It is terse and picturesque, with a fondness for triplets. The
use of the O.T. is very much like that in II Peter. Alford notes
that it is impassioned invective with epithet on epithet, image
on image. Bigg remarks on the stern and unbending nature of the
author, with no pathos and a harsh view of things and with
frequent use of Pauline phraseology. There are some fifteen words
not in the rest of the N.T. The grammar is less irregular than
that of II Peter. There is often a poetic ring in his words.

                           THE PURPOSE

        The author undoubtedly has the Gnostics in mind and is
seeking to warn his readers against them, as is true of II Peter.
This same purpose appears in the Johannine Epistles, as was true
also of Colossians, Ephesians, the Pastoral Epistles.

                           THE READERS

        Of this we know nothing at all. Dr. Chase believes that
the Epistle was sent to Antioch in Syria. That may be true,
though it is mere conjecture. Any place or places in Asia Minor
would suit so far as we know. The readers were probably both
Jewish and Gentile Christians. Jerusalem and Alexandria are urged
as the place of composition, but of that we have no real
information.

                             THE DATE

        This really turns on the genuineness of the Epistle.
There is no clear indication of the date, for the Gnostics
described can belong to the first or to the second century. If it
was used by II Peter, that would place it slightly before that
Epistle. The date suggested, 65 to 67 A.D., is purely
conjectural.

                      SPECIAL BOOKS ON JUDE

(Apart from those on II Peter or the Catholic Epistles)
Chase, F. H., _Jude in Hastings D B_ (1899).
Ermoni, V., _L'epitre de Jude_ (1903, in Vigoroux, Diction-
   naire de la Bible).
Georchin, B., _Der Brief Judas_ (1901).
Kasteren, J. P., _De brief uan den apostel Judas_ (1916).
Maier, F., _Der Judasbrief_ (1906).
Mayor, J. B., _The Epistle of Jude_ (in Expositor's Greek
   Testament, 1910).
Plummer, A., _St. James and St. Jude_ (Expositor's Bible).
Rampf, M. F., _Der Brief Juda_ (1854).
Stier, R., _Der Brief Judas, des Bruders des Herrn_ (1850).
Wandel, G., _Der Brief des Judas_ (1898).